Apex court denies relief to BPCL

The Supreme Court has refused to give any interim relief to state-owned BPCL which has disputed the tax demand raised by the Kerala government under the newly introduced Section 17-D of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act.

Terming the section as ‘unfair’, the oil firm alleged that the state government by enacting Section 17-D had taken away its rights existing prior to the introduction of the impugned provision which obliged an aggrieved party to deposit the entire assessed tax amount, even if it is disputed, as a precondition for filing an appeal before the appellate forum .

While refusing to stay the high court judgment that directed fresh assessment, an apex court Bench has issued limited notice to the Kerala government on “the question of validity of Section 17-D of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act”. The matter will come up for hearing on July 22.

BPCL said the rider in Section 17-D introduced by the Finance Act, 2007 was confiscatory in nature as it disentitled a party from pursuing the right of appeal against a wrong assessment order.” “The high court erred in not appreciating that there was no justification in proceeding to complete the assessment under Section 17D of the KGST Act,” the petition filed through advocate Parijat Sinha stated. Senior counsel CA Sundaram, appearing for BPCL, said that the oil firm had filed Form II before the state commercial authorities conceding total inter-state sales turnover of Rs 267.8 crore for 2001-02.

Jessica Lall case: SC upholds Delhi High Court verdict on Manu Sharma

New Delhi, Apr 19 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the verdict given by the Delhi High Court in the model Jessica Lall murder case, convicting prime accused Manu Sharma to life imprisonment.

On February 8, a bench of the apex court consisting Justices P. Sathasivam and Swantanter Kumar had reserved its verdict for April 19.

Lall was shot dead by Manu Sharma at the Tamarind Court Cafe restaurant owned by socialite Bina Ramani in South Delhi on April 29, 1999.

On December 18, 2006, reversing the order of acquittal recorded by the trial court, the Delhi High Court convicted Sharma and awarded him a life sentence.

The High Court also declared two other accused in the case — Vikas Yadav and Amarjeet Singh Gill — guilty for destruction of evidence.

They have also challenged their conviction and four-year jail sentence.

Sharma is the son of senior Haryana Congress leader Vinod Sharma while Yadav is the son of Uttar Pradesh politician D.P. Yadav.

Earlier, on February 21, 2006, the trial court verdict had acquitted Sharma.

Sharma had challenged the conviction in the apex court.

Senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Sharma, had argued that the judgment was pre-determined to hold the appellant guilty as one of the judges refused to withdraw from the bench.

Narrating the sequence of events, Jethmalani alleged that from everyday hearing, it was clear that the bench was going to reverse the acquittal by the trial court.

The High Court judgment was ‘nothing but perverse” and every finding of the trial court was rejected, he said.

Appearing for the Delhi Government, Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam, justified the conviction and submitted that there was sufficient evidence to convict and sentence Sharma to a life term. (ANI)

Jessica Lall case: SC upholds Delhi High Court verdict on Manu Sharma

New Delhi, Apr 19 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the verdict given by the Delhi High Court in the model Jessica Lall murder case, convicting prime accused Manu Sharma to life imprisonment.

On February 8, a bench of the apex court consisting Justices P. Sathasivam and Swantanter Kumar had reserved its verdict for April 19.

Lall was shot dead by Manu Sharma at the Tamarind Court Cafe restaurant owned by socialite Bina Ramani in South Delhi on April 29, 1999.

On December 18, 2006, reversing the order of acquittal recorded by the trial court, the Delhi High Court convicted Sharma and awarded him a life sentence.

The High Court also declared two other accused in the case — Vikas Yadav and Amarjeet Singh Gill — guilty for destruction of evidence.

They have also challenged their conviction and four-year jail sentence.

Sharma is the son of senior Haryana Congress leader Vinod Sharma while Yadav is the son of Uttar Pradesh politician D.P. Yadav.

Earlier, on February 21, 2006, the trial court verdict had acquitted Sharma.

Sharma had challenged the conviction in the apex court.

Senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Sharma, had argued that the judgment was pre-determined to hold the appellant guilty as one of the judges refused to withdraw from the bench.

Narrating the sequence of events, Jethmalani alleged that from everyday hearing, it was clear that the bench was going to reverse the acquittal by the trial court.

The High Court judgment was ‘nothing but perverse” and every finding of the trial court was rejected, he said.

Appearing for the Delhi Government, Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam, justified the conviction and submitted that there was sufficient evidence to convict and sentence Sharma to a life term. (ANI)

Sweeping changes to electricity industry proposed

Lawyers for the Royal Commission into Black Saturday have urged the commissioners to recommend sweeping changes to Victoria’s electricity industry.

Senior counsel assisting the inquiry, Jack Rush QC, told the commissioners five of the eleven major fires on Black Saturday were caused by powerline failures.

He said Victoria’s powerlines were old and proposed the commissioners recommend the single wire transmission lines that serve Victoria’s regional areas be replaced over ten years, perhaps with underground lines.

Mr Rush also proposed a return to more frequent inspection of power lines.

He said the current regulatory regime was “fundamentally weak” and recommended it be reformed to give the regulator more muscle.

Mr Rush recognised the enormity of the task and the massive cost, but said unless changes were made, Victoria would continue to experience the types of losses seen on Black Saturday.

Costly

The electricity company whose powerline has been blamed for starting one of the deadliest fire says it would cost up to $7.5 billion to place all transmission lines underground.

The fire that hit towns like Kinglake has been blamed on a snapped SP AusNet powerline in Kilmore.

Lawyers for SP AusNet have said that would cost between $6.5 billion and $7.5 billion for its network alone.

The power company says the cost would be borne by the Victorian Government and consumers, with an annual price rise of 20 per cent over the next two decades.

SP AusNet urged a more targeted use of undergrounding, depending on things like bushfire risk and terrain.

The lawyer also questioned the justification for replacing powerlines based on age rather than condition.

Fire hearing enters fourth week

The ACT Supreme Court hearing into the 2003 Canberra bushfires has entered its fourth week.

The hearing involves around 22 insured and 105 uninsured plaintiffs who are expected to seek about $75 million in property losses and insurance from the ACT and New South Wales governments.

The litigation, before Chief Justice Terrence Higgins, will determine whether the ACT or NSW authorities are liable for damages.

Fire victims, including plaintiff Wayne West of Wyora Station, 90 kilometres west of Canberra, have begun giving evidence.

Before the fire Mr West grew investment pine trees and lucerne hay and fattened cattle in the protected and isolated valley that is watered by the Goodradigbee River.

But it was destroyed in a blaze that began in NSW, and Mr West claims the NSW Government was negligent in its response to the fires.

Today Mr West’s barrister Bernard Collaery is expected to continue questioning Doctor Katja Mikhailovich, who owned Ulmara, neighbouring Wyora Station.

Up to 100 fire victims and 12 expert witnesses are preparing to give evidence to the hearing, which is scheduled to conclude on May 28.

Protracted hearing

There may also be some fiery debate over procedural issues in court today.

Mr Collaery is expected to warn the Chief Justice that the hearing risks running beyond six months at the current rate.

Mr Collaery is frustrated over the number of objections by senior counsel defending the NSW Government during oral evidence.

Late last year Chief Justice Higgins made specific orders to expedite these proceedings.

In a directions hearing he ordered the parties to reduce evidence in chief.

This means the evidence of witnesses was to be submitted in writing, prior to oral cross-examination in court.

Last week the Chief Justice stood down Dr Mikhailovich because much of her evidence had not been formally tendered in writing.

NY to pay $33 million over illegal strip searches

New York City must pay $33 million in damages to thousands of victims of illegal strip searches conducted in city jails over an eight-year period, a U.S. judge ordered on Monday.

The settlement resulted from a class-action lawsuit that claimed that between 1999 and 2007, correctional officers subjected detainees to invasive and humiliating strip searches on their admission to city jails.

