Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case: SC to consider listing bail plea of Surendra Gadling
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
The Supreme Court on Friday took note of repeated adjournments and assured early listing of the bail plea of advocate Surendra Gadling accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria was urged by his counsel and senior advocate Anand Grover, who said his client had been in jail for "6.5 years"."The bail plea has been adjourned 11 times in the Supreme Court," Grover added.The CJI said, "We will list it."On March 27, a bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal adjourned the bail hearing of Gadling and activist Jyoti Jagtap arrested in the case.It also deferred the petition filed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) challenging the bail granted to activist Mahesh Raut.Raut was given bail by the Bombay High Court but the order was stayed after the NIA sought a stay on the verdict to challenge it before the apex court.Gadling was accused of providing aid to the Maoists and allegedly conspiring with various co-accused, including the ones absconding in the case.He was booked under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, and the IPC and the prosecution claimed Gadling provided secret information about government activities and maps of certain areas to underground Maoist rebels.He reportedly asked Maoists to oppose the operation of Surjagarh mines, and instigated several locals to join the movement.Gadling is also involved in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case relating to the alleged provocative speeches delivered at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017. The police claimed the speeches triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial in Pune district.The high court had said Jagtap was an active member of the Kabir Kala Manch (KKM) group, which during its stage play at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017 gave not only aggressive, but highly provocative slogans."We are of the considered opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing the allegations or accusations of the NIA against the appellant (Jagtap) having conspired, attempted, advocated and abetted the commission of a terrorist act as prima facie true," the court had said.According to the NIA, the KKM is a front organisation of the Communist Party of India (Maoist).The high court had dismissed the appeal filed by the activist-cum-singer challenging a February 2022 order of a special court refusing her bail.The 2017 Elgar Parishad conclave was held at Shaniwarwada, an 18th-century palace-fort located in the heart of Pune city.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
How Trump's executive order could reshape college admissions and campus diversity across the US
The Trump administration recently issued an executive order requiring universities to publicly disclose detailed information about the race, test scores, and grade point averages of all applicants. This move intensifies an already heated national debate over college admissions, meritocracy, and campus diversity. According to The New York Times , the new data disclosure rules aim to increase transparency but could also shift admissions practices in ways that affect student diversity across the country's most selective institutions. A century-long debate over admissions For more than a century, colleges have grappled with the question of how to admit students fairly. The controversy touches on fundamental issues such as equal opportunity, racial justice, and the definition of merit. Traditionally, many colleges have used holistic admissions processes that consider applicants' life experiences, including race and socio-economic background, to build diverse and inclusive campuses. However, conservative groups argue that such subjective criteria can lead to unfair advantages for certain groups and discrimination against others, particularly white and Asian students. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Secret Lives of the Romanovs — the Last Rulers of Imperial Russia! Learn More Undo Supreme Court ruling and new federal requirements In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that considering race in admissions decisions was unconstitutional. This ruling forced universities to overhaul their admissions policies to comply with the new legal framework. Building on that decision, the Trump administration's executive order now requires colleges to report applicant data to a federal database called the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Education Secretary Linda McMahon emphasised that this data will help the public see whether colleges admit students based on merit or race, stating, according to The New York Times, it 'will enable the American public to assess whether schools are passing over the most qualified students in favor of others based on their race.' The pressure to prioritise test scores According to The New York Times , experts warn that this focus on quantitative measures like test scores and grade point averages could unintentionally favour wealthier students who often have access to better preparation and resources from an early age. James Murphy, director of postsecondary policy at Education Reform Now, told The New York Times , 'I think the incentives that this creates are a big deal. It is creating pressure on colleges to focus on higher G.P.A.s and higher test scores.' The history and impact of standardised testing The use of standardised test scores in admissions has a complex history. In the early 20th century, colleges prioritised intangible qualities such as character, leadership, and athletic ability. These factors sometimes served as barriers for certain groups, including Jewish students. After World War II, as the United States faced global competition, universities shifted focus towards academic metrics like the SAT. However, this shift has been challenged by civil rights advocates seeking more inclusive admissions policies. Income and racial disparities in test scores Research highlighted by The New York Times shows significant disparities in test scores tied to family income. For example, students from affluent households are seven times more likely to score at least 1300 on the SAT compared to those from low-income families. Among the high school class of 2024, just 1% of Black students and 2% of Hispanic students scored between 1400 and 1600, the highest SAT range. By contrast, 7% of white students and 27% of Asian students reached that score bracket. Admissions beyond test scores Given these disparities, very few elite colleges admit students solely based on test scores today. They also consider legacy status, special talents, and economic adversity to create a