‘Balakrishnan tarnished image of judiciary’

New Delhi, June 5 — The stubbornness with which Justice K.G Balakrishnan, who retired as Chief Justice of India last month, opposed the implementation of the Right to Information in the judiciary has damaged the image of the institution, according to rebellious judge D.V. Shylendra Kumar. In one of the strongest attacks by any judge across the country on Justice Balakrishnan, who is set to take over as the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chief on Monday, Justice Kumar held him responsible for further eroding the faith of the people in the judiciary. “Justice Balakrishnan, in an adamant manner, not only refused to divulge information on the functioning of the Supreme Court on the administrative side, but also tried to stonewall the judicial opinion expressed by the Delhi High Court in holding it (SC) amenable to part with information under RTI,” he wrote on his blog. “This stubborn attitude greatly damaged the image of judiciary in the country, and the already eroding faith and confidence of the people in the judicial system only got further reduced in the wake of such an attitude on the part of the former CJI,” Justice Kumar wrote. The only active blogger judge in the country’s higher judiciary, Kumar, in an open letter to the country’s citizens, has also taken a dig at Supreme Court judges, saying the top court of India is one of the most powerful in the world but not necessarily correct.

The judge wanted to know if Justice Balakrishnan had the details of judges’ assets since 1997, when the judges of the top court passed a resolution to do so, and what prevented him from making these public the day after the announcement.

RNRL chief Anil Ambani meets Prime Minister

New Delhi, May 12 (ANI): Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) chief Anil Ambani met Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh at his official residence on Wednesday morning and reportedly expressed his views on the Supreme Court”s verdict on the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row.

Before his meeting with Dr Singh that lasted for an hour, Ambani also met the Prime Minister”s Principal Secretary, TKA Nair, for about ten minutes.

He is also expected to meet Power Secretary P Uma Shankar and Power Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde later in the day.

Earlier on May 7, Ambani had said that he would not challenge the verdict of the apex court that that gave his brother, Mukesh”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), the advantage in the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row.

Delivering a judgement on the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row between Anil Ambani”s RNRL and Mukesh Ambani”s RIL, a three judge bench of the apex court, consisting former Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices P Sathasivam and B Sudershan Reddy said only the government can decide rates of these resources.

Quashing the family formula evolved by Kokilaben Ambani to solve the long drawn out dispute between her two sons, Anil and Mukesh, over sharing of gas, the court asked both to solve the matter through renegotiations within six weeks.

The apex court had said the RIL cannot supply gas to the RNRL and its power plants at 234 dollars per unit, which is what the brothers had agreed to in a private agreement in 2005.

The RIL has since challenged the price, arguing that it should be allowed to charge more, because the government has asked for higher prices.

The court held that gas belongs entirely to the government and it alone has the right to decide gas prices.

Anil maintained that he was rather looking forward to successful re-negotiation with RIL over the next 6 weeks as directed by the court.

Aiming to arrest the fall of the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG) stocks in the market, Anil maintained that the court had safeguarded the interest of 2.5 million RNRL shareholders.

The stock is trading down by 20 percent ever since the verdict came in. (ANI)

Kapadia takes over as new Chief Justice of India

New Delhi, May 12 (NAI): Justice S H Kapadia was on Wednesday sworn-in as the 38th Chief Justice of India (CJI).

President Pratibha Devisingh Patil administered the oath of office and secrecy to Justice Kapadia.

The event at Rashtrapati Bhawan was attended by the Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, his cabinet colleagues, outgoing Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and other dignitaries.

Born in September 29, 1947, Kapadia enrolled as an advocate in September 1974.

Appointed as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court in October 1991, Kapadia was elevated as a Permanent Judge in the same High Court in March 1993.

He was associated with a historical judgement in which a five-judge Constitutional Bench had held that the law put in the Ninth Schedule was open for judicial review.

He was served as the Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court from October 5, 2003 to December of the same year.

He was elevated to the Supreme Court on December 18, 2003. (ANI)

Murli Deora welcomes Supreme Court”s verdict on Krishna Godavari Basin Gas dispute

New Delhi, May 7 (ANI): Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Murli Deora on Friday welcomed the verdict of the Supreme Court in favour of Mukesh Ambani”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) in the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row, and called it a vindication of the Government”s stand.

“I am given to understand that entire gas belongs to nation and is upheld by the honourable Supreme Court. And the government has power and authority to allocate the price,” said Deora.

