- SLPs rejection appeals against death sentences will have to carry reasons – The Supreme Court has held that SLPs against decisions of lower courts granting death sentences to individuals, when dismissed should contain the reasons of dismissal. The Court observed that when consideration such a petition, the court has to consider without being bound by the decision of the trial or the High Court and grant the sentencing issue an independent thought. The court may turn down the SLP against the conviction but has to give reasons when considering the issue of sentencing, as various factors have to be kept in mind like nature of offence, circumstances—both extenuating or aggravating, the prior criminal record, if any, of the offender, the age of the offender, his background, his education etc. [Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v State of Maharashtra, Review Petition (Criminal) No. 388 of 2015 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 458 of 2015, date of orders: 01.11.2018]
- Zakia Jafri challenges acquittal of Narendra Modi in husband’s murder case – The Supreme Court agreed to hear the petition filed by Zakia Jafri, wife of Ahsan Jafri, former MP, who was brutally killed by mobs in the Gujarat riots in 2002. Zakia had filed a complaint with the Metropolitan Magistrate alleging that the riots had been orchestrated by politicians like Narendra Modi, but it was rejected. She then filed a revision against it. Earlier the Supreme Court had set up an SIT to look into the Godhra riots and it was looking into Mrs. Jafri’s case as well. In its report, the SIT had held that there was no conspiracy angle. The magistrate upheld the same view again. The Gujarat High Court also refused to interfere. [Zakia Ahsan Jafri v State of Gujarat, Diary No(s). 34207 of 2018, date of order: 19.11.2018]
- PIL seeking use of ballot papers in elections dismissed – A petition filed by an NGO Nyaya Bhoomi was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The petition sought the use of ballot papers instead of electronic voting machines because, it claimed, EVMs could be easily tampered with, affecting the result of the election. While dismissing the PIL, the court simply said that every system was capable of being misused. [Nyaya Bhoomi v Election Commission of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No.1332/2018, date of order: 22.11.2018]
- Abbott’s petition against probe initiated by CCI into cartelisation dismissed – The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by pharma giant Abbott against a probe by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) into allegations of price cartelisation over a diabetes drug. The proceedings before the CCI were set in motion on the basis of a letter sent by National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA), Department of Pharmaceuticals which claimed that four pharmaceutical companies Novartis India, Abbott, USV Ltd. and Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited were colluding to control the price of an important oral diabetes drug Vildagliptin, apart from some anonymous emails highlighting the same. Abbott alleged that the emails were fake and the data with the NPPA was also inaccurate and so the proceedings should be set aside. But the Court said that an order initiating a probe under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act was essentially administrative in nature and not judicial. The body should first collect its evidence. [Abbott Healthcare v Competition Commission of India, Writ Petition (Civil) 12129 of 2018, date of judgment: 13.11.2018]
- First death sentence awarded in Delhi Anti-Sikh riots case – An SIT had reopened nearly 60 cases relating to the anti-Sikh riots that followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984. These cases had been closed by the Delhi Police in 1994 for lack of evidence. In one of these cases, ADJ Ajay Pandey awarded one Yashpal Singh death sentence for killing Hardev Singh and Avtar Singh during the riots. The other convict, Naresh Sehrawat, was given a life sentence on account of his medical condition. A mob of about 500 persons, led by the two convicts, had encircled the house of the victims and had killed them. The case will now go to the High Court for confirmation of death penalty.
- Government resolution making 25% conviction mandatory for promotion for APPs dismissed – The Bombay High Court has quashed a Maharashtra resolution, which made 25% conviction, mandatory for Assistant Public Prosecutors to get promotion. The Court reiterated that the public prosecutors are more than just the state’s lawyers, they are officers of the court and are expected to render their services in helping the court in making a decision. They are simply expected to act fairly. The State cannot set a target or quota they have to meet, to get a promotion as it would hinder their ability to function properly. [Maharashtra State Public Prosecutors Association vState of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 8117 of 2017, date of judgment: 24.08.2018]
- Prosecution evidence completed in Sohrabuddin case – The prosecution rest its case this week in Sohrabuddin case. The last witness to be examined was the second Chief Investigation Officer of the case – Sandeep Tamgadge. He claimed that Amit Shah, and IPS officers DG Vanzara, RK Pandiyan and Dinesh MN were the ‘principal conspirators’ in the case. The first CIO had also claimed that these persons had benefitted from Sohrabuddin’s encounter but had no evidence to show. Tamgadge explained that Dinesh MN constituted a team of officers to escort Tulsiram Prajapati from Udaipur jail, to the court. This team then killed Prajapati and Sub-Inspector Ashish Pandya shot himself in the arm to fake an injury during the fake encounter. The accused will now be examined under Section 313 CrPC.
Prepared by Amritananda Chakravorty ([email protected]) and Mihir Samson ([email protected]), Delhi based practicing Advocates.
The post Weekly Round-Up of Major Decisions of the Courts in India as also Legal Policy Developments appeared first on Newspack by India Press Agency.
