English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Nirav Modi-PNB scam: SC defers hearing in PIL till Mar 15 after high courtroom drama

Published

on

Nirav Modi

A petition seeking a special investigation team (SIT) probe in the over Rs 11,000 crore “scam” involving diamantaire Nirav Modi and his transactions with the Punjab National Bank (PNB) triggering a verbal duel between the Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud and the petitioner, advocate Vineet Dhanda on Wednesday (February 21).

Dhanda’s petition, filed by his father – advocate JP Dhanda – on Tuesday, has made PNB, the Reserve Bank of India and the Union ministries of finance and law and justice parties in the case while seeking a direction for the initiation of deportation proceedings of Nirav Modi and others allegedly involved in the banking fraud, preferably within two months. It has also sought an investigation into the role of the top management of PNB in granting of loans to Nirav Modi and not being able to detect the alleged fraud. Directions from the top court to the Union finance ministry to frame guidelines on the grant and disbursal of loans involving big amounts has also been prayed for along with guidelines for framing of rules for the recovery of loans from the defaulters in a time-bound manner.

Following heated exchanges between the judges and Dhanda, during which Justice Chandrachud dubbed the petition as a “publicity interest litigation”, the top court decided to defer the hearing till March 15 when it will hear submissions by Attorney General KK Venugopal who has objected to the SIT probe and the petitioner’s other demand – the deportation of Nirav Modi.

During the course of the proceedings on Wednesday, the bench repeatedly reprimanded Dhanda while the Chief Justice too pulled him up for questioning Venugopal’s attempt at opposing the demand for an SIT probe.

Soon after the petition filed by Dhanda came up for hearing, Attorney General KK Venugopal opposed the demands made by the petitioner saying: “I am appearing for the Union Of India.We are opposing the petition. There is no need of intervention at this stage. This is a case in which FIRs have been filed, the investigation is on.”

However, Venugopal’s submissions did not go down well with Dhanda who shot back saying if a person takes a loan for Rs 1 lakh from a bank and defaults, he “suffers for not paying” but “the government is not doing anything when another person has walked away with Rs 11000 crore-worth of bank’s money”.

The petitioner asked the bench: “What does the AG mean by saying he is opposing” and added: “They (the government) should be answerable, the rich are escaping with money… a small man is hounded… Let him at least argue on issues.”

The Bench, however, denied Dhanda’s request for a notice to be issued to the centre on his petition, stating that since the Attorney General was present in the courtroom and was opposing the petition, there was no need at the moment for a notice to be issued to the centre.

As Dhanda continued with his demand, Chief Justice Misra shot back saying: “We are not here to hear speeches… you are just creating headlines, issuing notice is not your right”.

Observing that “by way of your petition, you are gaining publicity”, Justice Chandrachud told Dhanda: “It has become a fashion… you see something in the newspaper and then come and file a PIL.”

While Dhanda protested against the observations made by the Chief Justice and Justice Chandrachud, stating that he would withdraw his petition because the “Bench is insulting me”, Justice Khanwilkar intervened to say: “you can make legal arguments but do not make emotional arguments.”

Amid continuing outbursts by the petitioner, Chief Justice Misra asked: “the AG is opposing the petition on merits, shouldn’t we give him an opportunity to explain? Is investigation ordered in a day? These kinds of arguments – wholly emotional – you mean to say we must not hear the AG? (sic).”

Justice Chandrachud reiterated that Dhanda’s plea was “a publicity interest litigation” and said: “we must allow the government to investigate… if the government does not do, we can intervene. We cannot intervene like this… These are all PILs which play for the gallery.”

Dhanda shot back at the Bench claiming that he had been practicing law for the past 16 years and did not need publicity.

The Chief Justice then adjourned the hearing in the case till March 15.

India News

Om Birla likely to move motion to revoke suspension of 8 opposition MPs today

The Lok Sabha is likely to revoke the suspension of eight opposition MPs today, with a motion expected to be moved by the government following consensus on maintaining discipline.

Published

on

Om Birla

The suspension of eight opposition Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha is expected to be revoked on Tuesday, with Speaker Om Birla likely to initiate the process, according to sources.

The MPs, including seven from the Congress and one from the CPI(M), were suspended on February 3 for unruly conduct during the first phase of the Budget session after a resolution was adopted by the House.

Motion to be moved in Lok Sabha

Congress leader K Suresh said that Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju is expected to move a motion around noon seeking revocation of the suspensions.

Although the suspension was initially imposed for the entire session, scheduled to conclude on April 2, opposition parties have consistently demanded reconsideration since the second phase of the session began on March 9.

Agreement on maintaining decorum

At a recent meeting convened by the Speaker, both ruling and opposition sides reportedly agreed on maintaining discipline in the House.

