SC seeks report from trial judge on Babri Masjid demolition case involving BJP veterans

Agencies
September 10, 2018

New Delhi, Sept 10: The Supreme Court on Monday sought a report from a sessions judge in a Lucknow court on how he intends to complete the trial in the Babri Masjid demolition case involving BJP veterans L.K. Advani, M.M. Joshi and Uma Bharti within the April 2019 deadline.

A Bench of Justices R.F. Nariman and Indu Malhotra also sought the Uttar Pradesh government’s response on a plea of trial court judge S.K. Yadav, whose promotion was stayed by the Allahabad High Court on the ground that the apex court had directed him to complete the trial.

The court asked for the report from the judge in a sealed cover.

On April 19, 2017, the apex court had said BJP stalwarts Mr. Advani, Mr. Joshi and Ms. Uma Bharti would be prosecuted for serious offence of criminal conspiracy in the politically-sensitive 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case and had ordered day-to-day trial to be concluded in two years, that is April 19, 2019.

The apex court had dubbed the demolition of the medieval era monument a “crime” that had shaken the “secular fabric of the Constitution” and allowed the CBI’s plea on restoration of criminal conspiracy charge against the VVIP accused.

“There shall be no de novo [fresh] trial. There shall be no transfer of the judge conducting the trial until the entire trial concludes. The case shall not be adjourned on any ground except when the sessions court finds it impossible to carry on the trial for that particular date,” the apex court had then said.

Two sets of cases

There were two sets of cases relating to the demolition of the disputed structure on December 6, 1992. The first involved unnamed ‘karsevaks’, the trial of which is taking place in a Lucknow court, while the second set of cases relate to the leaders in a Rae Bareli court.

The apex court had ordered clubbing of the separate trials in the trial courts of Raebareli and Lucknow should be clubbed, to be conducted in Lucknow.

The conspiracy charge against 13 accused including Mr. Advani, Mr. Joshi and Ms. Bharti was dropped in the case, the trial of which was being held at a special court in Rae Bareli.

The second set of case was against unknown ‘karsevaks’ who were in and around the disputed structure and had pulled it down. The trial against them was being held in a Lucknow court.

The appeals were filed by one Haji Mahboob Ahmad (since dead) and the CBI against dropping of conspiracy charges against 21 accused including the top BJP leaders, eight of whom have died.

A supplementary charge sheet was filed against eight persons, but not the 13 who were discharged for plotting the demolition.

Conspiracy charges dropped

Besides BJP leaders Mr. Advani, Mr. Joshi and Ms. Bharti, conspiracy charges were dropped against Kalyan Singh (currently the Governor of Rajasthan), Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray and VHP leader Acharya Giriraj Kishore (both have since died).

The others against whom the conspiracy charge was dropped include Vinay Katiyar, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya, Satish Pradhan, C.R. Bansal, Ashok Singhal (now deceased), Sadhvi Ritambhara, Mahant Avaidhynath (now deceased), R.V. Vedanti, Paramhans Ram Chandra Das (now deceased), Jagdish Muni Maharaj, B.L. Sharma, Nritya Gopal Das, Dharam Das, Satish Nagar and Moreshwar Save (now deceased).

The appeals have sought setting aside of the Allahabad High Court’s order of May 20, 2010, dropping section 120B (criminal conspiracy) under the IPC while upholding a special court’s decision.

The CBI had chargesheeted Mr. Advani and 20 others under sections 153A (promoting enmity between classes), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505 (false statements, rumours etc circulated with the intent to cause mutiny or disturb public peace) of the IPC.

It had subsequently invoked charges under section 120B (criminal conspiracy), which was quashed by the special court whose decision was upheld by the high court.

While upholding the special court’s order, the high court had said the CBI at no point of time, either during the trial at Rae Bareily or in its revision petition, had ever stated that there was offence of criminal conspiracy against the leaders.

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 23,2020

Patna, Jan 23: "They should go wherever they want," Bihar Chief Minister and JDU supremo Nitish Kumar said on Thursday when asked of Prashant Kishor and Pavan Verma's repeated questions about the party's stand's on the newly enacted Citizenship Act.

"It is their personal decision. They should go wherever they want. We don't have an objection. Don't look at JDU in the context of statements by some people. JDU works with determination. We have a clear stand and don't have any confusion," the Chief Minister told reporters here.

"If they have something to tell, they should come and discuss it within the party. They should go wherever they want. They have my good wishes," he said.

JDU spokesperson and national general secretary Pavan Verma has questioned his party's alliance with the BJP in Delhi Assembly polls while Kishor has more than once made his differences with the party known on the issue of the amended Citizenship Act, and National Register of Citizens.

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 31,2020

Srinagar, Mar 31: In order to prevent the spread of coronavirus, the Jammu and Kashmir administration on Tuesday declared 20 villages of Kashmir division as 'red zone'.
"20 villages including Parray Mohala Hajin, Chandergeer Hajin, Batagund Hajin in Bandipora district, Gudoora, Chandgam, Pinglena, Parigam, Abhama, Sangerwani and Khaigam in Pulwama district, Waskura in Ganderbal, Sedew, and Ramnagri in Shopian district have been declared as red zones," said Department of Information and Public Relations, J-K, in a tweet.

In Srinagar district, Mehjoor Nagar, Natipora, Lal Bazar, Eidgah and Shalteng villages have been declared as red zones.

"Chadoora in Budgam district of Kashmir division has also been declared as red zone," another tweet said.

The total number of COVID-19 cases in Jammu and Kashmir climbed to 49 after 11 more people tested positive in the Union Territory on Monday. While three of these cases were reported from Jammu region, eight were from the Kashmir division.

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 23,2020

Expressing concern over the ban imposed on TikTok by the government of India, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly called the development in the south Asian country “worrisome”.

TikTok was amongst the 59 Chinese apps that were banned in India but why it hogs the maximum limelight because TikTok had the second-largest user base in India with over 200 million users.

As per The Verge writer Casey Newton, Zuckerberg was worried about TikTok’s India ban. Although it soon cashed into the opportunity and released a TikTok clone “Reels”, the government’s reason behind banning the app in India wasn’t received well by Mark Zuckerberg. 

He had said that if India can ban a platform with over 200 million users in India without citing concrete reasons, it can also ban Facebook if something goes amiss on the security and privacy front.

Why Mark finds it particularly worrisome because Facebook is already involved in a lot tussle with the governments across the world involving national security concerns. 

“Facebook already faces fights around the world from governments on both the left and the right related to issues that fit under the broad umbrella of national security: election interference, influence campaigns, hate speech, and even just plain-old democratic speech. Zuckerberg knows that the leap from banning TikTok on national security grounds to banning Facebook on national security grounds is more of a short hop,” the report by Casey read.

Facebook till now has not faced any kind of issue in India but considering the debacle with the other governments, it is not entirely wrong to worry about its future in India if any national security issue arises. Back in 2016, Facebook’s Free Basics service, which means a free but restricted internet service, was banned in India by the telecom regulators. 

The TRAI had said that the Free Basic services were banned in India because it violated the principles of net neutrality. With Free Basics services, Facebook had planned to bring more unconnected users online. But since 2016, there has been no major tussle between the Indian government and Zuckerberg due to national security issues.

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.