Oil Secretary S Sundareshan also welcomed the decision of the apex court saying the government would continue to decide the allocation and price of gas in future also.

“We are given to understand that this viewpoint of the government has been upheld. We are allocating the gas, we are deciding the price of the gas and we would continue to do so in the future,” said Sundaresan.

Emphatically stating that the government is the owner of natural resources, including gas available in the country, the apex court on Friday said that no individual or commercial entity could claim right to such resources.

Delivering a judgement on the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row between Anil Ambani”s Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) and Mukesh Ambani”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), a three judge bench of the apex court, consisting Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices P Sathasivam and B Sudershan Reddy said only the government can decide rates of these resources.

Quashing the family formula evolved by Kokilaben Ambani to solve the long drawn out dispute between her two sons, Anil and Mukesh, over sharing of gas, the court asked both to solve the matter through renegotiations within six weeks.

In June 2009, the Bombay High Court had upheld the RNRL”s claim of family agreement.

At the heart of the war is the gas produced by Mukesh Ambani”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) in the Krishna Godavari (KG) Basin.

On December 18, 2009, the apex court bench had reserved its judgement in the case.
The apex court heard the case for 26 days spread over nine weeks, beginning October 20, 2009.

The gas is sold to Anil Ambani”s Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) for its power plants.

The RIL had wanted to raise the price that was agreed upon by a family agreement in 2005 after the brothers decided to split the empire built by their father, Dhirubhai Ambani.

In 2007, the government said that the agreed-upon rate of 2.34 dollars per unit was far too low.

The RIL said it had to raise his rates accordingly to 4.2 dollars per unit and follow Government orders because it owns the gas, and that the RIL is just a contractor.

The RNRL accused the RIL of artificially inflating its costs and decreasing its output to make super-normal profits.

The government said it doesn”t recognize the family contract between Anil and Mukesh because the Krishna Godavari Gas is a government property.

Government said that two private parties cannot strike a deal without its clearance.

The government also said it has set the new price based on a fair formula. (ANI)

SC upholds selected UPSC candidates right to quota benefits

New Delhi, May 7 (ANI): A five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Friday upheld the constitutional validity of a Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) rule allowing merit list candidates belonging to reserved category to avail the quota benefit while choosing posts.

The bench consisting of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices S H Kapadia, R V Raveendran, B Sudershan Reddy and P Sathasivam set aside an earlier Madras High Court judgment on the issue.

The court passed the order on a special leave petition filed by the Centre challenging the Madras High Court verdict.

“Such migrations of reserved category candidates taking the benefit of reservation even after making into merit list is not inconsistent with the provision of the Constitution….Appeals are allowed,” the court said in its judgment.

Earlier, the Madras High Court had ordered that if a candidate from reserve category vacates his place in a general category merit list in civil services examination conducted by the UPSC and opts to prop up his position by opting for caste-based benefit, then the vacant general category seat should go to a reserved category candidate. (ANI)

Governors can’t be removed due to change of regime at Centre: SC

New Delhi, May 7 (ANI): In a judgement that could have deep political connotations the Supreme Court on Friday said governors cannot be removed or transferred just because of a change of government at the Centre.

A five-judge constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan gave the decision on a petition challenging the summary dismissal of governors by the President after a change of regime at the Centre.

Earlier, appearing for the petitioner, senior lawyer Soli J Sorabjee had questioned the removal of four governors by the UPA Government after the NDA lost elections in 2004.

He had said constitutional office holders should not be made sacrificial goats at the altar of electoral politics and should be treated with dignity that they deserve.

Sorabjee had suggested a fixed tenure for them or in case of removal, giving of proper reasons by the President of India. (ANI)

KG Basin row: SC says government is owner of gas

New Delhi, May 7 (ANI): Emphatically stating that the government is the owner of natural resources, including gas available in the country, the Supreme Court said on Friday that no individual or commercial entity could claim right to such resources.

Delivering a judgement on the Krishna Godavari Basin Gas row between Anil Ambani’s Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) and Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), a three judge bench of the apex court, consisting Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices P Sathasivam and B Sudershan Reddy said only the government can decide rates of these resources.

Quashing the family formula evolved by Kokilaben Ambani to solve the long drawn out dispute between her two sons, Anil and Mukesh, over sharing of gas, the court asked both to solve the matter through renegotiations within six weeks.

The decision is a major set back to the Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) headed by Anil Ambani and its impact was felt immediately on the share market.

