Sebi files petition with Supreme Court against Sahara firms

Market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India, on Wednesday filed a petition with the Supreme Court seeking action against the Sahara Group for not complying with the court’s orders.

The Supreme Court had on August 31 directed two unlisted Sahara group companies—Sahara India Real Estate Corporation (SIREC) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation (SHIC)—to refund around Rs. 24,000 crore to investors from whom the group had collected money.

The court had also directed the group to hand over all documents submitted by the investor to Sebi within 10 days to verify the genuineness of the investors. The deadline expired on September 10.

The court had appointed retired judge, Justice B.N. Aggarwal, to oversee this. Mr. Aggarwal has already submitted his status report to the court saying that Sahara failed to hand over the documents.

However, the group failed to hand over the documents, prompting the market regulator to approach the apex court.

According to some media reports, the Sahara group had dispatched two truck-loads of documents to Sebi's headquarters, but this was not confirmed by Sebi or Sahara officials.

The case is likely to be taken up on Friday.

Sebi had last year ordered the companies to refund the money, with 15 per cent annual interest, after it found that the fundraising process did not comply with its rules. An appellate tribunal upheld the regulator's order. Sahara then moved the apex court challenging the tribunal’s decision. The court ruled against Sahara.

Should all natural resources be auctioned? Supreme Court's answer today

New Delhi: The Supreme Court will pronounce its opinion today on whether all natural resources must be auctioned by the government, a decision the court made earlier this year in the context of the expansive telecom scam.

In February this year, the court cancelled 122 telecom licenses issued by former minister A Raja in 2008 on the basis of a first-come-first-serve policy which he allegedly manipulated.  In its landmark judgement, the court said that a get-in-line policy was fundamentally flawed and that a competitive bidding process must be followed for allocating all national resources.

The government, however, has argued that is not always possible, and that the verdict impedes upon the executive's right to decide policy.  It sought a clarification from the Supreme Court on whether its stand on an auction, as expressed in the telecom or 2G verdict, applies to other national resources too.

The government has been recently indicted  by the national auditor or CAG who said that because coal blocks were not auctioned from 2004-2009,  the country lost upto 1.86 lakh crores.  Though the government has challenged that estimate, the auditor's conclusion has added to the debate over how resources should be given away to private firms.  In the case of both airwaves for telecoms and coal blocks, the government has argued that an auction would have led to increased costs which would have adversely impacted consumers and the industry.

From: NDTV

Supreme Court issues notice to Stalin, son on land grab charges

Chennai/New Delhi: The Supreme Court today issued a notice to former Tamil Nadu deputy Chief Minister and DMK leader MK Stalin and his son Udhayanidhi among others on land grab charges.

The Jayalalithaa-led government in Tamil Nadu had approached the Supreme Court against the Madras High Order which had quashed the land grab case against Mr Stalin.

The case relates to leasing of land by Mr Stalin's son Udhayanidhi for his film unit in 2008. When the Jayalalithaa government came to power in 2011, the owner of the property complained that he was threatened to part with the land and implicated Mr Stalin and his son.

He later withdrew his complaint after an out-of-court settlement. The Madras High Court had then quashed the criminal case.

The Tamil Nadu government, however, had appealed against this order saying mere withdrawal of the complaint would not obliterate the criminality of the action and  the trial to proceed further to reach its logical conclusion.

Armed Forces win long standing pay battle in Supreme Court

New Delhi: The armed forces won a landmark victory in their long standing battle to get an anomaly in fixation of pay scales for commissioned officers noticed in the 4th Pay Commission.

The Supreme Court today ordered payment of rank pay arrears to all affected officers estimated to number over 20,000 with effect from January 1, 1986.

The government had been told the pay the arrears within 12 weeks. According to sources, the total outgo to government in making this payment will be over Rs. 1500 crore.

Military lawyers told NDTV that historically the most important litigation involving the military has culminated today.

The Supreme Court decided not to interfere in its earlier decision granting the cumulative benefits and arrears of Rank Pay with effect from 01-01-1986 to all affected officers.

It said the benefits shall be released to all officers irrespective of whether they had approached a judicial forum or not.

According to Major Navdeep Singh who specialises in military cases, this matter was carried over from the 4th Central Pay Commission (CPC) when an integrated pay scale of Rs. 2300-5100 was implemented for officers from the rank of 2/Lieutenant to Brigadier. In addition, rank pay was authorised to officers from the rank of Captain to Brigadier ranging from Rs. 200 to 1200 which was to be added into the basic pay for all intents and purposes.