The crimes the detainees committed, the suit alleged, were too minor to warrant the extensive searches the city’s Department of Corrections conducted.

“We are pleased that this serious deprivation of rights has been redressed for the tens of thousands of people who suffered these humiliating strip searches,” Richard Emery, lead attorney for the class, said in a statement.

The suit described a grizzly ambience for detainees as they were brought to jail before trial: “Each person was required to fully disrobe and stand naked for DOC officers to visually inspect his or her armpits, oral cavity, ears, nose, and navel,” court documents said.

“The detainee also had to squat or stand with his or her legs spread and body bent forward at the waist so that an officer could visually examine the detainee’s genitalia and anal cavity. Women were also required to lift their breasts.”

Civil rights activists called the decision it an “important settlement.”

“The Department of Corrections has no business subjecting an accused turnstile jumper or shoplifter to a strip search if there is no individualized suspicion of having a weapon or contraband,” said New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman.

City officials said jail procedures were changed in 2007, and that privacy was now being protected.

“The City of New York and its Department of Correction have worked diligently to ensure that both safety and privacy are given high consideration during intake search procedures,” said Genevieve Nelson, senior counsel at the New York City Law Department.

The settlement was given preliminary approval by Manhattan federal Judge John Koeltl on Monday. Victims must fill out claims before the judge grants final payment approval.

If about 15 percent of the 100,000 members of the class file for damages, they can expect up to $1,900 each out of the $29 million of settlement cash, class lawyer Mariann Wang said.

(Reporting by Basil Katz; Editing by Mark Egan and Peter Cooney)

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.

‘Predatory culture’ on HMAS Success

An inquiry has heard that a predatory culture existed on the Navy ship HMAS Success, with junior female sailors being bullied or coerced into having sex.

Men and women work side by side on HMAS Success, but sexual contact between sailors is forbidden.

The inquiry heard that new women on board were especially vulnerable.

The ship’s former Commanding Officer, Simon Brown, says it was rumoured that one group of male sailors was placing bets on who would be first to have sex with new female crew members.

Cmdr Brown also tried to verify another rumour circulating through the ship that two junior sailors had sex on a pool table in a bar in southern China.

He told the commission of inquiry that in April last year, HMAS Success sailed to China for the 60th anniversary of China’s navy, a big affair with many navies invited.

According to the rumour, as the two able seamen had sex some crew members encouraged others to come and watch.

Cmdr Brown says he understood there was cheering as well.

He says he sent the ship’s boatswain to investigate and he confirmed the story was out there.

Under questioning from senior counsel Douglas Campbell, the Navy Commander said he was not aware if any action was taken.

However, it was a different matter with an allegation of improper behaviour on board HMAS Success.

During the same China trip, a junior female sailor apparently had sex with a senior male sailor.

The ship’s boatswain again investigated and the junior sailor said it did happen. But the senior sailor said it did not. He was removed from the ship at the next port.

The inquiry has heard that the prime predators were members of the ship’s propulsion unit, who were meant to make sure the ship kept sailing. They have not been named.

Cmdr Brown says he was told about drinking games, the aim of which was to get junior female sailors drunk so they would be more compliant.

Some allegedly gave in so that the attention would go elsewhere.

The Commander’s source was three women who were so fed up with the situation on HMAS Success that they made a complaint.

He says he contacted headquarters in Australia and the Navy sent Lieutenant Dianne Markowski, an equity and diversity check officer.

Cmdr Brown told the inquiry he thought that a formal investigation was more appropriate.

But the Navy had made its decision.

Cmdr Brown was in uniform, as were many of the lawyers in the hearing room. The inquiry is headed by a civilian – Roger Giles QC – a former federal court judge.

He will report his findings and any recommendations to the head of the defence force.

The hearing has been adjourned until March 24.

