Mission Magalyaan Possible!! · 2014-09-29 · proud, Mangalyaan entered the Mars or‐ bit creating history in the words of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In November 2013, various

Mission Magalyaan Possible!!

"R.M. Lodha Passes e Baton To Contentious H.L. Dattu" On

Page 6

Law School Coverage

"Damodaram Sanjivayya National

Law University" (Page 8)

Fatah and Hamas Agree

on Unity Government in

Gaza

J. Jayalalithaa Held Guilty in Disproportionate

Assets CaseIn an event that made the country

proud, Mangalyaan entered the Mars or‐

bit creating history in the words of

Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In

November 2013, various attempts of

earth bound manoeuvres were per‐

formed. In December the MOM le

earth’s orbit and the Trans-Mars injec‐

tion was performed. Again in December

2013, First course correction manoeuvre

was performed on the spacecra and in

June 2014, the Second course correction

manoeuvre was executed.

On 22nd September 2014, MOM en‐

tered Mars’ Gravitational Sphere of In‐

#uence, motor test $red aer over 300

days of dormancy, and the last trajectory

correction manoeuvre was performed.

Two days later, the MOM reached the in‐

tended orbit around Mars, making India

the $rst country in the world, to have

successfully launched its mission to the

Red Planet on its very $rst attempt.

On the morning of 24th September

2014, the Indian Space Research Organi‐

zation successfully ignited the main liq‐

uid engine of 440 Newton along with the

8 small thrusters that $red for 24 min‐

utes and trimmed the speed of the air

cra which enabled smooth orbit inser‐

tion under the shadow of the red planet.

Later, the Mangalyaan broadcasted the

$rst few pictures from Mars.

e primary goal of the MOM revolved

around the construction of a spacecra

capable of performing an interplanetary

mission and demonstrating the conduct

of such a mission with respect to space‐

cra navigation, trajectory planning, ve‐

hicle maintenance and autonomous op‐

erations at great distance to Earth.

Amongst the excited audience of the sci‐

entists at the ISRO’s command centre at

Bangalore sat Prime Minister Narendra

Modi to cheer the Mars Orbiter Mission

or MOM. A tensed posture of the Prime

Minister was recorded during the $nal

moments but later, as the celebrations

began aer delayed communications sig‐

nals (since it takes 12.5 minutes for sig‐

nals to travel) and the news was con‐

$rmed that the spacecra had entered

the orbit, the Prime Minister smiled his

pleasure at the success.

Clapping down to the Rostrum, he said

“e moment this mission was named

MOM, I knew it would not disappoint.

Moms never fail... We dared to reach out

to the unknown.”

Mr. Modi also focused on the indigenous

nature of the entire mission and how it

was a “made in India” effort. "We built it

indigenously, in a pan-Indian effort,

s t r e t c h i n g f r o m B a n g a l o r e t o

Bhubaneswar, and Faridabad to Rajkot,"

he said repeatedly congratulating the In‐

dian scientists for this achievement.

Rival Palestinian factions, Fatah and

Hamas have agreed to a uni$ed govern‐

ment in Gaza that is set to assume power

immediately. e government will be

headed by Mahmoud Abbas, as agreed

upon by the two sides in talks held in

Egypt. e two sides agreed to the unity

government along with the UN control‐

ling the Gaza border crossings. Also, a

decision has been made to constitute a

joint committee than will oversee imple‐

mentation of previous reconciliation

agreements between the two factions.

e deal will see Hamas, which is con‐

sidered a terrorist organization by some

countries, cede power in the Gaza strip

which has been under its control since

2007 when it won elections there. Since

gaining power, Hamas has fought three

wars with Israel. Its recent con#ict with

Israel also ended in a cease$re deal

which stipulated that Mahmoud Abbas’

Palestinian Authority must control the

civil administration of Gaza.

Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, J. Jay‐

alalithaa sentenced to four years in

prison aer being convicted in Rs. 66

Crore disproportionate assets case along

with three others by Special sessions

Court in Jaipur. Chief of AIADMK, Jay‐

alalithaa was imposed $ne of Rs. 100

crore while her close aide Sasikala

Natarajan and J.Ilavarasi and her dis‐

owned foster son Sudhakaran, and the

other three convicted persons in the

case, were $ned Rs.10 crore each.

With the sentence, Jayalalithaa will lose

the post of the chief minister thereby be‐

coming the $rst serving chief minister to

lose her post and also walks into jail.

Special Judge John Michael D’Cunha

convicted the 66-year-old All India

Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

(AIADMK) chief in the case of owning

assets to the tune Rs.66.65 crore dispro‐

portionate to her known sources of in‐

come during 1991-96 when she was

chief minister for the $rst time. Convict‐

ed under Prevention of Corruption Act,

the AIADMK supremo has to now ap‐

proach a high court for bail before

mulling $ling an appeal challenging her

conviction. Unless the conviction is

stayed or overturned by a superior court,

Jayalalithaa will be disquali$ed under

the Representation of the People Act

from contesting elections for a period of

10 years—four years from the date of

conviction and six years thereaer.