However, while fixing the pay in the new scales, an amount equal to the rank pay was deducted from the emoluments resulting in financial loss to all affected officers. Hence all officers holding the rank of Captain to Brigadier as on 01-01-1986 suffered cumulative losses, Major Navdeep Singh says. The Kerala High Court in a case filed by Major AK Dhanapalan had termed illegal this deduction of rank pay.

Soon thereafter, many similar petitions were filed in various High Courts all over the country which were clubbed together and transferred to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court had on March 8, 2010, upheld the Kerala High Court verdict and granted relief to all similarly placed officers.

Things were, however, not to end there since the government constituted a committee to look into the amount involved and went back to the Supreme Court by filing an application for recall of the order dated March 8, 2010 on the grounds that the monetary outgo will be a big burden on the exchequer and also stating therein that many more issues on the subject were not taken into consideration by the Court and hence the order needed to be recalled, Major Navdeep explained.

The biggest credit, he says should go to Retired Defence Officers' Association (RDOA) who had been unflinchingly following up the matter with great zeal in a very objective and balanced manner.

From: NDTV

Marines' case: Supreme Court to hear Italian government's plea

New Delhi: The Supreme Court will today resume hearing the appeal by the Italian government for quashing the case against its two marines who were charged with murder by the Kerala Police for allegedly killing two fishermen.

Last Thursday, the Central government had told the court that two Italian Marines enjoyed no sovereign immunity and were liable to face prosecution under the Indian laws.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Gourab Banerji had told the bench of Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice J Chelameswar during the hearing last week that armed forces personnel of foreign countries did not enjoy any sovereign immunity and such privileges were provided only to their diplomats.

Mr Banerji contested the maintainability of the Italian government's writ petition by invoking Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, saying that there could not be any violation of the rights of the sovereign Italian state.

Article 32 of the Constitution provides for the remedies for the enforcement of the fundamental rights conferred by the constitution.

The ASG said this during the hearing of the petition of the Italian government and its two Marines seeking the quashing of charges against them and the suspension of their trial in the killing of two fishermen on February 15.

Chief Master Sergeant Massimilano Latorre and Sergeant Salvatore had shot dead the fishermen, allegedly suspecting them to be pirates.

The Marines have challenged the Kerala High Court order dismissing their petition claiming sovereign immunity.

The high court while rejecting the plea of sovereign immunity by Italian Marines had imposed a fine of Rs.1 lakh on each of them.

(With inputs from IANS)

For NDTV Updates,

Story first published:

September 04, 2012 08:30 IST

Tags: Italian Marines, Kerala Police, Supreme Court

Rs 26 cr spent on Kasab so far; execution may take years

Mumbai: While the Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the death sentence awarded to lone surviving terrorist Ajmal Kasab, the 26/11 gunman’s march to the gallows may still take a while. Kasab has the right to appeal before the President in the form of a mercy petition. However, President Pranab Mukherjee already has at least 11 mercy petitions pending with him, including that of Afzal Guru, who was convicted in the Parliament attack case.

Many believe that Kasab’s case should be given priority as Rs. 26 crore of public money has already been spent to arrange for his security, and other necessities.

Securing 26/11 convict Ajmal Kasab has so far cost the Maharashtra government more than Rs. 26 crore. The terrorist is imprisoned at central Mumbai’s Arthur Road jail since November 2008.
According to home department official, who did not wish to be named, Rs. 5.25 crore was spent on construction costs towards building bulletproof anda cell (the egg-shaped solitary confinement cell] for him in the jail.

The authorities felt that securing Kasab was crucial to the case because he was the only piece of solid evidence that could confirm the involvement of terrorist groups based in Pakistan in the gruesome attacks.

The biggest amount -- Rs. 19.28 crore – was charged by the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) that deputed its men to secure Kasab.

The state has asked ITBP to waive the charges but the security agency has not decided on it yet. ITBP continues to safeguard Kasab even now.

As per official records till June 2012, Rs. 38,879 was spent on his Kasab’s food, while his medical treatment and medicine cost more than Rs. 28,264.

The official said that in the past two months the state could have spent another Rs. 2000 on Kasab’s food and medicine.

The Public Works Department reinforced the cell in which Kasab was kept and also constructed a 20-ft-long bomb-and-bullet-proof tunnel on the jail premises to connect Kasab’s cell to the special court where the court trial was held.

The plan came in to force because authorities felt that the terrorist could be vulnerable to a grenade, artillery or chemical attack. PWD also installed CCTV cameras to monitor the place 24/7.