Key understandings include:

  • No member will enter the well of the House to protest
  • Papers will not be torn or thrown toward the Chair
  • MPs will not climb onto officials’ tables

The Lok Sabha Secretariat has also reminded members to keep areas within the Parliament premises obstruction-free to ensure smooth movement.

Speaker raises concern over conduct

Earlier, Om Birla had expressed concern over the use of banners, placards, and inappropriate language by some MPs. In a letter to party leaders, he stressed the need to uphold the dignity and traditions of parliamentary democracy.

He had also indicated that actions like suspension are taken in cases of serious misconduct, such as climbing onto tables during proceedings.

Suspended MPs

The suspended MPs include Gurjeet Singh Aujla, Hibi Eden, C Kiran Kumar Reddy, Amarinder Singh Raja Warring, Manickam Tagore, Prashant Padole, Dean Kuriakose (Congress), and S Venkatesan (CPI-M).

Continue Reading

India News

Maharashtra passes freedom of religion bill with jail term up to 10 years

Maharashtra passes anti-conversion bill with strict jail terms and fines, aiming to curb unlawful religious conversions.

Published

on

Maharashtra faces freedom of bill

The Maharashtra Assembly has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026, introducing stringent penalties to curb religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement or marriage.

The bill was cleared by voice vote late Monday, with the government asserting that it aims to protect individuals from unlawful conversions while safeguarding constitutional rights.

Under the provisions, individuals found guilty of conversion through marriage or deceit can face up to seven years in prison along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. In cases involving minors, women, persons of unsound mind, or those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the punishment increases to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5 lakh.

Mass conversions will also attract a jail term of up to seven years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. Repeat offenders could face imprisonment of up to 10 years.

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the law is not aimed at any particular religion but seeks to prevent conversions through illegal means. He emphasised that the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution does not include conversion through coercion or fraud.

He also noted that several states, including Odisha, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka and Jharkhand, have enacted similar laws.

The bill allows complaints to be filed by the affected individual or close relatives, while police can also initiate action in certain situations. The government said this provision is necessary as victims may not always be in a position to approach authorities.

Minister of State for Home Pankaj Bhoyar said the legislation ensures that conversions take place voluntarily and transparently. He addressed concerns over the requirement of giving a 60-day prior notice to the district magistrate, stating that the provision is meant to verify free consent.

The law also mandates informing authorities within 21 days after conversion, failing which it may be treated as invalid. The government described this as a measure for administrative record-keeping and to avoid disputes.

During the debate, members from the opposition raised concerns over possible misuse and vigilantism. Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh argued that the bill could affect constitutional rights, including privacy and equality. Some legislators also demanded that the bill be sent to a joint select committee for further scrutiny.

However, the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) extended support. MLA Bhaskar Jadhav said the bill does not target any religion and is aimed at preventing unethical practices.

The government maintained that the law does not restrict an individual’s right to change religion voluntarily but is intended to curb unlawful practices and maintain law and order.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee writes to poll chief over officers’ reshuffle, calls move arbitrary

Mamata Banerjee has written to the Chief Election Commissioner, calling the reshuffle of senior Bengal officials arbitrary and raising concerns over constitutional norms.

Published

on

mamta banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, raising strong objections to the recent reshuffle of senior bureaucrats in the state ahead of the assembly elections.

In her letter, Banerjee described the move by the Election Commission of India as “arbitrary” and expressed “deep concern” over what she termed a unilateral decision. She urged the Commission to refrain from adopting such measures in the future.

The Chief Minister pointed out that while the Election Commission does have the authority to make administrative changes during elections, past practice has involved consultation with the state government. According to her, the Commission would typically seek a panel of officers from the state and make its selections from that list, maintaining what she called constitutional propriety and administrative convention.

Banerjee warned that bypassing this process could undermine the institutional credibility and long-standing legacy of the poll body, and may also affect the foundational principles of the constitutional framework.

The controversy stems from the Commission’s decision, taken soon after announcing election dates, to remove several top officials from election-related duties. These include the state’s Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, Kolkata Police Commissioner, and Home Secretary.

The Commission has maintained that the reshuffle was aimed at ensuring a peaceful and violence-free electoral process.

Reacting sharply, Banerjee alleged bias in the decision-making, claiming that the removal of the Chief Secretary indicated an anti-women stance. She also accused the Commission of selectively targeting officers, suggesting that the move favoured individuals aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Meanwhile, the Trinamool Congress escalated its protest, staging a day-long walkout from the Rajya Sabha earlier in the day.

Responding to the criticism, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the Election Commission is a constitutional authority, adding that questioning its decisions in Parliament is inappropriate and unproductive.

The Commission has appointed a new Chief Secretary in place of the outgoing official as part of the reshuffle.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com