AAP retweets old tweets of Bedi and Ilmi

New Delhi, Mar 6: Shares of YES Bank and State Bank of India came under huge selling pressure on Friday as developments unfolded regarding SBI picking stake in the private lender. Shares of the lender hit record low of Rs 5.55, plunging 85 per cent, and were trading below its previous low of Rs 8.16 hit on March 9, 2009.

SBI, on the other hand, slumped 11 per cent to Rs 257.35 on the BSE. The benchmark S&P BSE Sensex was trading with a cut of over 3 per cent at 37,251.37 level.

In the past three months, share price of the private lender has plunged 41 per cent, while the state-owned lender has slipped 14 per cent. In comparison, the S&P BSE Sensex has dipped 5.6 per cent till Thursday.

On Thursday, the Reserve Bank of India superseded the board of troubled private sector lender YES Bank and imposed a 30-day moratorium on it “in the absence of a credible revival plan” amid a “serious deterioration” in its financial health.

During the moratorium, which came into effect from 6 pm on Thursday, YES Bank will not be allowed to grant or renew any loans, and “incur any liability”, except for payment towards employees’ salaries, rent, taxes and legal expenses, among others.

This is the first time that a bank of this size will be put under a moratorium by the RBI.

“The financial position of YES Bank had undergone a steady decline “largely due to inability of the bank to raise capital to address potential loan losses and resultant downgrades, triggering invocation of bond covenants by investors, and withdrawal of deposits,” RBI said in a statement.

“After the moratorium, the next step will be to infuse to money and keep the bank afloat. So from shareholders’ point of view, the future is certainly hazy as the capital requirement is huge. The good part, however, is that the RBI has stepped in and depositors don't have to worry,” says Siddharth Purohit, a research analyst at SMC Securities.

Meanwhile, analysts at Nomura believe that placing the Bank under moratorium implies that equity value in the bank would be negligible, and that the chances of private capital participating in future capital raising plan are near zero.

"Any resolution for Yes Bank is more proposed from the perspective of deposit holders and systemic stability, and not from the perspective of Yes Bank equity investors or even perpetual bond holders," they wrote in a note dated March 6.

In another development, SBI’s Board Thursday gave in-principle approval to consider an “investment opportunity” in YES Bank, even as it said “no decision had yet been taken to pick up stake in the bank”.

According to a  report, highly-placed sources indicated a rescue plan involving SBI and Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) was being discussed and an announcement in this regard might be made soon.

“While the finer details of the deal are being worked out, it is anticipated that both SBI and LIC together will take a 51 per cent stake in the bank, with a one-year lock-in period,” the report said.

Most analysts believe it is a positive step for the Indian financial sector as the government has tried to avoid a repeat of IL&FS-like crisis.

“The move is a positive step for the financial sector as a whole. By this, the government has tried to avoid a repeat of IL&FS-like crisis and has saved the depositors,” said AK Prabhakar, Head of Research at IDBI Capital. While we know that YES Bank has a huge pile of bad loans, SBI is the only bank that has the capacity to absorb it, he added.

However, the valuation at which YES bank would be taken over remains a cause of concern.

Global brokerage firm JP Morgan Thursday cut its target price for YES Bank on Thursday to Rs 1 per share, taking into account the potential fall in the lender’s net worth due to stressed assets.

“We believe forced bailout investors will likely want the bank to be acquired at near-zero value to account for risks associated with the stress book and likely loss of deposits. We think the bank will need to be recapitalised at nominal equity value and could test dilution of additional tier 1 (AT1) capital. We remain underweight and cut our target price to Rs 1 as we believe net worth is largely impaired,” JP Morgan said in a note.

Global brokerage firm Nomura estimates a need of Rs 25,000-44,000 crore and adjusted for Rs 7,400 crore of current coverage, if the current stress of Rs 65,000-70,000 crore faces 70 per cent loss given default (LGD).

"It implies Rs 18,000-37,000 crore needed for provisioning against the current net worth of Rs 25,700 crore Also, to run as going concern, the bank would require over Rs 20,000 crore of CET-1 capital as well," the note said.

YES Bank has registered slippages of Rs 12,000 crore so far in FY20, while it has placed Rs 30,000 crore of loan assets under the watch list. Its deposits stood at Rs 2.09 trillion on September 30, 2019, while its advances totalled Rs 2.24 trillion. The bank has delayed publishing its December quarter results by a month to March 14.

New Delhi, Feb 5: Following is the chronology of events in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case in which the Delhi High Court on Wednesday said the all the four convicts have to be hanged together, not separately.