It is believed that Kasab may join the mercy queue to delay his execution. However, the question that arises now is whether Mukherjee will give in to public sentiment and give priority to his plea.

Sudeep Pasbola, criminal lawyer and president of sessions bar association, said the President could consider decide to fast-track the petition if he wanted to. “The President being head of the execution system, can decide on the plea as he feels fit,” he explained.

However, noted criminal advocate IP Bagaria feels that with the petition of so many still pending, a terrorist shouldn’t be given priority. “Everyone should be seen equally and one has to wait for their turn for justice,” Bagaria said.

According to criminal lawyer Wahab Khan, who has represented many accused in terrorist attack cases, even if Kasab’s mercy petition was given priority and a decision was taken, he might not be executed as there were hardly any executors left.

“Also, since Abu Jundal’s trial is pending, it may be years before the execution of the death sentence,” he said.

“The state should not wait for the trial of the others to finish. It is not mandatory and it will serve no purpose. If they wait, there are many accused who are absconding and the process will never end,” a few of them opined.

From: HT

Death sentence for Ajmal Kasab? Supreme Court to decide today

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is scheduled to deliver its verdict on Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab's plea against his death sentence today. Kasab, the only terrorist caught alive during the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008, had pleaded the Supreme Court to commute his death sentence to life imprisonment on February 14.

A trial court had sentenced the 25-year-old to death on May 6, 2010, an order which was later upheld by the Bombay High Court on October 10 last year.

Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, who had been appointed amicus curiae by the Supreme Court to defend Kasab, had told the bench that he was not a part of the larger conspiracy for waging war against the nation. However, on behalf of the Maharashtra government, Gopal Subramanium had argued that Kasab should be hanged as he was a part of a conspiracy to wage war against India.

Even as Kasab's trial continues in the Supreme Court, the cost of keeping him alive is a huge burden on the state exchequer. While the Government has spent over Rs. 5 crores on his high security cell at Mumbai's Arthur Road jail, his security entrusted to the Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) has cost the state over Rs. 19 crores.

166 people were killed in the 2008 Mumbai attacks when 10 Pakistani terrorists sailed from Karachi to Mumbai 11 to show India a side of terror it had never dreamt possible. While Kasab was captured, all the other terrorists who had sailed with him and attacked Mumbai were killed during counter-terror operations. 

From: NDTV

2G case: Supreme Court verdict today on admitting plea seeking probe against P Chidambaram

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is expected to deliver verdict on Friday morning on admitting two petitions which seek a CBI investigation against Finance Minister P Chidambaram in the 2G telecom scam.

The top court will decide whether the petitions are maintainable or not - i.e. it will either admit one or both petitions, or dismiss them. If the court finds the petitions maintainable, it could issue a notice to the Centre or to the CBI or even to the Finance Minister.

One petition has been filed by Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy and the other by leading lawyer and anti-corruption activist Prashant Bhushan on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, a non-governmental organisation. They seek that the minister be investigated for his alleged role in the telecom scam - Mr Chidambaram was Finance Minister in 2008 too, when then Telecom Minister A Raja allegedly gifted mobile network licenses and frequency to ineligible companies.

Mr Swamy's petition says that Mr Chidambaram must be held responsible for allowing the telecom scam on his watch as Finance Minister. A special CBI court had rejected Mr Swamy's request in February this year and he had appealed to the Supreme Court against this verdict.

Some days before that, the Supreme Court cancelled 122 licences issued by Mr Raja and said that spectrum should have been auctioned instead of being given at no extra cost along with licences. 2G or second generation spectrum will now be auctioned this year on the court's orders. A Raja spent about a year in jail before being granted bail.

Mr Swamy says that Mr Chidambaram was aware of Mr Raja's actions. On matters like the pricing of spectrum, he should have intervened to protect the country's interests, Mr Swamy has argued.

The second petition filed by lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan alleges that Mr Chidambaram as Finance Minister overruled his officers who favoured the auction of spectrum. Mr Bhushan also says that Mr Chidambaram allowed two companies that were allegedly shown undue favour by Mr Raja, to sell stake to foreign investors at massive profits on the basis of licences that they had got at hefty bargains. The companies - Swan and Unitech Wireless - have said no rules were violated because they did not sell their stake but created additional equity. Swan partnered with UAE-based Etisalat and Unitech with Norwegian company Telenor.

The government has said that both companies operated within the parameters of the law in those partnerships.

From: NDTV