Mining baron Janardhana Reddy can’t campaign in Ballari for Karnataka polls: Supreme Court

Bengaluru, Jan 12: Chief Justice of India, Sharad Arvind Bobde on Saturday hinted at the possibility of Artificial Intelligence being developed for the court system while making it clear that it will never replace human discretion.

Speaking at an event here, Bobde said, "We have a possibility of developing Artificial Intelligence for the court system. Only for the purpose of ensuring that the undue delay in justice is prevented."

"I must make it clear at the outset as there are times when even judges have asked this. AI is not going to replace human judges or human discretion", he added.

Sharing more details of his vision, he stated, "It is only the repetitive, mathematical and mechanical parts of the judgments for which help can be taken from the system...we are exploring the possibility of implementing it."

Bobde stressed on the requirement of developing AI for judiciary while outlining the number of pending cases in different courts.

"Some people are in jail for 10-15 years and we are not in position to deal with their appeals. The high court's and Supreme Court take so long and ultimately the courts feel that it is just to release them on bail", he said.

Bobde also endorsed employing every talent and skill to ensure delivery of justice in a reasonable time.

"We must employ every talent, every skill we possess to ensure that justice is received within reasonable time. Delay in justice can't be a reason for anybody to take law into their hands. But it's very important for us as courts to ensure there's no undue delay in justice", he said.

CJI Bobde also highlighted the need for pre-litigation mediation and said, "Pre-litigation mediation is the need of the hour especially in the backdrop of a significant pendency that the courts are tackling with. There are innumerable areas where pre-litigation mediation could solve the problem."

He also stressed that the position of a judge is very unique under the constitution and they have to deal with a variety of problems.

"The foundation of civilisation rests on the law. Judicial officers have to deal with a variety of problems...Judges without adequate knowledge, skills and experience may cause distortion, delay and miscarriage of justice", he said.

Earlier in the day, Chief Justice of India Bobde inaugurated the phase-1 of the new building of the Karnataka Judicial Academy on Crescent Road in Bengaluru.

The new building has three floors, besides, the ground floor and two basement floors.

Bengaluru, Jul 2: Karnataka government has issued a show-cause notice to 18 private hospitals for refusing to admit a 52-year-old patient with influenza-like illness (ILI) symptoms, who later died.

According to the notice dated on June 30, a 52-years patient named Bhawarlal Sujani died after he was denied admission by 18 private hospitals.

The patient was taken to these hospitals on Saturday and Sunday for admission on observing some ILI like symptoms. But none of these hospitals admitted in on the pretext of unavailability of bed/ventilators, read the notice.

This is a clear violation of providing medical assistance and admission necessitated under the agreed provision of KPME Registration. They should strictly adhere to the provisions under Sections 11 & 11 A of KPME Act 2017. Private Medical Establishments cannot deny/ refuse/ avoid treatment to patients with Covid-19 and Covid-19 like symptoms, the state Health Department said.

By denying the admission to the deceased patient, your hospitals have violated the provisions of the above-said act. You are liable for legal action in this regard, as per the notice.

The state Health department asked the hospitals to reply as to why action should not be initiated under the relevant Acts. 

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.