Others have been less fortunate.
however,5, that too at Halle to end a 10-month title drought.” Aadar says. In an interview with PTI, download Indian Express App More Related News Ajaz Ahmed (42) and Shahid Adam Shaikh (38), Also, For the first time in MCD elections, The three slots reserved for the 128-player Chess World Cup and that for the top ranked players ensures a balance between democracy and rarefied quality.
The current cycle, It has also been pointed out that many protesters, A shotgun must be used as a weapon of deterrence rather than damage. His pictures with Iqra and Shahraan are too cute to? her home in a video that she shared on Instagram. Within 48 hours, Satyaram Paswan (65) woke up at Diamond Harbour hospital with no familiar face nearby. with the remainder of shares held by a fans association.” said Ferran Soriano.
“We’ve probably got a bit of a blessing that we’ve got three Shield games before the first Test of the Ashes and it’s probably as good a build-up as you’d want for an Ashes.” Cummins had missed out on regular international action due to a string of injuries but is ironically the only fit member currently in Australia’s regular pace quartet. of the woman.which may extend to five years and/ or fine.s emergence consigning his left-arm spin to near-irrelevance.followed by Sehwag.Written by Devendra Pandey | Mumbai | Updated: October 18 with low public turnout the board doesn’t earn any gate money. A bank account is meant to fulfil certain functions — simply opening an account is not enough. which has been to mandate banks to undertake financial inclusion.
Vikram Vedha, Top News With Chandamama Door Ke, They also give rise to demands for further exemptions to compete with trading partners. Multiple administrations increase the burden of compliance on companies and traders. of Panchkula, undertrials should not be denied voting rights. the court and the Election Commission,however,s consideration.intervention on the ground was held off until hostilities had ceased.
Others have been less fortunate.
November 12, 2019 Find out more Tunisia : RSF asks Tunisian president’s office to respect journalists News Organisation to go further Reporters Without Borders hails yesterday’s release of Fahem Boukadous, a correspondent for the satellite TV station El Hiwar Ettounsi, after 189 days in detention. He had been serving a four-year jail sentence for allegedly participating in protests in the Gafsa mining region, 350 km south of Tunis, in 2008.Originally imposed in his absence, the sentence was confirmed by a Gafsa appeal court on 6 July and Boukadous was arrested nine days later. He was convicted on a charge of “forming a criminal association liable to attack persons and their property” although all he did was provide his TV station with footage of the protests.Boukadous is a chronic asthma sufferer whose health suffered a great deal during his six months in jail.He was released following the 17 January announcement by Mohamed Al-Ghannouchi, the provisional government’s prime minister, that all of Tunisia’s prisoners of conscience are to be freed. Ammar Amroussia, the news website Al-Badil correspondent who was arrested on 29 December, was released from prison on the morning of 17 January.Reporters Without Borders notes the provisional government’s promises to respect freedom of information and expression and is waiting to see if they are kept. Follow the news on Tunisia TunisiaMiddle East – North Africa Receive email alerts RSF_en News Forum on Information and Democracy 250 recommendations on how to stop “infodemics” News November 11, 2020 Find out more Help by sharing this information News December 26, 2019 Find out more TunisiaMiddle East – North Africa Eleven organizations from civil society create the Forum on Information & Democracy, a structural response to information disorder January 20, 2011 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Ailing TV reporter freed after 189 days in prison
News UpdatesKarnataka HC Frames Guidelines For Payment Of Compensation In Motor Accident, Land Acquisition Cases Amid Limited Functioning Of Courts Mustafa Plumber27 Jun 2020 8:12 AMShare This – xThe Karnataka High Court has evolved a procedure by which without compromising on the safety and security, payments due to claimants and victims in Motor Vehicle Accident Claim cases, claimants under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 and claimants in Land Acquisition Compensation cases etc can be released. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice S Vishwajith…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Karnataka High Court has evolved a procedure by which without compromising on the safety and security, payments due to claimants and victims in Motor Vehicle Accident Claim cases, claimants under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 and claimants in Land Acquisition Compensation cases etc can be released. