Tag: hearing

  • Delhi HC adjourns hearing bail plea of Satyendar Jain and his aides

    Delhi HC adjourns hearing bail plea of Satyendar Jain and his aides

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday adjourned hearing in bail plea of jailed Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain and co-accused Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain in a Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case.

    On February 8, advocate Sushil Kumar Gupta appearing for Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain, the two aides of the Minister had concluded his submissions before a bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma.

    He had contended that in the present case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is just investigating the predicate offence and not the money laundering case, and that the ED had presumptively established a case of disproportionate assets (DA), but this could not be their case because the agency must first establish the existence of a scheduled offence.

    Citing the Vijay Madan Lal Judgment of the apex court, Gupta had argued that the role that the ED has given to his clients (Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain) in the current case should be different from the CBI case, but the ED has accused them under the same rules.

    He had further argued that the “proceeds of crime is the core” that needed to be established in the present case by the ED to have a case against his clients.

    Earlier, Gupta, on behalf of his clients, had said: “We have been roped in because the company, as per the Enforcement Directorate, belonged to Satyendar Jain.”

    He had added: “We are stating that it is our company, not Satyendar Jain’s.”

    The Jains’ counsel had said that Satyendar Jain has nothing to do with the company and that all the companies belong to them.

    Special Judge Vikas Dhull had denied the two bail on November 17 last year.

    Earlier, Satyendar Jain’s counsel N. Hariharan had asked how is the minister involved in the present case and how is he related to it as the money belonged to Ankush and Vaibhav Jain, which came back to their account without any premium.

    “My (Satyendar Jain’s) assets before and after the cheque period remained the same,” he had said.

    [ad_2]
    #Delhi #adjourns #hearing #bail #plea #Satyendar #Jain #aides

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • ‘PM CARES’ fund case: Delhi High Court posts hearing to April 20

    ‘PM CARES’ fund case: Delhi High Court posts hearing to April 20

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday adjourned hearing in a plea seeking a declaration of PM CARES Fund as “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, to April 20.

    Due to the unavailability of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the matter was adjourned.

    The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) on December 31 told the High Court that the Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations (PM CARES) Fund is not a public authority according to the Right to Information Act, 2005 and not a “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, but a “public charitable trust”.

    A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a plea moved by Samyak Gangwal, seeking a declaration of PM CARES Fund as “State” under the Constitution. It would attract consequential directions for disclosing the Fund’s audit reports periodically, disclosing the Fund’s quarterly details of donations received, utilisation thereof and resolutions on expenditure of donations, it added.

    The affidavit stated that the plea is based on “apprehensions and suppositions” and that a constitutional question should not be decided in a vacuum.

    Filed by the Under Secretary of PMO to the court, the affidavit said: “This Trust is neither intended to be, nor is in fact owned, controlled or substantially financed by any government nor any instrumentality of the government. There is no control of either the Central government or any state governments, either direct or indirect, in the functioning of the Trust in any manner whatsoever.

    “According to the affidavit submitted, the PM CARES Fund is a public charitable trust accepting only voluntary donations and is certainly not the Centre’s business.

    “PM CARES Fund does not receive funds or finances by the government,” it was mentioned.

    However, counsel for petitioner Senior Advocate Shyam Divan had said: “High functionaries of the government like the Vice President had requested the Rajya Sabha members to make donations” and that “the PM CARES Fund has been projected as a government fund”.

    In response, the PMO had argued: “The PM CARES Fund is administered on the pattern of Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF) as both are chaired by the Prime Minister. Like the National Emblem and domain name ‘gov.in’ are being used for the PMNRF, the same are also being used for PM CARES Fund.

    “The affidavit stated: “The composition of the Board of Trustees consisting of holders of public office ex officio – the Supreme Court, Union Home Minister, the Union Finance Minister, the former chairman of Tata Sons Ratan Tata, former Judge K.T. Thomas, and Former Deputy Speaker Kariya Mund” – is merely for administrative convenience and for smooth succession to the trusteeship and is neither intended to be nor in fact result into any governmental control in the functioning of the Trust in any manner whatsoever.

    “Besides the declaration of PM CARES Fund as ‘State’ under the Constitution, Gangwal has also sought that PM CARES Fund should be restrained from using ‘PM’ in its names/ website, State Emblem, domain name ‘gov’ in its website and PM’s Office as its official address.