- Dec 16, 2012: Paramedical student gang-raped and brutally assaulted by six men in a private bus and thrown out of the moving vehicle along with her male friend. The victims admitted to Safdarjung Hospital.

- Dec 17: Widespread protests erupt demanding stringent action.

- Police identify the accused - bus driver Ram Singh, his brother Mukesh Kumar, Vinay Sharma and Pawan Gupta.

- Dec 18: Ram Singh and three others arrested.

- Dec 20: Victim's friend testifies.

- Dec 21: A delinquent juvenile nabbed from Anand Vihar bus terminal in Delhi. Victim's friend identifies Mukesh as one of the culprits. Police conduct raids in Haryana and Bihar to nab the sixth accused, Akshay Kumar.

- Dec 21-22: Akshay arrested in Aurangabad district of Bihar and brought to Delhi. Victim records statement before the SDM in hospital.

- Dec 26: Following a cardiac arrest, victim flown to Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital by the government.

- Dec 29: Victim succumbs to injuries and other medical conditions. Police add murder charge in the FIR.

- Jan 2, 2013: The then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir inaugurates fast track court (FTC) for speedy trial in sexual offence cases.

- Jan 3: Police file charge sheet against five adults accused of murder, gang-rape, attempt to murder, kidnapping, unnatural offences and dacoity.

- Jan 17: FTC starts proceedings against the five adult accused.

- Jan 28: Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) says minority of the juvenile accused is proved.

- Feb 2: FTC frames charges against five adult accused.

- Feb 28: JJB frames charges against the minor.

- Mar 11: Ram Singh commits suicide in Tihar Jail.

- Jul 8: FTC completes recording of testimonies of prosecution witnesses.

- Jul 11: Delhi High Court allows three international news agencies to cover the trial in the case.

- Aug 22: FTC begins hearing final arguments in trial against four adult accused.

- Aug 31: JJB convicts the minor for gang-rape and murder and awards three-year term at probation home.

- Sep 3: FTC concludes trial. Reserves verdict.

- Sep 10: Court convicts Mukesh, Vinay, Akshay, Pawan of 13 offences including gang-rape, unnatural offence and murder of the girl and attempt to murder her male friend.

- Sep 13: Court awards death penalty to all 4 convicts.

- Sep 23: HC begins hearing the convicts' death sentence reference sent to it by the trial court.

- Jan 3, 2014: HC reserves verdict on convicts' appeals.

- Mar 13: HC upholds death penalty to the 4 convicts.

- Mar 15: SC stays execution of 2 convicts, Mukesh and Pawan, after they file appeals. Later, stays execution of other convicts also.

- Apr 15: SC directs police to produce the dying declaration of the victim.

- Feb 3, 2017: SC says it would hear afresh the aspect of awarding death penalty to the convicts.

- Mar 27: SC reserves verdict on their appeals.

- May 5: SC upholds death penalty to four convicts, says the case falls under the category of 'rarest of rare' and the offence created "tsunami of shock".

- Nov 8: Mukesh, one of the four death row convicts in the case, moves SC seeking review of its verdict upholding the capital punishment awarded to him.

- Dec 12: Delhi Police opposes Mukesh's plea in SC.

- Dec 15: Convicts Vinay Sharma and Pawan Kumar Gupta move SC for review of its verdict.

- May 4, 2018: SC reserves order on review plea of Vinay and Pawan.

- Jul 9: SC dismisses review pleas of three convicts.

- Feb, 2019: Victim's parents move Delhi court for issuance of death warrants of the four convicts

- Dec 10, 2019: Akshay moves plea in SC seeking review of his death penalty.

- Dec 13: Victim's mother moves SC opposing review plea of convict

- Dec 18: SC dismisses Akshay's review plea.

- Delhi govt seeks death warrants for execution of death sentence to the 4 convicts

- Delhi court directs Tihar authorities to issue notice to convicts to avail their remaining legal remedies.

- Dec 19: Delhi HC dismisses plea of Pawan Kumar Gupta claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence.

- Jan 6, 2020: Delhi court dismisses complaint filed by Pawan's father seeking FIR against sole witness

- Jan 7: Delhi court orders 4 convicts to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail.

- Jan 14: SC rejects curative petition of Vinay and Mukesh Kumar.

Mukesh files mercy petition before President

- Jan 17: President Ram Nath Kovind rejects mercy plea of Mukesh.

