Those top judges shouldn’t have brought the issue to the public, says Santosh Hegde

Agencies
January 13, 2018

Bengaluru, Jan 13: Former Supreme Court judge N Santosh Hegde today "wholly" condemned the action of four senior judges in going public over internal matters of the judiciary, saying it affected the reputation of the institution and may amount to contempt of court.

Questioning their action, he said internal matters of the judiciary should not have been brought to the public for discussion because neither the public nor the government or the executive can give any relief to them. "I wholly condemn the press meet yesterday held by the four judges of the Supreme Court. My complaint is these things should not have been publicly discussed, consequent to which the reputation of the judiciary has been affected," he told PTI.

In an unprecedented move in the country's judicial history, Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph had held a press conference yesterday and mounted a virtual revolt against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, questioning him on the 'selective' allocation of cases and certain judicial orders passed by him.

Hegde, a former Lokayukta of Karnataka, said their action would not benefit anybody other than drawing public attention. He said institutions like the judiciary survive on the confidence of the people. "Once the confidence of the people is lost, the institution will be useless," he said. Agreeing that the judges' intention was to 'bring the muck out of the system, he disapproved of their approach as it would set a new precedent where judges of High Courts and the Supreme Court would start bringing their differences into the public domain.

On whether their action was liable for impeachment, Hegde said he does not want to go to that extent, though he felt it can be possible, given the fact that a Calcutta High Court judge was impeached for contempt of court. He, however, felt that their action may amount to contempt of court. "Yes, it may amount to contempt of court but I am not talking about that...I don't want to take the issue to another direction. I am only questioning the action of the four judges who came out saying that the Chief Justice is giving cases according to his whims and fancies. "Yes, that is the jurisdiction given to him. And why not? That bench before which the case is posted does not have the only person. There are two other judges there." "That means you are suspecting the three judges. Let us not denigrate the institution," said Hegde.

Comments

s
 - 
Sunday, 14 Jan 2018

oh should they have gone to govt or police? to get killed?

Abu Muhammad
 - 
Sunday, 14 Jan 2018

The contempt of Court may be punishable, but what about the Contempt of Judicial system and contempt of Justice by CJI? It will never be questioned rather rewarded. Atleast now public come to know that Judiciary too infected with.............virus. Public had the doubt, now four senior most judges confirmed it. God save India!!! SATYA MEVA JAYATE!!

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 11,2020

Thrissur, Feb 11: The latest test result of the woman medical student, who arrived here from China's Wuhan region and was the first positive case from India for the novel Coronavirus (nCoV), has come out negative, health officials said on Monday.

Her condition was "stable", they said.

According to the state health department as of now, 31 people are in isolation wards across various hospitals in the state.

"The blood test result of the first patient from Thrissur, from the National Institute of Virology (NIV) testing centre at Alappuzha, shows a negative result.

But we need confirmation from the NIV at Pune," a senior medical officer told news agency.

After the first positive case was reported from Thrissur, two other Keralite students from Wuhan, the epicentre of the virus, had tested positive in Alappuzha and Kasaragod districts.

The health department had earlier said those in isolation wards of various hospitals in the state have come down to 34.

"A total of 3,367 are under observation across the state, of which 3,336 are under home quarantine," a release issued by the health department said.

The department has already sent at least 364 samples for testing at the NIV at Pune and so far 337 results have returned negative.

The ''state calamity'' alert, which was declared on February 3, was withdrawn on Friday after no new positive cases of infection were detected.

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 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The Karnataka High Court’s division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice H P Sandesh today rejected an application that wanted Amulya Leona’s case to be transferred from Karnataka Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

The bench, while observing that extraordinary jurisdiction can’t be exercised for transferring the case to the NIA, asked “What is so special that investigation should be transferred to NIA?”

The court, in its previous hearing, had questioned the maintainability of the petition seeking transfer of the sedition case against Leona to the NIA.

According to the petitioner, advocate Pavana Chandra Shetty, the case is a serious matter against national integration and unity and has not been investigated properly by the police. The state police also failed to file the chargesheet within 90 days, he said, and also asked for cancellation of her bail.

The bench asked the petitioner as to how a bail, already granted to a person, can be cancelled. “Is it not the indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if chargesheet is not filed within stipulated time? How can you make a prayer for cancellation of bail?”  the Court asked.

The counsel for the petitioner also stated that in cases of a cognizable offence, when the chargesheet is purposely not filed within the stipulated time, the matter will have to transferred to the appropriate authority.

The court responded to his contention by asking him how could the court override law and cancel the bail. “Where is the question of cancellation of bail? Can we override the law and say that bail should be cancelled?” said the bench.

Advocate Vishal Raghu had filed the petition for transfer of Leona’s case, who was accused of raising pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park. The advocate had blamed the probe team for not filing a chargesheet on time and has asked the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Leona.

Bengaluru student Amulya Leona was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi. She was arrested by the Bengaluru police for allegedly shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ slogans at an anti- CAA Protest in Bengaluru in February this year. On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

Her bail plea was earlier rejected by a Bengaluru court, after she had spent a three-month period in jail, stating that she may abscond if she is released. The sessions judge Vidhyadhar Shirahatti had also stated that if the petitioner is granted bail, she may abscond and may involve in similar offence which affects peace at large and hence her petition is liable to be rejected. The court had also noted that Amulya Leona is an influential person who may threaten and influence the witness and hamper the case in case of the prosecution and will abscond if released on bail.

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
May 12,2020

Bengaluru, May 12: Last week, a 28-year-old, eight-months pregnant woman, was found murdered at her house, in Diburahalli. The woman was hacked to death with a machete during the day and was discovered only after her family members returned home, later in the day. After the alleged murder, the accused tried to destroy the evidence, by cleaning the crime scene, and wiping the bloodstains off the walls and floors.

The victim was a homemaker and her husband is employed in the railway department. The police suspected that the murder was a result of someone known to the woman and family, and were soon proved right. The woman was murdered by her own brother-in-law, frustrated with her for allegedly not taking care of his mother and other family members properly.

The victim has been identified as Jyothi, and the accused is her husband’s brother Hareesh Babu, 38. “Jyothi and the accused are alleged to have had differences for the past few years. Their fights kept escalating over the years. She had also informed her family and her husband about the regular fights with the brother-in-law. The accused had been advised by the family, to back off from Jyothi. Owing to his violent streak, Babu’s wife had deserted him and their son. Since his wife’s departure, he had started troubling his brother’s wife and was regularly picked a fight with her.

He complained that Jyothi neglected to take care of his mother and other family members. Investigations reveal these as false allegations, and in fact, Babu’s son was being raised by Jyothi,” said an officer on part of investigations.

Last week, when the victim was resting at home, the accused returned home at around 10.30 am and picked up a fight with her. The fight escalated and Babu ended up hacking her to death with a machete. The victim’s father Nagaraj, at the time of filing a complaint, mentioned Babu’s regular fights with Jyothi and suspected his role in the murder of his pregnant daughter.

The accused, after killing her, had gone to the farm and pretended to not knowing about the the happenings back home. Based on the complainant’s suspicion, the police picked up Babu. After a thorough interrogation, Babu reportedly confessed to the murder of his sister-in-law. The machete, which was used for Jyothi’s murder, was also recovered by the police team.

A case of murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered and further investigations are underway.

Comments

abdullah
 - 
Tuesday, 12 May 2020

Put this case in fast track and hang him immediately.  No mercy should be shown on such inhumans.

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.