more balanced student body. Boston University professor Anthony Abraham Jack told The New York Times that the new order could push admissions towards a 'quota system for wealthy and white students.' He cautioned, 'If your class is too brown, too poor, then somehow you rigged the system.' Jack stressed the importance of context in evaluating applicants, telling The New York Times , 'If you have a student who gets a 5 in A.P. calculus, that doesn't give you a relative understanding of how good they are. What if they're the only young woman in the entire state to get a 5 in A.P. calc? That tells you how amazing that person is.' What this means for students As the admissions landscape shifts, students and families may find it harder or easier to understand what it takes to gain entry into selective colleges. The Trump administration's push for more standardised, data-driven admissions decisions may narrow the path for many, especially students from diverse and disadvantaged backgrounds. The debate continues as universities strive to balance fairness, diversity, and academic excellence in an evolving legal and political environment. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
News18
40 minutes ago
- News18
Important cases listed in Supreme Court on Monday
Agency: Important cases listed in the Supreme Court on Monday, Aug 11: * SC to hear a plea regarding recall of verdict ordering liquidation of Bhushan Power and Steel. *SC to hear plea relating to ex-minister V Senthil Balaji in cash-for-jobs scam cases. * SC to hear plea to examine challenge to the validity of extrajudicial divorce like 'Talaq-e-Hasan' among Muslims. * SC to hear plea by former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel in a criminal case. * SC to hear pleas by politicians Pappu Yadav and Derek O Brien challenging SIR in Bihar. *SC to hear plea by activist Medha Patkar in a defamation case filed by Delhi L-G VK Saxena in 2000. view comments First Published: August 11, 2025, 08:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
How homebuyers can protect themselves from being scammed by builder-bank nexus when buying under-construction houses
Devil in the details Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills Games builders play A cosy club Builder stops paying EMIs. Bank holds buyer liable (since the loan is in buyer's name). Buyer must start paying EMI, even if... — The house is not delivered. — The builder is insolvent or absconding. If staying on rent, buyer pays EMI + rent. lCredit score gets damaged due to missed payments. What should homebuyers do? Ensure the project is registered with RERA and check its status online. Avoid schemes that lack escrow accounts. Demand clear documentation of payment schedules and possession timelines. Seek independent legal and financial advice before committing. Prefer projects backed by reputed banks that conduct thorough due diligence. It was an offer homebuyers could not resist. Buy a pricey apartment for a small upfront payment of 5-10%. Borrow the rest from a lender with an added sweetener: your EMI payments are deferred until you get possession of the flat. The developer agrees to bear the interest burden until the buyer receives the keys to the house. What could go wrong? A lot, as it turns widespread defaults by cashstrapped developers on their commitments, banks have been demanding repayment from purchasers, despite homes remaining undelivered. Following petitions from thousands of aggrieved homebuyers, the Supreme Court this year directed a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into a housing scam by builders and banks. The CBI in July filed multiple cases against various Delhi/NCR-based builders, as well as banks, for duping homebuyers. This may be just the tip of the iceberg. The rot runs deeper. Real estate developers have, over the years, employed a wide array of tactics to attract buyers. Beyond freebies, discounts and creative sales pitches, builders have also offered convenient financing options promising 'no EMI till possession' subvention schemes and deferred payment plans linked to construction progress. Akhil Rathi, Head, Financial Advisory at 1 Finance, says, 'Subvention and deferred payment schemes aim to reduce the initial financial burden for homebuyers, especially those currently paying rent, by offering lower upfront costs and delayed EMIs .'However, there is often a devil residing within the fine print. In a subvention scheme , a tri-party agreement is executed among the homebuyer, the builder and the lender. The builder agrees to pay the pre-EMIs till possession. Even so, the actual borrower remains the homebuyer. So if the builder defaults on the interest payments, it is the homebuyer who is exposed. If he can't repay the loan, the buyer's credit rating the offer clearly specifies a timeline for this arrangement. Some developers promise to cover the interest cost only for the initial 18 to 24 months. 'Subvention plans are always timed. The builder offers to pay interest only for a specified number of years,' indicates Adhil Shetty, CEO, Beyond this period, the buyer is obligated to make EMI payments even if the project is not completed. Rathi adds, 'Builders also charge a much higher price for houses if bought through a subvention scheme. This hidden cost defeats its purpose.'As many buyers have discovered, delays in under-construction houses are a common occurrence in India. Thousands of homebuyers across Delhi/NCR, Mumbai and Pune have fallen victims to this. Data analytics firm PropEquity found in 2024 that one in five under-construction houses, totalling over 5 lakh units, remained undelivered as 1,981 projects across 44 cities were stalled in the preceding eight the remaining four under-construction houses were delivered after a substantial delay of 3-4 years. 'Construction delays are a standard feature of Indian realty for several reasons. This means that the subvention plan leaves borrowers high and dry in case of a serious project delay,' remarks be sure, the RBI had banned banks from entering into such arrangements. It had also barred lenders from making upfront disbursements to builders in underconstruction projects. Loans must be disbursed in tranches linked to construction progress. However, several NBFCs and fintech platforms continue to tie up with builders to offer variants of such construction-linked plan (CLP), a staple offering among builders, has proven to be a mirage. Under this arrangement, the buyer pays in tranches, linked to construction milestones. The builder receives payment only when the work is completed, supposedly reducing the risk for buyers. Surely, it is in the builder's interest to execute the project on time?Not quite. Experts point to a critical flaw in construction-linked plans. These are often not aligned with the builder's cash flow. 