Delhi HC stays release of Udaipur Files, refers petitioners to Centre
The film was scheduled to hit the screen on July 11. Lal, an Udaipur-based tailor in Rajasthan, was murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous, for 'sharing' a social media post in support of former BJP leader Nupur Sharma after her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammad.
A Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal directed the petitioners to approach the Centre within two days with their grievance. Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind had moved the court alleging that the film 'promotes hate speech and breaches the certification guidelines'. However, the CBFC informed the court that it had already ordered cuts which 'effectively addressed the petitioners' concerns'.
'The counsel for the petitioner has stated that the very intent of the movie is a complete vilification of a community, and it has a running theme portraying a community as being violent, responsible for causing riots and as being constantly in touch with terrorists in a neighbouring country. The film in its thematic expression shows persons belonging to a particular community in a negative light,' the court stated.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court clarified it did not pass any written order when it refused to urgently list the plea against the screening of movie. The clarification came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mohammed Javed – an accused in the case – said a confusion arose due to a Bench's remark, 'Let the film be released.'
(With PTI inputs)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
36 minutes ago
- Mint
Why no one blows the whistle until a short-seller turns up
The reaction to US-based short seller Viceroy Research's scathing report on the Vedanta Group was as predictable as it was performative. The company, not surprisingly, called the allegations 'baseless". There was also the familiar barrage of nationalist rhetoric summed up by former Rajya Sabha MP and BJP national executive member Swapan Dasgupta, who tweeted: 'Is there a concerted attempt by dodgy US financial organisations to undermine India's corporates/financial institutions?" But strip away the outrage, and the uncomfortable question remains: why did it take a foreign short-seller to say what no one in India's financial ecosystem had the courage or incentive to? After all, as Vedanta's CEO Deshnee Naidoo admitted, the points raised in the report are not new and have been previously disclosed to shareholders. Viceroy's dossier alleges opaque structures, questionable related-party transactions, and fragile debt positions across the sprawling Vedanta empire. You don't need to agree with every bit of the report. The key issue is that in a market ecosystem populated by regulators, exchanges, research analysts and institutional investors, why was such scrutiny absent until a short-seller showed up? The discomfiting answer is the lack of incentives. Reviled they may be, but short sellers are among the few market participants who have a genuine incentive to unearth problems inside companies. Since they make money when stock prices of their target companies fall, they are financially motivated to find what others ignore. Their motives are certainly not altruistic, but they drive the kind of transparency and accountability that almost all other market players shy away from. Take the recent Jane Street saga. The US-based high-frequency trader was eventually censured by Sebi for allegedly fraudulent and manipulative trades in index options. Sebi's action came as a surprise, but Jane Street's actions were known and discussed widely for months before the regulator's action. Shankar Sharma, Veteran investor and founder of GQuant Investech, posed the obvious question: Why did the exchange not act earlier? His answer: "Simple conflict of interest…How can they sanction JS when it drives FO volume massively, hence SE profits." That's because when you trade F&O contracts on the NSE, you are charged a small percentage of the trade value as transaction fees. Sharma's critique strikes at the core of our market structure; when exchanges benefit from the very entities they are meant to police, enforcement becomes a question of convenience rather than principle. That's why independent, profit-seeking actors like short-sellers are necessary, even if they operate in the shadows. It is no accident that some of the most explosive corporate scandals like Adani in India, Wirecard in Germany and Luckin Coffee in China, were flagged first by short-sellers. In each case, insiders maintained a studied silence till the proverbial fecal matter hit the overhead fan. In each case, external watchdogs were too slow or too compromised. The dirty work was done by someone with skin in the game and a profit motive. Of course, short-sellers can be wrong. They exaggerate, cherry-pick and even manipulate. But their work, when rooted in data and grounded in fact, performs a critical function. They are often the only ones willing to publicly accuse a company of fraud — because they have the most to gain if they're right, and the most to lose if they're wrong. Could the questions that Viceroy posed to Vedanta have been asked by its independent directors? Or its bankers? Or rating agencies? Or large institutional shareholders (foreign institutional investors (FIIs) and domestic institutional investors (DIIs) who together hold over 27% stake in Vedanta Ltd)? Possibly. But the brutal truth is that for none of them did the risk-reward trade-off make sense. The vitriol aimed at Viceroy isn't anything new. Others who've dared to say the emperor is naked, have faced far worse. In June 2012, Canada-based Veritas Investment Research called out Anil Ambani-group company Reliance Communications (RCom) for its accounting