Legal News at Vakilno1.com

Portuguese Supreme Court cancels Abu Salem’s extradition, CBI to appeal

New Delhi,  The Portuguese Supreme Court has cancelled the extradition of alleged mobster Abu Salem to India but the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) said it would challenge the verdict.

Salem had contended before the Portuguese court that his extradition should be cancelled as the conditions for this had not been met. However, this plea “has been rejected by the Supreme Court. Therefore, CBI is on a secure wicket,” CBI spokesperson Dharini Mishra told reporters.

She said the agency would approach the external affairs ministry on filing an appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court challenging the decision.
Read the rest of this entry »

Apex child rights body rescues nine child labourers

Jaisalmer (Rajasthan),  Nine child labourers working in a mine were rescued and a case lodged against their employer on the intervention of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), a statement said Monday.

“NCPCR had conducted a two-day visit Sep 15 to Jodhpur and Jaisalmer districts following the receipt of a number of complaints concerning various incidents of child rights violations,” a statement said.

According to the statement, Yogesh Dube and Shaifali Avasthi of the NCPCR said that at least nine children, in the age group of 3-10 years, were employed in a stone crushing mine.
Read the rest of this entry »

New Delhi, Aug 9  The Supreme Court Tuesday held that students have the right to inspect and photocopy their answer sheets after their evaluation under the Right To Information (RTI) Act.

The Apex Court bench of Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice A.K. Patnaik allowed the disclosure of the answer sheets of the examination conducted by boards, universities, institutions and public service commissions, when it upheld the Calcutta High Court judgment that permitted the students to inspect their answer sheets.

Read the rest of this entry »

HC refuses ‘maintenance’ to foreigner couple stuck in India

The Bombay High Court has said foreigners stranded in India due to pending criminal cases cannot seek maintenance to sustain themselves. As reported by DNA

Singapore national Zainab Yousuf (57) and her Japanese husband Teytsyo Hiryama (62) had sought maintenance from the state government.

Yousuf and Hiryama found themselves in an unusual predicamment: acquitted and set free by High Court, although not having permission to leave country since the appeal is pending.

Advocate Ayaz Khan, their advocate, argued that they had no source of livelihood here. Relying on article 21 of Constitution (right to life), Khan moved High Court for maintenance.

The two of them were arrested at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport here for possession of Hashish and were convicted and sentenced to ten years imprisonment in 2006.

But in January 2009, they were acquitted from the High Court. However, customs appealed it in the Supreme Court, and authorities didn’t issue them ‘exit visa’.

Yesterday, rejecting their plea, division bench of justice PB Majmudar and justice RG Ketkar said that “even for citizens of this country (India) who cannot maintain themselves, there isn’t any policy to offer shelter and maintenance. At the most the petitioners may obtain a work permit.”

HC refuses ‘maintenance’ to foreigner couple stuck in India

The Bombay High Court has said foreigners stranded in India due to pending criminal cases cannot seek maintenance to sustain themselves.

Singapore national Zainab Yousuf (57) and her Japanese husband Teytsyo Hiryama (62) had sought maintenance from the state government.

Yousuf and Hiryama found themselves in an unusual predicamment: acquitted and set free by High Court, although not having permission to leave country because the appeal is pending.

Advocate Ayaz Khan, their advocate, argued that they had no source of livelihood here. Relying on article 21 of Constitution (right to life), Khan moved High Court for maintenance.

The two of them were arrested at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport here for possession of Hashish and were convicted and sentenced to ten years imprisonment in 2006.

But in January 2009, they were acquitted by the High Court. However, customs appealed it in the Supreme Court, and authorities didn’t issue them ‘exit visa’.

Yesterday, rejecting their plea, division bench of justice PB Majmudar and justice RG Ketkar said that “even for citizens of this country (India) who cannot maintain themselves, there is no policy to offer shelter and maintenance. At the most the petitioners may apply for a work permit.”

Supreme Court Rejects PIL of Telangana MLAs

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking direction to the Andhra Pradesh Speaker to either accept or choose the resignation of over 139 legislators on the Telangana issue. As stated by NDTV

A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma said that the petitioner M Narayana Reddy, a former MP, had no locus standi in the issue.