'The payment plan is designed in a manner that you would have to pay 90% of the apartment price upon 'laying of the top floor of the building'. However, that is not how the project expenses are allocated. By the time the structure is complete, the builder usually has spent approximately 40-50% of the project cost. The rest 60% of the money is needed later,' observed Anurag Singh, Founder, Ansid Capital, in a recent post on X. Once the builder has received a majority of the project cost (via CLP), he slows down construction deliberately. He has already pocketed a sizable chunk of profits, but his costs are yet to materialise or flow out. He stops construction rather than pay for the remaining work. That is why buyers often find projects getting stalled in later stages, not initially. In the meantime, the builder diverts attention to new launches. Money received under CLP for Project A is diverted to buy land or finance construction in Project B or C. If Project A is delayed or abandoned, the builder has still made his in five under-construction houses were undelivered across major cities and towns in are notorious for gaming this arrangement. A builder claims a milestone (say, 10th or 15th slab) is complete even when actual work is pending. If a lender is involved, they may furnish forged completion certificates to get the lender to release the next tranche. This results in front-loaded payments even when the construction activity lenders carry out due diligence while choosing builders? Surely banks would not want any erosion in the value of their collateral. On the contrary, lenders have been lax in this regard. Many banks don't lend to builders (other than grade A) directly, given the risk in the real estate business. Instead, they offer home loans to individual buyers, which indirectly fund the builder. 'Essentially, the consumer is financing the builder in the name of 'construction-linked plan',' observes Singh. 'So a developer, to whom no bank lends money, can actually get easy finance from the buyers at 0% interest, while the borrowers pay the EMIs with interest,' he system has conveniently kept the builders well fed. In many cases, builders and lenders have pre-arranged cosy tieups. Banks sanction loans for new projects without batting an eyelid, even if these are missing clearances from local authorities. Some lenders may skip physical inspection of construction progress entirely, relying on the builder's documents. This lack of hygiene checks is because banks have no real skin in the game, say experts. How so? If the builder falters and the house (collateral) value shrinks, the bank can recover its value through auction and yet hold the homeowner liable for the outstanding builders and lenders have led homebuyers into a storm. 'Builders have often exploited subvention schemes to attract buyers without ensuring timely delivery. In many cases, they were used to mask delays or financial instability. Banks, too, have played a role by approving loans without adequate scrutiny of the project's viability, especially during periods of high market activity,' remarks Ravi Shankar Singh, Managing Director, Residential Transaction Services, Colliers India. 'Builders used these schemes to collect funds early while construction lagged. Banks, aiming to grow home loan portfolios, at times overlooked due diligence,' suggests a tri-party agreement project gets delayed or builder guardrails are now in place through the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA), but these lack sufficient enforcement mechanisms. This encourages builders to play the devil with impunity. 'A law is only as strong as its enforcement. RERA orders have no enforcement power. Even if you win interest penalty for delayed completion, you can take that victory certificate where you want to. The builder is not going to pay anything,' Singh laments in his post. 'We created a system that was designed to finance the extremely low-credit builder and rob the consumer of his lifetime earnings with no recourse to justice,' he unsuspecting homebuyers are now paying a hefty price for pursuing their housing aspirations. The dream abode has turned out to be a millstone around the neck rather than a means for achieving financial freedom. For those looking to buy, vigilance remains the only Pharande, Managing Director of Pharande Spaces, insists, 'Buying a home should be driven by at least as much awareness as sentiment. Homebuyers must always approach a real estate deal in the spirit of caveat emptor—buyer beware.'Verify the builder's track record and financial stability. Ensure the project is registered with RERA and check its status online. Seek independent legal and financial advice before committing. Shetty avers, 'Scrutinise all the documents, approvals, sanctions, etc. It does not matter whether the lender or the builder have done the legal legwork. As a buyer, you are the one investing your and your family's emotional, physical, and financial well-being in the property. So make sure you have a lawyer to make all the checks on your behalf.'Do not take blind comfort in easy financing offers. 'Subvention schemes and deferred payment plans are means by which buyers can pay for their homes in a more flexible manner, based on how far along the construction is. While this makes it easier for them to pay, such schemes are only useful if they are clear and have explicit terms, and if the developer can be relied upon to complete the project as per schedule,' says Pharande. Buyers should clarify who will be responsible if the builder misses interest payments, as such lapses can lead to missed payments that negatively impact the buyer's credit score, even though the disbursed funds were for construction, not personal use, insists the builder's track record and financial IndiaWatch out for front-loaded payment schedules. Paying 70-80% of the flat cost within 18 months while the project is scheduled for completion years later is a red flag. 'Make sure the payment schedule reflects the stages for actual completion of your flat and also till the handing over of all the legal documents like no-objection certificate (NOC) and occupation certificate,' asserts Shetty. You do not want the bank to advance the entire amount even if the entire post-completion paperwork is pending. This change needs to be made in the sale deed before it is signed and registered, he says. Further, insist on third-party verification of construction milestones before any payment. Relying solely on builder statements or certificates increases don't fall for incentives offered by the builder while overlooking crucial aspects of the Shankar Singh of Colliers asserts, 'It's important to focus on the fundamentals, location, builder credibility, legal clearances, and construction quality, rather than flashy incentives.
