NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today said the prosecution had faltered in its arguments in the Saumya murder case. The witnesses said that Saumya had jumped off the train on her own and their statements were taken into confidence when Govindachamy’s death sentence was commuted. “If Saumya had jumped off the train how can we say that it was Govindachamy who murdered her?” the court asked.
“The prosecution had argued that Govindachamy pushed Saumya off the train but the very witnesses (Witness No 4 Tomy Devasy and witness number 40 Abdul Shukkur) presented by the Prosecution submitted that she jumped off the train to save escape from the attacker. Both said that a middle-aged man had told them that he had seen Soumya jumping from the train. If one has to be hanged, we need 101 percent evidence against him. We won’t be able to award the capital punishment, if there is room for even the slightest doubt,” the court said.
The case will be considered again on October 17. The case was postponed, following the state government’s demand for more time to study the case.
Showing posts with label says SC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label says SC. Show all posts
Chandrabose: Defense witnesses should be given security, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Monday directed police to give adequate security to the defense witnesses in the Chandrabose murder case. The court gave the directive on the plea of industrialist Muhammed Nisham, accused in the case, seeking to shift the trial outside Kerala. The court rejected his plea.
The state police chief and district police superintendent are in charge to provide security to defense witnesses and if any lapses are seen then Nisham can approach the court again, the court clarified.
Nisham’s plea wanted to shift the trial outside Kerala as he thought that he will not get justice if it is held in Kerala. His plea alleged that he is tortured in police custody and the witnesses are also threatened.
The state police chief and district police superintendent are in charge to provide security to defense witnesses and if any lapses are seen then Nisham can approach the court again, the court clarified.
Nisham’s plea wanted to shift the trial outside Kerala as he thought that he will not get justice if it is held in Kerala. His plea alleged that he is tortured in police custody and the witnesses are also threatened.
AG cannot be barred, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Friday said they cannot bar Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi from appearing for bar owners in the case against the state government’s liquor policy.
A division bench of Justices Vikramjith Sena and Sivakeerthi Singh said he was not appointed by the court. The advocate of congress MLA T M Prathapan demanded to bar him from appearing for the bar owners.
The AG is centre’s legal expert. The centre appoints legal experts like him and so they can only bar him. If the appearance is violation of rules, then steps should be taken by the centre, the court said.
Meantime, the Kerala government who opposed AG appearing for the bar owners earlier not opposing it today was noticed.
A division bench of Justices Vikramjith Sena and Sivakeerthi Singh said he was not appointed by the court. The advocate of congress MLA T M Prathapan demanded to bar him from appearing for the bar owners.
The AG is centre’s legal expert. The centre appoints legal experts like him and so they can only bar him. If the appearance is violation of rules, then steps should be taken by the centre, the court said.
Meantime, the Kerala government who opposed AG appearing for the bar owners earlier not opposing it today was noticed.
Jiji Thomson can be charged with conspiracy in palmolein case, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Friday said there is no obstacle in charging present chief secretary Jiji Thomson with conspiracy in the palmolein corruption case. The court said it is not required to consider his plea seeking exemption from the case immediately. Jiji was the managing director of civil supplies corporation when the palmolein deal took place and is the fifth accused in the case.
Jiji Thomson had filed a plea in the Kerala High Court as well as the trial court to discharge him from the palmolein import case. Both the courts had rejected his pleas. He approached the Supreme Court stating the act of rejecting his acquittal plea was without judging the real facts.
However, the apex court pointed that the Kerala Government has given permission for his prosecution.
Jiji Thomson had filed a plea in the Kerala High Court as well as the trial court to discharge him from the palmolein import case. Both the courts had rejected his pleas. He approached the Supreme Court stating the act of rejecting his acquittal plea was without judging the real facts.
However, the apex court pointed that the Kerala Government has given permission for his prosecution.
Mullaperiyar: People’s safety more important, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court observed that the safety of the people is more important in the Mullaperiyar dam issue. The state has the right to make law for the safety of the people, the court said. The Supreme Court has favoured the continuous argument of Kerala regarding the safety of the people on the Mullaperiyar issue and water for Tamil Nadu.
It is the duty of the respective governments to take steps to assure the safety of the people. Nobody can stop that. The report of the high panel has stated that Tamil Nadu will get water if it retains the water level of the dam to 136 feet.
