January 28, 2010
A leading Bollywood actress found her cheque book had been stolen and several cheques totalling Rs 10 crore had been issued, forging her signature. The suspect cheques were forensically examined and the forger was identified, making it possible to recover the money in a few days.
A DNA test proved that a husband's suspicions about the paternity of his wife's second child were baseless, ending years of marital strife.
Forensic examination of a will proved that it had been forged by an unscrupulous member of the family. The contents of the will had divided the family for over two generations.
A leading industrialist was robbed of priceless family jewellery from his Delhi farmhouse. Fingerprint and forensic experts visited the site and, within three hours, identified the culprit who confessed to the crime.
Forensic science is the cutting edge of modern criminology and crime, and TV serials like CSI show us just why. The above examples are all cases that were solved in a forensic laboratory with one surprising twist: they were processed at India's first independent, private forensic science laboratory (FSL). Truth Labs (TL) is a Hyderabad-based initiative involved in helping the victims of crime; one through forensic examination and collection to be passed on to the police, and the other by examining evidence referred by individuals, the police and courts. Be it examining documents, analysing fingerprints, DNA profiling, polygraph testing, authenticating audio and video records, investigating a crime scene, screening a suspect from a psychological perspective or using any other probe to pinpoint the offender, TL is emerging as an effective investigating agency to complement existing governmentrun institutions. Private parties are using TL to resolve disputes that spring up over inheritance, forgery, impersonation, marital infidelity, and even corporate espionage. Being a non-profit organisation and part of a public society called Truth Foundation adds to TL's credibility. After Hyderabad, it has also expanded to Delhi and Bangalore. Chennai and Mumbai are on the horizon too.
What's more significant is that TL is not just emerging as an alternate dispute resolution mechanism for out-of-court settlements but is pioneering proactive forensics, which is relatively unknown in India. For the first time here, forensic services are available in an institutional setting under one roof and at international standards. An added advantage is it ensures privacy and confidentiality. Armed with scientific proof garnered by TL, the Hyderabad Police arrested a local power broker for letting out a huge commercial property with a forged rental deed. Fingerprint and document analyses carried out by TL helped establish the ownership of a disputed piece of agricultural land in northwest Delhi worth Rs 3 crore. In another case, a family from Mumbai approached TL for polygraph testing after a young bride confessed that her father-in-law had propositioned her when it was discovered that her husband was infertile and they were planning to have a test tube baby.
"The existing evidence laws are strong enough, if only those presenting evidence utilise it competently and confidently with professionalism."
KPC Gandhi, Truth Lab's founder
What TL's successes also prove is that investigations can be fast-tracked by using proper scientific methods. In a daring case of power abuse, by forging the signatures of the Karnataka governor, his adviser and special secretary, a Bangalore-based flying academy tried to get favours for the contract of maintenance, operation, training and other services for Raj Bhavan. The crime was solved within a week. TL has also been helpful in resolving false claims. In a child swapping case referred by the district hospital in Mandya, Karnataka, DNA testing by TL established that the child had not been swapped. Similarly, when a Delhi maid claimed hereditary rights saying that the father of her child was a son of the landlord, DNA tests proved that she was wrong.
The lab gets four or five calls every day asking for consultancy from individuals as well as courts. Being a private agency, it is free of the red tape and bureaucratic procedures which delay investigation, conviction and even court proceedings. There are 25 state-run and four Centre-run FSLs, which receive cases after months and, at times, years later from the police or courts. When, finally, the reports are sent, the courts take a few more months or even years to give the final verdict. This delay, during which vital evidence may also be lost, is why both the police and courts are increasingly banking on TL. The Karnataka Police have made it a practice for the CID to send all cases to TL directly. The Delhi Police, too, have directed all their police stations to refer cases in matters of urgency, importance and sensitive nature to TL.
Forensic reports in seven days means investigations are fast-tracked and bureaucratic sloth bypassed.
