Remember Justice Shylendra Kumar of Karnataka High Court? ... the same person who took on CJI Balakrishnan and the old-thinking judges on assets declaration issue! He does not seem to be too enamoured of standards of his own fellow judges.
Justice Shylendra at it again
Excerpts from news and my comments below:
“There is a dogma that one should not question the chief justice’s views. But the judge who has taken the oath to perform his duties should not hesitate to extend his views if he feels something is not right. But how many judges do that?’’ he questioned.
Comments: This is the right attitude which a public also expects from a judge. If a judge cannot stand for his oath and what's right in face of opposition, then who can public put trust in when they approach courts for justice?
Venting his ire further, he said: “There is another big misconception called the contempt of the court or scandalising the court. How can a court be scandalised? It is an institution. It is only the people inside the court who are scandalised. This contempt of court is now misused to gag people, and journalists who voice their concerns are the main targets.’’
Comments: How rightly said -- "How can a court be scandalized?" Scandals are targeted on persons and not on an institution. So where is the need to protect some judges in the name of institution? Let corrupt judges be swept away and be replaced by honest ones. That alone will give confidence to public and restore the dignity and respect an institution ought to deserve.
Contempt of court has become a hanging sword on any person who wants to express views on the functioning of courts and judges.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Allahabad High Court needs Rs 500 for RTI application!
Following is the link to Allahabad High Court's Rules for RTI.
http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/ai/rti/india/states/up/allahabad_high_court_rti_rules_2006.pdf
Of relevance to note are the following rules for giving RTI application in Allahabad high court:
3. Every application shall be made for one particular item of information only.
4. Each application shall be accompanied by a cash or draft or pay order of Rs 500/- drawn in favour of the Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad, or the District Judge of the concerned District Court as the case might be.
5. If the application is permitted, the applicant shall be entitled to information only after he makes payment in cash at the rate of Rs 15/- per page of information to be supplied to him.
Comments: Just read the above again -- RTI application allowed for one particular item only, Rs 500 per application, and Rs 15 per page of information.
And to think that RTI stands for "Right to Information". Surely justice is blind...and it thinks that everyone who files an RTI application is a super-rich Indian citizen.
http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/ai/rti/india/states/up/allahabad_high_court_rti_rules_2006.pdf
Of relevance to note are the following rules for giving RTI application in Allahabad high court:
3. Every application shall be made for one particular item of information only.
4. Each application shall be accompanied by a cash or draft or pay order of Rs 500/- drawn in favour of the Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad, or the District Judge of the concerned District Court as the case might be.
5. If the application is permitted, the applicant shall be entitled to information only after he makes payment in cash at the rate of Rs 15/- per page of information to be supplied to him.
Comments: Just read the above again -- RTI application allowed for one particular item only, Rs 500 per application, and Rs 15 per page of information.
And to think that RTI stands for "Right to Information". Surely justice is blind...and it thinks that everyone who files an RTI application is a super-rich Indian citizen.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Judicial Reforms, Judicial Accountability.... la la la, la la la
Recent news has Law Minister Mr Moily at it again. While it is good to be reform oriented but too much talk on reducing case duration from 15 years to 2 years only gives suspicion it is going to remain tall talk for some time to come (read: duration of UPA govt).
The news below:
http://www.ptinews.com/news/338308_Centre-to-bring-in-bill-on-judges-accountability--Moily
New Delhi, Oct 19 (PTI) The Centre today said it will bring in a comprehensive bill in the winter session of Parliament next month to ensure accountability and standard in judiciary.
"We need to introduce lots of systems to ensure accountability and standard among the judiciary. That is why...in winter session... we hope to come out with a very comprehensive bill," Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily told NDTV.
He said the government would like to replace the Judges Inquiry Act of 1968 with a new comprehensive bill named 'Judicial Accountability and Standard Bill, 2009.'
The Law Minister said the government would go for a national consultation on judicial reforms on October 24 and October 25 during which he may come out with a "vision statement" regarding bringing down the limit for the earliest disposal of cases from 15 years to just 2 years.
Comments: This better be followed by some action. Otherwise it would seem that it is nothing more than high-sounding talk of a 'newly' elected government which wants to promise too many things while early in power.
The news below:
http://www.ptinews.com/news/338308_Centre-to-bring-in-bill-on-judges-accountability--Moily
New Delhi, Oct 19 (PTI) The Centre today said it will bring in a comprehensive bill in the winter session of Parliament next month to ensure accountability and standard in judiciary.
"We need to introduce lots of systems to ensure accountability and standard among the judiciary. That is why...in winter session... we hope to come out with a very comprehensive bill," Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily told NDTV.
He said the government would like to replace the Judges Inquiry Act of 1968 with a new comprehensive bill named 'Judicial Accountability and Standard Bill, 2009.'
