Gujarat HC rejects Zakia Jafri's plea against SIT's clean chit to Modi

Agencies
October 5, 2017

Ahmedabad, Oct 5: The Gujarat High Court today rejected Zakia Jafri's plea challenging a lower court order upholding SIT's clean chit to then chief minister Narendra Modi and others on allegations of larger conspiracy in connection with the 2002 post-Godhra riots.

The high court, however, allowed Zakia to approach higher forums for further investigation in the case.

Zakia, the wife of slain former MP Ehsan Jafri, and activist Teesta Setalvad's NGO Citizen for Justice and Peace had moved the criminal review petition against a magistrate's order upholding the clean chit given by the special investigation team (SIT) to Modi and others regarding the allegations of a "larger criminal conspiracy" behind the riots.

The petition demanded that Modi and 59 others -- including senior police officers and bureaucrats -- be made accused for allegedly being part of a conspiracy which facilitated the riots.

It had also sought the high court's direction for a fresh investigation into the matter.

Ehsan Jafri, a Congress leader, was among 68 people who were killed at the Gulberg Society here when a mob attacked it on February 28, 2002, a day after the Godhra train burning incident which set off riots in the state.

The SIT's closure report, filed on February 8, 2012, gave a clean chit to Modi and others.

In December 2013, the metropolitan magistrate's court here rejected Jafri's petition against the report, after which she moved the high court in 2014.

Comments

Althaf
 - 
Thursday, 5 Oct 2017

When the judges belong to sangh parivar then how can we expect justice?? 

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
July 20,2020

Aligarh, Jul 20: The son of a motor mechanic in Aligarh, who had received a scholarship, topped at his high school in the United States.

Mohammad Shadab, son of the motor mechanic, told ANI, "Last year, I received the Kennedy-Lugar youth exchange scholarship worth Rs 20 lakh from the US government. Following this, I went to the States to pursue my high school education."

Out of 800 students, Shadab was also selected Student of the Month at his school. On his achievement, he said, "It was an achievement for me to be awarded this tag."

"I have worked really hard to top the high school," Shabad said.

Shadab said, "The condition at home was not good and it is still not that good. I want to support my parents and make them feel proud."
He also thanked the Indian government. "I am thankful to the Indian government for making me the flag-bearer in another county and choosing me for this scholarship."

Shabad's father, Arshad Noor, who is working as a motor mechanic for the past 25 years, said, "We had sent him to the US for his education and I am happy that he topped at the school."
On being asked about his son, Arshad said, "I want my son to become an IAS officer and serve the country."

But Shadab expressed the desire to work at the United Nations as a human rights officer.

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
March 12,2020

New Delhi, Mar 12: TMC MP Saugata Roy said Home Minister Amit Shah should resign for "failing" to control the riots in Delhi and demanded a judicial inquiry by a sitting Supreme Court judge.

Participating in a discussion on the violence in Delhi in Lok Sabha, Roy said the Delhi riots happened 72 years after Mahatma Gandhi was killed by a Hindu fanatic.

"Gandhiji has been murdered again in Delhi by, you know who," Roy said while addressing the Chair.

Taking on BJP MP Meenakshi Lekhi for defending BJP leaders for their controversial remarks, which he claimed instigated the violence, Roy said he has seldom heard such a communal speech ever.

Dubbing the BJP MP as "Devil's Advocate", Roy said, "She spent five minutes defending the most hated man. May I quote (William) Shakespeare and call her the Devil's Advocate?...She is the best Devil's Advocate possible. She has also been an advocate for the Delhi Police which has shown total inaction and ineptness in this whole riot in Delhi."

Thereafter Roy trained his gun at Shah, who was present in the house while the TMC MP was speaking.

He said that when the riots started on February 24, Home Minister Shah was sitting in the front row at Motera Stadium (in Gujarat) welcoming US President Donald Trump.

"When Mr. Shah should have been in Delhi Police control room, he was welcoming Mr. Trump at Motera. There was no order to the police. Then on 25th, things went out of control. Armed mobs fought with each other on the streets of Delhi," Roy said.

Demanding resignation of Shah, Roy raised questions on NSA Ajit Doval's visit to the riots-affected areas on February 26 and asked what was the Home Minister doing.

"Is it NSA's business to control ordinary law and order situation? Why was the Home Minister absent in action? There is no explanation for the same," he said.

The TMC leader said he feels bad standing face-to-face with Shah.

"He is still young, he has a good future. He should acknowledge responsibility for his failure to control or stop Delhi riots and bring peace in three days. In the name of God, go and do not stay in the Home Minister's position," Roy said, adding he is the man who could not prevent riots in Delhi, at a place 10 kilometres away from the Home Ministry.

Roy demanded a judicial inquiry into the riots by a sitting Supreme Court judge and complete rehabilitation for all the riot victims.

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
March 3,2020

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

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.