Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute

Krishna Janambhooomi: SC Disposes Plea Over Consolidation Of 15 Suits

The Supreme Court on Tuesday disposed of the Idgah Committee plea challenging the Allahabad High Court decision to consolidate 15 suits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute.

A bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed that an application to recall the order under challenge is pending before the High Court.

The Committee of Management Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah has challenged Allahabad High Court decision to consolidate fifteen suits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute.

Allahabad High Court on January 11, 2024, directed to consolidate fifteen suits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute.

After the hearing, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing the Hindu side, told ANI that the Supreme Court asked Shahi Idgah Masjid to present its case in Allahabad High Court.

“Supreme Court asked Shahi Idgah Masjid to present its case in Allahabad High Court. Allahabad High Court had consolidated 15 cases suits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute to hear them together and today Shahi Idgah Masjid came to the Supreme Court against that order,” Vishnu Shankar Jain said.

“Supreme Court said that the Idgah Committee has already filed a recall application against the order of consolidation of the Allahabad High Court, so first the recall application should be decided and then you can approach the Supreme Court,” he added.

In the plea, the Idgah Committee said that 15 different suits have been hurriedly consolidated without a proper hearing and the HC’s order deserves to be set aside as the suits have been filed by different parties with competing claims against one another and seeking different reliefs and as such, the consolidation of these suits is bound to lead to severe miscarriage of justice.

The various matters relating to Mathura’s Krishna Janambhoomi land dispute are being dealt in different legal forums.

Earlier, the Committee of Management Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah has filed an appeal in the top court challenging Allahabad High Court order, which transfers to itself all the petitions relating to Mathura’s Krishna Janambhoomi land dispute from District Court Mathura, Uttar Pradesh Masjid Idgah challenged the order dated May 26 passed by the Allahabad High Court, whereby it transferred all such cases relating to the Krishna Janambhoomi dispute from the District Court Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, to itself.

Ranjana Agnihotri, a resident of Lucknow, had filed a suit in Mathura court demanding the ownership of 13.37 acres of land by Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi.

In her legal suit, Agnihotri demanded the removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque built in Krishna Janmabhoomi.

The suit filed in the Mathura court sought the removal of a mosque said to have been built in 1669-70 on the orders of the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb in the 13.37-acre premises of Katra Keshav Dev temple, near the birthplace of Lord Krishna. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi K Ponmudy SC

SC Refuses To Interfere With Calcutta HC Order Directing CBI Probe In Sandeshkhali Case

In a setback to the West Bengal government, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with the Calcutta High Court’s order directing a CBI probe in the Sandeshkhali matter pertaining to the attack on ED officials.

The Sandeshkhali matter related to the attack on ED officials expunges remarks made by the High Court against state police.

During the hearing, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta asked the state police about the delay in arresting Shajahan Sheikh.

The top court asked the WB govt why he was (Sheikh) not arrested for so many days.

WB’s advocate replied that there was a stay on investigation by the court and within a day after clarification came from the court, the state police arrested the accused.

The lawyer also informed the top court that seven people were arrested earlier. WB’s advocate also said that allegations like state police delaying the probe were damaging.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, for respondents, gave the central agency’s version, informed SC that ED officials went to the house of the main accused in a matter concerning the ration scam running into crores of rupees and the ED officials were beaten up.

ASG informed the SC that some other cases had been filed, therefore, the investigation was stayed.

The apex court was hearing the West Bengal government’s appeal against the Calcutta High Court order directing a CBI probe in the Sandeshkhali matter about the attack on ED officials and called the decision by the High Court against the concept of federalism.

Challenging the validity of Calcutta HC’s March 5 division bench order, the West Bengal government also mentioned that the Calcutta High Court passed the order, uploaded it by 3:30 pm and asked the West Bengal government to comply with the directions by 4.30 pm which made it remediless.

