Cong MP Masood disqualified from Rajya Sabha

October 21, 2013

New Delhi, Oct 21: Convicted Congress leader Rashid Masood today became the first MP to lose his seat after the Supreme Court struck down a provision that protects a convicted lawmaker from disqualification on the ground of pendency of appeal in higher courts.

66-year-old Masood was held guilty in a case of corruption and other offences in September. His conviction was the first after the Supreme Court struck down a provision in the electoral law that provided immunity to MPs and MLAs from immediate disqualification.

Sources said the notification formally announcing a vacancy in the Rajya Sabha following Masood's disqualification was issued by Rajya Sabha Secretary General Shumsher K Sheriff.

A copy of the notification has been sent to the Election Commission for necessary action, the sources said.

Lok Sabha MPs Lalu Prasad and Jagdish Sharma, both convicted in the fodder scam, are set to be formally disqualified as the Lok Sabha secretariat is likely to follow suit.

In September, a special CBI court had held Rajya Sabha member Masood guilty in a case of corruption and other offences.

Masood, Minister of Health in the VP Singh government between 1990 and 1991, was held guilty of fraudulently nominating undeserving candidates to MBBS seats allotted to Tripura in medical colleges across the country from the central pool.masood

Special CBI Judge J P S Malik held Masood guilty of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating) and 468 (forgery).

Masood's conviction is the first case after the July 10 Supreme Court judgement that struck down sub-section 4 of Section 8 of Representation of the People Act, under which incumbent MPs, MLAs and MLCs can avoid disqualification till pendency of the appeal against conviction in a higher court. The appeal has to be made within three months of the conviction.

Seeking to negate the SC verdict, government had introduced a Bill in Parliament in the Monsoon session. But following differences with the opposition, the bill could not be passed.

An ordinance on the lines of the bill was later cleared by the Union Cabinet on September 24 to protect convicted lawmakers.

But reversing its earlier step, the Cabinet on October 2 decided to withdraw the Ordinance as well as Bill in the wake of public outburst against it by Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi.

The overturning of the decision came in the wake of Rahul Gandhi's trashing of the Ordinance as "nonsense". He had said it should be "torn" and "thrown out".

President Pranab Mukherjee had also questioned the government's decision on the ordinance.

Clearing the air about the procedure to be followed following conviction of an MP, Attorney General G E Vahanvati has recently told the Lok Sabha Secretariat that notification declaring the seats vacant should be issued immediately.

Giving his opinion for the second time in two weeks on the same subject, Vahanvati has made it clear that an MP stands disqualified the day he or she is convicted by a court and the notification announcing vacancy in seat should be done immediately.

He has also warned that any delay in issuing notification could mean non-compliance of a Supreme Court order.

The country's top law officer has made it clear that the notification should be issued by the concerned House from which the MP belongs.

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 29,2020

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.

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
July 10,2020

New Delhi, July 10: Hours before gangster Vikas Dubey was killed in an alleged police encounter on Friday, a plea was filed in the Supreme Court demanding urgent listing for action into his "possible killing" by Uttar Pradesh Police.

Advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay had apprehended in his plea that there is a high possibility that Dubey will also be killed in a 'fake' encounter after his arrest from Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh a day ago.

Upadhyay claimed that the UP Police was expected to "concoct the same story of encounter" for Dubey like it did when four of his associates were killed after the 2 July incident.

Dubey was the primary accused in the killing of eight policemen in Kanpur on July 2. He was arrested from Ujjain on Thursday. He was killed in a police encounter, when he allegedly tried to flee on Friday morning.

"During the hunt for Dubey and co-accused, five of his accused aides were arrested/caught and then killed by the police in the name of encounter...Thus, there is every possibility that even Dubey shall be killed by Uttar Pradesh Police like other co-accused once his custody is obtained," Upadhyay feared.

He submitted that the killing of the accused by the police in the name of encounter no matter how heinous the crime was "against the rule of law and serious violation of human rights and nothing sort of Talibanisation of the country". Upadhyay sought hearing in the matter on Friday itself, citing extreme urgency.

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 1,2020

New Delhi, Jan 1: Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Mumbai has allowed banks that lent money to embattled liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya to utilize seized assets, news agency reported today quoting sources from the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The court also said all parties affected by the order can appeal at the Bombay High Court till January 18.

Last month, a consortium of Indian banks petitioned a London court for ex-billionaire Vijay Mallya to be declared bankrupt over ₹9,000 crore in unpaid debts. It comes as Mallya, who founded the now defunct Kingfisher Airlines Ltd, faces extradition to his home country of India.

Mallya had fled India in March 2016 and has been living in the United Kingdom since then. The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines is fighting extradition to India in relation of fraud and money laundering allegations arising out of the debt acquired from the banks.

Mallya remains on bail pending the UK High Court appeal hearing in the extradition proceedings brought by India in relation to fraud and money laundering charges amounting to ₹9,000 crores. He had been arrested on an extradition warrant back in April 2017 and has been fighting his extradition in the UK courts since then.

He was granted permission to appeal against his extradition order, which is scheduled in the Royal Courts of Justice in London for February.

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.