Pleas on Loya's death serious but don't cast aspersions: SC

Agencies
January 22, 2018

New Delhi, Jan 22: The Supreme Court today dubbed as "serious" the issues raised in the pleas relating to the death of special CBI judge B H Loya but castigated a senior lawyer for raking up the name of BJP president Amit Shah in the case.

The apex court, which decided to look into "all documents with utmost seriousness" connected with the death of Loya, who was trying the Soharabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, also took umbrage at senior advocate Indira Jaising, who during the hearing, inferred a possible future order that the apex court may gag the media in the case.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, which was hearing two PILS on the Loya's death in 2014 transferred to itself the two other petitions pending at Nagpur and Mumbai benches of the Bombay High Court.

The bench, also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, restrained all the high courts in the country from entertaining any petition relating to Loya's death.

Loya, who was hearing the sensitive Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, had allegedly died of cardiac arrest in Nagpur on December 1, 2014, when he had gone to attend the wedding of a colleague's daughter.

The bench asked the parties to catalogue all documents relating to Loya's death which have not been filed so far and submit them for its perusal on February 2, the next date of hearing. "We must look into all documents with the utmost seriousness", it said.

The bench got irked when senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for a Bombay lawyers' body which has filed a PIL in the high court there, took the name of BJP president Amit Shah during the hearing, alleging that everything has been done to protect him (Shah).

"As of today, it is a natural death. Then, do not cast aspersions," the bench said while considering the strong opposition on the issue by senior advocate Harish Salve, the counsel for Maharashtra government.

During the hearing, CJI Misra got angry when activist lawyer Jaising inferred a possible future order that the apex court may gag the media in the case.

"This is not fair to me. This you cannot do," the CJI lamented and asked Jaising to retract and apologise forthwith.

Jaising retracted her statement and tendered an apology.

Earlier, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had recused itself from hearing two petitions, filed by Congress leader Tehseen Poonawalla and a Maharashtra journalist B S Lone on the issue, and had said that the matter be posted before "an appropriate bench".

In pursuance of that order, these two matters were listed today before the bench headed by the CJI.

Four senior-most apex court judges -- Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, M B Lokur and Kurian Joseph -- at their January 12 press conference had questioned the manner in which sensitive cases were being allocated and Loya's case was one of them.

A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had on January 19 posted the pleas seeking an independent probe into the alleged mysterious death of Loya for today by directing listing of petitions before "an appropriate bench".

The same bench on January 16 had also left it to the Maharashtra government to decide which documents, relating to Loya's death, could be handed over to the petitioners.

The state government, which had filed documents in a sealed cover relating to Loya's death, had opposed the petitioners' demand that the entire material should be handed over to them for perusal.

The apex court, in its January 16, the order said, "Let the documents be placed on record within seven days and if it is considered appropriate, copies be furnished to the petitioners. Put up before the appropriate bench".

In the encounter case which was being heard by Loya, the BJP President along with Rajasthan Home Minister Gulabchand Kataria, Rajasthan-based businessman Vimal Patni, former Gujarat police chief P C Pande, Additional Director General of Police Geeta Johri and Gujarat police officers Abhay Chudasama and N K Amin, have already been discharged.

The issue of Loya's death had come under the spotlight in November last year after media reports quoting his sister had fuelled suspicion about the circumstances surrounding his death and its link to the Sohrabuddin case.

However, Loya's son had on January 14 said in Mumbai that his father died of natural causes and not under suspicious circumstances.

The counsel for petitioners had told the court that this was a case of alleged mysterious death of a judge, who was hearing a sensitive case, and an independent probe was required.

In the pleas, it has been claimed that circumstances revolving around the death of the judge were "questionable, mysterious and contradicting".

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
January 16,2020

New Delhi, Jan 16: Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Bipin Rawat on Thursday said that he supported a negotiated peace deal between the US and Taliban in Afghanistan.

Gen. Rawat was speaking along with other world leaders at Raisina dialogue organised by India's influential think-tank Observer Research Foundation (ORF).

Arguing that terrorism was going to stay in the world as long as states were going to use it against other states, he said it was important to prevent states from using terrorism as a "proxy war".

"The only way to deal with it was what the US did post 9/11," he said, adding that the war against terror was necessary.

However, now a peace deal with Taliban is required, Gen. Rawat said.

"It must be a negotiated peace deal so that the Taliban stops using terrorism," he added. Hinting that the US should maintain its presence in Afghanistan, the CDS said that though Afghan security forces are now equipped to fight back terror groups in Afghanistan but they still need support.

The newly appointed CDS officially confirmed that India has shifted its stance on Taliban. India has traditionally been opposed to the Pakistan-backed Taliban in Afghanistan. Thousands of Afghans were given refuge in India when they fled the country due to oppression and terrorism of the Taliban regime. India is in alignment with the democratically elected government in Kabul that the Taliban remains supported by Pakistan.

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 14,2020

London, Feb 14: Liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya once again asked the Indian banks to take back 100 per cent of the principal amount owed to them at the end of his three-day British High Court appeal on Thursday against an extradition order to India.