TL averages seven days to submit its report, that too with ISO 9001 certification by legally valid and accredited experts. Moreover, it's a boon for individuals who can't approach government-run FSLs to resolve their personal matters--unless they approach the police in criminal cases or courts in civil cases. Now individuals and institutions are, without reporting to the police, turning to TL to resolve disputes, ranging across Internet fraud, corporate fraud, identity theft, false insurance claims and child paternity disputes to maintain their confidentiality. "Many a time, individuals and organisations are confronted with the problem of providing evidence to prove their statements to the police or courts. Due to lack of knowledge and resources to provide tangible proofs, they end up in frustration. TL has the knowledge, expertise and resources to advise those interested in obtaining evidence," says its founder Dr KPC Gandhi, a former IGP and director, Andhra Pradesh FSL. TL's findings are legally valid as the teams comprise recognised forensic experts. "The existing evidence laws are strong enough, if only those presenting evidence utilise it competently and confidently with professionalism," he says.
TL is inspired by Truth Labs Inc US, which operates on the same non-profit principles. The main problem TL faces in India is the shortage of trained professionals. It is collaborating with the University of Hyderabad, National Law School of India University, Bangalore, and the Bureau of Police Research and Development to raise standards and spread its net wider. As of now, TL acts as a facilitator and takes over where both the civil and criminal justice system have faced delays and incompetence. Considering how often that happens, private labs like TL are a welcome addition to crime busting in India.
Mr.Rebates
Saturday, March 27, 2010
POLYGRAPH/LIE-DETECTOR TEST
1) How is the Polygraph Examination conducted?
A Polygraph (popularly referred to as a Lie-Detector) is an instrument that measures and records physiological changes caused by the sympathetic nervous system, while the subject is asked a series of questions for which he has to answer “yes” or “no”, wherein deliberate lying produces bodily reactions reflected in blood pressure, respiration (breath rate), skin sensitivity etc. measured through the couplings made to the body of the person.
2) How accurate is a Polygraph?
The Polygraph has been proven to be 98% accurate in the tests so far conducted.
3) How long does it take to administer a Polygraph test?
It usually takes from 2 to 3 hours to administer a Polygraph test for each individual.
4) In Polygraph, Lie-Detector test the subject is administered a drug through injection?
No, Polygraph test is a physiological test of psychological conditions of the person which are measured through a) blood pressure b) breath/respiration rate c) skin resistance by attaching rubber/plastic cuffs to the forearm, chest and fingers just as in case of blood pressure test or ECG test.
5) Does Polygraph Examination require the consent of the person to be examined?
Yes. Nobody can be examined to undergo the test without their willingness.
6) In what types of cases can Polygraph Examination prove useful?
Psychological screening of suspects of examine frauds, thefts, abuse, harassment, dishonesty, infidelity, rape, murder, threat or any other white collar crime can be undertaken using Polygraph test.M
7) Does high blood pressure affect the accuracy of the Polygraph test?
No. While blood pressure is one of the physiological reactions measured, it does not affect the accuracy of the test. However, prior to examination, it is necessary to ensure medical fitness of the subject.
8) Does the emotional state of the person interfere the Polygraph Analysis?
Yes. The person undergoing the test should be in a calm and healthy condition.
9) Who should NOT take a Polygraph test?
a. Anyone who is being forced to take it.
b. Any person with a serious heart condition, unless his doctor has given written approval.
c. A pregnant women, unless her doctor has given written approval.
d. Any person who is determined to be mentally incompetent or any person who has a respiratory illness or cold and/or any person who has nerve damage or paralysis.
e. Any person who has had a stroke or is an epileptic.
f. Any person who is in pain (i.e., toothache, headache or a recent injury).
10) Is the Polygraph test conducted at all branches of Truth Labs?
No. Polygraph examination is currently undertaken at Delhi office of Truth Labs. However, in important cases tests can be organized anywhere in India.
A Polygraph (popularly referred to as a Lie-Detector) is an instrument that measures and records physiological changes caused by the sympathetic nervous system, while the subject is asked a series of questions for which he has to answer “yes” or “no”, wherein deliberate lying produces bodily reactions reflected in blood pressure, respiration (breath rate), skin sensitivity etc. measured through the couplings made to the body of the person.
2) How accurate is a Polygraph?
The Polygraph has been proven to be 98% accurate in the tests so far conducted.
3) How long does it take to administer a Polygraph test?
It usually takes from 2 to 3 hours to administer a Polygraph test for each individual.
4) In Polygraph, Lie-Detector test the subject is administered a drug through injection?
No, Polygraph test is a physiological test of psychological conditions of the person which are measured through a) blood pressure b) breath/respiration rate c) skin resistance by attaching rubber/plastic cuffs to the forearm, chest and fingers just as in case of blood pressure test or ECG test.