The Law Minister said the government would go for a national consultation on judicial reforms on October 24 and October 25 during which he may come out with a "vision statement" regarding bringing down the limit for the earliest disposal of cases from 15 years to just 2 years.
Comments: This better be followed by some action. Otherwise it would seem that it is nothing more than high-sounding talk of a 'newly' elected government which wants to promise too many things while early in power.
Accused's mysterious death in Judges and PF scam
Here is recent news which is shocking given the main accused in a scam allegedly involving a SC judge and several HC judges, has died mysteriously while in custody.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/need-thorough-probe-into-death-of-pf-scam-accused-says-moily/530815/
Excerpt from news below:
Comments: While the investigation etc on this will go on for a while, this surely points out to the fact that there is serious need of more transparency in our police, investigation agencies, judiciary etc. When powerful people are allegedly involved in a provident funds scam, any lack of transparency and information will only increase suspicion in public's mind that powerful forces are in some way involved in not letting the truth come out.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/need-thorough-probe-into-death-of-pf-scam-accused-says-moily/530815/
Excerpt from news below:
The mysterious death on Saturday of Ashutosh Asthana, main accused in the Ghaziabad Provident Fund (PF) scandal, has dealt a severe blow to the case which allegedly involves, among others, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court and seven judges of the Allahabad High Court.
It was in Asthana’s statement before the magistrate that names of judges, past and present, cropped up as alleged beneficiaries of the money he siphoned from PF accounts of employees. He had handed over to the CBI documents and receipts detailing the money trail.Comments: While the investigation etc on this will go on for a while, this surely points out to the fact that there is serious need of more transparency in our police, investigation agencies, judiciary etc. When powerful people are allegedly involved in a provident funds scam, any lack of transparency and information will only increase suspicion in public's mind that powerful forces are in some way involved in not letting the truth come out.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Indian women can have 2 husbands - 1 to slave on, 1 to pay maintenance
A recent news about a woman who has approached court for maintenance from first husband 3 years after divorce, WHILE she is now married to second husband!
http://www.samaylive.com/news/woman-approaches-court-for-maintenance-3-years-after-divorce/661309.html
The news is really shocking as given below:
The court, after hearing both the parties, pulled up Kirti for creating unnecessary trouble for Mayank, who is now well settled with his second wife and sent the case to mediation centre and asked them to solve the matter expeditiously.
The court also asked Mayank to pay Rs.2,000 per month each to her and their son till the final outcome of the case.
Comments: As per Indian laws and Hindu marriage Act 1956, the woman is not entitled to maintenance from first husband now that she has remarried. So is not this a travesty of written law that you can order for maintenance like ordering a pizza... and it will be delivered to you at your (ex)-husband's expense ... And your current husband is anyway available to provide for your more pressing shopping needs!
http://www.samaylive.com/news/woman-approaches-court-for-maintenance-3-years-after-divorce/661309.html
The news is really shocking as given below:
The court, after hearing both the parties, pulled up Kirti for creating unnecessary trouble for Mayank, who is now well settled with his second wife and sent the case to mediation centre and asked them to solve the matter expeditiously.
The court also asked Mayank to pay Rs.2,000 per month each to her and their son till the final outcome of the case.
Comments: As per Indian laws and Hindu marriage Act 1956, the woman is not entitled to maintenance from first husband now that she has remarried. So is not this a travesty of written law that you can order for maintenance like ordering a pizza... and it will be delivered to you at your (ex)-husband's expense ... And your current husband is anyway available to provide for your more pressing shopping needs!
Ex-law minister suggests women property laws are ineffective
Here is interesing news on alimony and discussion on women rights. It was organized in participation with a premier law school of India and a premier agency which tries to safeguard interests of women.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Legal-eagles-discuss-alimony/articleshow/5113510.cms
Excerpt from news below followed by Comments:
Stressing on the need for a comprehensive law to safeguard women, governor H R Bhardwaj, who wielded the law baton in the UPA government's 2004-09 run, said: "The moment a woman marries, she's entitled to 50% share in her husband's property. There may be some issues with the minorities, but it should still be applicable to many.''
Comments: Shri Bhardwaj ji, Given that you were a previous law minister and having an all encompassing knowledge of law and justice system, can we know your proposals on the following cases about your 'comprehensive' law:
1. What if a woman marries a man, gets 50% entitlement to his property, and next day (or next month) files case against him under PWDVA, or worse say under IPC 498A? According to this 'comprehensive' law, she will get 50% property for a marriage that lasts anywhere from 1 day to 1 month or 1 year, and then she can go ahead and do the same on next husband (lamb to be slaughtered).
2. There is already laws to protect daughters' share in parents' property. Are you trying to suggest by your statement that that law is totally ineffective in protecting women rights to property? If sons' rights are protected by that, then won't that law be enough to protect daughters' rights also?
