April 27, 2009
Learn all about interpol and notices issued to 498a victims. http://www.cbi.gov.in/interpol/notices.php
*******************************
On 7th August, 2009, a two Judges Bench in Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Crl. A. No.1452 of 2009) held that “the Municipal Laws of a country reign supreme in matters of Extradition.”
“A fundamental Right of a citizen whenever infringed, the High Courts having regard to their extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as also keeping in view that access to justice is a human right would not turn him away only because a Red Corner Notice was issued”, said the Bench.
The Bench furthermore held that “if a violation of any order passed by a civil court is made the ground for issuance of a Red Corner Notice, indisputably, the court will enquire as to whether the same has undergone the tests laid down under Sections 13 and 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure”.
***********************April 21: Interpol, which issues Red Corner notices to arrest criminals all over the world, has stopped issuing notices pertaining to Section 498(A) (dowry harassment) cases registered in India. There are about 3,000 requests for red corner notices from Indian government pending with Interpol.
The inspector-general of CID, Mr S. Umapathi, said there are as many as 120 cases from Andhra Pradesh pending with Interpol for the past eight months.Sources in the CBI said Punjab tops the list with nearly 300 cases.
According to sources, there is no law pertaining to dowry harassment in US and other developed countries and hence the Interpol is in dilemma whether they can issue Red Corner notice based on the Indian law.
“The mater has been discussed with US embassy officials recently. However, there was no improvement in the status,” Mr Umapathi said. “There was no delay in other criminal cases,” he added.
The external affairs ministry had sent several representations to Interpol explaining the seriousness of the cases booked under Section 498 (A). However it failed to get any positive response from them.
Write to Interpol:
1. Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files200 Quai Charles de Gaulle69006 LYON – France
2. INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau -- Requests for INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau records should be addressed to:
Dorothy S. BeatyFOIA/PA SpecialistOffice of General CounselINTERPOL-United States National Central BureauDepartment of JusticeWashington, DC 20530-0001(202) 616-9000
Interpol is just an organisation and has no legal judiciary of the people living in US (irrespective of their status-H1/B1/L1/F1/H4/green card/citizen), so folks dont worry and loose your sleep on this minute feud, irrespective of your US status, if your are on H-1 your green card proceedings wont get effected due to 498A Interpol RCN.
**********************************The following ruling pertains to extraditing an Indian citizen from India based just on an Interpol Red Corner Notice without the foreign government having issued a request for extradition.
In its present form, it would not apply to a foreign citizen hiding in India (several of whom have been extradited) or an Indian citizen hiding abroad against whom a RCN has been issued.
"the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case."
http://www.dnaindia .com/india/report_matrimonial-offenders-can-t-be-extradited-sc_1280809
New Delhi: Ashwin and Dina Patel (names changed) got married in Mumbai in 2002. Soon after, they moved to the US and there, had a daughter, Seema. In 2005, Dina, on grounds of abuse, obtained an order of judicial separation from Ashwin from a US court. The court granted interim custody of Seema to Dina, and access to the child to Ashwin.
After Ashwin returned to India with their daughter, Dina filed a case against Ashwin in the US accusing him of kidnapping Seema. Consequently, the US police issued two arrest warrants against him: a custody violation warrant, and a kidnapping felony warrant. A Red Corner notice was also issued against Ashwin by Interpol, which was recently upheld by the Bombay High Court after a petition was filed by Ashwin seeking stay on the warrants and notice.
Now, the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case. An act may be an offence in a particular country, but ifnot a crime in India, a citizen can't be extradited, ruled the bench comprising Justices SB Sinha and Mukundakam Sharma. Upholding the precedence of local laws over foreign enactments, the apex court said, "HC was, therefore, in our opinion, clearly wrong in holding that a Red Corner Notice should not be tinkered with."
Red corner notices are issued on terrorists, international mafia gangs, dreaded murderers. But in India RCN's are issued for matrimonial offences like ' He did not let me watch TV' or economic offences on wife for not giving enough money to kitty party. On the other hand blue corner notices are issued on others known to accused inorder to trace the whereabouts of the prime accused. You can read what a mockery Indian Police have made out of RCN's.
*******************************
On 7th August, 2009, a two Judges Bench in Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Crl. A. No.1452 of 2009) held that “the Municipal Laws of a country reign supreme in matters of Extradition.”
On 7th August, 2009, a two Judges Bench in Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Crl. A. No.1452 of 2009) held that “the Municipal Laws of a country reign supreme in matters of Extradition.”
“A fundamental Right of a citizen whenever infringed, the High Courts having regard to their extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as also keeping in view that access to justice is a human right would not turn him away only because a Red Corner Notice was issued”, said the Bench.
Red corner notices are issued on terrorists, international mafia gangs, dreaded murderers. But in India RCN's are issued for matrimonial offences like ' He did not let me watch TV' or economic offences on wife for not giving enough money to kitty party. On the other hand blue corner notices are issued on others known to accused inorder to trace the whereabouts of the prime accused. You can read what a mockery Indian Police have made out of RCN's. The Bench furthermore held that “if a violation of any order passed by a civil court is made the ground for issuance of a Red Corner Notice, indisputably, the court will enquire as to whether the same has undergone the tests laid down under Sections 13 and 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure”.
