The Delhi High Court expressed concern at posts being circulated over social media platforms “without any sense of responsibility” or checks regarding authenticity of its source. 

The issue was discussed in context of a matter wherein posts in Facebook and WhatsApp showed many students to have passed the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India exam when the results on the institute’s website showed them to have failed.

Petition To Check Grades Alloted

A petition was filed by 23 students challenging the results and sought for all the necessary records to be shown from the institute which included the tabulations made in the codified and de-codified form, that are used to declare the results of the November 2017 examination.

The HC dismissed the petition noting that it was devoid of merits.

Justice Rekha Palli however expressed “anguish” at the circulation of social media posts without any “sense of responsibility” and lamented that the hopes of some students had been shattered by it.

The judge  said despite it the “legal position” of the petitioners was insupportable  , as the official results declared by the institute had found them to be unsuccessful.

The court also pointed out that the students’ petition only questioned if more grade marks had been granted initially and then reduced.  The actual marking in itself had not been challenged, the judge noted. The court set aside this argument stating that it “cannot be a ground to interfere “ with the final results published.

Not Sure of Authenticity

According to the affected students, on January 17 they had learnt via messages on a social media platform that the institute had circulated “notifications” regarding exam results to its centres, branches and members, and as per these messages they had passed . But on logging into the institute’s website, they realised that they had failed  .

Although the petition included the copy of the screenshots obtained from the social media, the students admitted that they unsure regarding the authenticity of the messages received via Facebook.

The institute’s counsel sought for the petition to be dismissed calling it “wholly misconceived” as there had been no changes in the results published on its website at any time.

He also questioned the so-called “notification” stating that it was not an official notification and that the petitioners themselves were unsure regarding its authenticity.

The Delhi High Court has ruled that IndiGo Airlines cannot claim sole access to Terminal-1 of the IGI Airport in New Delhi simply because it suits the needs of the “corporate goliath”.  

The court also stated that Delhi International Airport Ltd’s (DIAL) decision to shift part of IndiGo operations from Terminal 1 to Terminal 2 need not be seen as “unreasonable” just because it may have an adverse impact on the airline.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Rekha Palli pointed out that the part relocation decision by DIAL was temporary, in place only until T-1 completes renovations and recommences operations.

With this ruling, the order of a single judge accepting DIAL’s October decision to shift some of the operations of Indigo, GoAir and SpiceJet from T-1 to T-2 at the Indira Gandhi International Airport has been upheld.

Having Highest Passenger Traffic No Justification For Monopoly

The HC bench rejected the suggestion made by IndiGo in its plea challenging the earlier order that Terminal 1 be given out for its exclusive use while rival low-cost carrier SpiceJet move its full operations to Terminal 2 . The court said that it came from IndiGo’s own commercial considerations and was not suggested for “the larger public good”.

The judges further noted that even if IndiGo is on top in regards to passenger traffic, it still does not  entitle it to claim monopoly over Terminal 1  and make SpiceJet shift out of T-1 just because its passenger traffic is one fourth that of IndiGo.
It accepted SpiceJet’s counsel submission that IndiGo’s attempts to claim exclusive use of T-1 would hurt its (SpiceJet) business prospects and would be anti-competitive.
The court also observed that such a decision would have resulted in  “a one horse race”, and give “a clear edge to IndiGo” , adding that it would give rise to accusation of partisan approach by the DIAL, which had tried to balance the interests all parties as much as possible given the space constraints .

The Supreme Court has advocated the use of CCTV cameras in courts and tribunals citing the 26/11 Mumbai attack and the 2016 Patiala House court violence in Delhi stating that it wants to introduce discipline, security and oversight in judicial proceedings.

Speaking of its benefits, the apex court referred to the CCTV screengrab of convict Ajmal Kasab at Victoria Terminus railway station, and said that it had provided critical evidence to his detriment during the trial.

The bench also observed that in the case involving Swapnil alias Pintu Shirke, who had been lynched inside Nagpur’s district court premises in 2005, there was no CCTV evidence and no one had come forward despite the murder occurring before hundreds of people,

A bench comprising Justice Adarsh Goel and Justice UU Lalit welcomed the government move to install CCTV cameras in several key tribunals such as the National Green Tribunal, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and National Company Law Tribunal.

Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu has mooted the idea of a new dress code for lawyers and judges of independent India . He also recommended that court orders and judgments be made available in regional languages.