Shortly aer the conviction in Bangalore,

AIADMK party workers went on ram‐

page in various parts of Tamil Nadu, in‐

cluding Chennai, Madurai, Salem and

Coimbatore. ey burnt effigies of DMK

leader M. Karunanidhi and Subramani‐

am Swamy, who had $led the case in

1996 disproportionate assets against her

in 1996, and pelted stones on shops in

the area forcing them to close. A govern‐

ment bus was also set on $re in

Kancheepuram. e DMK alleged that

there was a “complete breakdown in con‐

stitutional machinery” in Tamil Nadu

following the conviction of chief minis‐

ter Jayalalithaa in the disproportionate

assets case and sought the intervention

of the President and Prime Minister to

restore law and order.

2 TRIGGER TIMES Monday 29, 2014

News Brief From CourtsSC Demands

Fresh Affidavit With Details of

Prisoners of War In Pakistan

Supreme Court Quashes 214 Coal Block Allocation Since 1993, Levies Penalty of

Rs. 295/- Per Metric Ton of Coal Extracted

Delhi High Court Restrains IIPM

From Using Evidently False and

Misleading Advertisements

Supreme Court Quashes e Allotment of Chandigarh Law

Institute, Holds It Is Violation Of Article 14

Institute of Law & Ors. v/s Neeraj Shar‐

ma & Ors.

Nishita Golchha: e Supreme Court on

Monday quashed the land allotted to

Chandigarh Law Institute Pvt. Ltd, an

entity which had two sons of judge of the

Punjab and Haryana High Court and a

senior advocate among its directors. e

appeal in the SC was $led by the institute

aer the Punjab and Haryana High

Court had also pronounced that the al‐

lotment of land was invalid. e institute

was allotted 5.75 acres of land in

Chandigarh at Rs. 900/- per square yard

only.

As the two judges did not agree on cer‐

tain paragraphs, the matter was referred

to the third judge, who also pronounced

against allotment of land and cancelled

the allotment. e Supreme Court judg‐

ment mentions the further arguments

made as, “It was further contended that

the High Court ought to have noticed

that the land involved in this appeal had

been allotted to the appellant- institute

aer proper scrutiny and on published

and noti$ed rates of the land with a con‐

dition for speci$c utilization of the land

on lease hold basis and that none of the

town planning was affected by the allot‐

ment of land in question in favor of the

appellant-institute since the area of land

in question is situated in the institutional

area where educational institutions are

functioning.”

e court $nally held, “We therefore,

conclude that the High Court has rightly

held that the policy followed by the

Chandigarh Administration where the

allotment of land was done in favor of

the appellant-institute without giving

any public notice an din the absence of a

transperant policy based upon objective

criteria and without even examining the

fact that the Union Territory of Chandi‐

garh is already under extreme pressure

of over population and even in the case

of allotment of school sites by making no

attempt to enforce clause 18 of the

Scheme, 1996, there by con$ning the

said provision merely to the statute

book, is arbitrary, unreasonable and un‐

just and is opposed to the provisions of

Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Nishita Golchha: the apex court on Tues‐

day shunned the UPA Government for

the manner in which they dealt with the

issue of 54 Indian Prisoners of War

(PoWs), languishing in Pakistan jails for

nearly three decades. e court was

hearing petitioner $led by the parents of

some of these PoW. e Bench headed

by Chief Justice R.M. Lodha, said the

court would like to get an update on a

list submitted by the External Affairs

Ministry in 1985, which said 54 Indian

defense personnel were being held as

prisoners in neighboring Pakistan. e

Court questioned the UPA government

over its hesitation to approach the Inter‐

national Court of Justice on the grounds

that the ‘enemy country’ would object to

it.

Justice Kurein Joseph hence, urged the

NDA Government to adopt a fresh stand

on the issue and said, “Take up issue

with Pakistan. If they do not agree on

the idea of approaching the ICJ, you may

approach the ICJ yourself and let us see

what stand Pakistan takes.” e court

added, “Don’t be pessimistic, be opti‐

mistic. ese are basic human problems.

Al l the options, meritorious or

otherwise, must be explored in a matter

like this which is so serious and

sensitive. ere should not be any nega‐

tive approach.” On the issue of PoWs,

the apex court in 2012 had stayed a Gu‐

jarat High Court order directing the

Union government to move the ICJ on

Pakistan illegally detaining 54 Indian

Army men in breach of an agreement

between the two countries aer the 1971

war to exchange all prisoners of war.

B. Mahesh Sharma v/s Union of India &

Ors.

Nishita Golchha: A Delhi High Court

comprising of Chief Justice G. Rohini

and Justice Rajiv Sagai Endlaw on Friday

restrained the Indian Institute of Plan‐

ning and Management (IIPM) from us‐

ing the word “MBA, BBA, Management

Course, management School, Business

School or B- School” in relation to the

courses/ programmes being conducted

by them. the Court observed, “In our

opinion, the aforesaid is clearly a maze

created by the respondent to entrap stu‐

dents to enlist with it in the hope of ac‐

quiring a quali$cation which the respon‐

dent is not entitled to confer and thereby

enriching the respondent to a consider‐

able extent as is evident from the huge

expenditure earlier as well as now being

incurred by the respondent in publicity

in print and electronic media.”

ey were directed to prominently dis‐

play on the website of IIPM that they

were not recognized by any statutory

body/ authority and the status of the

Foreign University/ Institution and / or

its degree or certi$cate in the country of

its origin and whose degree or certi$cate

the students enrolling in the course/ pro‐

gramme offered by the IIPM would be

entitled to. IIPM was also directed to

display this judgment on their website,

within one week, to ensure that attention

of anyone visiting the said website is

drawn thereto. A cost of Rs. 25000 to be

paid to Delhi Legal Services Authority

was also imposed.