The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, wanted in India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to an alleged Rs 9,000 crores in unpaid bank loans, said the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are fighting over the same assets and not treating him reasonably in the process.

“I request the banks with folded hands, take 100 per cent of your principal back, immediately,” he said outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

“The Enforcement Directorate attached the assets on the complaint by the banks that I was not paying them. I have not committed any offenses under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) that the Enforcement Directorate should suo moto attach my assets," he said.

"I am saying, please banks take your money. The ED is saying no, we have a claim over these assets. So, the ED on the one side and the banks on the other are fighting over the same assets,” he added.

Asked about heading back to India, he noted: “I should be where my family is, where my interests are.

"If the CBI and the ED are going to be reasonable, it’s a different story. What all they are doing to me for the last four years is totally unreasonable.”

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bench presiding over the appeal, concluded hearing the arguments in the case and said they will be handing down their verdict at a later date after considering the oral as well as written submissions in the “very dense” case over the next few weeks.

On a day of heated arguments between Mallya’s barrister, Clare Montgomery, and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) counsel Mark Summers, arguing on behalf of the Indian government, both sides clashed over the prima facie case of fraud and deception against Mallya.

“We submit that he lied to get the loans, then did something with the money he wasn’t supposed to and then refused to give back the money. All this could be perceived by a jury as patently dishonest conduct,” said Summers.

“What they [Kingfisher Airlines] were saying [to the banks] about profitability going forward was knowingly wrong,” he said, as he took the High Court through evidence to counter Mallya’s lawyers’ claims that Westminster Magistrates Court Judge Emma Arbuthnot had fallen into error when she found a case to answer in the Indian courts against Mallya.

Mallya, who remains on bail on an extradition warrant, is not required to attend the hearings but has been in court to observe the proceedings since the three-day appeal opened on Tuesday. A key defence to disprove a prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation on his part has revolved around the fact that Kingfisher Airlines was the victim of economic misfortune alongside other Indian airlines.

However, the CPS has argued that “there is enough in the 32,000 pages of overall evidence to fulfil the [extradition] treaty obligations that there is a case to answer”. “There is not just a prima facie case but overwhelming evidence of dishonesty… and given the volume and depth of evidence the District Judge [Arbuthnot] had before her, the judgment is comprehensive and detailed with the odd error but nothing that impacts the prima facie case,” said Summers.

At the start of the appeal, Mallya’s counsel claimed Arbuthnot did not look at all of the evidence because if she had, she would not have fallen into the multiple errors that permeate her judgment. The High Court must establish if the magistrates’ court had in fact fallen short on a point of law in its verdict in favour of extradition.

Representatives from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as well as the Indian High Commission in London, have been present in court to take notes during the course of the appeal hearing.

Mallya had received permission to appeal against his extradition order signed off by former UK home secretary Sajid Javid last February only on one ground, which challenges the Indian government's prima facie case against him of fraudulent intentions in acquiring bank loans.

At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London in December 2018, Judge Arbuthnot had found “clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds” and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS on behalf of the Indian government.

Mallya remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April 2017 involving a bond worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his travel while he contests that ruling.

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
July 15,2020

New Delhi, Jul 15: Air India has started the process of identifying employees, based on various factors like efficiency, health and redundancy, who will be sent on compulsory leave without pay (LWP) for up to five years, according to an official order.

The airline's board of directors have authorised its Chairman and Managing Director Rajiv Bansal to send employees on LWP "for six months or for a period of two years extendable upto five years, depending upon the following factors - suitability, efficiency, competence, quality of performance, health of the employee, instance of non-availability of the employee for duty in the past as a result of ill health or otherwise and redundancy", the order said on Tuesday.

The departmental heads in the headquarter as well as regional directors are required to assess each employee "on the above mentioned factors and identify the cases where option of compulsory LWP can be exercised", stated the order dated July 14.

"Names of such employees need to be forwarded to the General Manager (Personnel) in headquarter for obtaining necessary approval of CMD," the order added.

In response to queries regarding this matter, Air India spokesperson said,"We would not like to make any comment on the issue."

Aviation sector has been significantly impacted due to the travel restrictions imposed in India and other countries due to the coronavirus pandemic. All airlines in India have taken cost-cutting measures such as pay cuts, LWP and firings of employees in order to conserve cash flow.

For example, GoAir has put most of its employees on compulsory LWP since April.

India resumed domestic passenger flights from May 25 after a gap of two months due to the coronavirus pandemic.

However, the airlines have been allowed to operate only a maximum of 45 per cent of their pre-COVID domestic flights. Occupancy rate in Indian domestic flights has been around 50-60 per cent since May 25.

Scheduled international passenger flights continue to remain suspended in India since March 23.

The passenger demand for air travel will contract by 49 per cent in 2020 for Indian carriers in comparison to 2019 due to COVID-19 crisis, said global airlines body IATA on Monday.

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.