Latest news with #SJK
News18
2 days ago
- Politics
- News18
SC to hear pleas over police reforms, ad-hoc appointment of DGPs
Agency: PTI New Delhi, Jul 28 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to examine after two weeks a range of issues including the ad-hoc appointment of DGPs in some states. A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria said it would also consider a plea of petitioner and former DGP Prakash Singh seeking to put a system in place where a panel comprising chief minister, the leader of opposition and the chief justice of the high court select the director general of police (DGP). Advocate Prashant Bhushan said like the appointment of the CBI director, a three-member panel could be set up to appoint a suitable person as the DGP. The bench also took note of the submission of senior lawyer Anjana Prakash who said due process was not followed in the appointment of Jharkhand DGP Anurag Gupta. Gupta was set to retire on April 30 under the Central government's rules on reaching the age of 60 but the state government wrote to the Centre for extension of his tenure, it was alleged. 'All these matters are important and will require sometime," the CJI said. The CJI asked the counsel, appearing for various parties, to provide the copies of their petitions to senior advocate Raju Ramachandran who would assist the bench as an amicus curiae. The pleas relate to the implementation of the top court's 2006 verdict on police reforms that recommended steps like separation of investigation and law and order duties. After 2006, the top court also passed another set of directions, including no ad hoc or interim appointment to the post of DGP by the state governments. The Union Public Service Commission, in consultation with a state government and other stakeholders, will have to prepare a list of three senior police officers and the state can appoint any one of them as DGP, the top court then said. Bhushan and others have alleged the apex court guidelines were being flouted by various state governments. 'There has been rampant corruption in the appointment of police chiefs… rampant," Bhushan said. PTI SJK SJK AMK AMK view comments First Published: July 28, 2025, 20:30 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.
News18
5 days ago
- News18
Courts can allow changes in criminal complaints if no prejudice caused: SC
New Delhi, Jul 25 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday said procedure was only a 'handmaiden and not a mistress of justice" and held courts can allow amendment in criminal complaints if changes do not cause any prejudice to the accused in trial. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and K V Viswanathan further observed procedural law was meant to aid justice, not hinder it. The top court's verdict reinforced the principle that procedural technicalities must not override the course of justice and allowed an amendment in a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. When a charge is altered, the court said, if there is no prejudice to the accused, the trial can proceed. 'Further, if it is likely to prejudice, the court may either direct a new trial or adjourn the trial to such a period. Section 217 of the CrPC grants liberty to the prosecutor and the accused to recall witnesses when charges are altered under the conditions prescribed therein. The test of 'prejudice to the accused' is the cardinal factor that needs to be borne in mind," it added. The court found it appropriate to observe that amendments to complaints were 'not alien" to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). 'Section 216 of the CrPC deals with the power of court to alter any charge and the concept of prejudice to the accused. No doubt when a charge is altered, what is altered is the legal provision and its application to a certain set of facts. The facts per se may not be altered….," the bench said. The case at hand stemmed from a complaint that three cheques issued by the respondents, amounting to Rs 14 lakh, dishonoured. The complaint alleged the cheques were issued for the purchase of 'Desi Ghee (milk products)". However, the complainant later sought to amend the complaint to correct a purported typographical error stating that the goods sold were actually 'milk." While the trial court allowed the amendment in September 2023, holding no prejudice would be caused as the cross-examination had not yet begun, the Punjab and Haryana High Court reversed its decision. The high court observed the amendment changed the nature of the complaint and potentially had tax implications under the GST regime. Setting aside the high court verdict, the top court held the amendment was a 'curable irregularity" and that it did not cause any prejudice to the accused. PTI SJK SJK AMK AMK (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: July 25, 2025, 20:45 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.