practices and corporate governance, leading to significant a drop in the company's stock price. Here's how the telco responded to the charges: 'The Veritas report lacks any credibility and is malafide in intent and approach…The report is full of factual inaccuracies, and baseless allegations masquerading as research." By 2016, RCom was desperately trying to sell assets in a bid to pay off its ₹45,000 crore of debt. In February 2019, it filed for bankruptcy. In another 2011 report, Veritas called out Kingfisher Airlines for 'poor disclosures, capricious accounting policies and understated liabilities". The company dubbed the report 'mischievous and sensational". In 2012, Kingfisher ceased operations and faced bankruptcy proceedings. As for Veritas, it was forced to wind up its business in India in 2014 after Nitin Mangal, one of its analysts, was remanded in custody for his report raising accounting and governance issues at Indiabulls Financial Services, Indiabulls Real Estate and other group firms. Markets need naysayers as much as they need Yes men and women, because uncomfortable truths often come from those with a vested interest in revealing them. Until domestic institutions are more willing, and incentivized, to speak up, we should be careful of shooting the messenger and look at the message instead.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘What signs of reformation has he shown?': Priyadarshini Mattoo's family relives horror of her death as killer seeks freedom
Hemant Mattoo hadn't felt this kind of rage in years. When he read about the Delhi High Court directing that the case for premature release of his sister's killer be considered afresh, it struck like a blow. But anger quickly gave way to disbelief when he saw the reason: the convict had shown an 'element of reformation.' Nearly three decades ago, his sister, Delhi University law student Priyadarshini Mattoo, was killed. She was 25. The accused was a college senior and an IPS officer's son, Santosh Kumar Singh. He had been pursuing her relentlessly in the months leading up to her death. On January 23, 1996, while Priyadarshini was alone at home, Santosh would be seen by a neighbour entering her house in the evening. She would later be found lying under her bed, with a room heater's cord wrapped around her neck — she had been brutally raped and murdered. For Hemant, the decades since her killing have been filled with recurring waves of fury. First, when the district court nearly let Santosh walk free, then when the Supreme Court commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment, and again upon learning that he was lodged in an open prison, afforded freedoms unimaginable to the family he destroyed. Speaking to The Indian Express, Hemant, who is settled in Canada, says, 'I want to know what signs of reformation he has shown. Has he apologised to my family? Has he apologised to his own family? He's never even approached us. He still maintains his innocence.' His anger mounts as he speaks further. 'He's been getting the mild side of the stick ever since he committed the crime. It's a joke that the justice system has played with us…' On July 1, the HC had directed the Sentence Review Board (SRB) to consider the case of Santosh's premature release afresh. Holding the SRB's decision to deny Santosh, along with two other prisoners, premature release as suffering from 'material procedural and legal infirmities', the court highlighted several lacunae in the current process undertaken by the board while deciding applications for early release of prisoners. A fresh decision is to be taken within four months. 'She faced months of harassment' Hemant vividly remembers that fateful January day. He was in Kuwait at the time when he got a call around 4 pm. It was from a family friend, who broke the news to him. 'The ground seemed to shift under my feet,' he says. By the time he reached Delhi, almost the entire Kashmiri Pandit community had gathered to pay their condolences. 'They first thought the murder was a militant attack. Then they got to know it was a guy who did it, a college student… Nothing like that had ever happened within our community.' Hemant pauses for a moment before saying, 'Well, apart from the exodus.' It had just been a few years after the Kashmiri Pandits had been forcibly exiled from the valley. The Mattoos had moved from Srinagar to Jammu. After Priyadarshini moved to the Capital to pursue her studies in Law, her father, Chaman Lal Mattoo, took up a job as chairman of a non-profit organisation in Delhi. However, their parents would soon notice how troubled Priyadarshini was in college. She had caught the eye of Santosh, a senior, and he was determined to woo her. In February 1995, he followed her on his bike and stopped her car at a traffic light. Priyadarshini responded by lodging a complaint at the R K Puram police station, where he signed an undertaking that he wouldn't harass her again. Six months later, in August, Santosh followed her home to Vasant Kunj and tried to break into the house. Priyadarshini went to the police. Again, the police made him sign an undertaking. By October, Priyadarshini's parents were aware of the routine harassment she was facing. She and her father approached the Commissioner of Police, seeking protection. She was subsequently assigned a Personal Security Officer (PSO). That same day, she debriefed the Dean of the Faculty of Law about the harassment, who, in turn, called Santosh and requested him to desist. Furious at her resistance, Santosh would attempt to get her expelled from college by accusing her of pursuing two degrees simultaneously. Priyadarshini had to give a detailed explanation to the authorities, reiterating Santosh's ploys of harassment. From then on, his behaviour saw an escalation. In November, he grabbed hold of her arm in college and refused to