Latest news with #SudhanshuDhulia
Hindustan Times
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC slams MCD over office near 700-yr-old structure, orders to vacate in 48 hours
The Supreme Court on Wednesday reprimanded the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for continuing to operate an office near a 700-year-old Lodhi-era monument in Defence Colony, despite earlier directions to vacate the area. The court granted the civic body 48 hours to clear the site 'lock, stock, and barrel'. The monument in question—Gumti of Shaikh Ali—sits at the centre of a roundabout near the Defence Colony market. Earlier this year, the apex court had come down heavily on the Defence Colony Resident Welfare Association (RWA), ordering it to vacate the structure after decades of illegal occupation, and directed its restoration. On Wednesday, the bench led by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia expressed strong disapproval of MCD's claim that its office, located 'adjacent' to the monument, was 'strategically situated' to carry out emergency operations in South Delhi. 'What kind of MCD are you?' the bench asked. 'Do you not know that no construction is allowed within 200 metres of a heritage monument? If you continue in this place, we will haul your commissioner for contempt.' Senior advocate Garima Parshad, representing MCD, argued that the restriction only applied to new constructions and not existing ones. Her argument was backed by the Delhi government's Land and Development Office (L&DO), which maintained the structure was 'safe' after the RWA's removal. The court, however, was unconvinced and ordered MCD to vacate the area entirely and hand over any keys to L&DO. The matter will be heard again on Friday to ensure compliance. The dispute over the monument began in January when the court directed the Defence Colony RWA to vacate the structure and pay ₹40 lakh to the Delhi government's archaeology department as compensation for occupying it since the 1960s. The department was tasked with restoring the structure. On Wednesday, the RWA informed the court that the compensation amount had been deposited. The archaeology department confirmed the same and told the court that the process to declare the monument as a protected site was underway. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appointed by the court to oversee compliance, informed the bench that MCD was not only operating an office near the monument but also using the surrounding area to dump construction debris. Trucks operated by the civic agency frequently used the space, he said. He also noted that a well-maintained park nearby remained locked and inaccessible to residents. Refuting MCD's justification that it needed the space for emergency services, Sankaranarayanan said the civic body had other offices in close proximity. 'Can this building function as an office? Can you not identify any other place?' the court asked after examining photographs of the site. The proceedings originated from a petition filed by Defence Colony resident Rajeev Suri, who sought to have the Gumti declared a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act). Suri approached the Supreme Court after the Delhi High Court dismissed his plea in February 2019. The court had earlier involved the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to look into how the RWA came to occupy the structure in the 1960s. The CBI found no legal basis for the occupation. According to its report, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) had issued a notification in 2004 to declare the structure protected, but dropped the plan after objections from the RWA. CBI cited ASI records in which a superintending archaeologist had written to the director general, noting that the monument had undergone several alterations under the RWA's occupation, making it difficult to restore. In 2008, the central government officially abandoned the proposal to protect the structure. Historical records back the monument's significance. The Gumti is mentioned in the Survey of Monuments of Delhi, conducted in the 1920s by Maulvi Zafar Hasan and published by ASI in 1926. It also features in a 1999 publication by the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH), which describes it as an octagonal tomb with pointed arches, a domed superstructure, and an inverted lotus atop the dome. Only one of the arches remains open, while the rest have been bricked up.
Deccan Herald
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Deccan Herald
SC dismisses dowry case by granddaughter-in-law of ex-governor
"We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the invocation of the extraordinary power under Section 482, CrPC which, as rightly held by the High Court, secures the ends of justice and puts to naught a criminal proceeding," a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said.
