Manesar land case: SC stays trial proceedings against four Haryana IAS officers
While the apex court had stayed the trial proceedings against former Haryana IAS officer, Rajeev Arora on May 29, the top court on July 16 and 29 ordered that trial proceedings with regards to retired IAS officers, Sudeep Singh Dhillon, Murari Lal Tayal and DR Dhingra shall stand stayed till the next date of hearing. The SC on July 29 also ordered a stay on the trial of former chief town planner, Dhare Singh.
Former chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda along with five former IAS officers and about 20 real estate developers have been indicted by the CBI in the case.
Former IAS officer, Rajeev Arora had petitioned the apex court after his revision petition challenging his summoning by a special CBI court was dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana high court on May 15.
A special CBI court had on December 1, 2020 ordered that the former IAS officer be summoned to face trial for committing offence under section 120-B read with 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the Manesar land case.
However, on a revision petition filed by Arora, the Punjab and Haryana high court on December 14, 2020 had stayed the operation and implementation of the order of the special CBI court.
Rejecting the challenge to the special CBI court's December 1, 2020 order, the HC on May15 said it found no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by learned special CBI court in summoning the petitioners.
An apex court bench headed by chief justice BR Gavai, however, on May 29 ordered that notice be issued to the respondents and 'proceedings qua the petitioner (Rajeev Arora) shall stand stayed till the next date of hearing.'
A special CBI court which is holding the trial of the case took note of the apex court's orders on Thursday. 'Arguments on the point of charge on behalf of accused Dhare Singh, Kulwant Singh Lamba and DR Dhingra are to be heard. However, it has been pointed out that the Supreme Court has stayed further proceedings qua accused Dhare Singh and DR Dhingra. This court has also been intimated that so far as accused Kulwant Singh Lamba is concerned, he too has filed an SLP which is likely to come up for hearing shortly and it has been submitted that since his case is at par with accused Dhare Singh and DR Dhingra, he is also likely to be granted stay by the Supreme Court,'' the special CBI court said.
Taking the apex court order on record, special CBI judge, Rajeev Goyal in an August 7 order said arguments on charge on behalf of aforenamed accused (Dhare Singh and DR Dhingra) are not required to be heard at this stage. 'However, chargesheet with regard to the remaining accused as per order dated December 1, 2020 except those accused (Rajeev Arora, Sudeep Singh Dhillon and Murari Lal Tayal) qua whom proceedings have been stayed by the Supreme Court is now required to be framed,'' the special CBI judge said while posting the case to August 22.
What was the land related matter
The Congress government headed by chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda was involved in the process to acquire about 912 acres in Gurgaon district for creating residential and recreational utilities in Industrial Model Township (IMT), Manesar. The acquisition process was halted in 2007 by the state government after a number of private real estate developers stepped in to buy the under-acquisition land from farmers under duress.
It is alleged that after the acquisition process under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 started, a number of real estate developers colluded with the officials to buy 400 acres from land owners at throwaway prices by creating panic that if the land owners did not sell their land it will be acquired by the state government for a measly sum. The CBI in its investigations found that acting in haste and under duress, the farmers sold the land at throw away rates of around ₹20-25 lakh per acre, totalling to about ₹100 crore, while the market value at that time was above ₹4 crore per acre, totalling to about ₹1,600 crore.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
11 minutes ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court Permits Aadhaar-Based Claims For Bihar Voter Roll Deletions, Orders Public Disclosure
The Supreme Court has granted significant relief to Bihar voters by permitting those whose names have been removed from the draft electoral roll to file claims using their Aadhaar cards as supporting documentation. The ruling came during Thursday's hearing of a petition challenging the Election Commission's June 24 decision to conduct a Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's voter list. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued comprehensive directions requiring the Election Commission to provide extensive public disclosure of deleted voter information through multiple media channels including newspapers, radio, and television. The court emphasized the importance of transparency in the electoral process and ensuring citizens are not dependent on political parties for crucial voting information. The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission's rationale for withholding the names of individuals whose registrations had been cancelled, particularly those who had died, migrated, or relocated to different constituencies. When informed that such lists had been shared exclusively with political parties in Bihar, the justices expressed concern about restricting public access to this vital information. The court directed the Election Commission to establish public display boards and website publications containing the names of deleted voters along with specific reasons for their removal. This measure aims to enable affected citizens to take corrective action within the stipulated 30-day period without relying on political intermediaries for information access. Following intense judicial scrutiny, the Election Commission agreed to comply with the court's demands for greater