Manohar Lal Sharma v/s e Principle

Secretary & Ors.

Nishita Golchha: A Supreme Court

bench comprising of CJ R.M. Lodha ,

Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Kuri‐

an Joseph on ursday quashed the allo‐

cation of 214 out of 218 coal blocks

which were allotted to companies since

1993. It was claimed that around Rs. 2

lakh crores were invested in the same.

e court stated, “Our judgment high‐

lighted the illegality and arbitrariness of

coal blocks and these consequence pro‐

ceedings are intended to correct the

wrong done by the Union of India; these

proceedings look to the future in that by

highlighting the wrong, it is expected

that the government will not deal with

the natural resources that belong to the

country as if they belong to a few indi‐

viduals who can $tter them away at their

sweet will; these proceedings may also

compensate the exchequer for the loss

caused to it, in the manner suggested by

the Learned Attorney General identi$ed

46 coal blocks that could be saved from

the guillotine, since all of them have

commenced production or are on the

verge of commencing production. As

these allocations are also illegal and arbi‐

trary they are also liable to be cancelled.”

However, the allotment of three coal

blocks was not disturbed and they are

Moher and Moher Amroli Extension al‐

located to Sasan Power Ltd. (UMPP) and

Tasra (allotted to Steel Authority of India

Ltd., a Central Government public sector

undertaking not having any joint

venture).

e bench clari$ed that the cancellation

will take effect only aer 6 months from

the date, which is with effect from 31st

March, 2015. is period of 6 months is

being given since the learned Attorney

General submitted that the Central Gov‐

ernment and CIL would need some time

to adjust to the changed situation and

move forward. e bench also accepted

the submission of the Attorney General

that the allottees of the coal blocks other

than those covered by the judgment and

the four coal blocks covered by this or‐

der must pay an amount of Rs.295/- per

metric ton of coal extracted as an addi‐

tional levy. is compensatory amount is

based on the assessment made by the

CAG. e compensatory payment

should be made within a period of 3

months and in any case on or before 31st

December 2014. e coal extracted

hereaer till 31st March 2015 will also

attract the additional levy of Rs. 295/-

per metric ton.

3TRIGGER TIMES Monday 29, 2014

U.S. Federal Court Issues Summons against Modi For His Alleged Role In “2002

Gujarat Genocide”

Bombay High Court: Government cannot

Compel Any Individual to Declare

or Specify His Religion

Supreme Court Directs UGC To Physically Verify

Deemed Universities

News Brief From CourtsInstall CCTV

Cameras in All the Police Stations Till

31 December Deadline: Guj HC

Nishita Golchha: A federal court in U.S.

has issued summons against Prime Min‐

ister Narendra Modi, in a lawsuit $led by

the American Justice Centre (AJC) for

his alleged involvement in the anti-Mus‐

lim pogrom in Gujarat during 2002,

which has been termed as the “2002 Gu‐

jarat Genocide” by the plaintiffs. Modi

was the Chief Minister of the state at the

relevant time. Speci$cally the twenty-

eight page complaint $led was said to

seek compensatory and punitive dam‐

ages and “charges PM Modi with com‐

mitting crimes against humanity, extra-

judicial killings, torture and in#icting

mental and physical trauma on the vic‐

tims, mostly from the Muslim Commu‐

nity.” e non-pro$t human rights orga‐

nization has called for a response from

the PM on the Alien Tort Claims Act

(ATCA) and the Torture Victim Protec‐

tion Act (TVPA). e event was termed

as an “attempted genocide against a pop‐

ulation persecuted for their religious be‐

liefs”, instead of communal riots.

It claims relief for crimes against human‐

ity, cruelty, inhuman or degrading treat‐

ment or punishment, extrajudicial

killing, wrongful death, negligence, pub‐

lic nuisance, battery and intentional and

negligent in#iction of emotional distress.

e complaint even terms the Special In‐

vestigation Team report, which cleared

Modi from complicity, as both “ques‐

tionable and lacking in credibility.” Gur‐

patwant Singh Pannun, whose law $rm

represents the plaintiffs, explained that

the summons issued by the Federal

Court of Southern District of New York

requires Mr. Modi to respond within 21

days aer it is served. If the PM fails to

answer the complaint, judgment by de‐

fault will be entered against him for the

relief demanded in the complaint. e

AJC also held a press conference on

September 26, to throw some light on

the implications of the lawsuit $les, in its

pursuit of justice.