    “On March 27, 2020, the trust deed of PM CARES Fund was registered as a Public Charitable Trust under the Registration Act, 1908 in New Delhi.

    “Keeping in mind the need for having a dedicated fund with the primary objective of dealing with any kind of emergency or distress situation, like posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, and providing relief to the affected, a public charitable trust under the name of PM CARES Fund was set up, the affidavit stated.

    [ad_2]
    #CARES #fund #case #Delhi #High #Court #posts #hearing #April

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • SC hearing on plea to restrain Gowri from taking oath as HC judge sees twists and turns

    SC hearing on plea to restrain Gowri from taking oath as HC judge sees twists and turns

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The high-profile hearing on pleas seeking to restrain Justice Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri from taking oath as a judge of the Madras High Court saw several twists and turns in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, with rumours doing the rounds that the matter could be heard around 9.15 am, just an hour before her swearing in.

    As soon as it was known that the swearing in of Gowri and four others as additional judges of the high court was scheduled at 10.35 am, the lawyers appearing for the petitioners in the apex court tried to get the matter, which was slated to be heard by a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh as item number 38 on Tuesday, listed before that.

    At around 8.50 am, rumours started spreading that the matter could be heard by a bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, after which the petitioners’ lawyers, including senior advocates Raju Ramachandran and Anand Grover, were seen waiting in the CJI’s courtroom.

    Soon after, the cause list on the apex court’s website showed that the two petitions were listed for hearing before a special bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai at 10.30 am as item number 301.

    The lawyers, who were waiting in the CJI’s courtroom, rushed to court number seven, where the special bench was to assemble.

    At around 10.25 am, five minutes before the scheduled court time, Justices Khanna and Gavai came to the dais and the hearing commenced.

    After hearing the arguments for around 25 minutes, the bench said, “We are not entertaining the writ petition. Reasons will follow.”

    Minutes before the apex court dismissed the pleas against Gowri’s appointment, she was administered the oath of office as an additional judge by the Madras High Court’s Acting Chief Justice, T Raja, at around 10:48 am.

    The top court was hearing two pleas, including one moved by three Madras High Court lawyers, that opposed Gowri’s appointment as an additional judge.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud had on Monday posted the plea of the three lawyers on February 10 but later, advanced it to February 7 after Ramachandran mentioned it again, saying the Centre has notified Gowri’s appointment.

    [ad_2]
    #hearing #plea #restrain #Gowri #oath #judge #sees #twists #turns

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • SC assures Bilkis Bano of early hearing of her plea against remission to convicts

    SC assures Bilkis Bano of early hearing of her plea against remission to convicts

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday assured Bilkis Bano, who was gang-raped and seven members of her family killed during the 2002 Gujarat riots, that her plea against the remission of the sentence of 11 convicts will be heard soon after the constitution of a new bench.

    A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala assured Bano, represented through her lawyer Shobha Gupta, that the new bench will be formed at the earliest.

    Gupta mentioned the matter for urgent hearingand said that a new bench needs to be constituted by the Chief Justice of India as Justice Bela M Trivedi recused from hearing the plea.

    CJI Chandrachud said, “I will do so at the earliest. The matter will be listed soon”.
    Earlier, on January 24, the hearing on Bano’s plea challenging the remission of sentence of 11 convicts in the gang-rape case by the Gujarat government could not be held in the top court as the judges concerned were hearing a matter related to passive euthanasia as part of a five-judge Constitution bench.

    On that day, the petition was listed for hearing before a bench of Justices Rastogi and CT Ravikumar.

    Both Justices Rastogi and Ravikumar were then busy hearing, as part of a Constitution bench headed by Justice K M Joseph, the pleas seeking modification of guidelines on the execution of a “Living Will or Advance Medical Directive” for permitting passive euthanasia.

    On January 4, Justice Trivedi had recused from hearing a batch of pleas challenging the remission of the sentence of 11 convicts in Bano’s case.

    Bano had moved the apex court on November 30, 2022 challenging the “premature” release of 11 lifers by the state government, saying it has “shaken the conscience of society”.

    Besides the plea challenging the release of the convicts, the gang-rape survivor had also filed a separate petition seeking a review of the apex court’s May 13, 2022 order on a plea by a convict.