Is there any logic on Tamil Nadu’s anxiety that they will not get water? If the water level rises and the dam destroyed, everything will be washed away including the verdict obtained by Tamil Nadu in 2006.
The court had made a statement in favour of Kerala when the case was considered yesterday.
It is the duty of the respective governments to take steps to assure the safety of the people. Nobody can stop that. The report of the high panel has stated that Tamil Nadu will get water if it retains the water level of the dam to 136 feet.
Is there any logic on Tamil Nadu’s anxiety that they will not get water? If the water level rises and the dam destroyed, everything will be washed away including the verdict obtained by Tamil Nadu in 2006.
The court had made a statement in favour of Kerala when the case was considered yesterday.
Coalgate: CBI is a caged parrot, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has raised questions on the independence of CBI, calling it a caged parrot speaking in its master's voice.
Making a scathing comment on the functioning of the investigating agency, the apex court said that the affidavit filed by CBI shows that it has many masters.
Asking the government to make CBI impartial, the apex court said it needs to be ensured that the CBI functions free of all external pressures.
If the CBI is not made independent, we will step in, the SC observed.
Commenting on Law Minister Ashwani Kumar's role, the apex court said that a minister can ask for a report but can't interfere with the CBI probe.
The court questioned how the CBI could have regular interactions with the ministry officials.
Slamming the action of joint secretaries who saw the probe report, the SC said, what business does the two joint secretaries have in visiting the CBI office?
The apex court observations came on CBI director Ranjit Sinha's second affidavit filed on Monday, stating that Law Minister Ashwani Kumar and senior officials of the PMO and coal ministry had made changes in the Coalgate probe report.
Ranjit Sinha in his nine-page affidavit to SC had given details of series of meetings with Ashwani Kumar, Vahanvati, Additional Solicitor General Haren Raval and Shatrughan Singh and A K Bhalla, joint secretaries of the PMO and the coal ministry during which changes in the probe reports were suggested and made by them.
The CBI version contradicts reports of Ashwani Kumar's account that he was not involved in drafting the changes.
Attorney General GE Vahanvati had earlier claimed in the apex court that he was not aware about the contents of the status report, a statement which has been contradicted by the CBI director's affidavit saying that AG had glanced through the report and changes were made in it on his suggestion.
Karappara Estate is forest land, says SC
NEW DELHI: The Karappara Estate in Nelliampathy is forest land, said the Supreme Court. The court who imposed a stay on Kerala High Court’s order directing to give possession right document to the estate land also noticed laxity on the side of the Kerala High Court.
The Kerala High Court on March 16 directed to give possession right to the Karappara estate, but the government approached the Supreme Court questioning it.
The government had informed the Supreme Court that as it is forest land the lease agreement cannot be renewed.
Central force not necessary for dam safety, says SC
Thursday, December 15, 2011: The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected Tamil Nadu’s plea for immediate deployment of CISF at the Mullaperiyar dam.A bench consisting of Justice DK Jain rejected Tamil Nadu’s plea after Kerala assured all security for the dam.
Tamil Nadu approached the court saying that Kerala is trying to destroy the dam. Senior advocate Harish Salwe, who appeared for Kerala, told the court that the state is ready to arrange all security for the dam and for the properties coming under the limits of Tamil Nadu.
Tamil Nadu’s plea was rejected after Kerala did not seek deployment of CISF in the area.
Mullaperiyar: Water level to stay at 136 ft, says SC
NEW DELHI: Urging for sanity and sensitiveness, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked Kerala and Tamil Nadu to maintain restraint on their statements on the Mullaperiyar dam row, lamenting that they were adding fuel to the fire instead of dousing it.A five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Justice D K Jain, declined to entertain Kerala’s plea for reducing the level to 120 feet and asked Tamil Nadu to ensure that the water level in the dam does not exceed 136 feet.
It also asked the Centre to clarify its position on Tamil Nadu’s plea for deployment of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) to protect the dam from possible vandalism.
“Both the parties instead of dousing the fire are adding fuel to it. There has to be sanity and sensitiveness,” the Bench observed, while referring to the hostile atmosphere prevailing in the two States over the century-old dam issue.
The Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction over Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa’s advertisement in dailies with court’s statements on the issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)