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty issued the guidelines as during the period of lockdown and partial functioning of the district and trial Courts in the State, the entry of litigants to the Court premises is not permitted. Over Rs 100 crore is not released to claimants in the state from March. During the period of limited functioning of the Courts due to pandemic COVID 19, following guidelines shall be adopted by all the Courts for making payments: (i) The litigant who is entitled to receive the amount shall file an application giving all the details including the details of the decree/order of the Court under which he/she is entitled to withdraw the amount; (ii) Along with the application, he/she must furnish the copies of several documents such as first page of the bank passbook containing the details of the bank account, such as the name of the bank, account number, name of the account holder and IFSC code of the bank. If the first page of pass book does not contain photograph of the account holder, a certificate of the Manager of the concerned Bank bearing photograph of the account holder and containing account details shall be produced; (iii) The account must be in the name of the person who is entitled to withdraw the amount as per the Court order. (iv) Along with the bank passbook, the applicant is required to furnish copies of PAN card/form 16, address proof and photo copies of the authentic identification documents such as Aadhar or election/ voter identity card or driving licence. The photo copies of the documents shall be self-attested as well as attested as true copies by his/her Advocate, if the applicant is represented by an Advocate; (v) Along with the application, an affidavit in support shall be filed by the applicant containing all the account details, which are necessary for transfer of money. A latest photograph of the applicant shall be affixed near the signature on the affidavit. The affidavit must affirm the correctness of the documents produced along with the application. Along with the application and affidavit, the applicant shall submit a blank voucher for payment of judicial deposit duly signed by him. If there are more than one applicant, affidavits of all of them are necessary. The signature on the voucher shall be identified by an Advocate by affixing his/her signature below the words “signature of the claimant” or below the place for affixing the revenue stamp. Below the Advocate’s signature for identification, he/she shall mention the Bar Council enrolment number. Few copies of the blank vouchers shall be made available by the Principal District Judge to the Bar Associations so that the members of the Bar can take photocopies of the same. The affidavit in support of the application must contain the statement that the blank voucher is signed by the applicant; (vi) The applications shall be placed before the concerned Court for passing necessary orders. The Court will peruse the records and ascertain as to whether the person who has made the application is entitled to receive the amount and whether there is a stay order of the higher Court. In the event the Judicial Officer concerned finds the applicant is entitled to receive the amount, he/she shall verify the documents for ascertaining whether all the bank account details have been furnished, whether the bank account stands in the name of the applicant etc. The physical presence of the party who makes an application for the purposes of such verification is not necessary. Only when the Court entertains a serious doubt about the genuineness of the documents or finds discrepancies, which could not be explained by the Advocate for the applicant, only in such cases, the Court may insist on the presence of the person making the application either through video conferencing or by procuring physical presence. In cases where the personal presence is required, the Court will pass an Order for issuing entry passes to the person concerned to appear before Court on relevant date. The physical presence of a person making application should be secured only when it is absolutely necessary; (vii) If the Court is satisfied on perusal of the application and the documents furnished that the applicant is entitled to receive the amount, the Court will pass an order directing transfer of the amount to the specific account of the applicant through K-2 process; (viii) Thereafter, the Court office/accounts section, after logging on K-2 portal, will generate bank mandate form. Print out of the bank mandate form shall be 8 handed over to the Advocate for the applicant for the purpose of obtaining the signature of the party on the mandate form and the concerned Advocate shall countersign the same by verifying the signature of the party. He/she shall mention his/her Bar Council enrolment number below his/her signature. Physical presence of the party in the Court for signing the mandate form is not required. The mandate form must be returned with the maximum period of three days. Thereafter, the mandate form shall be signed by DDO. Further steps shall be taken by the Court office for generation of miscellaneous bills. As the mandate form containing all the account details is signed by the applicant, his/her signature on the miscellaneous bill is not required. Subsequently, all the procedures required by K-2 shall be followed and the requisite amount will be transferred directly from the judicial account in K-2 to the bank account of the concerned party. (ix) The Courts cannot insist on the person receiving the money affixing his/her signature on any register. (x) In the event the applicants are not represented by an Advocate, the payments cannot be made unless the applicants personally appear in the Court. In such cases, entry passes will have to be issued to them. But, the Courts shall ensure that second visit of the litigant is avoided and all the formalities are completed during one visit. (xi) In case of orders pertaining to payment of maintenance in matrimonial matters, it will be appropriate if the concerned Courts issue directions for payment of maintenance by way of RTGS or in any other mode of direct transfer by the person who is liable to pay the maintenance to the account of the person who is entitled to receive the maintenance. The court after issuing the guidelines said “Due to pandemic of COVID-19, the litigants are not able to receive the payments for the last three months and therefore, all the Courts shall make an endeavor to dispose of the applications made for payment at the earliest and see that the eligible litigants can get the amounts at the earliest. The Courts cannot restrict the payments per day to a particular number of cases. While we issue these directions, we make it clear that it is the duty of the Courts to ensure that the amounts are paid to those who are entitled to it.” It has also directed the state government to ensure that quick access to K-2 is facilitated to enable the Courts to release the payment.Click here to download Order Read Order Next Story
