Latest news with #SureshKumarKait
New Indian Express
23-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Tensions escalate between lawyer groups over installation of Ambedkar statue at Madhya Pradesh HC
In a related development, Bhim Army national president Satpal Tanwar announced on Friday that he would visit Gwalior on May 26. He also appealed to Bhim Sena activists in Rajasthan to gather at the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court and remove the statue of Sage Manu if the installation of Ambedkar's statue at the Gwalior Bench is not permitted. Meanwhile, Madhya Pradesh Congress spokesperson and former MLA Shailendra Patel, who belongs to the OBC community, described the opposition to Ambedkar's statue as an act of 'disrespect to the Indian Constitution.' The controversy dates back to February 19, when a group of lawyers met the then Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Suresh Kumar Kait, and submitted a memorandum seeking approval for the statue. The Chief Justice reportedly gave verbal consent, after which a local committee was formed and a platform was constructed within the Gwalior Bench premises. However, a significant section of the High Court Bar Association in Gwalior opposed the initiative, claiming that the broader bar community was not informed and that necessary permissions from the building committee were not obtained. This disagreement triggered tensions between the two lawyer factions. On May 10, members of the Bar Association hoisted the national flag at the proposed statue site. They stated that the act was to commemorate Operation Sindoor and expressed their intention to erect a 100-foot-high tricolour at the location in the future. On May 14, a group of lawyers arrived for the statue's installation but were met with strong resistance from members of the Bar Association. Tensions escalated further on May 17, when lawyers opposing the statue reportedly assaulted Bhim Army leader Rupesh Ken and his associates outside the High Court premises in Gwalior, despite a heavy police presence. The Bhim Army members had come in support of the statue's installation. Subsequently, on May 19, lawyers from both factions travelled to Jabalpur to meet outgoing Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, who urged them to maintain peace. Since then, both sides have continued to hold discussions.
New Indian Express
23-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Tensions rise amid stand-off between lawyer groups over Ambedkar statue at Madhya Pradesh HC
In a related development, Bhim Army national president Satpal Tanwar announced on Friday that he would visit Gwalior on May 26. He also appealed to Bhim Sena activists in Rajasthan to gather at the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court and remove the statue of Sage Manu if the installation of Ambedkar's statue at the Gwalior Bench is not permitted. Meanwhile, Madhya Pradesh Congress spokesperson and former MLA Shailendra Patel, who belongs to the OBC community, described the opposition to Ambedkar's statue as an act of 'disrespect to the Indian Constitution.' The controversy dates back to February 19, when a group of lawyers met the then Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Suresh Kumar Kait, and submitted a memorandum seeking approval for the statue. The Chief Justice reportedly gave verbal consent, after which a local committee was formed and a platform was constructed within the Gwalior Bench premises. However, a significant section of the High Court Bar Association in Gwalior opposed the initiative, claiming that the broader bar community was not informed and that necessary permissions from the building committee were not obtained. This disagreement triggered tensions between the two lawyer factions. On May 10, members of the Bar Association hoisted the national flag at the proposed statue site. They stated that the act was to commemorate Operation Sindoor and expressed their intention to erect a 100-foot-high tricolour at the location in the future. On May 14, a group of lawyers arrived for the statue's installation but were met with strong resistance from members of the Bar Association. Tensions escalated further on May 17, when lawyers opposing the statue reportedly assaulted Bhim Army leader Rupesh Ken and his associates outside the High Court premises in Gwalior, despite a heavy police presence. The Bhim Army members had come in support of the statue's installation. Subsequently, on May 19, lawyers from both factions travelled to Jabalpur to meet outgoing Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, who urged them to maintain peace. Since then, both sides have continued to hold discussions.
Time of India
22-05-2025
- Health
- Time of India
HC directs parity in retirement age for vet docs
Bhopal: A division bench of the MP High Court directed the state govt to amend the service rules of veterinary doctors and raise their retirement age to 65, similar to allopathy and Ayush doctors. The court also declared as 'null and void' the notification of the state govt through which the retirement age of allopathic and Ayush doctors was raised to 65 years, excluding veterinary doctors. Hearing a petition from Dr Kedar Singh Tomar of Bhopal and a host of veterinary doctors from across the state, the bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain delivered the verdict. The veterinary doctors, in their petition, contended that they have a similar service profile as allopathic or Ayush doctors. Raising their retirement age to the exclusion of veterinary doctors was a violation of the fundamental right of equality. The petitioner said that they joined veterinary services between 1983 and 1988. They are working under the animal husbandry department, while allopathic and Ayush doctors are working under the health department. Senior counsel K C Ghildiyal and advocate Suyash Mohan Guru, who appeared for the petitioners, said that in 2011, the state govt raised the retirement age of allopathic and Ayush doctors to 65 years, while the retirement age of veterinary doctors continued to be 62 years, which is unjust. After hearing the arguments, the court allowed the petition and asked the state govt to bring parity in the retirement age of veterinary, allopathic, and Ayush doctors.