In June 2009, the Bombay High Court had upheld the RNRL’s claim of family agreement.

At the heart of the war is the gas produced by Mukesh Ambani”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) in the Krishna Godavari (KG) Basin.

On December 18, 2009, the apex court bench had reserved its judgement in the case.

The apex court heard the case for 26 days spread over nine weeks, beginning October 20, 2009.

The gas is sold to Anil Ambani”s Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) for its power plants.

The RIL had wanted to raise the price that was agreed upon by a family agreement in 2005 after the brothers decided to split the empire built by their father, Dhirubhai Ambani.

In 2007, the government said that the agreed-upon rate of 2.34 dollars per unit was far too low.

The RIL said it had to raise his rates accordingly to 4.2 dollars per unit and follow Government orders because it owns the gas, and that the RIL is just a contractor.

The RNRL accused the RIL of artificially inflating its costs and decreasing its output to make super-normal profits.

The government said it doesn”t recognize the family contract between Anil and Mukesh because the Krishna Godavari Gas is a government property.

Government said that two private parties cannot strike a deal without its clearance.

The government also says it has set the new price based on a fair formula. (ANI)

KG basin gas row: SC to deliver verdict today

New Delhi, May 7 (ANI): A three judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan will deliver its verdict on the Ambani gas sharing dispute involving the Krishna-Godavari Basin’s D6 block (KG-D6) on Friday.

There is a likely hood of two separate two judgements, as the apex court”s list of cases for Friday shows that Justice P Sathasivam and Justice B Sudershan Reddy will deliver separate judgements.

If the two judgments don”t concur, the majority opinion will prevail.

The judgment would also set the future course for the gas market, impacting government revenue and the power and fertiliser companies consuming the gas.

At the heart of the war is the gas produced by Mukesh Ambani”s Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) in the Krishna Godavari (KG) Basin.

The case is being seen as one of India”s biggest corporate battles, as it is a face-off between Mukesh and Anil Ambani both billionaires, who own gigantic business groups.

On December 18, 2009, the apex court bench had reserved its judgement in the case.

The apex court heard the case for 26 days spread over nine weeks, beginning October 20, 2009.

The gas is sold to Anil Ambani”s Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) for its power plants.

The RIL wants to raise the price that was agreed upon by a family agreement in 2005 after the brothers decided to split the empire built by their father, Dhirubhai Ambani.

In 2007, the Government said that the agreed-upon rate of 2.34 dollars per unit was far too low.

The RIL said it had to raise his rates accordingly to 4.2 dollars per unit and follow Government orders because it owns the gas, and that the RIL is just a contractor.

The RNRL accused the RIL of artificially inflating its costs and decreasing its output to make super-normal profits.

The government said it doesn”t recognize the family contract between Anil and Mukesh because the Krishna Godavari Gas is a government property.

Government said that two private parties cannot strike a deal without its clearance.

The government also says it has set the new price based on a fair formula.

The RNRL is seeking, under an earlier family arrangement,

In June 2009, the Bombay High Court upheld the RNRL’s claim. (ANI)

MPLADS constitutionally valid, says Supreme Court

New Delhi, May 6 (ANI): In landmark judgement, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of the MP’s Local Area Development (MPLAD) Fund.

A Constitutional Bench of the apex court consisting Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran, D K Jain, P Sathasivam and J M Panchal delivered the judgement while setting aside a petition filed by Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party president Prof Bhim Singh.

In his petition, Singh had questioned the constitutional validity of the MPLAD fund and stated that the MPLAD fund has lead to a lot of corruption.

In 1999, the MPLADS was challenged on the ground that it intruded into the autonomy and functioning of local authorities – village panchayats and municipalities – created under a constitutional amendment.

In 2006, a three-Judge Bench had referred the matter to a five-Judge Constitution Bench saying important questions of law needed to be settled.

After pending adjudication for years, a constitution Bench of the apex court had reserved its verdict in November 2009 on the issue.

The Court had to conduct some more hearings after the Union Government requested permission to make more submissions.

Under the MPLAD Fund, members of both Lok Sabha and Rjya Sabha gets two crore in each fiscal, which could be used for both planned as well as unplanned projects.

The MPLAD Fund was the brainchild of the then Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao. In 1993, Rao’s Government allotted one crore to each MPs for development activities in their respective constituency.

In 1998, the NDA Government led by A B Vajpayee hiked the MPLAD fund to two crore.