5) Does Polygraph Examination require the consent of the person to be examined?
Yes. Nobody can be examined to undergo the test without their willingness.
6) In what types of cases can Polygraph Examination prove useful?
Psychological screening of suspects of examine frauds, thefts, abuse, harassment, dishonesty, infidelity, rape, murder, threat or any other white collar crime can be undertaken using Polygraph test.M
7) Does high blood pressure affect the accuracy of the Polygraph test?
No. While blood pressure is one of the physiological reactions measured, it does not affect the accuracy of the test. However, prior to examination, it is necessary to ensure medical fitness of the subject.
8) Does the emotional state of the person interfere the Polygraph Analysis?
Yes. The person undergoing the test should be in a calm and healthy condition.
9) Who should NOT take a Polygraph test?
a. Anyone who is being forced to take it.
b. Any person with a serious heart condition, unless his doctor has given written approval.
c. A pregnant women, unless her doctor has given written approval.
d. Any person who is determined to be mentally incompetent or any person who has a respiratory illness or cold and/or any person who has nerve damage or paralysis.
e. Any person who has had a stroke or is an epileptic.
f. Any person who is in pain (i.e., toothache, headache or a recent injury).
10) Is the Polygraph test conducted at all branches of Truth Labs?
No. Polygraph examination is currently undertaken at Delhi office of Truth Labs. However, in important cases tests can be organized anywhere in India.
Slow justice contradicts India’s democratic strengths: PM
March 27th, 2010
New Delhi, March 27 India’s legal and judicial system reflects “great contradiction”, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said Saturday urging that the justice delivery mechanism needed to be expedited to strengthen the country’s democratic roots.
“The Indian legal and judicial system is one of the solid pillars of our democracy… Our government attaches great importance to the legal empowerment of the common man,” Manmohan Singh said, addressing a day-long national convention of Law, Justice and the Common Man.
The prime minister said democracy held “little meaning for the common man” unless he or she is able to secure basic rights and gain easy access to speedy justice.
“The Indian legal and judicial system in some sense reflects great contradiction Our democracy and legal system have strengths that are admired all over the world. We have a free press, a true independent judiciary and independent institutions like the Election Commission and Comptroller and Auditor General of of India, which underpin our democratic framework,” he said.
“However, all these strengths are somewhat diminished due the backlog of cases,” the prime minister added.
He asked state governments to initiate immediate action for the operationalisation of the Gram Nyayalaya Act, passed by the government last year and according to which 5,000 rural courts will be set up at the village level to dispense speedy justice.
“I urge state governments to initiate immediate action to operationalise this act in their states. Once the act is fully implemented, we will have more than 5,000 courts at village panchayat level. These will bring justice at the doorstep of common people,” the prime minister said.
According to official figures, there are over 3.10 crore cases pending across the country and the rural courts are aimed to help speed up the justice delivery system.
These courts will deal with cases at a level below the subordinate courts but in the same capacity. The act provides for first class judicial magistrates dispensing justice. Judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) will be posted at the rural courts and will be called Nyaya Adhikaris.
New Delhi, March 27 India’s legal and judicial system reflects “great contradiction”, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said Saturday urging that the justice delivery mechanism needed to be expedited to strengthen the country’s democratic roots.
“The Indian legal and judicial system is one of the solid pillars of our democracy… Our government attaches great importance to the legal empowerment of the common man,” Manmohan Singh said, addressing a day-long national convention of Law, Justice and the Common Man.
The prime minister said democracy held “little meaning for the common man” unless he or she is able to secure basic rights and gain easy access to speedy justice.
“The Indian legal and judicial system in some sense reflects great contradiction Our democracy and legal system have strengths that are admired all over the world. We have a free press, a true independent judiciary and independent institutions like the Election Commission and Comptroller and Auditor General of of India, which underpin our democratic framework,” he said.
“However, all these strengths are somewhat diminished due the backlog of cases,” the prime minister added.
He asked state governments to initiate immediate action for the operationalisation of the Gram Nyayalaya Act, passed by the government last year and according to which 5,000 rural courts will be set up at the village level to dispense speedy justice.
“I urge state governments to initiate immediate action to operationalise this act in their states. Once the act is fully implemented, we will have more than 5,000 courts at village panchayat level. These will bring justice at the doorstep of common people,” the prime minister said.
