English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Kulbhushan Jadhav: Pak gets a lashing from international court

Published

on

Kulbhushan Jadav

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]It asked Pakistan to inform the court of measures taken to implement the order staying the execution of Kulbhushan Jadhav.

The International Court of Justice on Thursday asked Pakistan to ensure that Indian citizen Kulbhushan Jadhav is not hanged until further orders and stayed his execution. The court asked Pakistan to give India consular access to Jadhav on Thursday, which in itself was a violation of the Vienna Convention, the court said.

ICJ President Ronny Abraham, who read out the judgement of the bench comprising 11 judges, had harsh words for Pakistan. The judge said Pakistan had violated Article 36 of the Vienna Convention by not giving consular access to Jadhav. He rejected Pakistan’s contention that the court had no jurisdiction on the Jadhav death sentence. “The court considers it has prime facia jurisdiction in the case,” he said.

The court provided India provisional rights to safeguard his life.  It asked Pakistan to inform the court of measures taken to implement this order.

The court observed that Pakistan has indicated that any execution of Jadhav would probably not take place before the month of August 2017. “This means that there is a risk that an execution could take place at any moment thereafter, before the Court has given its final decision in the case. The Court also notes that Pakistan has given no assurance that Jadhav will not be executed before the Court has rendered its final decision. In those circumstances, the Court is satisfied that there is urgency in the present case,” an ICJ press release on the case said.

The court was composed as follows: President Abraham of France; Judges Hisashi Owada of Japan, Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade of Brazil, Xue Hanqin of China, Joan Donoghue of the US, Giorgio Gaja of Italy, Julia Sebutinde of Uganda, Dalveer Bhandari of India, Patrick Lipton Robinson of Jamaica, James Crawford of Australia, Kirill Gevorgian of Russia and Registrar Philippe Couvreur.

Judge Cançado Trindade appended a separate opinion to the Order of the Court while Judge Bhandari made a declaration to the Order of the Court, the press release said.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_raw_html]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[/vc_raw_html][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Before the court in The Hague, India had argued that Jadhav was tried for espionage and given the death sentence in Pakistan, violating the Vienna Convention. Pakistan claimed that Jadhav, a former Indian Navy officer, was working for the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) when he was arrested from Balochistan in March 2016.

Upon India’s moving the international forum, Abraham wrote to Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to not execute Jadhav until the court heard the matter. The public hearing was held on May 15 at The Hague, Netherlands.

India moved the ICJ on May 8, charging Pakistan with “egregious violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations” in the matter of the detention and trial of Kulbhushan Jadhav. This was the first time in 18 years that India and Pakistan arrived at ICJ doorsteps.

Responding to Pakistani claims of Jadhav being a RAW agent, India said that he was a former Indian Navy officer-turned-businessman. Jadhav was kidnapped from Iran during a business trip and was then taken to Balochistan, New Delhi claimed.

Pakistan has consistently refused consular access to Jadhav, sought by India, on the grounds that he was tried for espionage and Islamabad was under no compulsion to entertain the Indian request.

India was represented at the ICJ by senior advocate Harish Salve while the Pakistan case was argued for by Khawar Qureshi.

The trial has been an emotional issue for social media in India and Pakistan. Both sides had seen vitriolic debates and jingoism in popular media over the case.

Pakistan had hanged another Indian, Sarabjit Singh, on May 2, 2013.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

DU VC Prof Yogesh Singh entrusted with additional charge of AICTE Chairman

Published

on

By

Prof. Yogesh Singh, Vice Chancellor of the University of Delhi, has been entrusted with the additional charge of the post of Chairman, AICTE till the appointment of a Chairman of AICTE or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

It is noteworthy that AICTE Chairman Prof. TG Sitharam was relieved of his duties after his term ended on December 20, 2025. According to a letter issued by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, on Monday, Prof. Yogesh Singh’s appointment is until the appointment of a regular AICTE Chairman or until further orders whichever is earlier.

Prof. Yogesh Singh is a renowned academician with excellent administrative capabilities, who has been the Vice-Chancellor of University of Delhi since October 2021. He has also served as the Chairperson of the National Council for Teacher Education. In August 2023, he was also given the additional charge of Director of the School of Planning and Architecture (SPA).

Prof. Yogesh Singh served as the Vice-Chancellor of Delhi Technological University from 2015 to 2021; Director of Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, Delhi from 2014 to 2017, and before that, he was the Vice-Chancellor of Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda (Gujarat) from 2011 to 2014. He holds a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering from the National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra. He has a distinguished track record in quality teaching, innovation, and research in the field of software engineering.

Continue Reading

India News

Goa nightclub fire case: Court extends police custody of Luthra brothers by five days

A Goa court has extended the police custody of Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra, owners of the nightclub where a deadly fire killed 25 people, by five more days.

Published

on

Luthra brothers

A court in Goa on Monday extended the police custody of Saurabh Luthra and Gaurav Luthra, the owners of the Birch by Romeo Lane nightclub, by five more days in connection with the deadly fire incident that claimed 25 lives on December 6.

The order was passed as investigators sought additional time to question the two accused in the case linked to the blaze at the Anjuna-based nightclub.

Owners were deported after fleeing abroad

According to details placed before the court, the Luthra brothers had left the country following the incident and travelled to Thailand. They were subsequently deported and brought back to India on December 17, after which they were taken into police custody.

Advocate Vishnu Joshi, representing the families of the victims, confirmed that the court granted a five-day extension of police custody for both Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra.

Another co-owner sent to judicial custody

The court also remanded Ajay Gupta, another owner of the nightclub, to judicial custody. Police did not seek an extension of his custody, following which the court passed the order, the victims’ counsel said.

The Anjuna police have registered a case against the Luthra brothers for culpable homicide not amounting to murder along with other relevant offences related to the fire incident.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi High Court issues notice to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi in National Herald case

Delhi High Court has sought responses from Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on the ED’s plea challenging a trial court order in the National Herald case.

Published

on

The Delhi High Court has sought responses from Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on a petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the National Herald case. The petition challenges a trial court order that refused to take cognisance of the agency’s prosecution complaint.

Justice Ravinder Dudeja issued notices to the Gandhis and other accused on the main petition, as well as on the ED’s application seeking a stay on the trial court’s December 16 order. The high court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2026.

The trial court had ruled that taking cognisance of the ED’s complaint was “impermissible in law” because the investigation was not based on a registered First Information Report (FIR). It observed that the prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was not maintainable in the absence of an FIR for a scheduled offence.

According to the order, the ED’s probe originated from a private complaint rather than an FIR. The court further noted that since cognisance was declined on a legal question, it was not necessary to examine the merits of the allegations at that stage.

The trial court also referred to the complaint filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and the summoning order issued in 2014, stating that despite these developments, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) did not register an FIR in relation to the alleged scheduled offence.

The ED has accused Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering. The agency has alleged that properties worth around Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which publishes the National Herald newspaper, were acquired through Young Indian.

The agency further claimed that Sonia and Rahul Gandhi held a majority 76 per cent shareholding in Young Indian, which allegedly took over AJL’s assets in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com