Defamation case: Kejriwal, Sisodia, Yogendra forced to appear

March 17, 2015

New Delhi, Mar 17: Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, his deputy Manish Sisodia and dissident AAP leader Yogendra Yadav were today forced to appear before a Delhi Court in a criminal defamation case after their failure to do so drew a stinging remark by the judge that they have "no respect for law".kejriwal sisodia

"There is nothing to reflect why the accused (Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav) have not appeared. Accused have no respect for law. Considering no one has appeared for accused, I am keeping the matter pending at 2PM. Call at 2PM," Metropolitan Magistrate Mayuri Singh said after the trio failed to comply with court's order that they were to "positively" appear today.

Hours after the court rejected their plea for exemption from personal appearance for the day citing lawyers' strike, the Chief Minister, Deputy CM and Yadav showed up before the Magistrate who marked their presence and fixed the case for May 2 for pronouncing order on the issue of whether to frame charges against the accused.

Kejriwal and Sisodia reached the court room together at around 1.45 pm while AAP leader Yogendra Yadav arrived few minutes later.

The presence of the Chief Minister resulted in over crowding of the court room and the premises prompting the magistrate to ask the onlookers to vacate the room.

On the arrival of the three leaders, the police barricaded the premises and the court room, which was already filled with advocates, litigants, mediapersons and staff of other courts, was latched from inside.

The case was put up before link magistrate Singh as Metropolitan Magistrate Muneesh Garg, before whom the matter was going on, was on leave today.

"As the presiding officer (before whom the case is going on) is on leave, I will fix the case for the purpose already fixed and will give you the date.

"I have marked the presence of the three accused, they can leave," the magistrate said.

The three leaders had sought exemption from personal appearance for the day saying the case was at a crucial stage and the presence of advocates was necessary.

Later on, the lawyers, including senior advocate H S Phoolka and advocate Rahul Mehra, who accompanied the AAP leaders were without bands due to the strike.

In the morning, the court had directed them to personally appear before it at 2 pm saying there was no ground for exemption from their appearance and they "have no respect for the law".

The court said the exemption application displayed no reason for the absence of the accused.

The court had noted that a clerk appeared on behalf of the accused and their advocates and moved the exemption plea.

The exemption plea, however, was opposed by complainant and advocate Surender Kumar Sharma saying the lawyers are on strike and not the litigants.

"It is mockery of justice. It would not be in the interest of justice if any adjournment is given in the case as the matter had earlier been adjourned three times due to absence of the accused," he said.

The court had earlier issued summons against the three AAP leaders under sections 499, 500 (defamation) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC, and had said there was prima facie material to summon the accused.

The court had granted bail to Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav, after they had appeared before it on June 4 last year in pursuance to summons against them.

In the post-lunch proceedings, complainant Sharma who was accompanied by large number of lawyers sought court's permission to advance arguments.

However, the magistrate denied the request saying the concerned court will hear the matter on the next date of hearing.

The court on February 11 had given last opportunity to Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav and directed them to positively appear before it today as it was scheduled to pass order on the issue of framing of charges.

Sharma, in his complaint, had alleged that in 2013 he was approached by volunteers of AAP who had asked him to contest the Delhi Assembly elections on a party ticket, saying Kejriwal was pleased with his social services.

He filled up the application form to contest the polls after being told by Sisodia and Yadav that AAP's Political Affairs Committee of the party had decided to give him the ticket. However, it was later denied to him.

On October 14, 2013, the complainant claimed that articles in leading newspapers carried "defamatory, unlawful and derogatory words used by the accused persons" which have lowered his reputation in the Bar and the society.

While issuing summons against AAP leaders, the court had said, "The press release published in newspapers as well as testimonies of witnesses reflect that defamatory remarks were published in the newspaper which affected the reputation of the complainant in the society and lowered his reputation in the eyes of other members of the society."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 27,2020

Jan 27: The Andhra Pradesh Cabinet passed a resolution on Monday setting in motion the process for abolishing the state Legislative Council.

A similar resolution will now be adopted in the Legislative Assembly and sent to the Centre for necessary follow-up action.

With just nine members, the ruling YSR Congress is in minority in the 58-member Legislative Council. The opposition Telugu Desam Party (TDP) has an upper hand with 28 members and the ruling party could get a majority in the House only in 2021 when a number of opposition members will retire at the end of their six-year term.

The move by the Andhra Pradesh cabinet came after the Y S Jaganmohan Reddy government last week failed to pass in the Upper House of the state legislature two crucial Bills related to its plan of having three capitals for the state.

Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council Chairman M A Sharrif on January 22 referred to a select committee the two bills -- AP Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Bill, 2020, and the AP Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) Act (Repeal) Bill -- for deeper examination.