NDTV
09-05-2025
- NDTV
Top Court Frees 6 Murder Accused "With Heavy Heart" As 71 Witnesses Turn Hostile
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday "with a heavy heart" acquitted six murder accused after majority witnesses, including the victim's son, turned hostile in the case. The "unsolved crime" saw 71 of the total 87 witnesses retracting from their statements. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran set aside the Karnataka High Court's September 27, 2023 order which rejected the trial court's finding and convicted the six accused in the case. "With a heavy heart for the unsolved crime, but with absolutely no misgivings on the issue of lack of evidence, against the accused arrayed, we acquit the accused, reversing the judgment of the high court and restoring that of the trial court," Justice Chandran said in a 49-page verdict he authored on behalf of the bench. The bench lamented the witnesses turning hostile in court and the "overzealous" investigation which was in "total ignorance of basic tenets of criminal law" often reducing "prosecution to a mockery". "Witnesses mount the box to disown prior statements, deny recoveries made, feign ignorance of aggravating circumstances spoken of during investigation and eye witnesses turn blind. Here is a classic case of 71 of the total 87 witnesses including eye witnesses, turning hostile, leaving the prosecution to stand on the testimony of the police and official witnesses," the bench said. The court went on, "Even a young boy, the crucial eyewitness, who saw his father being hacked to death, failed to identify the assailants." The high court, the top court said, relied on the testimony of the police and official witnesses to convict the accused. "We cannot but say that the high court has egregiously erred in convicting the accused on the evidence led and has jumped into presumptions and assumptions based on the story scripted by the prosecution without any legal evidence being available," the bench said. After analysing the evidence and the testimonies of the witnesses, the court's "only view" held the prosecution's utter failure in proving the allegations against the accused. "More so all the witnesses had turned hostile during the trial," it added. "Whatever be the reason behind such hostility, it cannot result in a conviction, based on the testimony of the investigating officers which is founded only on Section 161 CrPC statements and voluntary statements of accused; the former violative of Section 162 of the CrPC and the latter in breach of Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act," the bench held. Directing the release of the accused, if in custody and not required in any other case, the court said, "Truth is always a chimera and the illusion surrounding it can only be removed by valid evidence led, either direct or indirect, and in the event of it being circumstantial, providing a chain of circumstances with connecting links leading to the conclusion of the guilt of the accused and only the guilt of the accused, without leaving any reasonable doubt for any hypothesis of innocence." The bench said it could only accede to and share the consternation of the division bench of the high court, "bordering on desperation" owing to the "futility" of the entire exercise. "That is an occupational hazard, every judge should learn to live with, which cannot be a motivation to tread the path of righteousness and convict those accused somehow, even when there is a total absence of legal evidence; to enter into a purely moral conviction, total anathema to criminal jurisprudence," it added. It came on record that a rivalry between two brothers resulted in the death of one Ramkrishna, who worked for one of them before joining the other brother. The former employee along with his six associates conspired and killed Ramkrishna for shifting loyalties when he was taking stroll with his son on April 28, 2011, the police alleged.
