By our Correspondent
Last updated: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:02:06 GMT
Cuttack (Orissa): In a significant development, the High Court has admitted a petition of Gayatri Panda, a suspended women employee of the Legislative Assembly who had brought sexual harassment allegations on former Assembly Speaker Maheswar Mohanty.
Panda has urged the HC to quash the August 7, 2007 order of Orissa Human Rights Commission (OHRC) in which the Commission had given "clean chit" to the political leader saying there was no credible evidence against the former speaker.
Admitting Panda’s petition, HC Bench of Justices I. M. Qudussi and Justice B.P. Ray issued notices to the former Speaker, State Women Commissioner, OHRC, represented through its secretary and to the State government to file counters to the petition. more
Friday, December 26, 2008
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Orissa High Court acquittal in rape case “borders on the absurd”
J. Venkatesan
Conclusion contrary to law; name of victim revealed flouting order; apex court
It’s non-application of mind: Bench
Matter remitted back for disposal afresh
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed all trial courts and High Courts not to disclose in their judgments the names of rape victims.
Revealing the names will amount to judicial indiscipline, said a Bench consisting of Justices Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma.
‘Judicial indiscipline’
Notwithstanding a series of decisions by the apex Court that the name of a rape victim should not be indicated in the judgment, the Orissa High Court did the reverse.
“This speaks volumes of judicial indiscipline.”
The Bench faulted the High Court also for acquitting a convict on the absurd reasoning that the victim was a healthy tribal woman capable of resisting rape and that there was only one eyewitness.
Trial court order reversed
The High Court acquitted Sukru Gouda, reversing a trial court order convicting him of raping the woman on September 4, 1993.
The High Court said: “Admittedly she was an able-bodied tribal lady, capable of taking care of herself. It was natural that she would have resisted to the best of her ability if sexual intercourse was being committed on her against her consent.”
Baffling
Allowing the appeal by the State of Orissa against this judgment, the apex court said: “A bare reading of the High Court’s order shows a complete non-application of mind. Some of the conclusions are clearly contrary to the law as laid down by this court. The conclusions are not only confusing but border on the absurd. It baffles us as to why the High Court says that ‘law is well settled that it is not possible for a single man to commit sexual intercourse with a healthy adult female in full possession of her senses against her will’.”
‘Not fathomable’
The Bench said the basis on which High Court came to this conclusion was not fathomable.
“To say the least, the conclusion is not only contrary to law laid down by this court, but also shows scant regard for law declared by this court.”
Accused ignores notice
It remitted the matter back to the High Court to hear the appeal afresh for disposal, as the accused-respondent (Sukru Gouda) had not appeared before the court in spite of notice, keeping in view the correct legal principles. more
Conclusion contrary to law; name of victim revealed flouting order; apex court
It’s non-application of mind: Bench
Matter remitted back for disposal afresh
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed all trial courts and High Courts not to disclose in their judgments the names of rape victims.
Revealing the names will amount to judicial indiscipline, said a Bench consisting of Justices Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma.
‘Judicial indiscipline’
Notwithstanding a series of decisions by the apex Court that the name of a rape victim should not be indicated in the judgment, the Orissa High Court did the reverse.
“This speaks volumes of judicial indiscipline.”
The Bench faulted the High Court also for acquitting a convict on the absurd reasoning that the victim was a healthy tribal woman capable of resisting rape and that there was only one eyewitness.
Trial court order reversed
The High Court acquitted Sukru Gouda, reversing a trial court order convicting him of raping the woman on September 4, 1993.
The High Court said: “Admittedly she was an able-bodied tribal lady, capable of taking care of herself. It was natural that she would have resisted to the best of her ability if sexual intercourse was being committed on her against her consent.”
Baffling
Allowing the appeal by the State of Orissa against this judgment, the apex court said: “A bare reading of the High Court’s order shows a complete non-application of mind. Some of the conclusions are clearly contrary to the law as laid down by this court. The conclusions are not only confusing but border on the absurd. It baffles us as to why the High Court says that ‘law is well settled that it is not possible for a single man to commit sexual intercourse with a healthy adult female in full possession of her senses against her will’.”
‘Not fathomable’
The Bench said the basis on which High Court came to this conclusion was not fathomable.
“To say the least, the conclusion is not only contrary to law laid down by this court, but also shows scant regard for law declared by this court.”