According to official figures, there are over 3.10 crore cases pending across the country and the rural courts are aimed to help speed up the justice delivery system.
These courts will deal with cases at a level below the subordinate courts but in the same capacity. The act provides for first class judicial magistrates dispensing justice. Judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) will be posted at the rural courts and will be called Nyaya Adhikaris.
After wife plea, court bars NRI from selling Delhi property
Mar 27, 2010
NEW DELHI: It was a matrimonial dispute spread across continents. Married to an India-born UK citizen, a woman was sent back to her maternal house in India when things turned ugly between her husband and her. The woman filed a case against her husband and in-laws in a trial court here, despite the fact that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, has no jurisdiction outside the country.
The woman finally got some respite when the trial court directed her in-laws, who came to the country last month to sell off their property here and thereafter move back to London, not to sell their house without permission from the court. While the Supreme Court has said a woman does not have any right over the house owned by her in-laws, the trial court's order came after the woman told the court her belongings were still lying inside the Paschim Vihar house.
"I direct the respondents not to alienate the house and not to remove the household articles without seeking prior permission of the court," a mahila court at Tis Hazari said. It also directed the woman's brother-in-law, who also lives in London, not to leave the country without first taking permission from the court. Even though the woman has no right over the house belonging to her in-laws, the court's order has now allowed the woman to seek maintenance from her husband.
Arguing before the court, the woman's counsel, Prashant Mendiratta, said the woman, living with her parents in Gurgaon, had a three-month old daughter. He said the dowry, given at the time of the wedding, were lying in the woman's in-laws' house. The couple got married on November 23, 2008, in Delhi. After living in the country for a month, the couple left for London. However, the woman was allegedly thrown out after a dispute and came back to India in May 2009.
NEW DELHI: It was a matrimonial dispute spread across continents. Married to an India-born UK citizen, a woman was sent back to her maternal house in India when things turned ugly between her husband and her. The woman filed a case against her husband and in-laws in a trial court here, despite the fact that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, has no jurisdiction outside the country.
The woman finally got some respite when the trial court directed her in-laws, who came to the country last month to sell off their property here and thereafter move back to London, not to sell their house without permission from the court. While the Supreme Court has said a woman does not have any right over the house owned by her in-laws, the trial court's order came after the woman told the court her belongings were still lying inside the Paschim Vihar house.
"I direct the respondents not to alienate the house and not to remove the household articles without seeking prior permission of the court," a mahila court at Tis Hazari said. It also directed the woman's brother-in-law, who also lives in London, not to leave the country without first taking permission from the court. Even though the woman has no right over the house belonging to her in-laws, the court's order has now allowed the woman to seek maintenance from her husband.
Arguing before the court, the woman's counsel, Prashant Mendiratta, said the woman, living with her parents in Gurgaon, had a three-month old daughter. He said the dowry, given at the time of the wedding, were lying in the woman's in-laws' house. The couple got married on November 23, 2008, in Delhi. After living in the country for a month, the couple left for London. However, the woman was allegedly thrown out after a dispute and came back to India in May 2009.
Police to pay Rs 6 lakh for framing false cases
March 26, 2010
The Delhi High Court on Thursday awarded a compensation of Rs 5.62 lakh to a person, who was falsely implicated in 18 criminal cases by the police.
Prempal had sought a compensation of Rs 60 lakh from the Delhi Police for implicating him in 18 false cases between 1991 and 2007. But he got only a fraction of his claims.
The court directed Delhi Police commissioner Y. S. Dadwal to compensate the victim as well as tender a written apology to the victim and his family for their suffering.
"If the confidence has to be restored among the citizenry that the police are meant to protect their rights, then such an expression of contrition by those at the helm is imperative," the court said.
The court asked Dadwal to review the criminal cases pending against Prempal and asked him to take a decision within four weeks on whether these cases needed to be pursued against him.
Prempal was slapped with the cases because he had dared to take on the local policemen after they refused to return his household goods recovered from robbers.
"It started in 1991 when I filed an FIR of theft at my house. The police after arresting the accused and recovering the household goods did not return it. I took on the police and registered a case against them. After that a vigilance inquiry was done and the officials were suspended," "In revenge, the police destroyed 15 years of my life and my family by implicating me in false cases but could not prove any of the cases," he added.