Hindustan Times
09-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
SC frees 6 murder accused 'with heavy heart' as 71 of 87 witnesses turn hostile
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Friday "with a heavy heart" acquitted six murder accused after majority witnesses, including the victim's son, turned hostile in the case. The "unsolved crime" saw 71 of the total 87 witnesses retracting from their statements. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran set aside the Karnataka High Court's September 27, 2023 order which rejected the trial court's finding and convicted the six accused in the case. "With a heavy heart for the unsolved crime, but with absolutely no misgivings on the issue of lack of evidence, against the accused arrayed, we acquit the accused, reversing the judgment of the high court and restoring that of the trial court," Justice Chandran said in a 49-page verdict he authored on behalf of the bench. The bench lamented the witnesses turning hostile in court and the "overzealous" investigation which was in "total ignorance of basic tenets of criminal law" often reducing "prosecution to a mockery". "Witnesses mount the box to disown prior statements, deny recoveries made, feign ignorance of aggravating circumstances spoken of during investigation and eye witnesses turn blind. Here is a classic case of 71 of the total 87 witnesses including eye witnesses, turning hostile, leaving the prosecution to stand on the testimony of the police and official witnesses," the bench said. The court went on, "Even a young boy, the crucial eyewitness, who saw his father being hacked to death, failed to identify the assailants." The high court, the top court said, relied on the testimony of the police and official witnesses to convict the accused. "We cannot but say that the high court has egregiously erred in convicting the accused on the evidence led and has jumped into presumptions and assumptions based on the story scripted by the prosecution without any legal evidence being available," the bench said. After analysing the evidence and the testimonies of the witnesses, the court's "only view" held the prosecution's utter failure in proving the allegations against the accused. "More so all the witnesses had turned hostile during the trial," it added. "Whatever be the reason behind such hostility, it cannot result in a conviction, based on the testimony of the investigating officers which is founded only on Section 161 CrPC statements and voluntary statements of accused; the former violative of Section 162 of the CrPC and the latter in breach of Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act," the bench held. Directing the release of the accused, if in custody and not required in any other case, the court said, "Truth is always a chimera and the illusion surrounding it can only be removed by valid evidence led, either direct or indirect, and in the event of it being circumstantial, providing a chain of circumstances with connecting links leading to the conclusion of the guilt of the accused and only the guilt of the accused, without leaving any reasonable doubt for any hypothesis of innocence." The bench said it could only accede to and share the consternation of the division bench of the high court, "bordering on desperation" owing to the "futility" of the entire exercise. "That is an occupational hazard, every judge should learn to live with, which cannot be a motivation to tread the path of righteousness and convict those accused somehow, even when there is a total absence of legal evidence; to enter into a purely moral conviction, total anathema to criminal jurisprudence," it added. It came on record that a rivalry between two brothers resulted in the death of one Ramkrishna, who worked for one of them before joining the other brother. The former employee along with his six associates conspired and killed Ramkrishna for shifting loyalties when he was taking stroll with his son on April 28, 2011, the police alleged.
Time of India
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Employee doesn't have right to promotion but consideration if not disqualified: SC
The Supreme Court on Friday said while an employee did not possess a right to promotion, they had the right to be considered for promotion unless disqualified. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran was dealing with an appeal filed by a police constable in Tamil Nadu who was aggrieved by the denial of consideration of promotion for the sub-inspector's post. #Pahalgam Terrorist Attack Pakistan reopens Attari-Wagah border to allow stranded citizens in India to return Key Jammu & Kashmir reservoirs' flushing to begin soon Air India sees Pakistan airspace ban costing it $600 mn over 12 months "It is trite that the employee has no right to be promoted but has a right to be considered, when selections for promotions are carried out, unless disqualified; which right has been impinged, unjustly, in the above case," it said. The apex court observed he had faced both departmental and criminal action for allegedly thrashing a colleague during their posting at a check post. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo While in the criminal case, the appellant was arrested but acquitted later, the government set aside the punishment stemming from the departmental proceedings in 2009, it noted. However, the superintended of police said the appellant was not considered for promotion since he was disentitled in line with the rules for reason of a punishment of postponement of next increment for one year without cumulative effect, imposed in May 2005. Live Events The appellant's punishment, the bench said, was interfered with and was set aside in November 2009. "In such circumstances, the appellant could not have been disentitled from a consideration in the year 2019," the bench's verdict said. It added, "In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that the appellant must be considered for promotion, dehors any disentitlement due to his having become overaged." The consideration will be made and if found eligible, he shall be promoted from 2019 and consequential benefits shall also be paid to him, since it was not his fault that the authority denied his consideration for promotion based on a punishment which was already set aside, the bench said. The bench allowed the man's appeal challenging an order of the Madras High Court passed on October, 2023, dismissing his plea to consider him for promotion as an in-service candidate. The apex court said he was initially appointed in March 2002 and was eligible for consideration in 2019 when a notification was issued for considering eligible constables for in-service promotion in 20 percent departmental quota.