transparency in the voter deletion process. The court has mandated that the Election Commission submit a compliance report detailing implementation of these directives by August 22, demonstrating the urgency placed on resolving these electoral concerns. The legal challenge against Bihar's Special Intensive Revision was initiated by several opposition parties, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal, Congress, and the Association for Democratic Reforms. These organizations raised concerns about the potential disenfranchisement of legitimate voters through the revision process and questioned the methodology employed by the Election Commission. During previous hearings on August 13, the Supreme Court acknowledged that electoral rolls cannot remain static and require periodic updates to maintain accuracy. The court noted that the expansion of acceptable identity documents from seven to eleven for Bihar's voter list revision actually represented a voter-friendly approach rather than an exclusionary measure, contrary to opposition claims. The court's intervention addresses widespread concerns about voter suppression and ensures that legitimate voters have adequate opportunity to contest erroneous deletions from the electoral roll. By requiring Aadhaar card documentation for claims, the court has simplified the process for citizens seeking to restore their voting rights while maintaining verification standards. The directive for comprehensive media publicity serves multiple purposes, including informing affected citizens about their deletion status and providing clear pathways for remedial action. This approach recognizes that many voters may be unaware of their removal from electoral rolls until they attempt to vote during elections. The Supreme Court's emphasis on reducing citizen dependence on political parties reflects broader concerns about maintaining electoral neutrality and ensuring equal access to voting rights regardless of political affiliation. By mandating direct government communication with citizens, the court aims to eliminate potential manipulation of voter information by partisan interests. The Election Commission's agreement to implement these transparency measures represents a significant shift toward more open electoral processes in Bihar. The requirement for detailed reasons accompanying voter deletions will enable better scrutiny of the revision process and help identify any systematic issues affecting legitimate voters. The court has deferred further hearings on petitions challenging the Bihar Special Intensive Revision pending the Election Commission's compliance report, indicating satisfaction with the proposed transparency measures while maintaining judicial oversight of the process. This ruling establishes important precedents for electoral transparency across India, potentially influencing similar voter registration processes in other states. The decision balances the need for accurate electoral rolls with protection of legitimate voting rights, ensuring that administrative efficiency does not compromise democratic participation. The August 22 compliance deadline creates urgency for the Election Commission to implement these transparency measures before upcoming electoral processes, ensuring that affected voters have adequate time to address any erroneous deletions from the voter rolls.
Hans India
11 minutes ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court Grants Relief To Bihar Voters, Allows Aadhaar-Based Appeals Against Electoral Roll Deletions
The Supreme Court delivered significant relief to Bihar voters on Thursday by ruling that individuals whose names have been removed from the state's draft electoral roll can submit appeals using their Aadhaar cards as supporting documentation. The decision came as part of a comprehensive judicial review of the Election Commission's controversial Special Intensive Revision process that has sparked widespread political opposition. A two-judge bench consisting of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued detailed directives requiring the Election Commission to extensively publicize lists of deleted voters along with specific justifications for their removal through newspapers, radio, and television channels. This ruling addresses growing concerns about voter disenfranchisement and ensures greater transparency in the electoral process. The court's intervention emerged during hearings on petitions challenging the Election Commission's June 24 decision to conduct the Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's voter registration database. Opposition parties, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal, Congress, and the Association for Democratic Reforms, had raised serious concerns about the methodology and potential impact on legitimate voters' rights. During Thursday's proceedings, the Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission's practice of restricting access to deleted voter information, particularly when such data had already been shared with political parties in the state. The justices expressed concern about this selective disclosure approach, emphasizing that citizens should not be dependent on political organizations to access information crucial to their voting rights. The court specifically challenged the Election Commission's reluctance to publicly disclose the names of individuals who had died, migrated, or shifted constituencies, asking why such information could not be displayed on public boards or official websites. The justices stressed that affected voters should have access to remedial measures within the statutory 30-day period without requiring political party intervention. Following intensive judicial questioning, the Election Commission agreed to comply with the court's transparency requirements and committed to sharing comprehensive lists of deleted voters from Bihar's Special Intensive Revision. The court has mandated submission of a detailed compliance report by August 22, demonstrating the urgency attached to resolving these