Out of the 18 cases, he was acquitted in 13 after facing a prolonged trial. However in five cases, the police managed to get him convicted, which included four cases of theft and one under the Arms Act.
Prempal moved the high court in 2006 against the Delhi Police for falsely implicating him in a rape case of a minor girl in 2002.
The police accused him of raping the daughter of his landlord as he was having frequent quarrels with him. He was arrested, tortured in custody and suffered incarceration in jail for nearly seven years. Prempal was acquitted by a trial court in September 2004.
The trial court in its order had stated that the police officers involved in framing the case against Prempal should be given exemplary punishment, but the Delhi Police did not abide by it.
"I consider this as an eye-opener case, which reveals the manner in which police lets off real culprits and falsely implicates innocent persons, who dare ask for justice or who want erring police officers to be brought to book," the court observed.
"The torture of Prempal has converted him into a living corpse. It is a case which shows that the police force has persons of criminal character in it, who are out to damage the whole institution and need to be weeded out," the court added.
In all the five cases in which Prempal was convicted, the FIRs were lodged at the Sangam Vihar police station.
Four out of the five cases in which he was convicted were registered in 1999 under sections 457/ 380/ 411 of IPC related to trespass and house break- in by night to commit offence. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 18 months in each of the cases. However, Prempal was acquitted in seven similar cases.
The fifth conviction was under sections 25/ 27/ 54 and 59 of the Arms Act in which he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and six months and was fined Rs 100.
But he was acquitted in three other cases under the Arms Act.
Prempal was also acquitted in a case (FIR No 117/ 1991) where he was charged under sections 302/ 34 IPC. The Sangam Vihar police not only implicated him but also his son Sanjay and his wife. The court expressed surprise over the Delhi Police continuing to dub Prempal as a " hardened criminal". " Despite so many acquittals, the Delhi Police continue to dub him as a hardened criminal, this is an appellation that is at once unfair and unjustified.
The most precious years of his life were spent in trying to defend himself against these false cases," Justice S. Murlidhar said.
"What is disconcerting is the number of cases registered at the same police station and the ordeal that Prempal has had to undergo over several years to get relieved of the cases," he added.
Case Record:
18 false cases slapped against him
5 cases in which he was convicted
7 years Prempal had to spend in jail
Rs 5.62 lakh compensation awarded to him by the Delhi High Court
Rs 60 lakh compensation he had claimed for the harassment meted out to him
Download Full Judgment here::
http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/SMD/judgement/25-03-2010/SMD25032010CW110792006.pdf
The Delhi High Court on Thursday awarded a compensation of Rs 5.62 lakh to a person, who was falsely implicated in 18 criminal cases by the police.
Prempal had sought a compensation of Rs 60 lakh from the Delhi Police for implicating him in 18 false cases between 1991 and 2007. But he got only a fraction of his claims.
The court directed Delhi Police commissioner Y. S. Dadwal to compensate the victim as well as tender a written apology to the victim and his family for their suffering.
"If the confidence has to be restored among the citizenry that the police are meant to protect their rights, then such an expression of contrition by those at the helm is imperative," the court said.
The court asked Dadwal to review the criminal cases pending against Prempal and asked him to take a decision within four weeks on whether these cases needed to be pursued against him.
Prempal was slapped with the cases because he had dared to take on the local policemen after they refused to return his household goods recovered from robbers.
"It started in 1991 when I filed an FIR of theft at my house. The police after arresting the accused and recovering the household goods did not return it. I took on the police and registered a case against them. After that a vigilance inquiry was done and the officials were suspended," "In revenge, the police destroyed 15 years of my life and my family by implicating me in false cases but could not prove any of the cases," he added.
Out of the 18 cases, he was acquitted in 13 after facing a prolonged trial. However in five cases, the police managed to get him convicted, which included four cases of theft and one under the Arms Act.
Prempal moved the high court in 2006 against the Delhi Police for falsely implicating him in a rape case of a minor girl in 2002.
The police accused him of raping the daughter of his landlord as he was having frequent quarrels with him. He was arrested, tortured in custody and suffered incarceration in jail for nearly seven years. Prempal was acquitted by a trial court in September 2004.
The trial court in its order had stated that the police officers involved in framing the case against Prempal should be given exemplary punishment, but the Delhi Police did not abide by it.
"I consider this as an eye-opener case, which reveals the manner in which police lets off real culprits and falsely implicates innocent persons, who dare ask for justice or who want erring police officers to be brought to book," the court observed.