In April this year, the Planning Commission had rejected the proposal of some MPs to enhance MPLAD funds to Rs five crore from Rs two crore.

The scheme had come under judicial scrutiny in the wake of a sting operation “Duryo-Dhan” in 2005 that had shown some MPs demanding money from contractors to award work for projects under MPLAD scheme.

The expose had led to the expulsion of the members from both the Houses of Parliament.

The MPLAD scheme was in the news also in 2006 following allegations that trusts run by Election Commissioner Navin Chawla”s family got funds from the scheme. (ANI)

Supreme Court declares narco-analysis, brain-mapping illegal

New Delhi, May 5 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that brain mapping, narco-analysis or lie detector tests is unconstitutional because it is an unwarranted intrusion on the individual”s rights.

A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan said: ” “We are of the considered opinion that no individual can be forced and subjected to such techniques involuntarily.”

The apex court said these tests are violative of Article 23, which protects a person from being forced to give evidence against himself.

The apex court also said that certain safeguards must be there for consented narco test.

These intrusive tests violate a suspect”s ”right to privacy” that forms part of right to life and liberty, a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21, they contend.

Investigative agencies have been defending the use of these tests saying it is necessary to deal with organised crime and terrorism and to crack complicated cases.

This move can come as a setback to several high profile cases, like the Arushi murder case, Ruchika Girhotra case etc. (ANI)

Sarosh Homi Kapadia appointed as new Chief Justice of India

New Delhi, Apr 30 (ANI): Supreme Court Justice Sarosh Homi Kapadia has been appointed as the new Chief Justice of India (CJI).

He will assume charge May 12.

Kapadia takes over from Justice K.G. Balakrishnan.

“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (2) of Article 124 of the Constitution of India, President Pratibha Patil is pleased to appoint Justice Kapadia to be the Chief Justice of India with effect from May 12,” a press release from the ministry of law and justice stated.

Kapadia was appointed as Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court on October 5, 2003.

Later, he was elevated to the Bench of the Supreme Court of India on December 18, 2003. (ANI)

Supreme Court provides relief to Lalu Prasad in disproportionate assets case

New Delhi, Apr 1 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Government of Bihar has no authority to file an appeal against Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) supremo Lalu Prasad”s 2006 acquittal in a disproportionate assets case.

“The Bihar Government is not a competent authority to file an appeal in the case,” a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R M Lodha and B S Chauhan said.

The apex court also set aside a Patna High Court decision admitting the appeal filed by Bihar Government against the acquittal of Lalu and his wife Rabri Devi in the case.

During a final hearing on March 10, the CBI stood by Lalu in the Supreme Court and opposed the Bihar Government””s decision to challenge his acquittal in a disproportionate assets case, an off-shoot of the 1995-96 fodder scam.

The CBI had booked Lalu and Rabri Devi on charges of amassing property worth Rs 46 lakh above their legal sources of income.

Lalu was sent to the Bihar military police guest house on judicial remand in July 1997 and again in October 1998. He spent a day in the Beur Jail in the disproportionate assets case in November 2000.

Lalu and Rabri Devi, however, were acquitted of all charges by Special CBI Judge Muni Lal Paswan in December 2006.

The Bihar Government challenged their acquittal in 2007. (ANI)

VHP activists protest against Supreme Court”s verdict on live-in relationships

New Delhi, Mar 29 (ANI): Activists of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) on Monday staged a protest here against the Supreme Court for citing the example of the relationship of Hindu god Lord Krishna with his consort Radha to corroborate its judgment on live-in relationships.

The protestors asked the apex court to take back its observation.

“The observation made by it (apex court) regarding Radha-Krishna has hurt the sentiments of billions of Hindus. We request the Supreme Court that it should withdraw this comment from the final verdict. It should take back its observation,” said Swadesh Pal Gupta, Delhi VHP President.

The Supreme Court had on March 23 threw its weight behind live-in relationships, observing that for a man and a woman in love, to live together is part of the right to life, and not a “criminal offence”.

“If two people, man and woman, want to live together, who can oppose them? What is the offence they commit here? This happens because of the cultural exchange between people,” a special three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) K G Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B S Chauhan observed.

“If living together is an offence, then the first complaint should be filed against the Supreme Court, because we have permitted living together,” the court said, referring to a 2006 judgment in which the Supreme Court directed the administration and police across the country to protect runaway couples from harassment, and to initiate action against those resorting to violence.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by actress Khusboo to quash the 22 FIRs filed against her by Tamil activist groups and forums for her alleged comments on pre-marital sex in interviews five years ago.