The apex court said there was no public interest involved with the issue as claimed by the petitioner. “Who are you? It is very strange. You are not an MLA or MP. What are you? What’s the PIL? Who gave you the right to present petition,” the bench grilled Reddy while dismissing the PIL.

The 139 MLAs, cutting across party lines, are named as petitioners in the matter. They had submitted their resignation to the Assembly Speaker on December 10 and 23 last year. Andhra Pradesh Assembly has 284 members.

Life Term for ‘Killer’ Mom by Supreme Court

Holding as “unusual” the conduct of a mother, the Supreme Court has confirmed the life sentence on a woman who axed to death her four-year-old son. As reported by Indian Express

“Motherhood is one of the most precious gifts endowed upon mankind and there’s no relationship more pristine and pure than that of a mother and her child. No mother in normal circumstances can tolerate even a scratch on the body of her child,” a bench of justices P Sathasivam and H L Dattu observed in a judgement.

The apex court passed the judgement while dismissing the appeal of a tribal woman Satna Bai, charged with axing to death her minor son Kannilal in Chhattisgarh’s Ambikapur district on August 18, 1996.

“The appellant was found standing near the body of her son with a bloodstained axe in her hand. An obvious reaction for any mother would have been to go hysterical and clutch the body of her son.

Muslim Community criticise SC ruling over second marriage

Jaipur

Reacting towards the Supreme Court’s ruling, upholding as illegal the second marriage by a Muslim employee of Rajasthan government, a state-based forum of the community today said the order amounted to interference with the Muslim Personal Law. As reported by Press State Of India.

“With due respect to the Supreme Court, we would like to say that the decision is shocking for the Muslim community because it is a direct interference with the Muslim Personal Law recognised from the Constitution,” Rajasthan Muslim Forum (RMF) Convener Qari Mueenuddin said.

On January 29, the Supreme Court ruled that if a government employee remarries without permission, the erring persons could lose his job. The SC withheld the decision from the Rajasthan High Court, justifying the termination of a Rajasthan Police Constable Liyaqat Ali as he married second time without divorcing his first wife.

CJI squashes regional SC benches recommendation

New Delhi, Equating what the law states Commission’s recommendation for establishing of regional Supreme Court Benches to the ‘disintegration’ of the apex court, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan rejected the proposal.As reported by One India News.

I’m not the disintegration of the Supreme Court. Personally i think the Supreme Court can not be in any other part of India. This really is the highest court belonging to the land. It is in the capital city belonging to the land,” he said

It is a final court and we should maintain the integrity of the Supreme Court.” he added

AG opposes go on to set up four SCs

NEW DELHI: Attorney General G E Vahanvati has strongly opposed Law Commission’s radical recommendation for setting up of a Constitutional Court in Delhi and four Supreme Courts in the metros primarily to ease present litigational pressure on the SC. As reported by The Times of India

The legislative department from the law ministry had sought the superior law officer’s opinion after Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan endorsed the Commission’s five-month-old recommendation.

Holding the present character of the Supreme Court as an intrinsic reflection of the core values with the federal structure of the country, Vahanvati has faulted the Commission’s proposal on grounds of practicality and said that it strikes at the roots of the Constitution.

He said the Supreme Court in the national capital with judges utilized by all corners from the country representing various communities and sections of the society is a great symbol of unity, and that any dilution of its authority could create an anomalous situation.

“The Attorney General is against any dilution with the stature of the Supreme Court in its present form,” said legislative secretary Bhupinder Prasad.

The AG termed the Commission’s recommendation as completely unworkable and was even critical of the legislative mode suggested by it for the creation of a Constitutional Court. He said nothing less than an amendment to the Constitution could assist in developing a Constitutional Court since the concept was totally new in relation to the judiciary, one of the three branches of governance.

Article 130 from the Constitution provides that “The Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, since the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President from time to time, appoint.” The AG in his opinion has virtually supported the consistent stand of the full court of the apex court to not have its Bench any place in India.