“Because the impugned order passed by the Division Bench specifically frustrates the petitioners’ right to challenge the same before the top court under Article 136 of the Constitution, as the impugned order dated March 5, 2024, was pronounced by the Division Bench at 3 pm and uploaded on the High Court website by 3.30 pm, but the directions contained therein required the petitioner state to comply with such directions by 4.30 pm on March 5, 2024, which effectively curtailed the petitioners’ right to avail its remedy under Article 136 of the Constitution,” read the petition filed by the West Bengal government.

“Because it is trite law that the provision of appeal as provided in a statute cannot be ousted by a judicial order, which has been done in the present case, and which has rendered the state government. Remediless while negating the concepts of Federalism, where without any material on record, and the basis of surmises and conjectures as well as a media trial being conducted, the Division Bench has, on its own accord, mixed several issues to pass the impugned order, which is factually and legally incorrect,” the West Bengal government said.

Earlier this year, in January, ED officials came under attack in the North 24 Parganas district while they were on their way to raid the homes of former Bongaon Municipality chairman Shankar Adhya and Trinamool Congress leader Sheikh Shahjahan in connection with the ration ‘scam’ case.

Earlier, the Calcutta High Court transferred to the CBI the Sandehskhali case, which pertains to the attack on ED officials.

After weeks of no action, on February 29, Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Sheikh Shahjahan was arrested by West Bengal police, after which West Bengal’s Basirhat Court remanded him to 10-day police custody.

Following Shahjahan’s arrest, the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) claimed that he had been “put under the hospitality” of the state police in a bid to avoid arrest by the ED and the CBI.

Tension rose in Sandeshkhali after hundreds of women on the island came out on the streets against Shahjahan Sheikh, accusing him of perpetrating sexual abuse and other excesses on them along with his henchmen. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Abhijit Gangopadhyay BJP

Gangopadhyay: Will join BJP, After Stepping Down As Calcutta HC Judge

Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, who stepped down as a judge of the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday announced that he will join the Bharatiya Janata Party.

“Maybe on 7th (March) in the afternoon. There is a tentative program, when I will join BJP,” Gangopadhyay said while addressing mediapersons here today.

“The party will decide whether there will be candidates in the Lok Sabha or not. The ruling party of the state has inspired me to enter politics,” Gangopadhyay said.

Earlier today, he announced that he has stepped down as a judge of the Calcutta High Court.

Gangopadhyay had already conveyed his resignation to President Droupadi Murmu and planned to meet Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam later today for a “courtesy visit”.

He arrived at his chamber at the High Court in the morning, after which the resignation letter was sent.

There has been speculation that Gangopadhyay will contest the forthcoming Lok Sabha polls from Bengal’s Tamluk constituency on a Bharatiya Janata Party ticket. The Tamluk seat has been a bastion of the ruling Trinamool Congress in recent elections; the party has held it since the 2009 election.

Gangopadhyay rulings on various education-related issues in the state stirred political debates.

Ganguly had expressed his desire to serve the public, stating that it was his conscience calling.

“For the last two or more years I have been dealing with some matters, especially education matters, regarding which a huge corruption has been discovered and unearthed. A large number of important persons in the education sector of this government are now languishing in jail, under trial,” he said while speaking to ANI on Tuesday.

He said the reason for him quitting the job was a call of his conscience and added he would work towards the welfare of the public.

Earlier in February, the Supreme Court tagged Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee’s plea to issue directions to take action against Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay for his alleged “continuous politically motivated interviews” in connection with sub-judice cases. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Gujarat High court rahul case

Gujarat HC Refuses To Atay Rahul’s Conviction In Defamation Case

The Gujarat High Court on Friday refused to stay on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s plea seeking a stay on his conviction in the ‘Modi surname’ defamation case.

The bench of Justice Hemant M Prachchhak said that the trial court conviction order is proper.
“There is no need to interfere with the said order. Therefore, the application is dismissed,” he said.

