Fiat to Army: decide on trial or court-martial

May 2, 2012
Supreme_Court_of_I_1070402e
New Delhi, May 2: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Army to decide whether its personnel involved in fake encounter killings in Pathribal in Jammu and Kashmir and Assam should be court-martialled or tried in regular criminal courts.

If Army authorities were not keen on court-martial proceedings, the Central Bureau of Investigation could seek sanction from the Centre for prosecution of the erring officers, said a Bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar.

The case of killing of five civilians in the March 2000 Pathribal encounter has been pending in a Srinagar trial court with both the Army authorities and the officers challenging the Magistrate's order which asked the Army to explain, under Section 125 of the Army Act, whether it would try its men or wanted the civilian court to do the job. As the Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled against them, the Army personnel appealed to the Supreme Court.

The CBI maintained that no sanction was necessary to prosecute the erring officers under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) as the cold-blooded murders could not be said to fall within the ambit of their official duties.

In Assam, the CBI completed the investigation and filed charge sheet against seven Army personnel in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, under Section 302/201 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, for killing five civilians in a fake encounter. In this case, the Centre maintained that sanction from the competent authority was required for the prosecution of Army personnel.

Writing the judgment, Justice Chauhan said: “The competent Army Authority has to exercise his discretion as to whether the trial would be by a court-martial or a criminal court after the filing of the charge sheet and not after cognisance of the offence is taken by the court. A conjoint reading of the relevant statutory provisions and rules makes it clear that the term ‘institution' contained in Section 7 of the Act 1990 means taking cognisance of the offence and not mere presentation of the charge sheet by the investigating agency.”

Rejecting the Centre's stand that the Army personnel facing the CBI charge sheet could not be tried as they were discharging their official duty, the Bench said: “Facts of this case require sanction of the Central government to proceed with the criminal prosecution/trial. In case option is made to try the accused by a court-martial, sanction of the Central government is not required.”

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
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jan 4: The Supreme Court on Thursday extended till June 12 its earlier order of May 15 asking the government not to take any coercive action against companies and employers for violation of Centre's March 29 circular for payment of full wages to employees for the lockdown period.

A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, S K Kaul and M R Shah reserved the verdict on a batch of petitions filed by various companies challenging the circular of the Ministry of Home Affairs issued on March 29 asking the employers to pay full wages to the employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

In the proceedings conducted through video conferencing, the top court said there was a concern that workmen should not be left without pay, but there may be a situation where the industry may not have money to pay and hence, the balancing has to be done.

Meanwhile, the apex court asked the parties to file their written submissions in support of their claims.

The top court on May 15 had asked the government not to take any coercive action against the companies and employers who are unable to pay full wages to their employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

The Centre also filed an affidavit justifying its March 29 direction saying that the employers claiming incapacity in paying salaries must be directed to furnish their audited balance sheets and accounts in the court.

The government has said that the March 29 directive was a "temporary measure to mitigate the financial hardship" of employees and workers, specially contractual and casual, during the lockdown period and the directions have been revoked by the authority with effect from May 18.

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 15,2020

Mumbai, Jan 15: The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Wednesday redistributed portfolios of Deputy Governors following the appointment of Michael Debabrata Patra to the post.

An official release said that NS Vishwanathan will handle co-ordination, Department of Regulation (DOR), Department of Communication (DoC), Enforcement Department, Inspection Department (ID), Risk Monitoring Department (RMD), and Secretary's Department.

BP Kanungo will look after Department of Currency Management (DCM), Department of External Investments and Operations (DEIO), Department of Government and Bank Accounts (DGBA), Department of Information Technology (DIT), Department of Payment and Settlement Systems (DPSS), Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC), Foreign Exchange Department (FED), Internal Debt Management Department (IDMD), Legal Department (LD) and Right to Information (RIA) Division.

The release said that MK Jain will handle the Department of Supervision (DOS), Consumer Education and Protection Department (CEPD), Financial Inclusion and Development Department (FIDD), Human Resource Management Department (HRMD), HR Operations Unit (HR-OU), Premises Department (PD), Central Security Cell (CSC), and Rajbhasha Department.

Patra will look after the Monetary Policy Department including Forecasting and Modelling Unit (MPD/MU), Financial Markets Operations Department (FMOD), Financial Markets Regulation Department including Market Intelligence (FMRD/MI), International Department (Intl. D), Department of Economic and Policy Research (DEPR), Department of Statistics & Information Management (including Data and Information Management Unit) (DSIM/DIMU), Corporate Strategy and Budget Department (CSBD) and Financial Stability Unit.

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
August 3,2020

New Delhi, Aug 3: Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP Digvijaya Singh on Monday said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should defer the foundation stone laying ceremony for Ram temple from August 5 as it will be an "inauspicious hour" for the event.

"I request Modi Ji again that the inauspicious occasion of August 5 (for foundation stone laying ceremony for Ram temple) should be deferred. The construction of Ram temple is to begin after hundreds of years of struggle and PM Modi should leave his stubbornness that may cause an obstruction in the process," Digvijaya tweeted (translated from Hindi).

The Congress leader went on to claim that several BJP leaders were falling sick due to COVID-19 as the result of ignoring the norms of Sanatan Dharma. "The results of ignoring the norms of Sanatan Dharma are - all priests of Ram temple tested positive for COVID-19, death of UP Minister Kamal Rani Varun due to corona, UP BJP chief tested COVID-19 positive, Home Minister Amit Shah tested positive for COVID-19, Madhya Pradesh CM Shivraj Singh Chouhan tested positive for COVID-19, Karnataka CM Yediyurappa tested positive for COVID-19," he added.

"Lord Ram is the epicentre of faith for crores of Hindus and the PM should not play with norms and traditions of Sanatan Dharma established across thousands of years," he added.

The Congress leader further questioned the urgency of holding the foundation stone laying event in times when COVID-19 spread is prevalent across the country.

"By laying the foundation stone for Ram temple at an inauspicious hour, how many people do you want to send to the hospital Modi Ji? Yogi Ji, please explain to Modi Ji. In your presence, why are the norms and traditions of Sanatan Dharma being broken? What is your compulsion that you are allowing this to happen?" he contended.

"One more question arises. A minister of the Uttar Pradesh government died due to coronavirus. Union Home Minister tested positive for COVID-19 and Uttar Pradesh BJP chief also tested positive. In these circumstances, whether Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and India's Prime Minister should not be quarantined? Is being quarantined only mandated for common people? Not for Prime Minister and Chief Ministers? The time limit for quarantine is 14 days," he added.

He further said that the entire cabinet should go into quarantine otherwise they will infect the residents of Ayodhya.

"These people's religion is 'Hindutva' and not 'Sanatan Dharma'. hence they have nothing to do with Sanatan Dharma's traditions. They have broken all the norms. Now, Modi Ji will issue the muhurta and he will only lay the foundation stone," he tweeted.

The Prime Minister is scheduled to lay the foundation stone of the Ram temple in Ayodhya on August 5.

The construction of Ram temple will begin after the ceremony to lay the foundation stone in which Chief Ministers of several states, Ministers from the Union Cabinet and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat are also likely to participate.

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.