Connect with us

National

Nirmohi Akhara files application in SC opposing Centre’s request to release excess land acquired in Ayodhya

Agencies

Published

🕒

on

IST

New Delhi: Nirmohi Akhara filed an application in the Supreme Court opposing Centre’s request to release excess land acquired in Ayodhya.

In its application, Nirmohi Akhara, which is one of the parties in Ayodhya title dispute case, has told the apex court that the central government cannot get back the land now to give it to who they want.

Nirmohi Akhara also said that majority of land should not be given to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, adding that acquisition of land by the government had led to the destruction of many temples managed by the Akhara and SC must decide title dispute.

 

In January, the Centre had filed a plea in the SC seeking permission for the release of excess vacant land acquired around the disputed Ayodhya site. In its plea, the Centre has urged the top court to pass an order that the surplus land be handed over to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, a trust formed to promote and oversee the construction of a temple in Ayodhya.

According to the Centre, the 67-acre-land was acquired in 1992 after the demolition of the Babri Masjid and since only 2.7 acre is disputed so the remaining land should be returned to the original owners – Ram Janambhoomi Nyas.

It is to be noted that the SC had earlier said that status quo be maintained with regard to the acquired 67 acre of land around the disputed site. A total of fourteen peititions were filed in the SC against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement, delivered in four civil suits, that the disputed land should be divided equally among three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

In March, the SC had ordered a court-appointed and monitored mediation to resolve the long-pending Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.

The apex court had said that the three-member mediation panel will be headed by former Supreme Court judge FM Kalifullah, with spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and, lawyer and mediation expert Sriram Panchu as other members.

The order was passed by a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi. The bench also comprises justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer.


Advertisement
Loading...
Comments

National

SC verdict on pleas seeking Rafale judgment review on Thursday

Press Trust of India

Published

on

New Delhi, November 13: The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce on Thursday its verdict on petitions seeking a review of its judgment giving a clean chit to the Modi government in the Rafale fighter jet deal with French firm Dassault Aviation.

On May 10, the apex court had reserved the decision on the pleas, including one filed by former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan, seeking a re-examination of its findings that there was no occasion to doubt the decision-making process in the procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets.

A Bench, comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph, is likely to pronounce verdicts on three review petitions filed by the trio, lawyer Vineet Dhandha and Aam Aadmi Party lawmaker Sanjay Singh.
On December 14, 2018, the apex court dismissed the petitions seeking an investigation into the alleged irregularities in the Rs 58,000 crore deal.

 
Continue Reading

National

SC upholds disqualification of 17 Karnataka MLAs; they can contest Dec 5 bypolls

Agencies

Published

on

New Delhi, November 13: The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the order of former Karnataka Assembly speaker disqualifying 17 MLAs.

The SC, however, stroked down portion of Speaker’s order, which said MLAs would be disqualified till end of tenure of 15th Karnataka Assembly.

The SC verdict has paved way for disqualified MLAs to contest December 5 bypolls in Karnataka.

 

The SC said if elected in bypolls, these disqualified Karnataka MLAs can become ministers or hold public office.

The SC deprecated the manner in which these disqualified Karnataka MLAs directly approached it without first moving high court.

The top court said that its verdict was based on facts and circumstance of case and does not interfere in Speaker’s power to disqualify members.

The SC had reserved its verdict on petitions challenging the then Speaker KR Ramesh Kumar’s decision to disqualify 17 Karnataka MLAs before the crucial trust vote that led to fall of HD Kumaraswamy government in the state.

A Bench headed by Justice NV Ramana reserved its order after hearing counsel for the petitioners i.e. disqualified MLAs, Kumaraswamy and new Speaker V Hegde Kageri and others.

The decision eventually led to the fall of Congress-JD(S) government headed by HD Kumaraswamy, who was forced to resign after losing a trust vote. Thereafter, BS Yediyurappa-led government was formed in the state

Continue Reading

National

UK court set to hear Nirav Modi’s new bail application today

Press Trust of India

Published

on

London: A UK court is set to hear a new bail application on Wednesday filed by fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi, who is fighting extradition to India on charges of nearly USD 2 billion Punjab National Bank (PNB) fraud and money laundering case.

The 48-year-old is expected to be produced before Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London to make another attempt at being let out on bail until his trial in May next year.

He has been in custody at Wandsworth prison in south-west London, one of England’s most overcrowded prisons, since his arrest in March. “The bail application is at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday November 6. The grounds cannot be made public until the hearing,” said a spokesperson for the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which represents the Indian government in the extradition proceedings in court. Modi has reportedly claimed anxiety and depression in his latest application, with earlier bail applications at the court being rejected by Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot, and then also on appeal at the High Court in London, as he was deemed a flight risk.

 

His legal team has previously described their client’s experience in prison as “damaging” and offered stringent electronic tag and other conditions akin to house arrest at his posh Centrepoint apartment in the West End of London in an attempt to persuade the judge to grant bail.

“His experience in custody has been vivid and damaging…he is willing to abide by any bail conditions imposed by the court because Wandsworth is unliveable and makes the effective preparation of his case virtually impossible,” his barrister Clare Montgomery had told Judge Arbuthnot earlier in the year. They had also doubled the initial bail bond offer of 1 million pounds to 2 million pounds in an attempt to sway the court. However, Arbuthnot had concluded that Modi was wanted in connection with a “large fraud” and the doubling of security was “not sufficient to cover a combination of concerns that he would fail to surrender”.

In June, Modi’s legal team took his appeal against that ruling to the Royal Courts of Justice in London, where a judge was told about the diamond merchant’s troubled state of mind in “confidential” documents. “The circumstances he has had to endure at Wandsworth have been personally difficult and the confidential exhibits reflect the experience that has marked him deeply. The reality is that he is not the cold-blooded hardened criminal as claimed by the government of India but a jewellery designer from a long line of diamond dealers, and regarded as being honest, careful and reliable,” Montgomery told the High Court, adding that a number of individuals were willing to offer sureties and substantial sums to back up the claim that Modi is not a man who plans to run.

But in her judgment, Justice Ingrid Simler concurred with the Chief Magistrate that there were “substantial grounds” to believe that Modi would fail to surrender as he does possess the means to “abscond”. After considering all the material “carefully”, the judge said she found strong evidence to suggest there had been interference with witnesses and destruction of evidence in the case and concluded it could recur if he was let out of prison.

There are no strict limits on the number of times Modi can apply for bail, but he would have to produce substantially modified grounds in a new application. He has meanwhile continued to appear via videolink before the magistrates’ court in London, appearing in a standard prison-issued grey tracksuit and mostly freshly shaved and upbeat. His next routine 28-day appearance required under UK law is listed for November 11, a date that still remains on the court’s lists.

At a hearing last month, Judge Nina Tempia had confirmed that his extradition trial is scheduled between May 11 and 15 next year, with the case management hearings set to begin from February next year. Modi has been behind bars at Wandsworth prison since his arrest on March 19 on an extradition warrant executed by Scotland Yard on charges brought by the Indian government.

During subsequent hearings, Westminster Magistrates’ Court was told that Modi was the “principal beneficiary” of the fraudulent issuance of letters of undertaking (LoUs) as part of a conspiracy to defraud PNB and then laundering the proceeds of crime.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Subscribe to The Kashmir Monitor

Enter your email address to subscribe to this The Kashmir Monitor and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,021,447 other subscribers

Archives

November 2019
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  
Advertisement