Nishita Golchha: Tandon Committee has

found 44 deemed universities to be un$t

to be accorded the status of deemed uni‐

versity. Retired professor from AIIMS,

PN Tandon had listed such institutions

in the ‘C’ category. However, two institu‐

tions later surrendered their deemed

university tag. In addition, one such in‐

stitution was converted into center of na‐

tional importance, bringing the total

number down to 41. “Inspection means

physical veri$cation and that is our per‐

ception. If any defect is found, UGC

must tell them and give reasonable time

to rectify”, with these words, the

Supreme Court directed to conduct

physical veri$cation of deemed universi‐

ties which were blacklisted by Tandon

Committee.

e bench justices Dipak Misra and

Vikramjit Sen ordered that UGC com‐

plete physical veri$cation of all 41 uni‐

versities within 3 months. e Court

also declined the suggestion of verifying

universities through photographs and

videography and ordered for physical

veri$cation.

e Supreme Court has ordered the

UGC to $le a report aer the completion

of veri$cation process. Earlier, the Apex

Court had asked UGC to examine the

reports of deemed universities and then

advise the Central Government. UGC

had then set up a committee under its

Vice Chairperson, H Devaraj. e com‐

mittee heard all the 41 universities sepa‐

rately.

Show cause notices to 7 such universities

were issued and they were asked why

they should not be de-recognized. How‐

ever, the Central Government then le

the question to the Supreme Court.

UGC will now have to physically visit

each of the 41 universities and prepare a

report about the infrastructures and fac‐

ulty strength.

Sanjini Jain: e Gujarat HC on 27th

September, 2014 ordered the Govern‐

ment of Gujarat to complete the process

of installation of CCTV cameras in all

the police stations across the state and

the state govt has been given a deadline

of 31st December to do the same.

A PIL had been $led by Jagega who had

demanded that in order to control the

practice of custodial torture, all the po‐

lice stations should have CCTV Cameras

installed. e $rst order had been given

to the govt. by the Guj HC on 8th

November, 2012 and the authorities be‐

gan the process since then. e govern‐

ment began the process by installing four

to six cameras in some of the police sta‐

tions. Later the government decided to

install eight cameras in all the police sta‐

tions. Tenders for cameras with night-vi‐

sion and high de$nition were #oated by

the Gujarat Government. is was the

reason why the process got delayed.

As said by petitioners advocate, Rashmin

Jani, the Gujarat govt had intimated the

HC about the same and sought more

time for the completion of the project.

During the hearing of the PIL, the issue

of custodial torture was taken up by the

lawyer who stated the report of Times of

India of city crime branch police inspec‐

tor Paresh Solanki beating up business‐

men in custody at the DCB, crime's

headquarters in Gaekwad Haveli. e

lawyer also stated that cops converted a

civil dispute into criminal complaints a

lot of times.

e PIL was disposed by giving the state

govt a deadline of 31 December,2014.

Dr. Ranjeet Suryakant Mohite & Ors. v/s

Union of India and State of Maharash‐

tra

Nishita Golchha: e Bombay High

Court has directed the State “not to com‐

pel any individual to declare or specify

his religion in any form or any declara‐

tion.” e court also pronounced that by

the virtue of Article 25 of the Constitu‐

tion of India, every individual has the

right to say that he does not belong to

any religion or does not practice any reli‐

gion. e judgment was given aer a

public interest litigation was $led, con‐

tending that a citizen has a right to claim

that he does not belong to any religion.

e judgment notes, “e petitioners

claim that they made an application to

the State Government Printing Press for

notifying the change in religion. ey

wanted a gazette noti$cation to be issued

recording that they are not Christians

but they belong to “No Religion”. e ap‐

plications were rejected by the Govern‐

ment Printing Press. at is the cause of

action for $ling the present petition.”

Writing the judgment Justice A.S. Oka

said, “Freedom of conscience under Ar‐

ticle 25 encompasses in itself a freedom

to an individual to take a view that he

does not belong to any religion. It also

includes a right of an individual to claim

that he is ‘Atheist’. As the freedom of

conscience confers a fundamental right

to entertain a religious belief, it also con‐

fers a right on an individual to express

an opinion that he does not belong to

any religion.”

e judgment also notes, “No authority

which is State within the meaning of Ar‐

ticle 12 of the Constitution or any of its

agency or instrumentality can infringe

the fundamental right to freedom of

conscience.” He also said, “erefore, if

he is called upon by any agency or in‐

strumentality of the State to disclose his

religion, he can always state that he does

not practice any religion or he does not

belong to any religion. He cannot be

compelled to state that he profess a reli‐

gion.”


CPIL Apologies to Supreme Court, Court Asks For Assistance From Special Public Prosecutor in

e 2G Case

News Brief From CourtsSection 6(3) Of RTI Act Cannot

Be Read By CPIO so as to

Escape Responsibility:

Delhi HC

Guidelines Issued For Investigation of Police

Encounters: SC

National Tax Tribunal Act Declared Unconstitutional:

SC

PUCL V. Union of India

Sanjini Jain: In a landmark judgment

given by the Supreme Court on 23rd

September, 2014, 16 guidelines were is‐

sued with respect to the investigation of

police encounters. CJI RM Lodha and

Justice RF Nariman were of the view that

by the virtue of article 21 of the constitu‐

tion of India, a right to live life with hu‐

man dignity is guaranteed and any viola‐

tion of the same will be taken up very se‐

riously by the courts.

RM Lodha was of the view that “e

guarantee by Article 21 is available to ev‐

ery person and even the State has no au‐

thority to violate that right. In line with

the guarantee provided by Article 21 and

other provisions in the Constitution of

India, a number of statutory provisions

also seek to protect personal liberty, dig‐

nity and basic human rights. In spite of

Constitutional and statutory provisions

aimed at safeguarding the personal liber‐

ty and life of a citizen, the cases of death

in police encounters continue to occur”.