‘Our Culture’ Must Be Reflected

Speaking at the event for releasing the book ‘Trials of Truth’, authored by senior advocate and Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand, Naidu lamented that not just the Indian legal system but also the Parliament continued to follow conventions from pre-independence time.

According to him aspects like dress and language must indicate “our culture”.  Naidu further urged that the language used by courts be “the language of the people”, and that the judgments and orders should be in “their mother language” as people need to understand “what’s written in the order.”

Naidu also questioned as to why English remained the preferred language of courts since litigants often don’t understand discussions in the proceedings.

Judicial System Must Reform

The Vice President also urged the judiciary to “reform and transform” so as meet the demands of “young and aspirational India”.

Calling for speedy justice, he said that the country’s Judicial system must reform itself such that it can retain “the confidence of the people.”

Books Deals With Sensational Criminal Cases 

Anand’s book ‘Trials of Truth’ discusses several of India’s memorable criminal cases  including those concerning Nirbhaya, Priyadarshini Mattoo, Jessica Lall, Tandoor case, Ranga Billa kidnapping as well as Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.

Pinky Anand said at the event that the book was not for lawyers but for the civil society. She highlighted that the book does not contain “usual commentaries” regarding India’s criminal justice system but focuses on how the system delivers as well as “the journey of criminal trials”.

Anand also noted that criminal trials typically evoke curiosity among people and this book includes some best of stories in the judicial history of India.

Legal and forensic experts have called for increasing the use of forensic DNA evidence in the Indian criminal justice system as it can play an important role in helping the courts arrive at just and logical conclusions.

According to them this can yield better results, improve conviction rate, and reduce backlogs.

Speaking at a  panel discussion in the 24^th All India Forensic Science Conference held in Ahmedabad, specialists from various disciples such as forensics, law enforcement, victim advocacy, and policy & legislation urged authorities to address the poor demand for DNA casework in India and optimise existing forensic infrastructure .

The session was organised by Gordon Thomas Honeywell – Governmental Affairs(GTH-GA)  along with Raksha Shakti University and Gujarat University, Ahmedabad, and featured officials from agencies like CFSL, CBI .

Poor Growth Of DNA Casework In India

Forensic DNA has grown by leaps and bounds in most countries, but India remains woefully behind.

There is currently no criminal DNA database program in the country, and DNA casework – collecting DNA from known suspects and comparing it to DNA left at crime scenes – remains sporadic.

According to GTH-GA Estimates, DNA profiles are developed in less than 10,000 cases annually  in India.  A country like the United Kingdom, on the other hand, typically completes DNA testing on nearly 50,000 cases per year.

The conviction rate in crimes against women in India fell to 18.9% as per the 2016 NCRB report, the lowest in a decade and just one in every four rape cases ended with a conviction, the experts noted.

The specialists highlighted that DNA evidence is today rarely collected in cases and even when it is available, the samples were found to be either irrelevant or the DNA yield turn out to be poor.

According to the experts, poor DNA casework in investigations is due to

• lack of training crime respondents in handling evidence
• improper crime scene management
• overburdened and underfunded forensic labs, and
• inadequate awareness regarding DNA evidence collection, particularly in sexual assault cases.

Citing field studies, Dr. G. K. Goswami, IPS, Joint Director, CBI, Lucknow  stated that investigating agencies avoid forensic evidence as a result of “undue delay in forensic reporting.”

Dr. Rajiv Giroti, Dy. Director CFSL, Hyderabad has recommended an “integrated approach”. He said that changes need to be brought in evidence collection and there must be increased coordination between investigating agencies and other stakeholders for better functioning of the labs.

Goswami has also called for the augmentation of “forensic facilities” which includes qualified personnel and technology.

DNA Evidence Powerful Tool For Convictions

The panel experts observed that DNA evidence can be effectively used to solve crime even in the absence of a database citing the example of  Italy, where DNA evidence is used to solve crime even though there is no database in the country.

Ravi Kant, Senior Advocate at Supreme Court and President of Shakti Vahni noted that DNA fingerprinting is one of the most “reliable forensic tools” which can be used as “a potent weapon against sexual predators.”

The panel has recommended that

• first responders and all involved officials in regards the chain of custody of evidence be educated and trained regarding DNA evidence
• a central ‘standard operating procedure’ in the form of an investigation manual be developed

According to Tim Schellberg, President, GTH-GA , groups that work to protect women and children against violent/sexual crime must demand DNA collection from crime scenes as well as their timely testing.

He stated that only by taking advantage of forensic DNA can the country’s conviction rate be increased.