The VHP, founded in 1964, is an ideological ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). (ANI)

Supreme Court rejects PIL for M F Husain”s return

New Delhi, Mar 26 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which urged the Central Government to take steps to ensure M F Husain”s safe return to India and withdraw all cases pending against him.

The apex court bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan rejected the petition, saying Husain has every right to stay in India, but he has to take a decision in this regard

The Supreme Court said it could not direct the Union of India to withdraw the cases as private individuals had filed the complaints.

The judges were hearing the petition filed by Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party Chief Bhim Singh. He had filed the PIL on February 26. (ANI)

Former Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash gets temporary relief

New Delhi, March 16 (IANS) In a temporary relief for former Lieutenant-General Avadesh Prakash, the Supreme Court Tuesday decided to hear his plea against the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT)order of February that facilitated a fresh Court of Inquiry (COI) against him in the Sukna land scam.

A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice Deepak Verma and Justice B.S. Chauhan decided to hear Prakash’s plea against being made an accused in the case midway through a CoI but refused to grant any specific relief to him.

Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Prakash, pleaded before the court to halt the CoI proceedings but the court did not oblige. However, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaisingh assured him that ‘nothing may happen’ till the hearing in the apex court on March 29.

The former military secretary, the senior-most officer of the Indian Army ever accused of a scam, has come to the apex court claiming that COI order was a violation of the principal of natural justice. The tribunal headed by Justice A.K. Mathur had endorsed the army’s move to make him an accused in the scam.

His counsel contended that the former military secretary had appeared as a 19th witness before the CoI, probing the Sukna land scam, but after his deposition he was made an accused in the case.

As CoI ordered his court martial, the former lieutenant general moved the Armed Forces Tribunal, which gave him the permission to examine all other witnesses, examined before him.

Not satisfied with the tribunal’s ruling, Prakash moved the apex court seeking the ruling be scrapped.

The Court of Inquiry report of Sep 29, 2009, had indicted Prakash for ‘using his position of authority to pressurise the staff of Headquarters 33 Corps and influencing Lt-Gen P.K. Rath, GOC’ to issue a no-objection certificate to transfer a 71-acre tea estate adjacent to the Sukna military station to family friend and businessman Dilip Agarwal.

Trial against Jayalalithaa temporarily halted

New Delhi, March 16 (IANS) The Supreme Court Tuesday temporarily halted the ongoing trial of former Tamil Nadu chief minister J. Jayalalithaa in a 14-year-old corruption case of amassing wealth far exceeding her legal income.

A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan halted the trial while deciding to hear on March 19 a lawsuit of the AIADMK chief, challenging the March 10 ruling of the Karnataka High Court that endorsed the June 5, 1997, order of the trial court taking cognisance of a complaint against her.

Following the high court’s order, a Banaglore court, where her trial was shifted in November 2003 by the apex court on a lawsuit by DMK general secretary K. Anbazhagany, was to begin day-to-day cross examination of prosecution witnesses against her from March 18.

But the bench, which also included Justice Deepak Verma and Justice B.S. Chauhan, accepting Jayalalithaa’s counsel Mukul Rohatgi’s plea that the trial court should defer its proceedings till the hearing by the apex court, halted the trial temporarily.

The bench asked the prosecution to ensure that the examination of witnesses does not begin March 18 and inform the trial court that the apex court has listed the AIADMK supremo’s appeal for hearing on March 19.

The apex court earlier had transferred the cases out of Tamil Nadu on Anbazhagan’s contention that a fair trial in the two cases against her was not possible when she was heading the state government.

In her lawsuit, Jayalalithaa contended that the March 10 order of the high court has glossed over the fact that the charge sheet against her was not able to make out any case against her.

Her lawsuit said the special judge, Chennai, had taken cognizance of the June 1997 charge sheet against her ‘mechanically without applying his mind’.

Jayalalithaa is accused of amassing Rs.66.65 crore between 1991 and 1996 when she was the chief minister.

–Indo-Asian news Service

Manmohan Singh not in tune with Sonia Gandhi over RTI

New Delhi, Mar 5 (ANI): Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh has reportedly disagreed with Congress President Sonia Gandhi over the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

As per news channels, Dr Singh is in favour of excluding the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from falling under the ambit of the RTI Act, whereas Sonia Gandhi has opposed any amendments in the Act.

