Delhi High Court directs government to consult with DLSA to consider release of inmates unable to pay surety amount despite bail being granted

Source : Indlaw.com

The Delhi High Court directed the Sheila Dikshit government to have consultations with the Delhi Legal Services Authority (DLSA) member secretary to consider release of those inmates languishing in jail for years together as they have no money to pay the surety amount despite bail being granted to them. 

A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan directed Sunil Kumar Gupta, the law officer of prisons, to consult DLSA member Secretary Asha Menon as to how those prisoners who, though they had been granted bail by the courts, cannot be set free because they cannot afford to pay the requisite surety amount. 

Mr Nazmi Waziri, counsel for the Delhi government, told the court that there are about 11,000 under trials in the ten jails, including Tihar, of whom 150-200 had been granted bail by the courts but cannot be released because they are poor and had no money to pay for their bail bonds.

SPS Rathore gets Bail from Supreme Court

Source : Indlaw.com

The Supreme Court today granted bail to former Haryana DGP S P S Rathore in the Ruchika molestation case. 

Rathore, who was awarded six-month imprisonment by the trial court for an offence under Section 354 IPC, had received further setback when the Punjab and Haryana High Court enhanced his sentence to 18 months. 

Rathore came in appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgement of the High Court. 

A bench comprising Justices P Sathasivam and B S Chauhan ordered the release of Rathore on bail till the final diposal of his appeal. 

The apex court also admitted his appeal. 

The CBI has already decided to close two cases against Rathore involving the illegal detention and torture of Ashu Girhotra, brother of Ruchika. 

Ruchika, an upcoming tennis player, had committed suicide when she could not tolerate the torture to which her brother was subjected by Haryana police, allegedly at the instance of Mr Rathore who was IGP at that time.

Leave your comments.

Won't Say Sorry : Shanti Bhushan to Supreme Court

Source : New Kerala.com

Shanti Bhushan

Former law minister Shanti Bhushan Wednesday told the Supreme Court that he and his lawyer son Prashant Bhushan would prefer to go to jail instead of tendering an apology for pointing to corruption in the judiciary.

Bhushan told this to the court after he and his son were asked if they were willing to offer an apology.

The former law minister told the apex court bench of Justice Altamas Kabir, Justice Cyriac Joseph and Justice H.L. Dattu that he was speaking for himself and his son Prashant Bhushan.

The senior Bhushan said this when he was asked by the court whom he was speaking for.

He bacame a party to the contempt case by filing an affidavit saying that of 16 chief justices' of India, eight were "definitely corrupt", six were "definitely honest" and for two of them "a definite opinion cannot be expressed."

The court is hearing a contempt petition against the senior counsel Prashant Bhushan and managing editor of Tehelka magazine, Tarun Tejpal.

The contempt proceedings were initiated after Prashant Bhushan in an interview to Tehelka levelled allegation of corruption against the sitting judges of the apex court.

Prashant Bhushan in his interview had alleged that Justice S.H. Kapadia (now the Chief Justice of India) who had the shares in Sterlite company decided a mining lease case in favour of the company.

The court took serious objection to the senior counsel Rajiv Dhawan saying "the fact that there is corruption in judiciary is not in doubt".

Reframing his statement, Dhawan said that former chief justice S.P. Barucha had said that 20 percent of judges in the country were corrupt.

To this, Justice Kabir said "he did not say that. It was other way round" meaning that Justice Barucha had said that 80 percent of judges were honest. That the remaining 20 percent were corrupt was an inference drawn by the people, he said.

Justice Kabir said that you can say there is "a little doubt" that there is corruption in judiciary.

Appearing for Tejpal, Dhawan said that the concern expressed in the Tehelka magazine were "bonafide" and "genuine".

He said that question is if there were genuine and bonafide concerns about the state of affairs in judiciary then how they could be dealt with.

He questioned the summary procedure of initiating the contempt proceedings against the alleged contemnor. He said that there was no mechanism by which genuine grievances or concerns about the judicial functioning could be addressed.

He told the court that it was dealing with a case of "constructive contempt". The question is was it a malafide and mischievous exercise of editorial powers.

Ramalinga Raju & 5 others Surrender before Trial Court

Article Source: Times of India

B Ramalinga Raju, the prime accused in the multi-crore Satyam accounting fraud, and five others surrendered before a trial court in Hyderabad on Wednesday. 

Ramalinga Raju, his brother B Rama Raju, former Satyam CFO V Srinivas and three other former employees of the IT firm -- G Ramakrishna, Venkatapathi Raju and Srisailam -- surrendered before the 21st additional chief metropolitan magistrate as the Supreme Court had last month cancelled their bail. 

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) later took the disgraced founder and former chairman of Satyam Computer Services Limited to Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences (NIMS) for a medical check-up. 

The Supreme Court had Tuesday rejected the petitions of the accused seeking additional time to surrender. 

The apex court had on October 26 cancelled the bail of Raju and five others and had asked them to surrender before the trial court by November 10. 

Raju, 56, was arrested in January last year after he admitted to India's biggest corporate fraud. He was granted bail by the Andhra Pradesh High Court Aug 18 on the ground that other accused had also been granted bail. 

At that time Raju was undergoing treatment at NIMS for hepatitis C infection. He had been avoiding court since November last year, delaying the commencement of the trial. He was discharged from NIMS Oct 2.

Find the Original Article here.