A Madras High Court bench has reserved its orders regarding a petition seeking a court directive to the CBI allowing Karti, son of former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram, to travel to Europe including the UK in regards to his daughter’s studies as well as for his business requirements.

The bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose has reserved its orders for February 16, after hearing arguments submitted by senior counsel Gopal Subramanium and Additional Solicitor-General (ASG) G Rajagopalan.

Look Out Circular Issued Against Karti

The CBI had issued a look out circular (LOC) in August 2017, restraining Karti from leaving India, on the ground of the FIR registered by it with respect to the alleged irregular approval of Rs. 305 crore worth foreign investment in INX Media, done in 2007 at his instance during the time his father was the Union Finance Minister.

The bench has asked the CBI to submit a counter affidavit to address the main plea that challenges the validity of the LOC. The matter has been posted to March 3 for further hearing.

While presenting his arguments Subramanium asserted Karti that had already submitted for questioning before the agency and has assured cooperation in future.

He also noted that the petitioner and his family were available in the court and there was no need for lookout notices as he was not a fugitive, adding that there was no justification for the apprehension that Karti would not come back since he has his roots here.

Subramanium further noted that the family owned just one property aboard and highlighted that the family had filed an affidavit stating that if the government could identify any property so far not listed as theirs it would be transferred to the government

No Cause For Urgency

In response, Rajagopalan emphasised that the trip was for business purposes, and that if it had been for “any emergency or medical reasons”, there would have been no objection. The government counsel further stated that if the choice was between the interest of the probe and private interest, then the former is more important.

Rajagopalan also contended that the CBI had received leads involving  “money trail” of the alleged offence that had linkages to UK and other European countries.  He said there was “a real and potential danger” that Karti’s presence in these countries may result in tampering of the evidence .

Rajagopalan also pointed out that the LOC was valid for just three more months, in which time the  agency is likely to complete the investigation.

The ASG added that the petitioner returning to India was not the primary issue, but “there was something more to it,” as there is no reason for the urgency for the trip right now.

The Central Government has defended in the Supreme Court the appointment of two judges for a short period of time stating that Additional Judges, who are typically appointed for a period no less than two years, can hold office even for a day.

The government made the argument in an affidavit filed in context of a PIL  to explain the appointment of two Additional Judges in the Rajasthan High Court for less than two years.
Justice Virendra Kumar Mathur has been appointed for a period of 1 year 3 months while Justice Jhala will hold office for 1 year 1 month 17 days.

Petition Questioning Short Term Appointment

In its affidavit, the Department of Justice has noted that under Clause (1) of Article 224, the appointment of Additional Judge can be for a maximum of two years but it can go lower than that as well.

The PIL filed by advocate Sunil Samdaria has challenged the duo’s appointment, asking the reason for their appointment when they would not be able to complete even one full term as Additional Judges.

According to Samdaria the HC is currently overburdened with cases that have been pending for over 10 years and therefore such short-term appointments were improper and had to be quashed, a position he has argued is backed by a Constitution Bench ruling of the apex court.

Not Qualified

The petitioner has further highlighted that the two had been appointed by the government when they were not even in service as they had both retired as judicial officers.

Samdaria’s petition also claimed that the two were neither eligible nor qualified to be appointed.

According to the Department of Justice however, the appointment was not irregular since as per rules, the candidates need to be in the ‘judicial office’ at the time of the vacancy arising which was the case as the two vacancies has arisen in 2014 when the duo was in service.

The department’s affidavit also pointed out that the issue was coming up since the HC had delayed the recommendations for the Additional Judges. Although the vacancies had come up in October 2014, the government said, the HC had sent the necessary proposal to the Chief Justice of India only in July 2016.

The appointments were notified by the government in May 2017 after the SC Collegium cleared their names.

The petition is being heard by a bench led by Justice AK Sikri which had issued a notice to the government in October, after which the affidavit was filed. The case comes up for its next hearing this week.

In case the apex court does not intervene, Justice Jhala is set to retire in July 2 this year and Justice Mathur will do so on September 1 after they turn 62.

A shocking video has turned up that shows a 26-year-old law student in Uttar Pradesh’s Allahabad being beaten by a group of men repeatedly with a hockey stick, broken pipe and bricks outside a restaurant.

Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml3oZ7YpBMs

The victim slipped into a  coma subsequently and died in a hospital next morning.

The police have said that a waiter of the restaurant has been arrested, and the search for others involved is ongoing.

The video has been reportedly shot by a passerby and shows  the victim, Dilip Saroj, lying unconscious on the steps of the restaurant where he was beaten up.

The men assaulting him seemed drunk but none of the passers-by seemed to have intervened. The person filming also failed to call the police.

The owner of the restaurant is however seen in the video trying to stop the attackers by pushing the men aside but fails. He along, with others, later took Dilip to the hospital on a motorcycle.

FIR Filed Based On Brother’s Complaint

A First Information Report ( FIR) has been filed based on a complaint filed by Dilip’s brother.

The police say that, Dilip, who was living in Allahabad in a rented house, had stepped out for dinner with two friends when they got into an argument with some people which soon turned violent. While Dilip’s friends managed to escape, he could not.

One of Dilip’s friends and an eyewitness, Prakash Singh said that they had been sitting on the stairs leading to the restaurant after dinner when three people came and pushed and abused them. When Dilip and his friends went to confront them, the three started attacking them.

The violent attack was captured in the CCTV camera inside the restaurant.

The police stated that one of the waiters working at the restaurant Munna Chauhan,  had hit Dilip with a rod on the head but later helped take him to the hospital. It is not yet known why he had attacked Dilip.

Sukriti Madhav, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Allahabad said that although the attackers can be seen in the CCTV footage, with the exception of the main accused, Vijay Shankar Singh, who is said to be employed with the Indian Railways, no one else has yet been identified. He stated that special teams have been formed to arrest the accused.

Since taking power last year, U.S. President Donald Trump has sought to change the Europe-centered and Russia-focussed strategic policy framework of the country prevalent from 1945, which has been resisted by the entrenched establishment.

In coming years, one of the changes Trump may push for is to regain the global primacy of the United States and its allies particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, which  would require good relationships with countries like Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

In this context the current political upheaval in the Maldives, triggered by the dictatorial moves of President Abdulla Yameen, who earlier illegally toppled the legitimate head of state, Mohammad Nasheed by a civilian coup carried out with the help of police, military and bureaucratic heads, gains importance.

Moderate Country Becoming  ‘Wahabbized’

In the past months, the Maldives a moderate country has been coming under pressure to transform into a ‘wahabbized’ state which can be stopped if India and the United States act together.

Yameen has been steadily working to promote the efforts by radicals to ‘Wahabbize’ the Maldives, similar to the efforts of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey and Mohammad Morsi in Egypt.

A crisis erupted recently when Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed of the Supreme Court ruled that the disqualification of some anti-Yameen legislators was mala fide. Yameen in response arrested and imprisoned Saeed. Other justices subsequently overturned his judgment, stating that President Yameen had “asked for it.”

India Must Give Support To Maldives

Given that Nasheed remains the legal head of state, his call in recent weeks for India to assist in removing President Yameen from power can be considered legal and within the full ambit of international law as per Madhav Das Nalapat, the director of the Department of Geopolitics & International Relations at Manipal University, and UNESCO peace chair.

China has however urged “restraint”.  If India accepts this advice, then it would be clear to all countries in the region that India’s support for full sea and air access given to, and for the protection of sovereignty of all the powers within the Indo-Pacific has little value.

Similar to the support extended in 1988 to Maldives from India, there needs to assistance given to those in the Maldives who are seeking to revive democracy in the island nation.

Nalapat hopes that Trump will come out in the open and back moderate Maldivians in their moves, ideally by placing U.S. forces in the Indian Ocean and joining hands with India’s armed forces.

If Nasheed is reinstated, he must hold elections within 18 months of retaking an office and remove the police and military officials who have acted against the rule of law by going against the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

Modi And Trump Must Respond To Call For Intervention

In 1988, Rajiv Gandhi had been warned against intervening in the Maldives, but the then prime minister had gone ahead, boosting India’s reliability as a partner.

The recent call for help from the Maldives gives an opportunity to Trump and PM Narendra Modi to show the same spine as Gandhi, and ensure that the Wahabbized army and police of the Maldives are stopped from blocking the democratic rights and freedoms of the Maldivian people.

The Delhi High Court  has decided that the ongoing cross-examination of Arun Jaitley in the defamation suit filed by him will be transferred from the joint registrar to a court .

Ruling on an appeal filed by AAP Chief Arvind Kejriwal, Justice Manmohan said the Union finance minister’s cross examination will be done by a single judge of the high court.

The date of hearing for the case has been set for February 12 before Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw for the recording of Jaitley’s evidence.

Cross-Examination Deadline No Longer Applicable

The judge has further said the joint registrar’s order which directed Kejriwal to finish up Jaitley’s cross-examination on February 12 was not applicable as the court will now decide regarding the time frame and the questions put to the Union minister.

The senior BJP leader has been already cross-examined before the joint registrar on nine earlier occasions.

Jaitley has filed a Rs 10 crore defamation suit against Kejriwal plus five other AAP leaders for alleging financial irregularities in the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA) of which Jaitley was the president from 1999 to 2013.

Apart from Kejriwal AAP leaders Raghav Chadha, Kumar Vishwas, Ashutosh, Sanjay Singh and Deepak Bajpai have been named as defendants. All of them have denied all the allegations of defamation.

Appeal Against Joint Registrar Order

The court accepted the delegation of the cross-examination to the single judge after the counsel for Jaitley and Kejriwal agreed to it and directed that the trial be carried on in “a fair, time-bound and speedy manner”

The court also observed that some of the questions put to Jaitley by the defendant Kejriwal in one of the sessions “were not required.”

The court’s direction came while hearing Kejriwal’s challenge of the joint registrar’s February 2 order asking him to finish Jaitley’s cross-examination on February 12 itself.  The joint registrar had further directed that Kejriwal would be given no more dates for further cross-examination of the Union minister.

Kejriwal’s advocate Anupam Srivastava, challenged this order stating that they were recording the evidence in a “dignified manner”, and were putting only relevant questions to the finance minister.

He further contended that the joint registrar had committed an error by restricting their right to cross examine Jaitley.

Just An Excuse To Stall Case

Appearing for Jaitley senior counsel Sandeep Sethi and advocate Manik Dogra, opposed the counsel’s argument  and pointed out that the Union Minister had been crossed examined on nine occasions and has faced almost 275 questions.

Sethi further noted with five more defendants remaining, “this case will never end”, and said it was “their attempt to stall the proceedings.”

The judge accepted the submission of Jaitley’s counsel, but noted that it was reasonable to give them some time.

The Bombay High Court has said that the Goods And Services Tax (GST) regime was not user-friendly and has asked those responsible for its implementation to resolve glitches that has resulted in widespread frustration on the part of companies trying to file returns.

The GST Network has suffered repeated disruption as  administrators have worked to remove the bugs in the system which underpins the new tax framework launched on July 1.

The GST Council has set up a panel headed by Bihar deputy chief minister Sushil Modi to examine the IT issues. The issues have resulted in several extensions being provided in regards to the filing of forms and has delayed the rollout of the e-way bill for transport of goods

No Cause For Celebrations

Calling the situation, “not a satisfactory state of affairs ,” the judges of the high court has urged that the focus must be on resolving the problems in a reform that was heralded with much fanfare by the government.

It further pointed out the various special sessions of Parliament or special or extraordinary meetings of (the GST) council mean nothing to the assesses “unless they obtain easy access to the website and portals.”

The court has directed the government to file its response by February 20, which is the next date of hearing.  The government has also been asked to inform the court of the steps been taken to address taxpayer grievances concerning the GST Network.

The court has expressed hope that it would not be called upon to supervise the implementation of the law.
Exposed To Penalties And Fines

The court made the remarks while was hearing a petition submitted  by Abicor and Binzel Technoweld.

The petitioner, who is a robotics and automation equipment manufacturer, moved the HC after it could not access its online profile even after being granted a provisional registration number under the central and Maharashtra GST Acts.

The petitioner stated as a result it could not get its final registration number which exposes it to interest liabilities and penal consequences.

The court observed that similar grievances had been raised before the Allahabad High Court.

In that case, the Allahabad HC has directed the revenue authorities to reopen the portal and if that could not be done, then to process the applicant’s petition manually and pass orders as needed regarding credits before the court.

The Bombay High court said if there was no progress shown by the authorities in the situation, then it would also be forced to pass similar orders which may even extend beyond the specific petitioner.
System Needs Extensive Testing

According to MS Mani, partner, Deloitte India, the system needs to be tested in full to ensure that it can handle all “future taxpayer interfaces” like as e-way bill or credit matching.

Pratik Jain, indirect tax leader, PwC  highlighted that the Bombay HC ruling is significant as the GST administration depends on technology and such issues have been coming up repeatedly.

He further added that while “a world-class IT infrastructure” has been created, given the volume of transactions, it may need time to “stabilise. He suggested that the government put in place some sort of mechanism to deal with the taxpayers’ grievances.