The court dismissed Rahul Gandhi’s plea and noted that at least 10 criminal cases were pending against him and even after the present case, some more cases have been filed against him. One such case has been filed by the grandson of Veer Savarkar, the court said.

Earlier in May this year, Gujarat HC reserved its order on Rahul Gandhi’s plea seeking a stay on his conviction in the 2019 ‘Modi surname’ defamation case.

Rahul Gandhi had moved the Gujarat High Court on April 25 challenging the Surat sessions court order which declined to stay his conviction in the criminal defamation case.

During the hearing on April 29, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Rahul Gandhi, had sought time to produce certain documents on record after which the court adjourned the hearing to May 2.

The Surat sessions court had on April 20 rejected Rahul Gandhi’s plea seeking a stay on his conviction in the criminal defamation case.

In his judgement, Additional Sessions Judge Robin P Mogera cited Rahul Gandhi’s stature as an MP and former chief of the country’s second-largest political party and said he should have been more careful.

He cited prima facie evidence and observations of the trial court and said it transpires that Gandhi made certain derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi apart from comparing people with the same surname with thieves.

Judge Mogera said the surname of the complainant in the case, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lawmaker Purnesh Modi, is also Modi. “…the complainant is [also an] ex-minister and involved in public life. Such defamatory remarks would have certainly harmed his reputation and caused him pain and agony in society,” he said.

He cited the disqualification criteria under the Representation of the People Act and added that removal or disqualification as MP could not be termed irreversible or irreparable loss or damage to Gandhi.

Following his conviction by a lower court in the criminal defamation case, Rahul Gandhi was disqualified as Lok Sabha MP. He had been elected to Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala.

The lower court sentenced the Congress leader to two years in jail on March 23 under sections 499 and 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case filed by Purnesh Modi.

At a rally in Karnataka’s Kolar in April 2019, Rahul Gandhi, in a dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, said, “How come all the thieves have Modi as the common surname?”.

Following the session’s court verdict, Congress had said it will move the Gujarat High Court. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

Manipur Biren

‘I Am Confused,’ Manipur CM On Reasons Behind Violence

Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh on Saturday said he was also confused about reasons for ethnic violence in Manipur, saying his government had not made any recommendations if the Meitei community should or should not be included as Scheduled Tribe and that the answer may be with those who organised solidarity rally after which clashes erupted.

In an exclusive interview with ANI, Biren Singh also targeted the opposition Congress, saying “we are eating the poison fruits, seeds of which were sowed by them” .
“”I am confused as well…I had said a consensus is important…High Court had asked us; my Government had still not recommended if the Meitei community should or should not be included as Scheduled Tribe. There was four-week time. So, I don’t know the reason. It should be the organisation, that organised a solidarity rally to not include Meitei, that should tell the world…They have the answer…,” Biren Singh said when asked about the reasons behind ethnic violence in his state that erupted about two months back.

Asked if an international organisation could have a role to play, in the violence in his state, the Chief Minister said Manipur faces challenges of a border state.

“…Manipur is a neighbour to Myanmar. There is China nearby. 398 km of our borders are porous, unguarded. There are security forces but such a large area can’t be guarded…But going by what is happening, we can neither deny nor vehemently affirm…It seems pre-planned but the reason is not open…,” Biren Singh told ANI.

Biren Singh lashed out at opposition parties particularly the Congress, which has been demanding his resignation over law and order situation in the state.

“…Where did these problems come from? These are deep-rooted. They are not today’s problems. Those who are levelling allegations, like Congress – we are eating the poison fruits, seeds of which were sowed by them…The entire world knows whose mistake was it…The ethnic clash between Kuki and Meitei continued for two-three years, there were losses and deaths. That is why, the Kuki militants rose at that time…they were given a free run from 2005-2018, for 13 years. That is why this is happening…,” he said.

He said the state and Central governments were making all efforts for restoring peace in the state and added that he spoke with Kuki brothers and sisters over the telephone earlier in the day that “let’s forgive and forget”.

