Cop killed in stone-pelting after PM's rally

Jan 6: India’s Finance Ministry has delivered a challenge to its revenue collectors: meet tax targets despite $20 billion of corporate tax cuts.

Through a video conference on Dec. 16, officials were exhorted to meet the direct tax mop-up target of 13.4 trillion rupees ($187 billion), a government official told reporters. Collection in the eight months to November grew at 5% from a year earlier, against the desired 17%.

The missive shows Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s urgent need to buoy public finances in a slowing economy where April-November tax collections were half the amount budgeted. Authorities withheld some payments to states and have capped ministries’ expenditure as the fiscal deficit ballooned beyond the target.

The government’s efforts to maintain its deficit goal goes against advice from some quarters, including central bank Governor Shaktikanta Das, who urged more spending to spur economic growth.

It’s uncertain though how much room Modi’s administration has to boost expenditure, given that it may already be borrowing as much as 540 billion rupees through state-run companies, a figure that isn’t reflected on the federal balance sheet. Uncertainty about public finances pushed up sovereign yields in November and December, compelling Das to announce unconventional policies to keep costs in check.

“This is not a time to conceal the fiscal deficit by off-budget borrowing or deferring payments,” said Indira Rajaraman, an economist and a former member of the Reserve Bank of India’s board. “If they were to stick to the target, that would be catastrophic because there is so much pump-priming that is needed right now.”

GDP grew 4.5% in the quarter ended September, the slowest pace in more than six years as both consumption and investments cooled in Asia’s third-largest economy. Only government spending supported the expansion, piling pressure on Modi to keep stimulating.

S&P Global Ratings warned in December it may downgrade India’s sovereign ratings if economic growth doesn’t recover. Government support seems to be waning now, with ministries asked to cap spending in the final quarter of the financial year at 25% of the amount budgeted rather than 33% allowed earlier. This new rule will hamstring sectors including agriculture, aviation and coal, where not even half of annual targets have been disbursed.

As the federal government runs short of money, it’s been delaying payouts to state administrations.

Private hospitals have threatened to suspend cash-less services to government employees over non-payment of dues, while a builder informed the stock exchange about delayed rental payments from no less than the tax office itself.

India is considering a litigation-settlement plan that will allow companies to exit lingering tax disputes by paying a portion of the money demanded by the government, the Economic Times newspaper reported Saturday.

The move will help improve the ease of doing business besides unlocking a part of the almost 8 trillion rupees ($111 billion) caught up in these disputes. The step, which is being considered as part of the annual budget, could also bridge India’s fiscal gap.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has refused to comment on the deficit goal before the official budget presentation due Feb. 1.

A deviation from target, if any, “will need to be balanced with a credible consolidation plan further-out,” said Radhika Rao, an economist at DBS Group Holdings Ltd. in Singapore.

New Delhi, Jul 24: The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the ICMR to come out with a clarification that mobile number, government-issued identity card, photographs or even a residential proof ought not to be insisted upon for Covid-19 test of mentally ill homeless persons.

According to an Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) advisory of June 19, every person who was to be tested for Covid-19 has to provide a government-issued identity proof and should have a valid phone number for tracing and tracking the individual and his/her contacts.

A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan said that ICMR should issue a clarification by way of a circular or an official order that the identity proof, address proof and mobile number are not required for testing mentally ill homeless persons.

The high court said a camp can be organised for testing such persons as is being done across Delhi for others.

"Guidelines have to be given by you (ICMR). You put it in black and white for the states'' benefit. You only need to clarify in two-three lines that mobile number, address proof and identity cards are not required for testing mentally ill homeless persons," it said.

"Use your powers for the public at large. Once you do so (issue the clarification), all states will comply," the bench added.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for ICMR, sought time to take instructions from the government regarding the observations made by the bench.

The high court, thereafter, listed the matter for further hearing on August 7.

The bench was hearing a PIL moved by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal seeking directions to ICMR and Delhi government to issue guidelines for Covid-19 testing of mentally ill homeless persons in the national capital.