Accused ignores notice
It remitted the matter back to the High Court to hear the appeal afresh for disposal, as the accused-respondent (Sukru Gouda) had not appeared before the court in spite of notice, keeping in view the correct legal principles. more
Friday, November 21, 2008
"Don't convert this court into police station," SC to Yuva Shakti
SC no to PIL for invoking MCOCA against Raj Thackeray
New Delhi, Nov 21: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a petition seeking registration of a criminal case under MCOCA against MNS chief Raj Thackeray for the his party's hate campaign and violence against north Indians and non-Marathis in Maharashtra.
"It is not our duty to pass orders for registering cases," said a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, warning an NGO against filing petitions for registration of cases under MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act).
"Don't convert this court into police station," the Bench, also comprising Justice P Sathasivan, said, expressing its displeasure against the NGO, , for filing the petition.
"How can we pass such type of directions," the Bench said referring to the petition in which the NGO had also sought that liability should be put on MNS and its chief for the damage caused to public property during the violence.
The PIL had also sought a direction to the Election Commission for de-recognising MNS as a political party.
Advocate Rakesh Kumar Singh said that the NGO was approaching the apex court as the fall out of the violence was not restricted to Maharashtra but had also spread to other parts of the country.
He submitted that how can the apex court be silent when a political party was encouraging and spearheading violence against citizens, many of whom were students going to Maharashtra to appear in competitive examinations.
Bureau Report
New Delhi, Nov 21: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a petition seeking registration of a criminal case under MCOCA against MNS chief Raj Thackeray for the his party's hate campaign and violence against north Indians and non-Marathis in Maharashtra.
"It is not our duty to pass orders for registering cases," said a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, warning an NGO against filing petitions for registration of cases under MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act).
"Don't convert this court into police station," the Bench, also comprising Justice P Sathasivan, said, expressing its displeasure against the NGO, , for filing the petition.
"How can we pass such type of directions," the Bench said referring to the petition in which the NGO had also sought that liability should be put on MNS and its chief for the damage caused to public property during the violence.
The PIL had also sought a direction to the Election Commission for de-recognising MNS as a political party.
Advocate Rakesh Kumar Singh said that the NGO was approaching the apex court as the fall out of the violence was not restricted to Maharashtra but had also spread to other parts of the country.
He submitted that how can the apex court be silent when a political party was encouraging and spearheading violence against citizens, many of whom were students going to Maharashtra to appear in competitive examinations.
Bureau Report
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
SC asserts the judiciary’s primacy over the executive
Apex court collegium puts its foot down
J. Venkatesan| Refuses to reconsider elevation of 3 judges |
New Delhi: Asserting the judiciary’s primacy over the executive in the appointment of judges, the Supreme Court collegium, headed by the Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan, on Tuesday refused to reconsider its decision on elevation of three High Court Chief Justices as apex court judges.
The collegium reiterated its earlier recommendation on the elevation of the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court A.K. Ganguly, the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court R.M. Lodha and the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court H.L. Dattu and sent back the file to the Union Law Ministry for being sent to President Pratibha Patil.
The recommendations were sent to the Law Ministry in the middle of October for forwarding the names to the President through the Prime Minister’s Office.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) fights Indian guest workers' cause
Leading US rights body fights Indian guest workers' cause
Tue, Nov 18 08:51 PM
New York, Nov 18 (IANS) A leading US rights body has joined a class-action lawsuit against the federal government, filed early this year on behalf of about 500 Indians, alleging they were trafficked into the US through the H-2B guest worker programme.
The guest workers, who were brought from India to work in shipyards after Hurricane Katrina, were misleadingly recruited, exploited and mistreated, alleged in a statement Monday.
The federal government has fallen short of its responsibility to protect the rights of guest workers in this country, it alleged.
One of the most active civil-rights activist groups in this country, ACLU has charged that these workers were given dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent US residents and subjected to squalid living conditions, fraudulent payment practices and threats of serious harm upon their arrival.
Observing that immigrant guest workers are among the most vulnerable groups of workers, Chandra Bhatnagar, staff attorney with the ACLU Human Rights Program and co-counsel in the case, demanded that the government must take immediate action to stop sanctioning worker abuse and fix this dangerous system.