let go. This time, Priyadarshini filed a complaint and an FIR was registered at Maurice Nagar police station under IPC Section 354 (assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty). Santosh was arrested — before being let go on a personal bond, a signed letter promising the police that he'll appear in court when he is summoned. By December 1995, Priyadarshini was a nervous wreck. Hemant, who had come to Delhi for a vacation, recalls that she looked stressed. '… I remember she looked scared and stressed. When I asked her, she brushed it off as exam stress… she never told me anything. Later, when I demanded why I was kept in the dark, my cousins said nobody wanted me to worry…' By January next year, she was gone. The post-mortem report noted 19 injuries and three broken ribs. Santosh had also used his motorcycle helmet to bludgeon her head, a piece of evidence that would become crucial in the High Court case. When the helmet was submitted as evidence, it was damaged — the visor was broken, containing specks of blood. Moreover, Priyadarshini's PSO and the neighbour who saw Santosh entering the house would note in their testimonies that they had seen the same helmet with him, but undamaged and with a visor. During Priyadarshini's last rites, their mother confided in Hemant that they'd approached Santosh's father. 'They had asked him to make his son stop troubling Priya…,' recalls Hemant bitterly. But his father's faith in the judiciary was never shaken. 'He always believed the right thing would be done. He told me, 'We'll do it the right way, we'll take the legal route'… He sent me back to Kuwait as well because he was scared I'd do something stupid,' Hemant says. 'She was a tomboy, funny and fearless' Back in Kuwait, Hemant felt unmoored. 'Those days, I walked around like there was no life in me… She was eight years younger, she was my baby sister,' he says. He recalls Priyadarshini as a funny, gregarious, fearless and tomboyish girl. 'She was an incredible prankster. She would do this thing back when we were in Srinagar. When someone would come to visit our house, she'd tell them that their scooter was in the way and a neighbour had asked us to move it; could she have the keys? She'd then take the vehicle for a joy ride,' Hemant laughs. 'You could never be sad around her; she was always brimming with jokes. She was good at mimicry too — she only had to listen to someone talk once… Back then, she'd pick fights over politics with the boys in Nawabazaar. We used to say, 'We need to find a girl for this girl' because she was so tomboyish…,' he says. If Priyadarshini were still here, Hemant says, she'd probably have moved to the States or Canada after her studies. 'After we left Kashmir, we felt out of place everywhere. We were always looking for a place to settle down and put down our roots. He (Santosh) really took what little we had left,' says Hemant.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
PMO greenlights GST revamp; All eyes on council
The Prime Minister's Office has given in-principle go-ahead for a significant recast of the goods and services tax ( GST ) framework, setting the stage for the first major overhaul of the levy rolled out eight years ago, people familiar with the development said. A proposal in this regard may be moved for the consideration of the GST Council , the apex decision-making body for the indirect tax, at its upcoming meeting in August after the monsoon session of parliament. The finance ministry will reach out to states to build a political consensus on taking the reforms forward. It has already begun inter-ministerial consultations with key stakeholder departments on the proposed move, said the people cited. The revamp will cover both slab changes and procedural simplification to give relief to consumers as well as businesses, they said. A ministerial panel has been mandated by the GST Council to look at the rate rationalisation but it has made little headway. Industry has over the past few months made a strong case to the government for a recast of the GST framework including rates, slabs and procedures, while flagging numerous pain points. Fewer Slabs Proposed Lawmakers across party lines have also highlighted issues related to GST and the need to address them. GST currently has five key slabs — nil, 5%, 12%, 18%, 28% — and two — 0.25% and 3% — for bullion. The 5% slab has about 21% of all goods under GST. The 12% slab has 19% of items, while the 18% slab has 44% of items. The highest rate of 28% covers 3% of total goods. A key proposal being examined is scrapping the 12% slab and moving items to the 5% or 18% slabs. Detailed discussions have been held at the highest level in the government and policymakers are of the view that a simplified GST regime could give a further boost to the economy, said one of the persons. The time is opportune for the recast with the tax structure stabilising and macroeconomic fundamentals being in robust health, he said. Given that free trade agreements with advanced economies are on the cards, the government is keen to ensure that local industry does not face any constraints in scaling up to take advantage of the accords. A revamp of the income tax law is already imminent with the bill slated for the monsoon session. A compensation cess is levied on some so-called sin goods, including cigarettes and automobiles, in the top 28% slab, introduced to compensate states for any possible revenue loss due to GST transition for five years until June 2022. The cess was extended until March 31, 2026, to repay the interest and principal on the ₹2.69 lakh crore that the Centre had borrowed on behalf of states during the Covid period to meet the deficit in the cess fund. A separate ministerial panel has been tasked by the GST Council to look at the use of the surplus in the cess fund and the way ahead on that front.