The changes proposed by the Prime Minister in the RTI Act will keep the office of the Chief Justice of India out of the purview of the Act.

There are reports that Dr Singh has written a letter to Congress President saying that some changes are needed in the RTI Act to address the concerns of the judiciary.

A leading news channel on Thursday night reported that Sonia Gandhi wrote to Dr Singh two months ago that she was determined that there should be no amendments to the Act and the existing RTI Act should be put into operation appropriately.

The channel further reported that Dr Singh in his reply said there was a need for RTI amendments, but all stakeholders would be consulted prior to making any alteration.

There are reports that the Chief Justice of India (CJI), K G Balakrishnan, wrote a letter to Dr Singh in November 2009 expressing concern over the possible consequences of bringing his office into the purview of the RTI Act. (ANI)

Shopian Case: J and K High court grants bail to four cops

Srinagar, Sep.11 (ANI): The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on Friday granted bail to four policemen who were accused of having a role in the controversial Shopian murder case.

The policemen-Former Superintendent of Police of Shopian Javed Iqbal Mattoo, Deputy Superintendent of Police Rohit Baskota, Station House Officer Shopian Shafiq Ahmed and Sub-inspector Gazi Abdul Rehman-were released on payment of a bond of Rs.50, 000 each. The four had been accused of destroying evidence related to the case.

Last month, the Jammu and Kashmir Government had decided to hand over the controversial rape and murder case involving two women to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The State Cabinet unanimously took the decision hours after opposition parties created an uproar in the State Assembly alleging tampering of DNA test reports in the case.

Friday’s granting of bail came almost a month after the same court rejected an earlier bail plea.

The court had then rejected their plea under the Section 497 of CRPC (discretionary powers of the judge to grant bail or not).

The four had also moved a petition in the Supreme Court against the ruling of J and K High Court, to arrest these officers and also to collect blood samples to prepare the DNA mapping of these officers.

An apex court bench headed by the Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan had asked the Shopian sessions court to expeditiously consider the bail pleas.

During the hearing, the bench had said the High Court should have left it to the superior police officers to investigate the case and should have entitled the police officers to move for bail before the appropriate court.

The bench had also expressed surprise that only because of agitation the investigation was handed over to the Special Investigation Team (SIT).

The J and K High Court, hearing a Public Interest Litigation Petition (PIL) filed by J and K High Court Bar Association in connection with alleged rape and murder of Neelofar and Aasiya Jan in Shopian ordered for the arrest of four police officers who were suspended in the same the case. The court also ordered to constitute SIT and DNA mapping of these officers. (ANI)

SC asks Indian embassy to ensure safety of students in Australia

New Delhi, Sep 4 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Indian High Commissioner and Consulate General in Australia ensure the safety of Indian students and to prevent them from falling prey to fake educational institutions in that country.

An apex court bench headed by Chief Justice K.G.Balakrishnan expressed concern over Indian students falling prey to fake Universities.

Attorney General G. E. Vahanvati informed the court that the Government has laid down guidelines to aid the student community in Australia.

Cases of Indian students being duped by fake universities in Australia came to light when a petition was filed seeking an apex court direction to the Union Government to take action.

Vahanavati said the Ministry of External Affairs has published the measures to be taken by students before they go abroad for study on its website.

The court then disposed the petition. (ANI)

Himachal HC judges to make public their assets

Shimla, Aug 30 (ANI): The judges of the Himachal Pradesh High Court also decided to make their property public, on the lines of Supreme court justices.

Earlier, the judges of Kerala and Delhi high court had announced their decision to make their assets public.

“A decision to declare assets has been taken unanimously by all the nine judges, including acting Chief Justice R.B.Mishra, after the apex court judges’ resolve to make public their assets,” V.K. Sharma, Registrar General of the High Court, said.

Sharma informed that the details of the assets of the judges would be put up on the high court’s website at the earliest.

He added, “We are awaiting the guidelines that have been finalised by the apex court in this regard. As soon as we get these, the list of assets of the judges would be put on the High Court website.”

The Himachal Pradesh High Court had adopted a resolution in 2008 that all judges should declare assets and investments in their name or in the name of their spouse.

Earlier on Wednesday, a meeting of the Justices of the Supreme Court chaired by Chief Justice K.G.Balakrishnan decided to make public the details of their assets.

The issue of disclosing of assets by judges caused a major debate after an article written by Justice Shylendra Kumar of the Karnataka High Court. (ANI)