- Foreigners facing trial in Tablighi case may leave during pendency of case, says govt in SC
The Supreme Court was today informed that foreigners facing trial for attending the Tablighi Jamaat activities in Delhi may leave the country during the pendency of the cases.
A three-judge bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna was hearing a plea filed by 34 foreign nationals challenging the decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to blacklist over 3,000 of them from travelling to India for a period of 10 years.
The Bureau of Immigration under the MHA had blacklisted these individuals under Category A. According to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, most of these people are facing criminal charges and blacklisting an individual was a sovereign plenary function. According to the Central government these people violated the Visa Manual 2019 by taking part in Tablighi Jamaat activities and also committed an offence punishable the Foreigners Act, 1946.
- China’s attempt to bring up J&K at UNSC makes no headway
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) today issued a statement saying that yet another attempt by China, trying to meddle in “India’s internal matter” and trying to bring it up at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has met with “little support from the international community”.
The statement said that India rejected China’s attempt to discuss the issue of Jammu and Kashmir in the UNSC.
The ministry noted that while China initiated a discussion in the UNSC on issues pertaining to the Indian Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, it’s not the first time that China has attempted to raise a subject that is India’s internal matter. Like previous instances, this attempt too met only with a little support from the international community, said the statement from the MEA.
The statement says that the government, therefore, rejected China’s interference in India’s internal affairs and urges it to draw proper conclusions from such infructuous attempts.
India’s representative to the United Nations, T.S. Tirumurti also tweeted: “Another attempt by Pakistan fails! In today’s meeting of UN Security Council (UNSC) which was closed, informal, not recorded, and without any outcome, almost all countries underlined that J&K was a bilateral issue & did not deserve time and attention of the Council.”
His tweet was in reference to UNSC member states’ meeting held recently behind closed doors. This was the third meeting that discussed the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, after the first meeting that was held on August 16, 2019 and another on January 15, 2020.
- P&H HC asks Centre to reconsider its ban on import of used ventilators
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the Centre whether import of refurbished ventilators can be permitted, suggesting reconsideration of the ban on import of these ventilators.
The bench of Justices Rajan Gupta and Karamjit Singh remarked that the induction of such ventilators “may help some serious patients.”
The bench had been informed during the previous hearing that the import of used important equipment is prohibited. This included ventilators. The ban had been imposed for the following reasons:
Ensuring Quality Control: Used critical care equipment can be sold as remanufactured without actually being evaluated in terms of quality, safety and effectiveness. In addition, there may be issues related to repair, maintenance, availability.
- 10 days in jail despite bail: DG tenders unconditional apology to Delhi HC
The Director General of Police (Prisons) today tendered an unconditional apology before the Delhi High Court with regards to the illegal detention of a prisoner for 10 days in jail, despite bail having been granted to him in all his cases.
A divisional bench of the court, comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Subramonium Prasad, while hearing the matter through video conferencing, noted: “There’s a lack of basic knowledge to interpret legal orders on part of the jail authorities, they should brush up their law.”
The petition was filed by a prisoner who has been granted bail in both the complaints filed against him under the Negotiable Instruments Act and was illegally detained by the jail authorities for 10 days, even after completing all the formalities as directed by the court.
The bench expressed its deep dissatisfaction toward the reasoning submitted by the prison authorities with regard to the illegal detention of the petitioner.
The bench considered the unconditional apology submitted by the DG (Prison) for the reasoning submitted by the concerned superintendent. The court stated: “We’re deeply dissatisfied by the way through which the superintendent tried to defend himself. There’s no legal basis for that.”
The court further stated that the superintendent should compensate the prisoner personally.
The bench directed the Delhi State Legal Service Authority to conduct workshops for all the jail superintendents in Delhi and has further directed to make a special module for them specifying the duties, obligations, and prisoners’ rights.
- Advance bail not automatic, just because ‘nothing was recovered from the accused’: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court while hearing an anticipatory bail petition, said that advance bail in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) case could not be granted just because “nothing was recovered from the accused.”
The original advance bail application was filed on behalf of a person accused under Sections 22 (c), 28 and 29 of the NDPS at the Sessions Court. That court observed that since nothing was recovered from the accused, and there was no prima facie material available that indicates his active involvement in the crime. Therefore, he is being granted bail.
The state government filed a petition before the High Court challenging the order of the Sessions Court.
During hearing, Justice R Narayan Pishradi said that as per Section 37 (1) (b) (ii) of the Act, if the public prosecutor opposes the application of bail, then it is important that two conditions for granting bail to the accused be satisfied.
“The first is that the court should be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that he is not guilty of the alleged crime against the accused,” said the judge.
“The second is that the court should also be satisfied that it has reasonable grounds to believe that the accused will not commit any crime after release on bail, or is unlikely to do so. Only after the satisfaction of these two conditions does the court have the power to grant bail to the accused,” he concluded.
The bench also said: “These two conditions are cumulative, not alternative. If either of these two conditions is not satisfied, then the ban continues and the accused cannot be released on bail.”
The Court also said that the court’s satisfaction must be based on “reasonable grounds“. The phrase ‘proper basis’ means that, prima facie, there should be more than one basis. At the same time it shows sufficient probable cause to believe that the accused is not guilty of the crime he is accused of.
The court explained that the reasonable belief required suggests that the facts and circumstances present are sufficient in themselves, which justifies the satisfaction that the accused is not guilty of the alleged crime. Thus it is mandatory to register satisfaction on both the aspects mentioned above.
The satisfaction of the court regarding the existence of both the above conditions is for a limited purpose, which is limited only to the question of releasing the accused on bail. In view of the order of the Sessions Court, the court stated that they did not consider both the conditions mentioned under Section 37 (1) (b) of the Act nor was any satisfaction recorded in respect of those conditions.
The bench said that it is also not possible to infer from the said order that the Sessions Court was satisfied with regard to these conditions. Therefore, the order of the Sessions Court is being cancelled. Also, instructions are being given that a fresh bail application be filed on behalf of the accused, to be considered afresh.
- Senior BJP leader Manoj Sinha named J&K Lt Governor after Murmu quits
Senior BJP leader Manoj Sinha has replaced Girish Chandra Murmu as the new Lieutenant Governor of J&K after the latter resigned yesterday.
Sinha, 61, carries with him the experience of having been a Lok Sabha MP as well as administrative acumen garnered from his years as a top BJP leader in the party’s national council. He was also a Minister of State in the first term of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The resignation of Murmu, exactly a year after the abrogation of Article 370 in the valley, was significant. Murmu, a 1985-batch IAS officer of the Gujarat cadre, however, has been associated with the Modi government for long, even as far back when Modi was chief minister of Gujarat. The 60-year old will now take over as the new Comptroller and Auditor General of India, after the current CAG, Rajiv Mehrishi retires later in the week.
Exactly one year after J&K’s special status was scrapped, Mr Sinha’s appointment is seen as an attempt to revive political process in Jammu and Kashmir. Sources say Prime Minister Narendra Modi may also visit Srinagar in coming days.
The appointment of Sinha is also a precursor, say sources that there is a good sign of political activity resuming in the valley. The PM is expected to visit the valley soon, it has been said.
0 Comments