Coronavirus India update: State-wise total number of confirmed cases, deaths on July 24

The high court on July 9 had asked the ICMR to consider the plight of the mentally ill homeless persons and see whether they can be tested without insisting upon a mobile number, government issue identity card and residential address proof.

The bench had said to ICMR that many homeless mentally ill persons are institutionalised or in shelter homes and therefore, traceable, so there was no need for their identity proof or phone numbers to test them for Covid-19.

In response to the court''s query, ICMR has filed an affidavit stating that the purpose behind the submission of government identity card and telephone number was to ensure proper tracking and treatment of positive cases and their contacts as ''Test/Track/Treat'' is the best strategy for control of Covid-19 pandemic. 

It further said that since health was a state subject, the concerned state health authority may consider adopting a suitable protocol to ensure that the strategy of ''Test/Track/Treat'' is followed and the grievance raised in the PIL is also addressed.

ICMR, in its affidavit, has said that it has only advised facilitating contact tracing as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients.

"The modalities regarding the contact tracing as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients completely falls under the domain of IDSP. NCDC and state health authorities. 

"ICMR is a research organization and the contact tracing, as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients, is not under the domain of ICMR," it has said in its affidavit.

Bansal has claimed in his petition that the Delhi government has not taken seriously the lack of guidelines with respect to Covid-19 testing of mentally ill homeless persons.

Coronavirus Worldometer | 15 countries with the highest number of cases, deaths due to the Covid-19 pandemic

He has said the high court had on June 9 directed it to address the grievances raised by him in another PIL with regard to mentally ill homeless persons in accordance with law, rules, regulations and government policy.

He said that on June 13 he also sent a representation to the Chief Secretary of Delhi government for providing treatment to mentally ill homeless persons in the national capital who have no residence proof. 

However, nothing was done by the Delhi government, he had told the court.

New Delhi, Feb 29: Former Union Minister M J Akbar told a Delhi court on Friday that journalist Priya Ramani had defamed him by calling him with adjectives such as 'media's biggest predator' in the wake of #MeToo movement in 2018 that harmed his reputation.

M J Akbar made the allegations before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja through his lawyer during the final hearing of a private criminal defamation complaint filed by him against Priya Ramani. Akbar resigned as Union minister on October 17, 2018.

Ramani in 2018 accused Akbar of sexual misconduct around 20 years ago when he was a journalist.

Senior advocate Geeta Luthra, appearing for Akbar, said that the allegations were intentional and malafide.

“When you call someone media's biggest predator, it is per se defamatory. Calling a person with such adjectives is on the face of it defamatory. In the eyes of the people, Akbar's reputation was harmed... The per se effect was lowering of my (Akbar) reputation in the eyes of the right thinking members of the society,” she told the court.

She said there was no due process in the allegations. “It has a cascading effect. Embarrassing questions were asked. I (Akbar) am a person of greatest integrity... There was no due process in the allegations. You cannot just make allegation and let that person suffer,” she added.

Luthra said that if there was any grievance, it had to be raised then and there before the appropriate authority.

“We need to realise the effect has what we say or what we do. It's not like she went to any authority or raised any grievance. Opportunity was there, rights were there but to attack so person behind their back on social media...knowing that his whole life will be adversely affected? It's not right,” she said.

M J Akbar has denied all the allegations of sexual harassment against the women who came forward during #MeToo campaign against him.

Akbar had earlier told the court that the allegations made in an article in the 'Vogue' and the subsequent tweets were defamatory on the face of it as the complainant had deposed them to be false and imaginary and that an “immediate damage” was caused to him due to the “false” allegations by Priya Ramani.

Ramani had earlier told the court that her “disclosure” of alleged sexual harassment by Akbar has come at “a great personal cost” and she had “nothing to gain” from it.

She had said her move would empower women to speak up and make them understand their rights at workplace.

Several women came up with accounts of the alleged sexual harassment by M J Akbar him while they were working as journalists under him.

He has termed the allegations “false, fabricated and deeply distressing” and said he was taking appropriate legal action against them.