Apex court questions bail for murder suspects

New Delhi, May 27 (IANS) The Supreme Court Wednesday sought the Uttar Pradesh government’s response to the grant of bail to the alleged killers a top official of the Indian arm of Italian business firm Graziano Transmissioni.

A vacation bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Deepak Verma issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh government on a lawsuit by the Greater Noida-headquartered firm, challenging the grant of bail to the six accused persons involved in killing the CEO, Lalit Kishore Chaudhary.

Chaudhary had been bludgeoned to death Sep 22 last year by a 200-strong mob of dismissed workers which had barged into the company premises and indulged in large-scale violence.

The violence had resulted in injuries to around 40 executives and workers of the firm. The dismissed workers were demanding they be reinstated.

While seeking the state government’s explanation as to why the bail granted to the six accused persons should not be cancelled, the apex court bench, however, refused to stay the Allahabad High Court order for the bail.

The six accused, who were granted bail May 19, are Kailash Chand, Jaswant Singh, Pankesh Kumar, Jogendra Singh, Rajendra and Komal Singh.

Challenging the grant of bail by the high court to the six, the company contended that bail should not have been granted when the accused have been charged with heinous offences punishable with death or life imprisonment.

Appearing for Graziano, senior counsel Siddharth Luthra argued that the high court had erred in freeing the accused on bail as the seriousness of their offences that included murder cannot be ignored.

He also criticised the high court order, saying that it granted bail despite apprehensions that the accused might tamper with evidence and try to influence witnesses after their release.

Luthra also argued that after their release, the six accused would also instigate other workers of the firm to resort to agitation.

He said the high court had ignored the fact that the accused in order to pressurise the management to concede their demands had taken started rioting and brutally killing the CEO while injuring 40 others.

Indira Jaisingh: Govt indifferent about health warnings on tobacco products

After a stern reprimand from the Supreme Court for the seeming indifference regarding warnings on cigarette packs, the Central government said that the statutory pictorial warning on cigarette and tobacco products will be displayed from May 30 onwards.

With the NGO Health for Millions’ senior counsel, Indira Jaisingh, alleging that the Centre was unnecessarily prolonging the issue, the Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium assured the requisite government action, to a bench headed by Justice B N Aggarwal.

In its case filed against the government, the NGO has accused the government of curtailing parts of the original pictorial warnings on tobacco products.

Saying that the government initially talked of displaying a ‘skull-and-crossbone’ image, along with the warning that smoke can even harm a baby in mother’s womb; Jaisingh drew attention to the X-ray images of lungs being currently displayed, and the supposed addition of a scorpion.

In her argument, Jaisingh said that the image of a scorpion does not serve as a “health recall” image for Indian masses; and that the globally-used skull-and-crossbone image is a symbol of health warning, which breaks all linguistic barriers.

Jaisingh further said that the delay in government action and the indifferent attitude was an indication of the government falling prey to the “tobacco lobby,” and accused the ministers and MPs owning tobacco plantations for an alleged hand in delaying the implementation of the warnings.

Health Warnings On Tobacco Packs From May 30

Come May 30, cigarette and tobacco makers have to flaunt the legislative pictorial warning on the packs of their products as the Centre promised to put into effect the rule making the provision obligatory in a month’s time.

Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium gave the word to a bench led by Justice B.N. Aggarwal after senior counsel Indira Jaisingh, appearing for NGO Health for Millions, alleged the Centre was dragging its feet on the subject.

Jaisingh charged the administration of crumpling under the force from the tobacco lobby.

When Jaisingh sounded off the Centre had thinned out the original warning signs on tobacco products, the bench said, “This way, the government wants to control the population.”

Jaisingh said that the administration at first planned to display images of a skull and bone along with a warning that tobacco products even kill a baby in mother’s womb.

But, using X-ray images of lungs on the label of tobacco products has diluted the caution, she claimed.

After hearing the Centre and Jaisingh, the court decided to take up latter’s request for a final clearance on April 30.