electoral concerns. The legal challenge reflects broader anxieties about potential voter suppression through administrative processes. Opposition parties have argued that the revision methodology could disproportionately affect certain demographic groups and legitimate voters who may lack access to comprehensive documentation or awareness of the revision process. The Supreme Court addressed these concerns by acknowledging that electoral rolls cannot remain permanently static and require periodic updates to maintain accuracy. However, the court distinguished between necessary administrative updates and potentially exclusionary practices that might disenfranchise eligible voters. In a previous hearing on August 13, the court noted that expanding acceptable identity documents from seven to eleven for Bihar's voter list revision actually represented a voter-friendly approach rather than an exclusionary measure. This observation contradicted opposition claims that the revision process was designed to restrict voting access. The court's decision to allow Aadhaar card-based appeals significantly simplifies the process for affected voters seeking to restore their registration status. This approach recognizes Aadhaar as a widely accessible form of identification while maintaining reasonable verification standards for electoral integrity. The directive for comprehensive media publicity serves multiple purposes beyond mere transparency. It ensures that affected citizens receive direct notification about their deletion status and provides clear guidance on available remedial procedures. This approach reduces information asymmetries that could prevent legitimate voters from exercising their democratic rights. The Supreme Court's emphasis on reducing citizen dependence on political parties for electoral information reflects broader constitutional principles about electoral neutrality and equal access to democratic participation. By mandating direct government communication with citizens, the court aims to eliminate potential partisan manipulation of voter information. The Election Commission's agreement to implement enhanced transparency measures represents a significant shift in administrative approach to voter registration management. The requirement for detailed explanations accompanying voter deletions will enable better public scrutiny of revision processes and help identify systematic issues affecting legitimate voters. The court has postponed further hearings on petitions challenging Bihar's Special Intensive Revision pending the Election Commission's compliance report, indicating provisional satisfaction with proposed transparency measures while maintaining judicial oversight of implementation. This ruling establishes important precedents for electoral administration across India, potentially influencing similar voter registration processes in other states. The decision demonstrates judicial commitment to balancing administrative efficiency with protection of fundamental voting rights in democratic processes.
NDTV
11 minutes ago
- NDTV
Makes Top Court's "Intent" Clear: Yogendra Yadav On Poll Roll Revision Order
New Delhi: Aadhaar will be the 12th document for the 65 lakh people whose names were deleted from the voter list by the Election Commission, political analyst Yogendra Yadav said today, suggesting that though it is an interim relief, eventually it might apply to everyone. Mr Yadav is one of the petitioners who have challenged Special Intensive Revision exercise or SIR by the Election Commission ahead of the assembly election in Bihar. They consider the interim relief from the Supreme Court that came today -- the inclusion of Aadhaar and the order that the poll body release the 65 lakh names dropped from the lists - a positive. The court's decision, he told NDTV, should please the Election Commission too. Regarding the direction that the Commission reveal the 65 lakh names and must mention the reason for deletion from the draft rolls, Mr Yadav said it was the "first indication" that the Supreme Court "insists on transparency". "We were simply saying for the last two weeks -- you (the Election Commission) have thrown 65 lakh people out of the voters list. You say the reasons are very valid. Just give us names and give us which name has been deleted for which reason. You are telling us 22 lakh people have been deleted because they are dead. We were simply saying, please give us the names so that we can check, their families can check. Election Commission wouldn't do that," he told NDTV in an exclusive interview. "Today, after 45 minutes of dragging their feet, the Election Commission was forced to do that. So, that's the transparency," he said. Also, though the top court said the 65 lakh people would be able to approach the Commission with Aadhaar, "Clearly, it cannot be that Aadhaar is relevant only for those 65 lakh and not for the 7.24 crore". "The intent of the court was quite clear. So, I would say for all practical purposes, the list of 11 has been expanded to include Aadhaar, which is a very major step forward," he told NDTV. During today's hearing, the bench of Justices Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said Aadhaar is a statutorily recognised document for identity and residence. When Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said the poll body is not accepting Aadhaar, Justice Bagchi said, "No, no they have to". "It is a statutory obligation. It has to be there," said Justice Kant. Regarding the names of 65 lakh voters, the Supreme Court said the Election Commission must give "wide publicity" to the lists, especially on vernacular language newspapers and broadcast and telecast on Doordarshan and other channels. "The district election officer, if they have a social media handle, shall display the notice there as well," it said. The court has also directed the Election Commission to advertise that they are going to accept Aadhaar in addition to the 11 documents they have specified, said advocate Prashant Bhushan, who is also a petitioner in the case.