“We are making all efforts, at all levels, to restore peace. A few hours ago, I spoke with our Kuki brothers and sisters over the telephone that let’s forgive and forget; reconcile and live together like we always have…Government has only tried to screen the people coming from outside in the wake of Myanmar turmoil and send them back once the situation improves. Our priority is to restore peace normalcy in Manipur,” Biren Singh said.

The Chief Minister also gave a personal message to the people of the state saying all tribes have to live together and he will not allow division of the state.

“We are one. Manipur is a small state but we have 34 tribes. All of these 34 tribes have to live together…We just have to be careful that not many people from outside should come and settle here so that there is no demographic imbalance…As the CM, I promise you I won’t allow Manipur to break or allow separate administration. I will sacrifice to keep everyone as one,” he said.

Biren Singh slammed Rahul Gandhi who visited Manipur for two days earlier this week and alleged that he had come with “a political agenda”.

“We can’t stop anyone. But the timing – it has been 40 days. Why did he not come earlier? He is a Congress leader but in what capacity was he making the visit? I don’t think the timing was right. He seemed to have come with a political agenda. He came and then there was an incident in the market and BJP office was attacked. Did he come for the situation in the state or for political mileage? I don’t support the manner in which he came,” Biren Singh said.

The Chief Minister also revealed reasons for not deciding to go ahead with the decision to resign, saying he felt the support of people who had gathered outside his residence and that he had earlier felt hurt over actions of a section of people despite the Centre and state governments making a lot of efforts for restoration of peace in the state that has witnessed ethnic violence.

The Chief Minister has come under repeated attack from the opposition, particularly the Congress, over the law and order situation in the state.

Ethnic violence erupted in the State on May 3 after clashes during a rally organised by the All Tribal Students Union (ATSU) to protest against the demand for including Meiteis in the list of Scheduled Tribes (STs).

Home Minister Amit Shah visited the state and announced several measures for the restoration of peace. (ANI)

Read more: http://13.232.95.176/

Manipur DGP

SC Sets Aside Kerala HC Order On Media One Licence

The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the Kerala High Court order upholding the decision of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to revoke the license of news channel Media One, stating that independent press is necessary for a robust democracy and critical views of the channel against the government policies cannot be termed as anti-establishment.

In its order, the apex court also opined that the procedure of the ‘sealed cover’ infringe the principles of natural justice and open justice.
A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud allowed the Media One plea challenging the Kerala High Court order which upheld the order of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to revoke the license of a news channel.

The top court also said the Ministry of Information Broadcasting should proceed to issue a renewal license to the channel within four weeks and the interim order of the top court is allowed to continue until the renewal permissions are granted.

The top court also remarked on the importance of an independent press for better functioning of society, saying that the critical views of media cannot be termed anti-establishment and the use of such term presumes that the press should always support the government.

The court also turned down the submission related to the alleged link of shareholders to Jamaat-e-Islami Hind saying that it is not a legitimate ground to restrict the rights of the channel. The court also noted that there was no material to show such a link.

The apex court also took into account the procedure of sealed cover practice saying that such a practice cannot be adopted to avoid the harm caused by public immunity proceedings. The top court said if the purpose can be achieved through public immunity proceedings then sealed cover proceedings should not be adopted.

The top court had earlier stayed the central government’s decision banning the Malayalam news channel and allowed it to resume broadcasting its content.

The Supreme Court was hearing the Media One plea challenging the Kerala High Court order upholding the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting order to revoke the news channel’s licence.

In the Special Leave Petition preferred by Media One, through advocate Pallavi Pratap, the channel said it has filed the petition under dire and compelling circumstances.

The petition also said it raises seminal questions of law impinging upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression as well as the importance of an independent, free and unbiased press guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Centre justified its decision on the ground that the denial of security clearance to the Malayalam news channel ‘Media One’ is based on intelligence inputs, which are sensitive.