- Trial court issues death warrants again with execution date as February 1, 6 am.

- Jan 25: Mukesh moves SC against rejection of mercy plea.

- Jan 28: SC hears arguments, reserves verdict

- Jan 29: Convict Akshya Kumar approaches SC with curative petition

- SC rejects plea of Mukesh challenging rejection of his mercy plea.

- Jan 30: SC dismisses curative plea of Akshay Kumar Singh.

- Jan 31: SC dismisses plea filed by Pawan seeking review of its order rejecting his juvenility claim.

- Delhi court again postpones execution of the black warrants till further order.

- Feb 1: Centre moves HC against the trial court order.

- Feb 2: HC reserves judgement on Centre's plea.

- Feb 5: HC dismisses Centre plea against trial court order; says all 4 convicts have to be hanged together. It directs the convicts to pursue all legal remedies within a week, failing which the authorities ordered to take action in accordance with law.

Jan 1: The ban on the practice of instant triple talaq, making it a penal offence and the increase in the strength of Supreme Court judges were two of the major achievements of the law ministry in 2019.

In July, Parliament gave its nod to The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2019. The new law makes talaq-e-biddat or any other similar form of talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce pronounced by a Muslim husband void and illegal.

It makes it illegal to pronounce talaq three times in spoken, written or through SMS or WhatsApp or any other electronic chat in one sitting.

According to the new law, any Muslim who pronounces the illegal form of talaq upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

During the year, four new judges were appointed to the Supreme Court in September, taking its strength to 34, the highest-ever.

However, vacancies in high courts and lower courts are on the rise and convincing state governments and the 25 high courts to come on board to create an all-India judicial service to recruit judges for the subordinate courts tops the agenda of the Law Ministry in 2020.

Besides creating a consensus on setting up the All-India Judicial Services, the ministry will also have to focus on filling up vacancies in the high court. On an average, the vacancies stood at 400 throughout this year.

With more than 5,000 positions of judicial officers in district and subordinate courts lying vacant, the Law Ministry has pitched for setting up all-India judicial services.

The sanctioned strength of the judicial officers in district and subordinate courts was 22,644. The number of judicial officers in position and vacant posts is 17,509 and 5,135, respectively.

The government has proposed that while states and high courts can recruit judicial officers, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) can hold pan-India entrance tests.

The ministry has made it clear that such services would not encroach on the powers of the states.

As of now, the selection and appointment of judges in subordinate courts is the responsibility of the high courts and state governments concerned.

The Narendra Modi government has given a fresh push to the long-pending proposal to set up the new service to have a separate cadre for the lower judiciary in the country.

But there is a divergence of opinion among state governments and respective high courts on the constitution of the All India Judicial Service (AIJS).

One of the problems cited is that since several states have used powers under Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to declare that the local language would be used in lower courts even for writing orders, a person say selected from Tamil Nadu may find it difficult to hold proceedings in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

The other point of opposition is that an all India service may hamper the career progression of state judicial services officers.

Another key issue the ministry has to handle in 2020 is vacancies in the 25 high courts.

Throughout 2019, on an average, the high courts faced a shortage of 400 judges.

According to Law Ministry data, as on September 1, the high courts had 414 vacant positions as compared to the sanctioned strength of 1,079 judges. The figure was 409 in August and 403 in July, as per the data.

A three-member Supreme Court collegium recommends the names of candidates for appointment as high court judges. In case of appointments to the Supreme Court, the collegium consists of five top judges of the top court.

High court collegiums shortlist candidates for their respective high courts and send the names to the law ministry.

The ministry, along with background check reports by the Intelligence Bureau, forwards it to the Supreme Court collegium for a final call.

The government has maintained that appointment of judges in the high courts is a "continuous collaborative process" between the Executive and the Judiciary, as it requires consultation and approval from various Constitutional authorities.

Vacancies keep arising on account of retirement, resignation or elevation of judges and increase in judges' strength. In June last year, the vacancy position stood at 399, while it was 396 in May.

In April, 399 posts of judges were vacant, while the figure was 394 in March. The vacancy position in February stood at 400 and in January, it was 392, according to the data collated by the Department of Justice.

Over 43 lakh cases are pending in the 25 high courts.

Another priority would be the finalisation of the memorandum of the procedure to guide the appointment and transfer of the Supreme Court and high court judges. The issue had now been pending for over two years now with the SC collegium and the government failing to reach a consensus.

Successive governments have also been working on making India a hub of international arbitration. It has taken several steps to change laws dealing with commercial disputes.