    In its May 13, 2022 order, the apex court had asked the state government to consider the plea of a convict for premature release in terms of its policy of July 9, 1992 which was applicable on the date of conviction and decide it within a period of two months.

    All 11 convicts were granted remission by the Gujarat government and released on August 15, last year.

    Bano’s review plea against the May 13, 2022 order, however, was dismissed by the top court in December last year.

    The victim, in her pending writ petition, has said the state government passed a “mechanical order” completely ignoring the requirement of law as laid down by the Supreme Court.

    “The en-masse premature release of the convicts in the much talked about case of Bilkis Bano has shaken the conscience of the society and resulted in a number of agitations across the country,” she has said in the plea.

    Referring to past verdicts, the plea said en-masse remissions are not permissible and, moreover, such a relief cannot be sought or granted as a matter of right without examining the case of each convict individually based on their peculiar facts and role played by them in the crime.

    “The present writ petition challenging the decision of the State/ Central Government granting remission to all the 11 convicts and releasing them prematurely in one of the most gruesome crimes of extreme inhuman violence and brutality,” it said.

    The plea, which gave minute details of the crime, said Bilkis and her grown-up daughters were “shell-shocked with this sudden development”.

    “When the nation was celebrating its 76th Independence Day, all the convicts were released prematurely and were garlanded and felicitated in full public glare and sweets were circulated,” it said.

    The top court is already seized of PILs filed by CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, Revati Laul, an independent journalist, Roop Rekha Verma, who is a former vice chancellor of the Lucknow University, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra against the release of the convicts.

    Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing the riots that broke out after the Godhra train burning incident. Her three-year-old daughter was among the seven family members killed.

    The investigation in the case was handed over to the CBI and the trial was transferred to a Maharashtra court by the Supreme Court.

    A special CBI court in Mumbai had on January 21, 2008 sentenced the 11 to life imprisonment on charges of gang-rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of seven members of her family.

    Their conviction was later upheld by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court.

    The 11 men convicted in the case walked out of the Godhra sub-jail on August 15 after the Gujarat government allowed their release under its remission policy. They had completed more than 15 years in jail.

    [ad_2]
    #assures #Bilkis #Bano #early #hearing #plea #remission #convicts

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Delhi HC adjourns hearing on Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea in UAPA case

    Delhi HC adjourns hearing on Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea in UAPA case

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday adjourned, to Tuesday, the hearing of former Jawaharlal Nehru University student and activist Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea seeking bail in a Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) case related to alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 northeast Delhi Riots.

    The violence had erupted while protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

    Due to Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar’s unavailability, the matter was adjourned.

    A Delhi court, on January 4, discharged Imam with 10 other accused persons in a case related to the incidents of violence at Jamia Millia Islamia in December 2019.

    The violence had erupted after a clash between the police and people protesting against the CAA in December 2019.

    Additional Sessions Judge of Saket Court Complex, Arul Verma, had passed the order.

    He had held that the police were unable to apprehend the actual perpetrators behind the commission of the offence, but surely managed to rope in the 11 accused as “scapegoats”.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Delhi #adjourns #hearing #Sharjeel #Imams #bail #plea #UAPA #case

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • High Court Rolls Out Virtual Case Hearing For Ladakh

    High Court Rolls Out Virtual Case Hearing For Ladakh

    [ad_1]

    JAMMU: Under the effervescent patronage and guidance of Acting Chief Justice, High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Tashi Rabstan, the High Court today rolled out an initiative of taking up the Judicial matters of UT of Ladakh through virtual mode by allowing the parties and lawyers to appear and plead their cases from Ladakh itself.

    In its first kind of initiative, the Court of Justice Tashi Rabstan today heard the matters of UT of Ladakh virtually, in which the lawyers and government representatives who were petitioners and the respondents in the listed cases appeared on virtual mode from Leh and pleaded their cases.

    As many as, six (6) matters of the UT of Ladakh were listed today before the Bench, in which the virtual proceedings were conducted.

    In the today’s era of technology, conducting the proceedings of a case virtually by connecting different locations on one platform is going to be a big boon in the judicial dispensation. Rolling out such a facility for the people of Ladakh by the High Court is aimed at easing out the sufferings of the litigants and the lawyers who earlier had to physically travel to Jammu and Srinagar for appearing in their respective matters. This will save time besides being financially viable for both parties of the case.