"The torture of Prempal has converted him into a living corpse. It is a case which shows that the police force has persons of criminal character in it, who are out to damage the whole institution and need to be weeded out," the court added.
In all the five cases in which Prempal was convicted, the FIRs were lodged at the Sangam Vihar police station.
Four out of the five cases in which he was convicted were registered in 1999 under sections 457/ 380/ 411 of IPC related to trespass and house break- in by night to commit offence. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 18 months in each of the cases. However, Prempal was acquitted in seven similar cases.
The fifth conviction was under sections 25/ 27/ 54 and 59 of the Arms Act in which he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and six months and was fined Rs 100.
But he was acquitted in three other cases under the Arms Act.
Prempal was also acquitted in a case (FIR No 117/ 1991) where he was charged under sections 302/ 34 IPC. The Sangam Vihar police not only implicated him but also his son Sanjay and his wife. The court expressed surprise over the Delhi Police continuing to dub Prempal as a " hardened criminal". " Despite so many acquittals, the Delhi Police continue to dub him as a hardened criminal, this is an appellation that is at once unfair and unjustified.
The most precious years of his life were spent in trying to defend himself against these false cases," Justice S. Murlidhar said.
"What is disconcerting is the number of cases registered at the same police station and the ordeal that Prempal has had to undergo over several years to get relieved of the cases," he added.
Case Record:
18 false cases slapped against him
5 cases in which he was convicted
7 years Prempal had to spend in jail
Rs 5.62 lakh compensation awarded to him by the Delhi High Court
Rs 60 lakh compensation he had claimed for the harassment meted out to him
Download Full Judgment here::
http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/SMD/judgement/25-03-2010/SMD25032010CW110792006.pdf
Judicial Accountability Bill in this session
March 26, 2010
The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill would be introduced in the current session of Parliament after Cabinet approval, Law Minister Veerappa Moily said here on Friday.
Mr. Moily said the Bill would incorporate the Supreme Court's suggestions and put in place a systematic process to ensure high standards in the judiciary.
The Law Ministry was holding discussions with the Ministry of Human Resource Development on the scope of the proposed National Commission for Higher Education and Research with respect to legal education.
The Law Ministry would like to strengthen the Bar Council of India and would not allow anything that would be “detrimental” to the council's functioning, including its role in legal education. To elicit suggestions for improving legal education, a national consultation on legal education would be held on May 1 and 2, as part of the National Legal Mission, he said.
The Minister was talking to reporters after presiding over the convocation of the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University.
On quota for the Other Backward Classes in the Women's Reservation Bill, he said the government was looking into the suggestion, but it would be difficult to implement it, as there was no caste-wise census since 1931.
The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill would be introduced in the current session of Parliament after Cabinet approval, Law Minister Veerappa Moily said here on Friday.
Mr. Moily said the Bill would incorporate the Supreme Court's suggestions and put in place a systematic process to ensure high standards in the judiciary.
The Law Ministry was holding discussions with the Ministry of Human Resource Development on the scope of the proposed National Commission for Higher Education and Research with respect to legal education.
The Law Ministry would like to strengthen the Bar Council of India and would not allow anything that would be “detrimental” to the council's functioning, including its role in legal education. To elicit suggestions for improving legal education, a national consultation on legal education would be held on May 1 and 2, as part of the National Legal Mission, he said.
The Minister was talking to reporters after presiding over the convocation of the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University.
On quota for the Other Backward Classes in the Women's Reservation Bill, he said the government was looking into the suggestion, but it would be difficult to implement it, as there was no caste-wise census since 1931.
Court restrains Interpol from taking custody of child from NRI
Friday March 26, 2010,
The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court. (Custody battle: A child's wait for justice)
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries. The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court.
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries.
The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court. (Custody battle: A child's wait for justice)
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries. The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court.
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Cr. PC amendments come into effect
Saturday, Jan 02, 2010
NEW DELHI: The Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 2008, providing for sweeping changes in the criminal justice delivery system in the country has come into effect.
The Act, which gives protection to rape victims, got President Pratibha Patil’s assent in January last year, but was kept in abeyance for about a year.