Ministry of railways through secretary

and Anr. V. Girish Mittal

Sanjini Jain: e Delhi HC has said that

section 6 (3) of the right to information

act cannot be read in such a way by the

CPIO that its responsibility is only limit‐

ed to forwarding applications to the dif‐

ferent departments.

An RTI application had been $led by

Girish Mittal, who had sought some in‐

formation from the Ministry of railways

and he further $led a complaint with the

CIC when his request for information

wasn’t furnished within the 30 days

mandate. ereaer his application was

transferred to Research designs and

standard organization, by the concerned

central public information officer. e

order passed by the central information

commissioner on 11th March, 2013,

which said that the informant must be

provided by the information and that

CPIO should be imposed with a $ne of

Rs. 25000 was challenged in the Delhi

HC. When the present petitioners had

sought a review of the aforesaid order,

CIC refused on the ground that it did

not have the power to review.

Justice Bakhru directed the CPIO to give

all the necessary information clearly stat‐

ing that it cannot escape liability by pass‐

ing information on the application to the

other officials. In the present case, Girish

Mittal had sought information regarding

the Garib Rath trains in all the zones.

CPIO was bound to provide the infor‐

mation and the petition was dismissed

with the said order.

Madras Bar Association V. Union of In‐

dia and another.

Sanjini jain: A landmark judgment was

given by Chief Justice of India, RM Lod‐

ha, Justice AK Sikri, Justice Khehar, and

Justice Chelameswar on 25th September,

2014 declaring the sections 5, 6, 7,8,13

of the National Tax Tribunal act uncon‐

stitutional. e aforesaid provisions of

the act which were declared to be uncon‐

stitutional by the apex court were the

foundations on which the national tax

tribunal act stood. e majority of the

judges were of the opinion that the par‐

liament doesn’t have the power to take

away the powers of the court and give it

to something that isn’t court by its very

nature.

is act gave the national tribunal the

power to decide on the questions per‐

taining to substantial law and this was

challenged by the Madras Bar Associa‐

tion and the others who had $led a peti‐

tion contending that the basic structure

of our constitution was being violated.

e power of judicial review vested in

the HC is being infringed by this act.

History of tax legislation in India was

discussed extensively in the 270 page

judgment given by the apex court.

e Supreme Court held that:

“i) e Parliament has the power to en‐

act legislation, and to vest adjudicatory

functions, earlier vested in the High

Court, with an alternative court/

tribunal. Exercise of such power by the

Parliament would not per se violate the

―basic structure‖ of the Constitution.

(ii) Recognized constitutional conven‐

tions pertaining to the Westminster

model, do not debar the legislating au‐

thority from enacting legislation to vest

adjudicatory functions, earlier vested in

a superior court, with an alternative

court/tribunal. Exercise of such power

by the Parliament would per se not vio‐

late any constitutional convention.

(iii) e ―basic structure‖ of the Con‐

stitution will stand violated, if while en‐

acting legislation pertaining to transfer

of judicial power, Parliament does not

ensure, that the newly created court/tri‐

bunal, conforms with the salient charac‐

teristics and standards, of the court

sought to be substituted.

(iv) Constitutional conventions, pertain‐

ing to constitutions styled on the West‐

minster model, will also stand breached,

if while enacting legislation, pertaining

to transfer of judicial power, conventions

and salient characteristics of the court

sought to be replaced, are not incorpo‐

rated in the court/ tribunal sought to be

created.

(v) e prayer made in Writ Petition (C)

No.621 of 2007 is declined. Company

Secretaries are held ineligible, for repre‐

senting a party to an appeal before the

NTT.

(vi) Examined on the touchstone of con‐

clusions (iii) and (iv) above, Sections 5,

6, 7, 8 and 13 of the NTT Act (to the ex‐

tent indicated hereinabove), are held

tobe unconstitutional. Since the afore‐

said provisions, constitute the edi$ce of

the NTT Act, and without these provi‐

sions the remaining provisions are ren‐

dered ineffective and inconsequential,

the entire enactment is declared uncon‐

stitutional.”

National tax tribunals were thought to

reduce the burdens on the high court

and this judgment has increased the bur‐

den on the high court’s already having a

large number of pending cases. National

Company Appellate Tribunal is also be‐

ing challenged in the Supreme Court re‐

garding its constitutional validity.

Nishita Golchha: Aer the NGO CPIL,

the petitioner in the 2G scam case and

also in news for the controversy regrind‐

ing the contents of the visitors register of

the CBI Director tendered an uncondi‐

tional apology to the SC, the apex court

agreed to hear NGO’s plea for recalling

its order by which it had directed that

name of whistle blower be revealed. e

NGO apologized to the SC for its inabili‐

ty to share the name of the whistle blow‐

er. e SC had also asked the Special

Public Prosecutor in the 2G case, Mr.

Anand Grover to assist the court in de‐

ciding the petition relating to the visitors

register of the CBI Director’s residence.

e court ordered that all the relevant

documents, including the CBI $le noting

and visitor’s register of the director’s resi‐

dence be given to the Special Public

Prosecutor.