The Kerala HC, on February 8, 2022, upheld the order of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting revoking the licence of Media One from the list of permitted news channels citing security reasons.

The HC dismissed petitions filed by the channel against the government order.

While dismissing the writ petition challenging the order of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the Kerala HC made it clear that principles of natural justice and interference by the court in cases of national security have a very limited role. (ANI)

Chandershekhar wife bail

Delhi HC Upholds Validity Of Centre’s Agnipath Scheme

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a batch of petitions challenging the Agnipath scheme and seeking resumption and enrolment as per the previous recruitment scheme in Indian defence services.

“The scheme is made in the national interest and to ensure that armed forces are better equipped,” said a Bench headed by the Chief Justice of Delhi while passing the judgement.
A Division bench headed by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma also comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad on Monday upheld the central government’s Agnipath Scheme and said that the court finds no reason to interfere in the said scheme.

On December 15, 2022, the bench kept the Judgement reserved after hearing arguments on behalf of different petitioners and the central government.

During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the central government and submitted before the court that more than 10 lakh aspirants have been given the benefit of age relaxation. The Agnipath scheme is a major paradigm shift in the recruitment process of defence personnel. We cannot put everything on the affidavit but we can say that we acted bona fide in the matter.

The central government has informed the Delhi High Court that no prejudice has been caused to any of the candidates who had participated in the earlier recruitment process.

It was further informed by the central government that recruitment in the ‘armed forces’ stands on a completely different footing viz-a-viz employment in public offices, as it constitutes an essential sovereign function, which directly relates to the maintenance of national security.

Therefore, the central government in exercise of its sovereign power and to effectively and efficiently safeguard the security and integrity of the country is duly empowered to change the policy providing the mode and methods/service conditions of the persons who are to be employed in the armed forces, stated the affidavit.

The decision of the central government to make recruitment through a new ‘Agnipath Scheme’, therefore, constitutes a policy decision taken by the government for national security reasons, it was further stated

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for one of the petitioners challenging the scheme and argued that the decision made by the government is arbitrary and unfair. There is no real reason behind the decision.

He also argued that the candidates whose select list was out were made to keep on waiting for two and half years.

ASG Bhati responded to the contention and said, “There is a difference between the Navy and other defence forces. The Navy cannot afford to put on hold the process as it will impact its operational capabilities and war readiness. They had modified the recruitment plan.”

“Selection does not give a right to an appointment. The process got delayed because of Covid,” ASG argued.

The Chief Justice asked the ASG, “People who had cleared the examination were waiting. Why did you not complete the process? How you will answer this?”

ASG submitted that in June 2021, the decision was taken at the highest level. It was clear that the Agnipath scheme is a paradigm shift. After June 2021, we want to bring a big paradigm shift in the manner in which recruitment takes place.

It was clarified by the central government that the Agniveer is a separate cadre and ranks lower than sepoy.

During the argument advocate, Ankur Chibber who appeared for some of the petitioners argued that there can not of disparity in salary. The entry-level in force is sepoy. An Agniveer would get less salary than a sepoy. There should be an equal salary for equal work.

Another point he raised was that an Agniveer would have to join afresh if he is selected after a period of four years of service. His past four years of experience would not be counted. It will affect his seniority and other benefits.

Advocate Kumud Lata, the counsel for Harsh Jay Singh argued that the tenure of service is four years. Agniveer would not be entitled to a gratuity.

She also raised a point that there is no provision for pension for Agniveers. She also referred to other countries including USA, Russia, and Israel during her arguments.

Justice Prasad said, “It is a new scheme which gives an option to a young man to get training. After that, he can go and do any job. Moreover, it is not compulsory.”

Another advocate, who has served in the army for 21 years, submitted that the period of training is short. The tenure of service is also short. What quality the force will get if training is too short.

He submitted that there is physical and arms training which requires at least one year. He also submitted that the sense of belonging develops over a period of time. The soldiers give respect and get respect over the period of time they spend in the force.