Army chief, defence secretary get contempt notice over pension

New Delhi, April 9 (IANS) The Supreme Court Thursday issued notices to army chief General Deepak Kapoor and Defence Secretary Vijay Singh for allegedly ignoring its order for removal of discrepancies in pensions.

A bench of Justice Altmas Kabir and Justice Cyriac Joseph issued notices on a lawsuit filed by 19 retired army officers of major general rank.

The litigation alleged that the government has ignored a September 2008 Supreme Court order that there should not be any discrimination between officers of major general rank – those who retired before 1996 and those who retired after 1996.

In their lawsuit, the retired officers pointed out that the pension disparity had occurred due to implementation of the fifth pay panel report in a faulty way by the defence ministry.

Appearing for the petitioners, senior counsel Nidesh Gupta said the anomaly had resulted in brigadiers, an army officer one rank lower than the major generals, retiring after 1996 getting more pensions than the major generals retiring before 1996.

Gupta told the court that retired officers are demanding that the minimum pay of major generals should be fixed a notch above the maximum pay of brigadiers for removal of the anomaly and disparity resulting in the pay structures of the retired army officers.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had in June 2005 ordered any disparity should be abolished but the defence ministry moved the Supreme Court challenging the ruling.

The apex court eventually in September 2008 upheld the high court ruling and ordered the government to fix the pensions of the retired army officers within three months.

The government, however, chose to challenge it through a review petition, which continues to lie in the apex court’s registry owing to some defects in the petition.

Why NSA, SC asks Maya govt

THE SUPREME Court on Thursday asked the Uttar Pradesh (UP) government to respond to BJP leader Varun Gandhi’s petition challenging his detention under the National Security Act (NSA). The bench headed by Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan issued notices to the Pilibhit district magistrate and the UP government after senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi mentioned Varun’s petition for urgent hearing.

The court has also issued notices following Varun’s plea for a stay on the district magistrate’s March 29 order for detention under NSA. Rohtagi argued that the move was politically motivated and aimed at sabotaging his client’s political career. “If he remains in jail for another 15-20 days, it will all be over,” Rohtagi said.

He also questioned the legality of the detention order citing clauses under Section 3(3) of the NSA. Senior counsel Harish Salve, countering Rohtagi’s arguments, said the UP government took all steps that are required before invoking NSA and the order was completely legal. Describing the preventive detention order as “perverse and mala fide” in his habeas corpus petition, Varun alleged that it was an attempt to deprive him of his fundamental right to personal liberty and foil his political debut.

Varun has also questioned the Election Commission’s advise to BJP to not field him. The next hearing was fixed for April 13 after Rohtagi told the court that the last date for filing nominations was “April 16 or 17.

Apex court relief for Kampani in default case

Nimesh Kampani can now think of coming back to India. The country’s best-known investment banker and chairman of J.M.Financial has been living in Dubai for the last four months.

The Supreme Court on Thursday gave him interim protection from arrest. He was in Dubai to avoid arrest following allegations that Nagarjuna Finance, a Hyderabad-based company with which Kampani was an independent director in the 1990s, defaulted on payments worth Rs 100 crore to thousands of investors.

Earlier, the Andhra Pradesh High Court had refused to grant anticipatory bail to Kampani, who has been charged for his association with the company as an independent director between 1998 and 1999. The Andhra Pradesh police had also issued a “look-out notice” for Kampani.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrish-nan gave relief to Kampani after senior counsel Harish Salve pointed out that the offences alleged were actually committed after he left the company. Nagarjuna Finance had collected deposits from the public but failed to meet its commitments to depositors following adverse market reaction towards the company after a setback to its hire purchase business.

The Andhra Pradesh Police had arrested the company Chairman K.S. Raju in December 2008. Nagarjuna Finance is being investigated for failing to return money collected from about 85,000 depositors.

He has been sought to be made an accused under the Andhra Pradesh Depositors Act after a period from 1999, but his lawyers have argued that NFL has been charged for defaulting payments during the period 1999-2008 much after Kampani had resigned from Board. When contacted his son Vishal Kampani refused to comment.