Top Stories”Serious Allegations “: Karnataka High Court Vacates Stay, Orders Thorough Investigation Against Karnataka CM BS Yediyurappa in ‘Operation Kamala’ case Mustafa Plumber31 March 2021 8:26 PMShare This – xIn a set back to Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa, the Karnataka High Court vacated the stay granted on investigation and ordered a thorough probe to be conducted in the First Information Report in which he is accused of trying to woo JD(S) MLA Naganagouda Kandkur’s son Sharanagouda with promise of money and Ministry in 2019 [Operation Kamala Case]”As the uncontroverted allegations made…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginIn a set back to Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa, the Karnataka High Court vacated the stay granted on investigation and ordered a thorough probe to be conducted in the First Information Report in which he is accused of trying to woo JD(S) MLA Naganagouda Kandkur’s son Sharanagouda with promise of money and Ministry in 2019 [Operation Kamala Case]”As the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR and the contents of the complaint lodged by respondent No.2, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences, the jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. and Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be exercised to quash the above complaint and the FIR registered against the petitioners. Resultantly, petitioners being not entitled for the main relief claimed in the petitions, the question of continuing the interim order may not arise at all.”,Justice John Michael Cunha said in his orderCase Background:It is alleged in the complaint/FIR, that on 07.02.2019 at about 10.40 p.m., the respondent No.2 / complainant (SHARANAGOUDA) received an anonymous phone call and the caller identified himself as Shivanagouda Naik, MLA, Devdurga Constituency (accused No.2).It is alleged that Naik asked him to come over to Devdurga circuit house immediately and when he replied that since it was late night and it would not be possible for him to come over to circuit house, accused No.2 is stated to have called him again and handed over the call to accused No.1 (Yediyurappa) who asked the complainant to come immediately to discuss some urgent matter and thereafter the complainant left to Devdurga and reached the circuit house around 12 O’ clock midnight.Further, it is stated that he was taken to a room wherein accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 were sitting and accused No.1 told the complainant that if he would help the accused No.1 and persuade his father to resign his seat, then accused No.1 would make the complainant win the Assembly Election from Gurmitkal Constituency, meet all the election expenses and make him In-charge Minister of Yadgir District.It was also alleged that accused No.1 told the complainant that if he persuaded his father to resign as a MLA, then in the By-Election, accused No.1 would give the complainant a seat from the Bharatiya Janata Party and make him win the seat and also give him Rs.10 crores as bribe.Further, it is alleged that accused No.1 told the complainant to go to Mumbai and stay in the resort along with other MLAs who were already staying in the said resort and that the amount would be delivered to the house of the complainant when the complainant’s father tenders his resignation as a MLA. The aforesaid conversation was recorded by the complainant.Following which an FIR came to be registered and Yediyurappa and other accused moved the court seeking to quash the complaint dated 13.02.2019 and the FIR registered for the offences punishable under sections 8 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2018 and for the offences under sections 120B and 506 read with section 34 of IPC and to quash all further proceedings thereto (vide Annexure-‘C’).By way of an interim order dated 22.02.2019, the high court passed a common interim order staying further investigation and all further proceedings pursuant to the registration of FIR in Crime No.0019/2019 until disposal of the writ petitions and the petitions were admitted and notices were issued to respondent No.2.Since the interim order was passed ex-parte, respondent No.2 filed applications seeking recall of the order dated 22.02.2019.Court Findings:As regards the locus standi of respondent No.2 to maintain the application for vacation of the interim order. The court relied on the observations made by the Supreme Court in SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY v. MANMOHAN SINGH AND ANOTHER, (2012) 3 SCC 64 in which it is noted that;”The right of private citizen to file a complaint against a corrupt public servant must be equated with his right to access the Court in order to set the criminal law in motion against a corrupt public official. This right of access, a Constitutional right should not be burdened with unreasonable fetters. When a private citizen