He submitted that the government did not take feedback from the unit level which operates at the ground. The government should reconsider it.

Earlier, the bench refused to put a stay on the Agnipath Scheme and said. “If petitioners get success in the case, they will get it.”

“We will not pass any stay or interim order and will hear the case finally,” added the bench.

On July 19, 2022, the Supreme Court transferred various pleas related to Agnipath Scheme to Delhi High Court.

The Supreme Court also clarified that as regards to other similar petitions challenging Agnipath Scheme pending in other various High Courts, the concerned HCs should either give an option to the petitioners to either have their petitions transferred to the Delhi HC or to keep their petitions pending with liberty to petitioners to intervene in Delhi High Court.

The top court had also requested the Delhi HC to take up the matter and dispose of it expeditiously.

“High Courts of Delhi, Kerala, Punjab and Haryana, Patna and Uttarakhand are hearing matters connected to these schemes,” noted SC.

The SC directions come after hearing advocates Kumud Lata Das and M L Sharma for petitioners and SG Tushar Mehta for Respondents.

A petition challenging the scheme stated that the announcement of the scheme has caused nationwide protests in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, Haryana, Uttarakhand, West Bengal and various other states due to the short-term duration of the scheme in the Indian Army for four years coupled with future uncertainties of the trained ‘Agniveers’.

A PIL in this regard also sought quashing of the Centre’s notification for the Agnipath scheme saying the scheme is “illegal and unconstitutional”.

The Union Cabinet on June 14, 2022, approved a recruitment scheme for Indian youth to serve in the three services of the Armed Forces called Agnipath and the youth selected under this scheme will be known as Agniveers. Agnipath allows patriotic and motivated youth to serve in the Armed Forces for a period of four years. The Agnipath Scheme has been designed to enable a youthful profile of the Armed Forces. (ANI)

Read More:http://13.232.95.176/

Haldwani Railway Land

Haldwani Railway Land: SC Says Jan 5 Plea Against Eviction

The Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed for January 5 the hearing of petitions challenging Uttarakhand High Court’s decision ordering the State authorities to remove encroachments from railway land in Haldwani’s Banbhoolpura area.

The matter was mentioned before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud who said the matter would be heard on Thursday.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan mentioned the plea before the top court saying, more than 5,000 houses in Haldwani are being demolished and it is similar to the matter scheduled to be heard on Thursday. He requested the apex court to tag the matter along with the matter coming up for hearing on January 5.

“Yes it will come up tomorrow,” CJI Chandrachud said.

The Uttarakhand High Court had on December 20 ordered the removal of encroachments from railway land in the Banbhoolpura area of Haldwani after giving notice to the residents one week in advance.

Led by Congress MLA from Haldwani, Sumit Hridayesh, residents of the area approached the Supreme Court on Monday challenging the High Court’s order.

A total of 4,365 encroachments will be removed from the area. Those facing eviction have been living on the land for many decades.

Residents have been protesting against the removal of encroachments from railway land in compliance with a High Court order. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176

High Court Tells Delhi Govt To Fill Vacancies In Jails

High Court Tells Delhi Govt To Fill Vacancies In Jails

The Delhi High Court has directed the Government of NCT Delhi to ensure that the appointments are made positively within a period of six months in relation to pending vacancies of Medical Officers, Paramedical Staff, Welfare Officers, Counsellors, Teachers for Education, Yoga Teachers, etc in the jails.

The Bench of Justice Satish Chander Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad in an order dated December 12 stated: “this Court is of the opinion that as the Respondents have already taken steps to depute persons on the post of Teachers and have taken steps for appointment of Counsellors, and they are certainly going to conclude the process of recruitment within a period of six months from today, no further orders are required to be passed in the present PIL.”

After going through the status report stated that 48 teachers and 23 Technical Teachers have been deputed by the Education Department, Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) for training and imparting technical education to the inmates. It is stated that in respect of Counsellors, a notice has been issued inviting applications for 40 posts of Counsellors, however, appointments have not taken place.