However, the SC rejected the con‐

tentions made by the CBI director and

opined of Special Public Prosecutor has

to be considered as any order by it would

have implication in the 2G cases.


Denial of Sex to Husband Without A Reasonable Cause Would Amount to Mental Cruelty; can be A Ground Of

Divorce: SC

Uma Bharti Launches

Cleanliness Drive in Water Resources

Ministry

Disclaimer: Every sincere effort has been

made by the Trigger Times newspaper to

ensure that the information provided is

correct. Any mistake or omission is in‐

advertent and unintentional.

In case of complaints and other issues,

write to us at [email protected].

All claims, disputes or complaints are

subject to exclusive jurisdiction of

courts/forums/tribunals in Ahmedabad

only.

Editors and Team Trigger

1. Garvit Khandelwal (Chairman of

TT Media)

2. Siddharth Bapna (Deputy Chair‐

man and PR manager of TT Media)

3. Shalini Goyal (Secretary of TT

Media )

4. Tanvi Gadkari (HR manager of

TT Media)

5. Haardik Sharma (Joint Secretary

of TT Media)

6. Milap Chopra (Treasurer of TT

Media )

7. Karan Valecha (Joint Treasurer of

TT Media)

8. Nishita Golchha (Editor of TT

Media)

9. Sanjini Jain (Editor of TT Media)

Vidya Viswanathan V. Kartik Balakrish‐

nan

Sanjini Jain: e appeal in this case arose

out of a judgment passed by the Madras

HC in 2012 wherein the marriage be‐

tween the two parties was dissolved.

e appellant got married to the respon‐

dent in 2005. Subsequently, they went to

London and stayed there for eight

months since the husband had a job

there. ey returned to India in Decem‐

ber, 2005. e appellant returned back to

London though his wife did not accom‐

pany him inspite of the return ticket be‐

ing purchased for her by the husband.

e husband $led a petition under sec‐

tion 13(1) of the Hindu marriage act,

1955 for the dissolution of marriage on

13th September, 2008. e husband in

his petition had stated that he was mis‐

treated by his wife. She used to send e-

mails which were derogatory in nature

and also used to get violent at times.

Even aer making efforts to join his

company, wife didn’t respond and hence

the husband $led a petition for the dis‐

solution of marriage on the grounds of

cruelty before the family court of Chen‐

nai.

e wife however held that the marriage

could not be consummated because the

husband wanted to have kids brie#y aer

the marriage and denied the allegations

made by the husband.

e court ordered the husband to pay

Rs. 40 lakh as alimony since the wife

wasn’t working that time.

e principles laid down in Ghosh vs.

Jaya Ghosh (2007) 4 SCC 511, were reit‐

erated by the Apex court.

“No uniform standard can ever be laid

down for guidance, yet we deem it ap‐

propriate to enumerate some instances

of human behaviour which may be rele‐

vant in dealing with the cases of ‘mental

cruelty’. e instances indicated in the

succeeding paragraphs are only illustra‐

tive and not exhaustive.

(i) On consideration of complete matri‐

monial life of the parties, acute mental

pain, agony and suffering as would not

make possible for the parties to live with

each other could come within the broad

parameters of mental cruelty.

(ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the

entire matrimonial life of the parties, it

becomes abundantly clear that situation

is such that the wronged party cannot

reasonably be asked to put up with such

conduct and continue to live with other

party.

(iii) Mere coldness or lack of affection

cannot amount to cruelty, frequent rude‐

ness of language, petulance of manner,

indifference and neglect may reach such

a degree that it makes the married life

for the other spouse absolutely intolera‐

ble.

(iv) Mental cruelty is a state of mind.

e feeling of deep anguish, disappoint‐

ment, frustration in one spouse caused

by the conduct of other for a long time

may lead to mental cruelty.

(v) A sustained course of abusive and

humiliating treatment calculated to tor‐

ture, discommode or render miserable

life of the spouse.

(vi) Sustained unjusti$able conduct and

behaviour of one spouse actually affect‐

ing physical and mental health of the

other spouse. e treatment complained

of and the resultant danger or apprehen‐

sion must be very grave, substantial and

weighty.

(vii) Sustained reprehensible conduct,

studied neglect, indifference or total de‐

parture from the normal standard of

conjugal kindness causing injury to

mental health or deriving sadistic plea‐

sure can also amount to mental cruelty.

(viii) e conduct must be much more

than jealousy, sel$shness, possessiveness,

which causes unhappiness and dissatis‐

faction and emotional upset may not be

a ground for grant of divorce on the

ground of mental cruelty.

(ix) Mere trivial irritations, quarrels,

normal wear and tear of the married life

which happens in day to day life would

not be adequate for grant of divorce on

the ground of mental cruelty.

(x) e married life should be reviewed

as a whole and a few isolated instances

over a period of years will not amount to

cruelty. e ill-conduct must be persis‐

tent for a fairly lengthy period, where the

relationship has deteriorated to an extent

that because of the acts and behaviour of

a spouse, the wronged party $nds it ex‐

tremely difficult to live with the other

party any longer, may amount to mental

cruelty.

(xi) If a husband submits himself for an

operation of sterilization without medi‐

cal reasons and without the consent or

knowledge of his wife and similarly if the

wife undergoes vasectomy or abortion

without medical reason or without the

consent or knowledge of her husband,

such an act of the spouse may lead to

mental cruelty.