The chairman had said that he was using his discretionary powers under Rule 154 while referring the Bills to the select panel in line with the demand of the TDP.

Following this, the chief minister had told the Assembly, "We need to seriously think whether we need to have such a House which appears to be functioning with only political motives. It is not mandatory to have the Council, which is our own creation, and it is only for our convenience."

"So let us discuss the issue further on Monday and take a decision on whether or not to continue the Council," he had said.

In fact, the YSRC had on December 17 first threatened to abolish the Council when it became clear that the TDP was bent on blocking two Bills related to creation of a separate Commission for SCs and conversion of all government schools into English medium.

As the Legislature was adjourned sine dine on December 17, no further action was taken. But last week, the issue cropped up again as the TDP remained firm on its stand on opposing the three-capitals plan.

The YSRC managed to get two TDP members to its side, but the government failed to get the three capitals Bills passed in the Council.

"What will be the meaning of governance if the House of Elders does not allow good decisions to be taken in the interest of people and block enactment of laws? We need to seriously think about it… Whether we should have such a House or do away with it," the chief minister had said in the Assembly.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 5,2020

Jodhpur, Jun 5: A video has gone viral on social media showing what could be called Jodhpur's George Floyd moment with a twist, showing cops throwing a person on the ground and pressing his neck with their knees for roaming around without a mask.

However, unlike the unfortunate incident in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the cops in Jodhpur reportedly acted after the person, said to be mentally challenged, turned violent after being confronted by the police.

Dumb TV media is playing the initial part of this video as 'India's George Flyod moment'. Doesn't matter to them that the same video shows the man beating the cops back badly pic.twitter.com/vGSaON6oii

— Swati Goel Sharma (@swati_gs) June 5, 2020

George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, died after being arrested by the police outside a shop in Minneapolis in the US on May 25. Footage showed a white officer, Derek Chauvin, kneeling on Floyd's neck for several minutes while he was pinned to the floor. He was pronounced dead later in the hospital, triggering widespread protests across the US.

However, in the Jodhpur incident, the man, identifed as Mukesh Kumar Prajapat, did not die but instead started fighting with the policemen.

Jodhpur police officers confirmed that the video was shot in the city on Thursday after the police wanted to issue a challan against the man for roaming on the streets without wearing a mask before he started manhandling the police.

The video shows a cop pressing his neck with his knee while two other cops held the young man's legs. A huge crowd gathered when the scuffle broke out.

Meanwhile, the SHO of Dev Nagar police station, Somkaran, said that the police were issuing a challan to Prajapat when he attacked them and tore their uniform. An FIR has been lodged against Prajapat on a complaint lodged by the Pratap Nagar police station. He will be produced in the court later in the day.

Prajapat is said to be mentally challenged and had damaged his father's eye earlier for which a case was registered against him, the poice said. Action is being initiated against Prajapat under the Epidemic Act, they added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 28,2020

Feb 28: National oil marketer Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) on Friday said it is ready to supply low emission BS-VI fuels from April 1 and that there will be a marginal increase in retail prices.

The largest oil supplier has spent over Rs 17,000 crore to upgrade its refineries to produce the low-sulfur diesel and petrol, the company's chairman Sanjiv Singh told reporters here.

Without disclosing the quantum of price increase, Singh said, “there will definitely be a marginal increase in retail prices of the fuels from April 1 when the whole country will be run on new fuels, which will have a sulphur content of only 10 parts per million (ppm) as against the present 50 ppm.

“But let me assure you, we will not be burdening the consumers with a steep hike,” Singh said.

He said, state-run oil marketing companies (OMCs) have invested Rs 35,000 crore to upgrade their refineries, of which Rs 17,000 crore have been spent by IOC alone.

Earlier this week, the sell-off bound BPCL said it had invested around Rs 7,000 crore for the same. ONGC-run HPCL has not so far disclosed its readiness for BS-VI supplies or its capex on the same.

HPCL had said from February 26-27 it was ready with BS-VI fuels and that it would sell only the new fuels from March 1.

IOC switched to BS-VI fuel production a fortnight ago and all its depots and containers are ready now, Singh said.

However, he said some remote locations, where the intake is very low, will take some more time to switch. But the company is planning to drain out the entire BS-IV stock and replenish the new fuels at such locations, he added.

Further, it has been reported that the companies will have to increase prices by 70-120 paise a litre, but Singh said, to arrive such a weighted average is not possible given the complexities of each refinery.

He, however, asserted that the price hike will not be a burden on consumers.

We are not looking at this investment from a pure return on investment basis, but this is a national mandate and we have done it.

Having said that, all those countries that moved to low emission fuels are charging higher prices; and from April 1, our prices will also be benchmarked against Euro VI prices as against the present practice of the cost-plus model, Singh concluded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.