News18
5 days ago
- Politics
- News18
SC issues notice to U'khand on plea of blind judicial services exam aspirant
New Delhi, Jul 25 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday sought responses from the Uttarakhand government and its public services commission on a plea challenging exclusion of persons with blindness and locomotor disability from taking up judicial services examination. A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan issued fresh notices to the state, the services commission and the registrar general of the Uttarakhand High Court on Sravya Sindhuri's plea. The bench was informed that the petitioner, who is completely blind, challenged the exclusion of the blind, and those with locomotor disability from being eligible for the judicial exams. 'That is very bad, very bad on the part of the government," Justice Pardiwala asked. The bench issued the notice to the state considering the examination was scheduled to begin on August 31 and none appeared despite previous notices. The top court on March 3 delivered a landmark judgement in a similar case and held blind persons cannot be denied opportunity of employment in judicial services, as it struck down provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules that excluded them. 'It is high time that we view the right against disability-based discrimination, as recognised in the RPwD Act (Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act) 2016, of the same stature as a fundamental right, thereby ensuring that no candidate is denied consideration solely on account of their disability," it said. The plea, on which the top court issued the notices on Friday, alleged the recruitment advertisement of May 16 violated constitutional rights and statutory provisions under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPwD) Act. The petition also challenged the restriction of PwBD (persons with benchmark disability) eligibility to only four specific categories: leprosy cured, acid attack victims, muscular dystrophy, and dwarfism, and consequential exclusion of several other benchmark disabilities such as blindness and locomotor disability. The petitioner's counsel submitted the recruitment notification not only unlawfully restricted eligibility but also imposed a domicile requirement, disqualifying persons with benchmark disabilities who are not residents of Uttarakhand. The advertisement was alleged to be contrary to Section 34 of the RPwD Act, which mandates 4 per cent reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities in government establishments, with 1 per cent specifically for blindness and low vision and another 1 per cent for locomotor disabilities. It sought quashing of the advertisement to the extent it excludes non-domiciled PwBD candidates and restricts eligibility to only four sub-categories. PTI SJK SJK AMK AMK view comments First Published: July 25, 2025, 16:15 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.
News18
22-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
One should not hold on to govt accommodation endlessly: SC rejects ex-MLA plea
New Delhi, Jul 22 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to hear a plea of a former Bihar MLA against the demand for over Rs 20 lakh as penal house rent for overstaying in the government bungalow and said, 'One should not hold on to government accommodation endlessly." A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria was hearing the appeal of former MLA Avanish Kumar Singh against a Patna High Court verdict. A division bench of the high court on April 3 dismissed the intra-court appeal against the single judge bench order upholding the state's demand for over Rs 20.98 lakh as penal house rent for the alleged unauthorised occupation of a government bungalow at Taylor Road in Patna. 'One should not hold on to government accommodation endlessly," the CJI said. The bench, however, granted the former lawmaker the liberty to take steps 'as permissible in law." The plea was later dismissed as withdrawn. The division bench of the high court affirmed the decision of a single judge bench dismissing Singh's petition on the grounds of non-maintainability. The high court said Singh had previously filed and unconditionally withdrawn a similar petition without seeking liberty to refile the case. Singh, a five-time MLA from the Dhaka constituency, was allotted government quarter 3 on Taylor Road in Patna during his tenure as a legislator. Following his resignation as MLA on March 14, 2014, Singh continued to reside in the bungalow until May 12, 2016, a period during which the quarter had already been earmarked for a cabinet minister. The former MLA said after his resignation and subsequent defeat in the 2014 parliamentary elections, he was nominated to the State Legislature Research and Training Bureau and, hence, was entitled to the same perks and privileges as a sitting MLA under a 2008 notification. It was argued in the high court that this entitled him to continue residing in the same bungalow, and challenged the Building Construction Department's letter dated August 24, 2016, demanding Rs 20,98,757 in penal rent for the alleged overstay. Citing the 2008 notification, the high court observed while it extended certain privileges to members of the Research and Training Bureau, it did not authorise them to continue occupying ministerial quarters allotted during their tenure as MLAs. 'It nowhere provides that a former MLA will continue to retain, of his own will, the same government accommodation/quarter which he had earlier occupied as MLA," the high court said. PTI SJK SJK AMK AMK AMK view comments First Published: July 22, 2025, 17:30 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.
News18
22-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
SC rejects PIL against political parties using national tricolour in their flags
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New Delhi, Jul 22 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday refused to examine a PIL seeking action against political parties for allegedly using flags with the tricolour along with party symbols. A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria declined to hear the petition filed by one Sanjay Bhimashankar Thobde, who appeared in person. The plea said certain political parties have been using flag designs closely resembling the national tricolour in their political campaigns, often replacing the Ashoka Chakra with party symbols. It also specifically named Congress, the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar faction), and the Nationalist Congress Party. The plea said this amounted to a violation of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971. 'Since when are they doing it? Some parties have been doing it since independence," the bench said and rejected the plea. PTI SJK SJK AMK AMK 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.