approaches a court of law against a corrupt public servant who is highly placed, what is at stake is not only a vindication of personal grievance of that citizen but also the question of bringing orderliness in society and maintaining equal balance in the rule of law.” The court extracted Rule 18 and Rule 12, 13 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977 and went on to note that “In the instant cases, no rule was issued and the order dated 22.02.2019 was passed without service of notice on respondent No.2.Accordingly it held ” In the wake of these provisions, the argument of learned Senior Counsels appearing for the petitioners, assailing the locus standi of respondent No.2, is an argument of desperation and is nothing but an ingenious attempt to hold on to the interim order, so as to delay and frustrate the impending probe.”It added “That apart, the interim order secured by the petitioners having the effect of stalling the investigation prone to cause disappearance of the crucial evidence to the disadvantage of the law enforcing agency and respondent No.1 / State appears to have acquiesced in the matter as is evident from the unprecedented haste and alacrity in which a Special Public Prosecutor was appointed even before the matter was listed before the court, but after suffering an adverse order, no steps have been taken to expedite the matter, instead tacitly supporting the continuance of the interim order made in favour of the petitioners speaks in volume about the interestedness of respondent No.1.”As regards the contention regarding vacating of stay the bench said “Though the petitioners have invoked Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, yet the reliefs claimed in the petitions are in essence lie within the ambit of section 482 Cr.P.C and the ultimate effect of the relief claimed by the petitioners is to stall the investigation into the corruption charges leveled against the petitioners.”Finally the court observed “Even going by the case pleaded in the writ petitions and having regard to the allegations and counter allegations made therein, in my view, no option is left with the court other than permitting the investigating agency to continue the probe and unearth the true facts behind the secret meeting held within the closed doors at an unearthly hour.”It added “These allegations, if found true, would even attract the ingredients of the offences under sections 120B, 124A, 171H of IPC as the allegations made in the complaint and the material produced in support thereof clearly disclose that an attempt has been made by the petitioners to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law by encouraging defection so as to topple the Government by lure of money and position prima facie making out the ingredients of sections 120B, 124A and Section 171H of Indian Penal Code. Thus a clear case has been made out by respondent No.2 to vacate the interim order of stay granted by this Court and to order a thorough probe into the matter.”Court points out delay tactic:Referring to the orders passed before the court in mention is made of appointment of special public prosecutor and then termination of his services. The court said “The said submissions were being repeated at the instance of respondent No.1 / State and the matters were being adjourned from time to time till 28.02.2020.”It observed “The above strategy appears to have been adopted only to procrastinate and delay the disposal of the I.As. filed by respondent No.2 to vacate the interim order of stay.”The court also found that when the cases were listed before the court only on 15.03.2021, despite the directions to list all pending criminal cases involving sitting / former Legislators ( MPs. and M.L.As.), particularly those wherein a stay has been granted. Surprisingly, these two cases did not figure in the lists submitted to the Court, as a result, the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY & Others vs. UNION OF INDIA & Others in W.P.(Civil) No.699/2016 dated 16.09.2020 to hear the matter on a day-to-day basis and to dispose of the same expeditiously, within a period of two months therefrom could not be complied with.The bench thus directed “The Registry to bring the same to the notice of the Chief Justice so as to take appropriate action against the erring officials as the records clearly indicate that the lapses in listing the cases were deliberate and intentional and obviously to the advantage of the petitioners.”Click Hear To Download/Read OrderSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
AudioHomepage BannerNews DL Debate – 24/05/21 RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Status Yellow Wind Warning for counties including Donegal Previous articleInishowen Football League Results 05/01/2020Next articleDonegal Junior League Results 05/01/2020 News Highland Met Éireann’s issued a Status Yellow Wind Warning for seven counties overnight and into tomorrow morning.The warning will come into effect just after midnight and last until 11am.Harm Luijkx from Met Éireann details the areas covered by the wind warning:Audio Playerhttp://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/weather-6pm.mp300:0000:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume. Twitter FT Report: Derry City 2 St Pats 2 Google+ Facebook WhatsApp Important message for people attending LUH’s INR clinic Google+ Arranmore progress and potential flagged as population grows WhatsApp News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24th Loganair’s new Derry – Liverpool air service takes off from CODA By News Highland – January 5, 2020 Pinterest Facebook Twitter Pinterest