***********************
April 21: Interpol, which issues Red Corner notices to arrest criminals all over the world, has stopped issuing notices pertaining to Section 498(A) (dowry harassment) cases registered in India. There are about 3,000 requests for red corner notices from Indian government pending with Interpol.
The inspector-general of CID, Mr S. Umapathi, said there are as many as 120 cases from Andhra Pradesh pending with Interpol for the past eight months.Sources in the CBI said Punjab tops the list with nearly 300 cases.
According to sources, there is no law pertaining to dowry harassment in US and other developed countries and hence the Interpol is in dilemma whether they can issue Red Corner notice based on the Indian law.
“The mater has been discussed with US embassy officials recently. However, there was no improvement in the status,” Mr Umapathi said. “There was no delay in other criminal cases,” he added.
The external affairs ministry had sent several representations to Interpol explaining the seriousness of the cases booked under Section 498 (A). However it failed to get any positive response from them.
Write to Interpol:
1. Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files
200 Quai Charles de Gaulle
69006 LYON – France
2. INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau -- Requests for INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau records should be addressed to:
Dorothy S. Beaty
FOIA/PA Specialist
Office of General Counsel
INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau
Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530-0001
(202) 616-9000
Interpol is just an organisation and has no legal judiciary of the people living in US (irrespective of their status-H1/B1/L1/F1/H4/green card/citizen), so folks dont worry and loose your sleep on this minute feud, irrespective of your US status, if your are on H-1 your green card proceedings wont get effected due to 498A Interpol RCN.
**********************************
The following ruling pertains to extraditing an Indian citizen from India based just on an Interpol Red Corner Notice without the foreign government having issued a request for extradition.
In its present form, it would not apply to a foreign citizen hiding in India (several of whom have been extradited) or an Indian citizen hiding abroad against whom a RCN has been issued.
"the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case."
http://www.dnaindia .com/india/report_matrimonial-offenders-can-t-be-extradited-sc_1280809
New Delhi: Ashwin and Dina Patel (names changed) got married in Mumbai in 2002. Soon after, they moved to the US and there, had a daughter, Seema. In 2005, Dina, on grounds of abuse, obtained an order of judicial separation from Ashwin from a US court. The court granted interim custody of Seema to Dina, and access to the child to Ashwin.
After Ashwin returned to India with their daughter, Dina filed a case against Ashwin in the US accusing him of kidnapping Seema. Consequently, the US police issued two arrest warrants against him: a custody violation warrant, and a kidnapping felony warrant. A Red Corner notice was also issued against Ashwin by Interpol, which was recently upheld by the Bombay High Court after a petition was filed by Ashwin seeking stay on the warrants and notice.
Now, the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case. An act may be an offence in a particular country, but ifnot a crime in India, a citizen can't be extradited, ruled the bench comprising Justices SB Sinha and Mukundakam Sharma. Upholding the precedence of local laws over foreign enactments, the apex court said, "HC was, therefore, in our opinion, clearly wrong in holding that a Red Corner Notice should not be tinkered with."
In its present form, it would not apply to a foreign citizen hiding in India (several of whom have been extradited) or an Indian citizen hiding abroad against whom a RCN has been issued.
"the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case."
http://www.dnaindia .com/india/report_matrimonial-offenders-can-t-be-extradited-sc_1280809
New Delhi: Ashwin and Dina Patel (names changed) got married in Mumbai in 2002. Soon after, they moved to the US and there, had a daughter, Seema. In 2005, Dina, on grounds of abuse, obtained an order of judicial separation from Ashwin from a US court. The court granted interim custody of Seema to Dina, and access to the child to Ashwin.
After Ashwin returned to India with their daughter, Dina filed a case against Ashwin in the US accusing him of kidnapping Seema. Consequently, the US police issued two arrest warrants against him: a custody violation warrant, and a kidnapping felony warrant. A Red Corner notice was also issued against Ashwin by Interpol, which was recently upheld by the Bombay High Court after a petition was filed by Ashwin seeking stay on the warrants and notice.
Now, the Supreme Court has ruled that an Indian citizen locked in a "matrimonial dispute" cannot be extradited to another country, as a "matrimonial dispute does not constitute an extraditable offence."
The apex court recognised that the husband violated US laws. "The husband came to India with the child in 2006 and in violation of US custody orders." But the SC held that merely the issuing of a "Red Corner" notice by a court abroad doesn't mean the arrest of the person is required. The foreign government needs to issue a request for extradition, which hasn't been done in this case. An act may be an offence in a particular country, but ifnot a crime in India, a citizen can't be extradited, ruled the bench comprising Justices SB Sinha and Mukundakam Sharma. Upholding the precedence of local laws over foreign enactments, the apex court said, "HC was, therefore, in our opinion, clearly wrong in holding that a Red Corner Notice should not be tinkered with."
No comments:
Post a Comment