It incorporates the recommendations of the Law Commission, the Justice Malimath Committee’s report and the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court to prevent overcrowding of jails with undertrials. Lawyers stoutly opposed the amendments relating to arrest, notice of appearance before a police office and adjournments, and urged the government not to notify the amended law. So the Centre has decided not to notify Sections 5, 6 and 21 (b).
With the permission of court, a rape victim can engage an advocate to help the prosecution. Any victim’s statement will have to be recorded at the victim’s home or in a safe place or a place of her choice.
As far as practicable, the statement should be recorded by a woman police officer in the presence of the victim’s parents or guardian or near relatives or social worker of the locality.
Under the new law, statements can be recorded through audio/video or other electronic means. Investigation of rape/child sex abuse must be completed in three months from the date when information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station.
The law provides for in camera trials and protection of the victim’s identity, maintaining the confidentiality of the name and address of the parties and conduct of trials by a woman magistrate. It will enable the victim to go on appeal against any order passed by the court acquitting the accused or convicting him of a lesser offence, or awarding inadequate compensation. Such appeal shall be made in the court where an appeal is ordinarily made against the order of conviction.
The Act mandates the police officer making an arrest to bear his identification badge or tag. A memorandum of arrest shall be prepared, witnessed and countersigned. The person arrested shall be told that he/she has the right to inform a relative or friend. To protect the interests of the accused, it stipulates that an arrested person be examined immediately by a medical officer.
It mandates the State governments to establish police control rooms at the State and district levels and display on notice boards kept outside the control rooms the names and addresses of the persons arrested, and the names and designations of the police officers who made the arrests.
The law provides for compensation to victims for illegal arrest and police harassment.
In coordination with the Centre, every State should prepare a scheme for providing funds for compensation to the victim or his/her dependants who suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime and who require rehabilitation. Whenever a recommendation is made by a court for compensation, the District Legal Service Authority or the State Legal Service Authority shall decide the quantum of compensation.
If the trial court is satisfied that the compensation awarded under Section 357 of the Cr. PC is not adequate, or the cases end in acquittal or discharge or the victim has to be rehabilitated, it may recommend compensation.
NEW DELHI: The Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 2008, providing for sweeping changes in the criminal justice delivery system in the country has come into effect.
The Act, which gives protection to rape victims, got President Pratibha Patil’s assent in January last year, but was kept in abeyance for about a year.
It incorporates the recommendations of the Law Commission, the Justice Malimath Committee’s report and the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court to prevent overcrowding of jails with undertrials. Lawyers stoutly opposed the amendments relating to arrest, notice of appearance before a police office and adjournments, and urged the government not to notify the amended law. So the Centre has decided not to notify Sections 5, 6 and 21 (b).
With the permission of court, a rape victim can engage an advocate to help the prosecution. Any victim’s statement will have to be recorded at the victim’s home or in a safe place or a place of her choice.
As far as practicable, the statement should be recorded by a woman police officer in the presence of the victim’s parents or guardian or near relatives or social worker of the locality.
Under the new law, statements can be recorded through audio/video or other electronic means. Investigation of rape/child sex abuse must be completed in three months from the date when information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station.
The law provides for in camera trials and protection of the victim’s identity, maintaining the confidentiality of the name and address of the parties and conduct of trials by a woman magistrate. It will enable the victim to go on appeal against any order passed by the court acquitting the accused or convicting him of a lesser offence, or awarding inadequate compensation. Such appeal shall be made in the court where an appeal is ordinarily made against the order of conviction.
The Act mandates the police officer making an arrest to bear his identification badge or tag. A memorandum of arrest shall be prepared, witnessed and countersigned. The person arrested shall be told that he/she has the right to inform a relative or friend. To protect the interests of the accused, it stipulates that an arrested person be examined immediately by a medical officer.
It mandates the State governments to establish police control rooms at the State and district levels and display on notice boards kept outside the control rooms the names and addresses of the persons arrested, and the names and designations of the police officers who made the arrests.
The law provides for compensation to victims for illegal arrest and police harassment.
In coordination with the Centre, every State should prepare a scheme for providing funds for compensation to the victim or his/her dependants who suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime and who require rehabilitation. Whenever a recommendation is made by a court for compensation, the District Legal Service Authority or the State Legal Service Authority shall decide the quantum of compensation.
If the trial court is satisfied that the compensation awarded under Section 357 of the Cr. PC is not adequate, or the cases end in acquittal or discharge or the victim has to be rehabilitated, it may recommend compensation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)