(xii) Unilateral decision of refusal to

have intercourse for considerable period

without there being any physical inca‐

pacity or valid reason may amount to

mental cruelty.

(xiii) Unilateral decision of either hus‐

band or wife aer marriage not to have

child from the marriage may amount to

cruelty.

(xiv) Where there has been a long period

of continuous separation, it may fairly be

concluded that the matrimonial bond is

beyond repair. e marriage becomes a

$ction though supported by a legal tie.

By refusing to sever that tie, the law in

such cases, does not serve the sanctity of

marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant

regard for the feelings and emotions of

the parties. In such like situations, it may

lead to mental cruelty.

Dissolution of marriage on the grounds

of denying sexual intercourse without

valid reason would amount to mental

cruelty and Supreme Court maintained

it to be a ground for divorce.

Soure: Press Information Bureau

Union Minister for Water Resources,

River Development and Ganga Rejuve‐

nation Sushri Uma Bharti launched a

special cleanliness drive as part of the

Swachh Bharat Ahbiyan in her Ministry

on September 27, 2014. Senior officials

and staff of the Ministry joined the Min‐

ister with full enthusiasm in the drive

which was carried out in Shram Shakti

Bhawan.

Speaking on the occasion the Minister

said that with the support of the people

and the Media the message of cleanness

will reach every nook and corner of the

country. She said, “ “If I do this on regu‐

lar basis, then may be the other people

will start doing it naturally. Some people

may start doing it out of shame and

some others might realise that it is their

duty."

Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, will

launch the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan on

October 02, 2014.


PM during his tour to US

Justice HL Dattu

Swatchh Bharat Abhiyan

launched in Rashtrapati

Bhavan

PM's Meeting with

Distinguished Indian

Americans

DID YOU KNOW ??

R.M. Lodha Passes e Baton To Contentious

H.L. Dattu


A group of 10 distinguished Indian

Americans called on the Prime Minister,

Shri Narendra Modi, on September 27,

2014.

e Prime Minister urged them to share

their views on the development of India.

e Indian-Americans mentioned clarity

of decision-making, ease of doing busi‐

ness, skill development and strong uni‐

versity-industry links as some of the im‐

portant areas that needed to be focused

on. ey praised initiatives such as Digi‐

tal India and the Swachh Bharat Ab‐

hiyaan.

In the course of conversation, the Prime

Minister referred to his Government’s

recent initiatives. He mentioned the

“Make in India” initiative, and said it

would lay emphasis on ease of doing

business. He said that investors need a

sense of security and con$dence in the

economy. He referred to the raising of

FDI limits in defence and railways, and

said that investors must realize that FDI

also stands for “First Develop India.” e

Prime Minister also referred to the Digi‐

tal India and Skill India initiatives.

e group said they would like to inter‐

act with the Prime Minister in future as

well. e Prime Minister urged them to

share their ideas on the MyGov platform

– MyGov.in

1. In California, It is illegal for a sec‐

retary to be alone in a room with her

boss.

2. Interracial marriage was still ille‐

gal in Alabama in 2000.

3. Since 1986, US authorities have

had the legal right to access any 180-day

old email, without a warrant.

4. In Saudi Arabia, there is no mini‐

mum age for marriage. In 2008, a Saudi

court refused an 8-year-old girl, who

asked for a divorce from her 58-year-old

husband.

5. e only two states where divorce

is illegal are the Philippines and e Vat‐

ican.


e Swatchh Bharat Abhiyan was

launched in Rashtrapati Bhavan on

September 27, 2014 with all officers and

staff, including those from President’s

Bodyguard, Army Guard and Delhi Po‐

lice undertaking a cleanliness drive with‐

in the President’s Estate.

Around 35 officers and 2000 employees

of the President’s Secretariat led by Sec‐

retary to the President, Ms. Omita Paul

took part in cleanliness initiatives in

three different sections of Rashtrapati

Bhavan. e weekend of September 27

and 28, 2014 has been declared working

days for all officers and staff. e cleanli‐

ness drive will continue till October 2,

2014 (Gandhi Jayanti).

On account of Puja, President Pranab

Mukherjee would be at his ancestral

home in Mirati, West Bengal on Gandhi

Jayanti. He will pay homage to the father

of the nation by garlanding a portrait of

Mahatma Gandhi in the Kirnahar Shib

Chandra High School, Kirnahar, District

Birbhum. He will also mark the day by

#agging off a cleanliness drive by chil‐

dren belonging to the local school.

TT bureau: In the midst of the contro‐

versial National Judicial Appointment

Bill, the appointment of new Chief Jus‐

tice of India, by recommendation of the

former Chief Justice R M Lodha is a his‐

torical event. is would be last such ap‐

pointment, henceforth which, appoint‐

ment of judges would proceed with in

accordance with the NJAC.

28th September 2014, Sunday becomes a

day to observe such historical momen‐

tum; wherein, Justice H.L. Dattu was

sworn in as the new Chief Justice of In‐

dia. He succeeds RM Lodha, who demit‐

ted the office on 27th September, 2014.

Justice Dattu, was administered the oath

of office by President Pranab Mukherjee.

He is the 42nd Chief Justice of India and

will be at the helms of the Indian Judi‐

ciary till December 2, 2015.