    “In future, hearing of the matters of Ladakh willl be done virtually by allowing the parties to appear and plead their cases from the UT itself and it will be a regular feature”, stated Anoop Kumar Sharma, Registrar Computers (IT), High Court of J&K and Ladakh.

    [ad_2]
    #High #Court #Rolls #Virtual #Case #Hearing #Ladakh

    ( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

  • High Court Rolls Out Virtual Case Hearing For Ladakh

    High Court Rolls Out Virtual Case Hearing For Ladakh

    [ad_1]

    JAMMU: Under the effervescent patronage and guidance of Acting Chief Justice, High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Tashi Rabstan, the High Court today rolled out an initiative of taking up the Judicial matters of UT of Ladakh through virtual mode by allowing the parties and lawyers to appear and plead their cases from Ladakh itself.

    In its first kind of initiative, the Court of Justice Tashi Rabstan today heard the matters of UT of Ladakh virtually, in which the lawyers and government representatives who were petitioners and the respondents in the listed cases appeared on virtual mode from Leh and pleaded their cases.

    As many as, six (6) matters of the UT of Ladakh were listed today before the Bench, in which the virtual proceedings were conducted.

    In the today’s era of technology, conducting the proceedings of a case virtually by connecting different locations on one platform is going to be a big boon in the judicial dispensation. Rolling out such a facility for the people of Ladakh by the High Court is aimed at easing out the sufferings of the litigants and the lawyers who earlier had to physically travel to Jammu and Srinagar for appearing in their respective matters. This will save time besides being financially viable for both parties of the case.

    “In future, hearing of the matters of Ladakh willl be done virtually by allowing the parties to appear and plead their cases from the UT itself and it will be a regular feature”, stated Anoop Kumar Sharma, Registrar Computers (IT), High Court of J&K and Ladakh.

    [ad_2]
    #High #Court #Rolls #Virtual #Case #Hearing #Ladakh

    ( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

  • House Republicans are setting their first hearing for their investigation into an alleged politicized government.

    House Republicans are setting their first hearing for their investigation into an alleged politicized government.

    [ad_1]

    The notice set a broad topic — the subcommittee’s name — and didn’t include who will testify.

    [ad_2]
    #House #Republicans #setting #hearing #investigation #allegedpoliticized #government
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • SC judge recuses from hearing Punjab govt plea against bail to Majithia

    SC judge recuses from hearing Punjab govt plea against bail to Majithia

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant on Monday recused himself from hearing a Punjab government plea challenging the high court order, which granted bail to Shiromani Akali Dal leader and former minister Bikram Singh Majithia in a drug case.

    The matter was listed for Monday before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and J.K. Maheshwari.

    As soon as the matter came up for hearing, Justice Surya Kant said he was part of the high court bench which passed directions to set up a special task force to investigate the matter.

    Majithia, the brother-in-law of SAD President Sukhbir Singh Badal and brother of former Union minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal, had been lodged in the Patiala jail onFebruary 24 last year.

    The Punjab government, represented by senior advocate Shyam Divan, moved the apex court challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court order dated August 10, 2022.

    The bench ordered: “Let the matter be listed before a bench in which one of us (Justice Kant) is not a member.”

    Granting bail to Majithia, the high court had observed that there were “reasonable grounds” to believe that he is not guilty. Majithia was released after spending more than five months in the Patiala jail in the drug case.

    However, the high court had clarified that the trial court should proceed independently of the observations made by it. Majithia was booked on the basis of a 2018 report of the anti-drug special task force (STF) into a drug racket in the state.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #judge #recuses #hearing #Punjab #govt #plea #bail #Majithia

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • A Senate hearing focused on Ticketmaster allowed lawmakers to dust off their best attempts at Taylor Swift references. 

    A Senate hearing focused on Ticketmaster allowed lawmakers to dust off their best attempts at Taylor Swift references. 

    [ad_1]

    181008 taylor swift gtty 773
    A bipartisan Senate Judiciary Committee tore into Ticketmaster following the debacle last fall over Taylor Swift concert tickets.

    [ad_2]
    #Senate #hearing #focused #Ticketmaster #allowed #lawmakers #dust #attempts #Taylor #Swift #references
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )