Law Ministry gives Show Cause Notice to ASG A.S. Chandiok

Article Source : Hindustan TImes.com

The law ministry has pulled up its senior-most law officer in the Delhi High Court for having represented a private party last week. In a letter to additional solicitor general Amarjit Singh Chandiok, law secretary DR Meena has asked him to explain his appearance for a private power company, New Delhi Power Limited (NDPL).

Hindustan Times had first reported about Chandiok's appearance in the case on October 27, which even surprised the bench headed by chief justice Dipak Misra.

The bench headed by justice Misra had heard Chandiok for some time under the presumption that he was appearing for the government till he told them that he represented the NDPL. A shocked bench had later remarked: "All this while we were hearing you under the impression that you represented the government".

Chandiok, who also heads the high court bar association, said, “I have not received any letter from the ministry so far and I appeared only to assist the court. There is no wrongdoing."

This is for the second time in less than three months that the ministry has rebuked its law officers for acting independently without seeking permission.

In a letter to all the law officers on August 18, the ministry had reminded them that they were bound by the government rules of 1987 and they had no powers to take any decision without its nod.

Chandiok has come under criticism in the past also for accepting private briefs without the ministry's permission.

There have also been reports of law officers providing legal opinions to other government departments and public sector units without informing the law ministry.

The ministry is also understood to be upset with the law officers for freely airing their views to the media on sensitive legal matters being handled by them.

Find the original article here.

Disclaimer:
Legalblog.in does not claim any responsibilty for the the above article or its contents. The article has been provided 'as is' from its source. Legal Blog.in does not claim any copyright in the published material nor can it be held liable for the published material

Supreme Court takes Serious view of Huge Wastage of Food Grains

Article Source : SC Judgments.com

Describing the distribution of food grains to the poor as a matter of ‘grave importance’, the Supreme Court asked the Centre if godowns of Food Corporation of India or the government cannot preserve them, why should these not be allocated in BPL categories, particularly in 154 poorest districts of the country. 

A bench comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma adjourning the hearing of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL)’s petition till November 11, asked the government to inform the court about the mechanism through which over seven crores BPL families can also be covered under the Public Distribution System to ensure food security for all the BPL families. 

The apex court also asked why the BPL families are being identified on the basis of 1991 census, while the population has gone up to over 117.61 crore.

Find the original Article here.

Gujarat Government moves Supreme Court against the Gujarat HC order in the Ishrat Jahan Encounter Case

Article Courtesy : Indlaw.com

Gujarat government has moved the Supreme Court against the Gujarat High Court order to get the Ishrat Jahan encounter case probed by a new special investigation team. 

The petitioner has contended that High Court has no power to handover the probe of the case to a non-statutory investigating agency. 

The state government has also urged the apex court to set aside the High Court order setting up a new SIT. 

In a special leave petition filed in the apex court, the state government has sought stay of the High Court till the disposal of its SLP.

The SLP will be heard on November 12. 

The Supreme Court had earlier refused to hand over the investigation of the case to the SIT, headed by former CBI Director R K Raghavan. This SIT is already probing ten major riots cases in Gujarat in 2002, including the Gulbarg Society massacre in which Congress former MP Mohammad Ehsan Jafri was among 69 people killed. 

Ishrat Jahan and her three accomplices were killed on June 15, 2004 allegedly by Gujarat police who had claimed they were terrorists of Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) outfit and had planned to murder state Chief Minister Narendra Modi. UNI Ishrat Jahan encounter case

The Original Article can be found at http://www.indlawnews.com/NewsDisplay.aspx?7083f6a0-7e1b-4f6d-a38a-d009bd388c42

Bride Burning falls under 'Rarest of Rare' cases : Supreme Court

This snippet may be read in continuation of our previous post on the Law relating to Dowry Death. The Supreme Court, in a recent Judgment has stated that Bride Burning falls under the category of 'rarest of rare' cases and deserves the death penalty.

The Bench comprising Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, opened their judgment with the words "The hallmark of a healthy society is the respect it shows to women. Indian society has become a sick society. This is evident from the large number of cases coming up in this Court (and also in almost all courts in the country) in which young women are being killed by their husbands or by their in-laws by pouring kerosene on them and setting them on fire or by hanging/strangulating them. What is the level of civilsation of a society in which a large number of women are treated in this horrendous and barbaric manner? What has our society become - this is illustrated by this case."

The Bench went on to hold;

"We have carefully perused the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and the judgment of the trial court and other evidence on record. We see no reason to disagree with the judgment and order of the High Court convicting the appellants. In fact, it was really a case under Section 302 IPC and death sentence should have been imposed in such a case, but since no charge under Section 302 IPC was levelled, we cannot do so, otherwise, such cases of bride burning, in our opinion, fall in the category of rarest of rare cases, and hence deserve death sentence. Although bride burning or bride hanging cases have become common in our country, in our opinion, the expression "rarest of rare" as referred to in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 898 does not mean that the act is uncommon, it means that the act is brutal and barbaric. Bride killing is certainly barbaric.

Crimes against women are not ordinary crimes committed in a fit of anger or for property. They are social crimes. They disrupt the entire social fabric. Hence, they call for harsh punishment. Unfortunately, what is happening in our society is that out of lust for money people are often demanding dowry and after extracting as much money as they can they kill the wife and marry again and then again they commit the murder of their wife for the same purpose. This is because of total commercialization of our society, and lust for money which induces people to commit murder of the wife. The time has come when we have to stamp out this evil from our society, with an iron hand."

Find the Entire Judgment here.

--

The Legal Blog.in