Time of India
21-05-2025
- Time of India
HC quashes rape & dowry FIR against judicial officer
Jabalpur: Madhya Pradesh high court has quashed an FIR filed in Panna district against a judicial magistrate first-class (JMFC) under charges of rape and dowry demand . "The long gap of two years between the first alleged act of sexual intercourse and the continued relationship until the filing of the complaint reflects that it is a case of a love affair going sour. Allowing the prosecution of the applicant/petitioner to continue for the alleged offence would be nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law," a division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain said. The complainant, a patwari, had filed the FIR at Ajaygarh police station in Panna district in 2018, accusing the judicial officer of sexual misconduct under the pretence of marriage and refusing to marry when dowry demands were not met. She alleged that he demanded Rs 50 lakh in cash, 30 tolas of gold, a car, and all wedding expenses as dowry. When her father said he couldn't fulfil these demands, he allegedly called off the match. During the hearing, the division bench found that a bribery case was pending against the complainant, which the respondent was unaware of initially. Upon learning about the pending case, the respondent's family refused the marriage. HC said in its order that continuing prosecution for the alleged crime of rape due to a failed romantic relationship would be a gross misuse of the legal process. "There is also a lack of credible evidence regarding the alleged dowry demand. The review of the records clearly indicates that the complainant is attempting to harass unnecessarily due to the refusal of the proposal," the bench said, and issued orders to annul the FIR.
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Civil judge exam process to continue but with HC riders
Bhopal: A division bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court modified its order staying the process of recruitment of civil judges, asking to complete the process in the next three months. The court, however, clarified that all the appointments to the post of civil judge would be subject to the final order of the court on a petition alleging violation of reservation norms in the exam. The bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain stayed the process of recruitment of civil judges in response to the said petition in its order on January 24, 2025. However, the Supreme Court, in its order on March 3, 2025, asked to fill the vacancies for the post of civil judge all over the country. The double bench modified its earlier order in light of the Supreme Court directive . Secretary of the Advocate Union for Democracy and Social Justice, Ram Girish Verma, in his petition, stated that the MP High Court advertised vacancies of 138 civil judges at the junior level on November 17, 2023. There were 31 posts for the unreserved class and 17 more backlog posts for them, 9 posts for SC and 11 backlog posts, 12 posts for ST and 18 backlog posts, 9 posts for OBCs and 1 backlog post, and 6 posts for the physically challenged. The petitioner contended that the relaxations given to reserved class candidates were not extended to OBCs in the exam. Additionally, there are never backlog vacancies for the unreserved classes, but there are 17 backlog posts for them in the vacancies of civil judges advertised in 2023. The compulsion to get 20 out of 50 interview marks to clear the exam is 'unscientific', he argued. He further contended that there is a provision for the selection of candidates from the reserved classes from the unreserved seats if they score marks at par with general candidates. However, among the candidates selected for the interview, not a single candidate from any of the reserved classes was selected from the general category. After the initial hearing, the bench led by the Chief Justice stayed the process of selection, but now it has modified its order, allowing the process to continue and its completion in three months. However, the selection of candidates would be subject to the final outcome of the petition. Bhopal: A division bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court modified its order staying the process of recruitment of civil judges, asking to complete the process in the next three months. The court, however, clarified that all the appointments to the post of civil judge would be subject to the final order of the court on a petition alleging violation of reservation norms in the exam. The bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain stayed the process of recruitment of civil judges in response to the said petition in its order on January 24, 2025. However, the Supreme Court, in its order on March 3, 2025, asked to fill the vacancies for the post of civil judge all over the country. The double bench modified its earlier order in light of the Supreme Court directive. Secretary of the Advocate Union for Democracy and Social Justice, Ram Girish Verma, in his petition, stated that the MP High Court advertised vacancies of 138 civil judges at the junior level on November 17, 2023. There were 31 posts for the unreserved class and 17 more backlog posts for them, 9 posts for SC and 11 backlog posts, 12 posts for ST and 18 backlog posts, 9 posts for OBCs and 1 backlog post, and 6 posts for the physically challenged. The petitioner contended that the relaxations given to reserved class candidates were not extended to OBCs in the exam. Additionally, there are never backlog vacancies for the unreserved classes, but there are 17 backlog posts for them in the vacancies of civil judges advertised in 2023. The compulsion to get 20 out of 50 interview marks to clear the exam is 'unscientific', he argued. He further contended that there is a provision for the selection of candidates from the reserved classes from the unreserved seats if they score marks at par with general candidates. However, among the candidates selected for the interview, not a single candidate from any of the reserved classes was selected from the general category. After the initial hearing, the bench led by the Chief Justice stayed the process of selection, but now it has modified its order, allowing the process to continue and its completion in three months. However, the selection of candidates would be subject to the final outcome of the petition.