For the past four months, Kampani has been in hiding in Dubai, evading arrest in India where at all major airports there is a ‘red alert’ for him.

Insist on candidates giving all information: apex court to poll panel

New Delhi, April 2 (IANS) Candidates attempting to wriggle out of giving vital information about themselves while filing nomination papers are in for trouble – thanks to the Supreme Court.

The apex court Thursday asked the Election Commission to insist that candidates inform the poll panel about their educational qualifications, financial assets and liabilities and possible criminal antecedents while filing their poll papers.

A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice P. Sathasivam issued the direction to the poll panel while hearing a lawsuit, which pointed out that some candidates – exploiting some legal anomalies – leave the relevant columns in their nomination papers blank.

The public interest lawsuit had been filed last year by Resurgence India, a civil rights group, which detected a trend among candidates of leaving blank the columns demanding critical information about them.

Appearing for the civil right groups, senior counsel Prashant Bhushan explained to the bench that his client had found this out after scrutinising over 7,000 affidavits filed by candidates along with their nomination papers during the Punjab assembly elections in 2007.

He said candidates, out of fear of attracting charges of perjury for giving false information under oath in the affidavit, would rather leave the column blank.

Bhushan explained that this would leave the poll panel incapable of either rejecting the nomination or taking any action.

On this lawsuit, the apex court had issued notice last year to the poll panel, which in its reply said that by resorting to this mechanism candidates have been able to frustrate voters’ right to critical information about themselves.

Appearing for the Election Commission, senior counsel Meenakshi Arora Thursday admitted that by this ruse candidates make the poll panel unable to take any action against them.

Arora, however, told the court that the poll panel was now insisting that candidates must fill at least ‘not applicable’ or ‘nil’ in those columns and not leave them blank. However, in such cases, the poll panel would still be able to prosecute the candidates for committing perjury.

At this the bench asked the Election Commission to insist on getting the information from the candidates.

Voters had got the legal right on such critical information about candidates following a protracted legal battle in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court in early 2000s.

The apex court ruled in favour of the voters’ right to information about the candidates. The government changed the electoral laws following the ruling, but the Election Commission is yet to frame proper rules to ensure voters rights, said Bhushan.

Voices against Dutt get louder

Sanjay Dutt on Monday faced opposition from certain unexpected quarters in his attempt to step into his father’s shoes for a career in politics. Apart from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), there were at least three applications filed by people from Lucknow who opposed his plea for a stay on his conviction to make it possible for him to enter electoral politics.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan reserved the verdict after hearing the arguments of senior counsel Harish Salve for the actor and others who opposed the plea. Appearing for these applicants, senior counsel Soli Sorabjee, K.T.S. Tulsi and Prashant Bhushan argued that staying Dutt’s conviction for illegal possession of arms would send a wrong signal to the society and encourage criminalisation of politics.

“Those who break the law should not make the law,” Tulsi told a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Balakrishnan, adding that it would be against the intention of Parliament, which enacted the Representation of the People Act, 1951. According to Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, a person convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more is disqualified from contesting parliamentary or assembly elections.

Appearing for the CBI, Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium too opposed the plea of Munnabhai, sentenced to six years’ imprisonment by a Mumbai TADA (Terrorist and Disruptive Activities [Prevention] Act) court. “It is not his fundamental right to contest elections and #8230; It will be against public policy to allow a convicted man to contest polls,” he said.

“He would not suffer irretrievable or irreparable injury if his plea was refused,” he added. Dutt, the Samajwadi Party’s candidate from Lucknow, raised legal points and referred to his family background to seek relief.

Salve took the court through the evidence to make out a case for stay of his conviction. He said Dutt had possessed arms as there was a threat to the life of his father the late Sunil Dutt and other members of his family after the January 1993 riots.

Dutt has sought suspension of the conviction and asked for parity with BJP leader Navjot Singh Sidhu, whose conviction in a road rage case was stayed in 2007.