The court direction came during the hearing of a PIL filed by Advocate Amit Sahni stating that a large number of vacancies of Medical Officers, Paramedical Staff, Welfare Officers, Counsellors, Teachers for Education, Yoga Teachers, etc, are lying vacant and the Government is not filling up the vacancies.

The Counsel for the Petitioner after going through the status report was fair enough in stating before this Court that once time has been granted by this Court to the GNCTD to fill up the vacancies/ back-logs within a period of six months, no further orders are required to be passed in the present PIL, said the Court.

Vaibhav Mishra, Sonali Tiwary, and Monica Chauhan, Advocates appeared for Petitioner Amit Sahni in the matter while Sanjana Nangia, Advocate, and Sameer Vashist, Additional Standing Counsel for Respondent (GNCTD).

“In respect of Medical and Para Medical staff, it is stated that steps have been taken to fill up the posts. The Counsel appearing for the GNCTD was fair enough in stating before this Court that a breathing period of six months is granted to the State to conclude the process of recruitment. The prayer is allowed,” the court said.

In the PIL, petitioner Amit Sahni had also sought directions to the Government of NCT Delhi and DG Prisons to constitute and notify the Board of Visitors, Service Board, State Advisory Board, Prison Development Board, and Forum for Prison Staff, as provided in Delhi Prison Act 2000 and Delhi Prison Rules 2018, in the larger interest of prisoners lodged in Delhi Jails as well as in the interest of Delhi Prison Administration.

There is an acute shortage of prison staff in general and particularly all posts of educational, correctional staff, psychiatric social workers, and psychologists have been lying vacant for a long. The respondents are duty-bound to take adequate steps not only for the welfare of the prisoners but for the well-being of the prison staff as well. The shortage of prison staff is a reason for the inadequate management of Delhi Jails and many-a-times the same leads to violence upon the errant inmates by the Jail Staff, said the plea. (ANI)

Read more: http://13.232.95.176/

Anil Deshmukh In Corruption Case

HC Grants Bail To Ex-Minister Anil Deshmukh In Corruption Case

Bombay High Court on Monday granted bail to former Home Minister of Maharashtra Anil Deshmukh in a corruption case filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The court has granted bail to the leader of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) on a surety amount of Rs 1 lakh. He is also required to submit his passport in court.

On the court’s decision, Deshmukh’s lawyer, advocate Aniket Nikam said that they argued for his bail on the grounds of his deteriorating health and had also produced his health records before the Court.

“We argued on health grounds. His health was deteriorating and we produced his health records before the court… CBI said that they would go to the higher court against this order, the court allowed them and in that context, it stayed the order for 10 days,” Advocate Aniket Nikam said.

Earlier, the CBI had opposed Deshmukh’s bail plea after he moved the Bombay High Court on October 26 for bail in connection with the case after a special CBI court rejected Deshmukh’s bail plea on October 21.

Rejecting the bail application of Anil Deshmukh, the CBI court had previously said that in this case, the statement of public witness Sachin Waze has been recorded by the CBI during the hearing of the bail application.

“It is clear from the statements of the witnesses that Anil Deshmukh is the main conspirator in this whole case. The charges against him are very serious. In such a situation, if he is granted bail, he can influence the case and the witnesses,” the CBI court had said.

Deshmukh was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in November 2021, which stated that he had misused his position as state home minister and collected Rs 4.70 crore from various bars in Mumbai through some police officers.

According to the ED, Deshmukh had misused his position as state home minister and collected Rs 4.70 crore from various bars in Mumbai through some police officers.

Earlier on October 11, the Supreme Court refused to cancel the bail granted to the former home minister in the money laundering case lodged against him by Enforcement Directorate (ED).

On October 4, the Bombay High Court granted bail to Deshmukh in a money laundering case being investigated by the ED. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176