3. Are you saying that a daughter is now entitled not only to equal share in parents' property, but also entitled to share in husband's property? Have you discussed or thought of all the repercussions of this in a society which still does not have the mindset to give equal share to daughters?
4. Is this not a sinister way to introduce laws which instead of protecting daughters' interest by giving share in parents' property, make a daughter a burden to be removed and dumped on shoulders of husband and in-laws.
5. Have you discussed and found statistics on what has been the benefit of other women protection laws like Dowry Act, IPC 498A, PWDVA 2005 etc. How many women have benefited from them. And please don't tell us the number of cases filed as one of the benefits! Just as a hospital cannot claim to have done good job merely because it received so many emergency cases in an year, you cannot claim to have done justice if you simply claim that so many cases were filed under IPC 498A, PWDVA, Dowry Act etc!
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Legal-eagles-discuss-alimony/articleshow/5113510.cms
Excerpt from news below followed by Comments:
Stressing on the need for a comprehensive law to safeguard women, governor H R Bhardwaj, who wielded the law baton in the UPA government's 2004-09 run, said: "The moment a woman marries, she's entitled to 50% share in her husband's property. There may be some issues with the minorities, but it should still be applicable to many.''
Comments: Shri Bhardwaj ji, Given that you were a previous law minister and having an all encompassing knowledge of law and justice system, can we know your proposals on the following cases about your 'comprehensive' law:
1. What if a woman marries a man, gets 50% entitlement to his property, and next day (or next month) files case against him under PWDVA, or worse say under IPC 498A? According to this 'comprehensive' law, she will get 50% property for a marriage that lasts anywhere from 1 day to 1 month or 1 year, and then she can go ahead and do the same on next husband (lamb to be slaughtered).
2. There is already laws to protect daughters' share in parents' property. Are you trying to suggest by your statement that that law is totally ineffective in protecting women rights to property? If sons' rights are protected by that, then won't that law be enough to protect daughters' rights also?
3. Are you saying that a daughter is now entitled not only to equal share in parents' property, but also entitled to share in husband's property? Have you discussed or thought of all the repercussions of this in a society which still does not have the mindset to give equal share to daughters?
4. Is this not a sinister way to introduce laws which instead of protecting daughters' interest by giving share in parents' property, make a daughter a burden to be removed and dumped on shoulders of husband and in-laws.
5. Have you discussed and found statistics on what has been the benefit of other women protection laws like Dowry Act, IPC 498A, PWDVA 2005 etc. How many women have benefited from them. And please don't tell us the number of cases filed as one of the benefits! Just as a hospital cannot claim to have done good job merely because it received so many emergency cases in an year, you cannot claim to have done justice if you simply claim that so many cases were filed under IPC 498A, PWDVA, Dowry Act etc!
RTI act -- positive amendments sought
From news below:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/208486/RTI-Act-to-be-mended.html
One of the main suggestions of the commission, which has been included in the list of proposed amendments, is that the Act should be made more NRI-friendly. “The NRIs, being Indian nationals, can apply for information under the RTI Act, but the means for access for them are very unsatisfactory. Where do they pay the fee of Rs 10, and how? When they approach Indian embassies, they are seldom helped.”
Comments: This is an excellent idea. The RTI act is applicable to all Indian citizens. To deny its use to NRIs or even Indian citizens who are travelling and outside India is not a good idea.
The Government is also planning to reduce the number of organisations mentioned in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act which are exempt from disclosure norms. At present, there are 22 security and intelligence organisations which do not have the general obligation to disclose information unless it is a matter of human rights violation or corruption. These include RAW, Intelligence Bureau, DRDO, SPG, CRPF and CISF. Sources said organisations like Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) could be taken off the Schedule.
Comments: Again this is in interest of more disclosure of information and fits in with fundamental right to information. Denial of information should be an exception and therefore most departments of government should be openly accessible as far as their decision making is concerned.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/208486/RTI-Act-to-be-mended.html
One of the main suggestions of the commission, which has been included in the list of proposed amendments, is that the Act should be made more NRI-friendly. “The NRIs, being Indian nationals, can apply for information under the RTI Act, but the means for access for them are very unsatisfactory. Where do they pay the fee of Rs 10, and how? When they approach Indian embassies, they are seldom helped.”
Comments: This is an excellent idea. The RTI act is applicable to all Indian citizens. To deny its use to NRIs or even Indian citizens who are travelling and outside India is not a good idea.
The Government is also planning to reduce the number of organisations mentioned in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act which are exempt from disclosure norms. At present, there are 22 security and intelligence organisations which do not have the general obligation to disclose information unless it is a matter of human rights violation or corruption. These include RAW, Intelligence Bureau, DRDO, SPG, CRPF and CISF. Sources said organisations like Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) could be taken off the Schedule.
Comments: Again this is in interest of more disclosure of information and fits in with fundamental right to information. Denial of information should be an exception and therefore most departments of government should be openly accessible as far as their decision making is concerned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