'Often paying exorbitant sums of money to deceitful and abusive recruiters in their home countries, these guest workers are subject to the control of a single 'employer-sponsor' once they've arrived in the US, with no safeguards in place to protect even the limited rights guaranteed by law,' he alleged.
The class action lawsuit was filed in US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in March 2008 by Southern Poverty Law Center, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Louisiana Justice Institute and the New Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice.
It came after a campaign early this year spearheaded by the Alliance of Guest Workers for Dignity, a project of the New Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice.
The lawsuit complains that recruiting agents hired by Signal International, the marine industry company, held guest workers' passports and visas; coerced them into paying extraordinary fees for recruitment, immigration processing and travel, and threatened the workers with serious legal and physical harm if they did not work under the Signal-restricted guest worker visa.
The complaint also charges that once in the US, the men were required to live in Signal's guarded, overcrowded labour camps, subjected to psychological abuse and defrauded out of adequate payment for their work.
Signal has denied the charges.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Primacy of executive, a dangerous move - by Anil Divan
The Hindu Wednesday, Oct 22, 2008 Opinion - Leader Page Articles
...............
Crisis in the higher judiciary
The Ghaziabad Provident Fund Scam was followed by Rs.15 lakh in cash being sent by a law officer to a sitting judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court now allegedly meant for another woman judge.
Justice Soumitra Sen, a serving judge of the Calcutta High Court has been identified by the Chief Justice of India as fit for impeachment. A few years ago, Justice Shamit Mukherjee of the Delhi High Court was accidentally discovered to be indulging in dubious transactions when phones of certain other officials were under surveillance by the police.
The reputation of the higher judiciary is at a low ebb. To quote from the author’s article “Judging the judges” ( December 5, 2002), “Unless vigorous in-house action is taken by the judiciary to repair the damage, public opinion will call for legislative intervention by Parliament. A legislative mechanism unless properly framed may be subversive of judicial independence … Every adversity is an opportunity”.
There is well-intentioned and legitimate criticism of the collegium system as now functioning. The present system of appointment requires radical restructuring — but the reform must be in the right direction. Reviving a failed system is a recipe for disaster. The final word in appointments to the higher judiciary can never be safely entrusted to fractious coalition governments — weak on governance, soft on terrorism and high on corruption. Each coalition partner will demand its quotas on the High Bench as well as the High Courts — on occasions threatening withdrawal of support. An increasing politicisation of the judges indebted to political factions is not a result “devoutly to be wished.”
In our dissatisfaction with the present system, let the family silver not be stolen by the executive. Let the Bar and civil society give a clear response to the Law Minister that under no circumstances can the old system of primacy of the executive be restored.
The way forward is a transparent, accountable and open merit system, but that is another call.
read it all
...............
Crisis in the higher judiciary
The Ghaziabad Provident Fund Scam was followed by Rs.15 lakh in cash being sent by a law officer to a sitting judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court now allegedly meant for another woman judge.
Justice Soumitra Sen, a serving judge of the Calcutta High Court has been identified by the Chief Justice of India as fit for impeachment. A few years ago, Justice Shamit Mukherjee of the Delhi High Court was accidentally discovered to be indulging in dubious transactions when phones of certain other officials were under surveillance by the police.
The reputation of the higher judiciary is at a low ebb. To quote from the author’s article “Judging the judges” ( December 5, 2002), “Unless vigorous in-house action is taken by the judiciary to repair the damage, public opinion will call for legislative intervention by Parliament. A legislative mechanism unless properly framed may be subversive of judicial independence … Every adversity is an opportunity”.
There is well-intentioned and legitimate criticism of the collegium system as now functioning. The present system of appointment requires radical restructuring — but the reform must be in the right direction. Reviving a failed system is a recipe for disaster. The final word in appointments to the higher judiciary can never be safely entrusted to fractious coalition governments — weak on governance, soft on terrorism and high on corruption. Each coalition partner will demand its quotas on the High Bench as well as the High Courts — on occasions threatening withdrawal of support. An increasing politicisation of the judges indebted to political factions is not a result “devoutly to be wished.”
In our dissatisfaction with the present system, let the family silver not be stolen by the executive. Let the Bar and civil society give a clear response to the Law Minister that under no circumstances can the old system of primacy of the executive be restored.
The way forward is a transparent, accountable and open merit system, but that is another call.
read it all
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
