Mangalurean Justice Abdul Nazeer elevated as Supreme Court Judge

[email protected] (CD Network)
February 19, 2017

Mangaluru, Feb 19: Justice S Abdul Nazeer, who was the senior judge of Karnataka High Court, has been elevated as the judge of Supreme Court. He was one of five new judges sworn in on Friday. The apex court now has a total strength of 28 judges.S Abdul Nazeer

With the swearing in of Justice Sanjay Kishnan Kaul, Justice Naveen Sinha, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagouder, Justice Dipak Gupta and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer, the apex court now falls short only by three judges against its sanctioned strength of 31.

57-year-old Justice Nazeer, who hails from Beluvai village in Mangaluru taluk, is one of the six children of Late Fakir Saheb.

After completing his B.Com at Mahaveera College in Moodbidri in 1979, he obtained law degree from SDM Law College in Mangaluru. He has started his career as a lawyer under Advocate M K Vijayakumar in Karkala and then worked under K S Qasim and Tarak Ram in Bengaluru.

After several years after practice, he was appointed as a judge in Karnataka High Court in 2003. His honesty and promptness helped him in his growth. He was the only judge from Karnataka to be elevated to Supreme Court this time.

Justice Kaul was the Chief Justice of Madras High Court; Justice Sinha was the Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court; Justice Shantanagouder was the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court; Justice Gupta was the Chief Justice of Chhattisgarh High Court.

Comments

s nayeema
 - 
Friday, 3 May 2019

hon ble justice s abdul nazeer sahib is very good and honest judge since he is giving good judgement to me i am satisfied with her i cant firget till of my swath thanks lots

Syed k zunnoor…
 - 
Monday, 20 Feb 2017

We are really proud of you sir,,pride of karnatka

IMTIAZ AHMED
 - 
Sunday, 19 Feb 2017

MAY ALLAH GIVE GOOD HEALTH AND STRENGTH TO DOING THE RESPONSIBLE JOB IN GOOD JUSTIFICATION. ALL THE BEST.

Althaf
 - 
Sunday, 19 Feb 2017

Masha allah. Hope he is fair and provide justice to all.

Chaddi's need burnal on a urgent basis.

Ahmed Bava
 - 
Sunday, 19 Feb 2017

Ma Sha Allah Mabrook Justice S Abdul Nazeer.

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
June 3,2020

Mangaluru, Jun 3: A banner that read "Veer Savarkar Flyover Pumpwell" surfaced on the sidewall of the Pumpwell flyover in Mangaluru on Tuesday night.

It is suspected that activists of Bajrang Dal put up the controversial banner. Though it was removed later, it sparked debates on social media and photos of it went viral.

The development comes amid the controversy over the naming of a flyover at Yelahanka in Bengaluru after Savarkar.

A Hindutva ideologue, Savarkar has tendered apology to British imperialists and pledged to support them following his arrest during India’s freedom movement.

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 19,2020

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.

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 13,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 13: Though he submitted his resignation as leader of the opposition over a month ago, former chief minister Siddaramaiah continues as the face of the Congress in Karnataka.

However, this may change as All India Congress Committee (AICC) interim president Sonia Gandhi has summoned Siddaramaiah to Delhi for a final consultation over change of guard. Over the past month, there has been speculation over the possibility of Congress persisting with Siddaramaiah as opposition leader and either party troubleshooter DK Shivakumar or former ministers MB Patil, HK Patil or Eshwar Khandre replacing incumbent president Dinesh Gundu Rao. Both tendered resignations owing moral responsibility for the party's dismal performance in the 15 bypolls held last month.

In the past 24 hours, there has been talk of Siddaramaiah being asked to be the state unit president and vacating the other post for a young turk or experience legislator including the likes of Shivakumar who could be the face of KPCC by 2023 if he gets a clean chit from the ED in cases of money-laundering, etc. Seniors, including former KPCC president and DyCM G Parameswara and former minister HK Patil, are strong contenders to be leader of the opposition if Siddaramaiah is asked to vacate the post.

However, sources in the Siddaramaiah camp dismissed the possibility of him becoming KPCC president. "He has never aspired for the post and the high command is not inclined to do it," said a member in his camp.

Siddaramaiah may meet Sonia on Tuesday morning. It's still unclear if any other KPCC functionaries have been summoned. Sources said Sonia is scheduled to leave India for medical treatment on January 15 and wanted to complete the consultations about Karnataka. The high command has reportedly gone through reports submitted by party observers Madhusudan Mistry and Parameswara.

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.