Handyala Lakshminarayanaswamy Dat‐

tu was born on 3rd December, 1950. He

is born and brought up in Handihal, Bel‐

lary district, Karnataka. He is also a for‐

mer Chief Justice of Kerala High Court

and Chattisgarh High Court.

Showcasing a high pro$le career, Justice

Dattu has been elevated at different posts

at different period of times. He was en‐

rolled as an advocate on 23rd October,

1975. He practiced at Bangalore in civil,

criminal, constitutional and taxation

matters. Chief Justice Dattu appeared as

government counsel in the Karnataka

high court for the sales tax department

from 1983 to 1990, government advo‐

cate from 1990 to 1993, standing counsel

for the income tax department from

1992 to 1993 and a senior standing

counsel for the IT department from

1993 to 1995.

He was thereby, appointed a judge of the

Karnataka High Court on December 18,

1995. ereaer, he was elevated as

Chief Justice of Chhattisgarh High Court

on February 12, 2007. ree months lat‐

er on May 18, 2007, he was transferred

to head the Kerala High Court. Appoint‐

ment as the Chief Justice of India, the

most respected post in the country has

been his highest achievement so far.

e pompous oath ceremony, which was

held in Darbar Hall of Rashtrapati Bha‐

van was attended by Vice President

Hamid Ansari, former deputy Prime

Minister L.K. Advani, Home Minister

Rajnath Singh, Urban Development

minister Venkaiah Naidu, outgoing

Chief Justice RM Lodha and Justice AS

Anand as well as other seated and retired

judges.

He has been a public $gure since long.

e cases taken up by him in near past

has been signi$cant. e memories of

his public and private visit to Goa from

September 30- October 3, 2011 while he

stayed at Taj Vivanta in Panaji are still

afresh in public memory. His contribu‐

tion towards environment protection

and evolution of concept of ‘$nality of

judgment’ through the case of Indian

Council for Enviro Legal Action v/s

Union of India & Ors. is of prominent

importance.

He had been in limelight for putting a

stay on the sentence of Kohli, in a widely

agitated Nithari Hatyakand case. He has

also headed the Supreme Court bench

for conducting the hearings of CBI chief

Ranjit Sinha. Justice Dattu was widely

appraised when he, accompanied by Jus‐

tice RM Lodha had decided that Justice

Ganguly was involved in the sexual ha‐

rassment case against a law intern and

the panel indicted resignation of retired

judge Justice AK Ganguly from his post

of being a chairman of West Bengal Hu‐

man Rights Commission in December

2012.

Justice Dattu has portrayed an example

of rule of law as well as of supremacy of

law. We look forward for his signi$cant

contributions towards the upliing and

spreading of peace and justice in our so‐

ciety.


Powered By e Knowledge Steez

Webinar on “Governing

Global Climate Change: Issues, Challenges and

Resolutions”

JCSL: Research Associate

Programme (Volume II)

Call For Papers : International Seminar Celebrating Multiple

Identities In India

Consumers India Invites Applications

for Autumn Batch Of Internship Programme

From October 18, 2014 To November 30,

2014

Call for papers for vol. 18 (2013-2014)

of the Spanish yearbook of

international law (SYBIL)

Adhrit Foundation’s

Campus Ambassador

Program

Events for Law Students

e Call for Papers for Vol. 18

(2013-2014) of the Spanish Yearbook of

International Law (SYbIL), in now open.

Manuscripts dealing with any topic of

interest in the $eld of Public and Private

International Law and International Re‐

lations should be submitted to the edi‐

t o r s b y 3 1 O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4 . e

manuscripts shall conform to the Style

Guide of the SYbIL (available here) and

must be submitted to the Editor’s ad‐

dress at [email protected]. Fully aware of

the paramount importance of interna‐

tional practice, the Yearbook publishes

contributions in English from active

practitioners of international law on a

regular basis. e Yearbook also includes

critical comments on Spanish State prac‐

tice relating to international and EU law,

as well as international reactions to that

practice. e General Articles section

gives authors an opportunity to submit

original manuscripts (15,000-18,000

words) on a broad range of topics in in‐

ternational law and international rela‐

t i o n s . e L I N K i s h t t p : / /

con#icto#aws.net/2014/spanish-year‐

book-of-international-law-call-for-pa‐

pers/ .

Only law students (LL.B/LL.M/Ph.D

(Law) or Legal Professionals) are eligible

to apply. Candidates willing to apply for

the Research Associate position shall

forward their Resume along with 1 sam‐

ple write up on any of the above given

areas of law. It is requested write your

write up in your own words and don’t

copy from other sources as it is. Interest‐

ed candidates shall apply online

t o r a p @ j c s l . c o . i n a n d

[email protected] (Arti‐

cles should be sent on both the email-id

compulsory). Last date for Application:

31/10/2014

Disclaimer: e information provided

within this page is provided by the orga‐

nization knowledge Steez (www.knowl‐

edgesteez.com). TRIGGER TIMES is

not responsible for the accuracy, com‐

pleteness,suitability, or validity of any in‐

formation on this page.

e Seminar welcomes presentations

and discourses around themes of diversi‐

ty, pluralism and multiculturalism which

endow India to celebrate its multiple

identities. Feel free to take up any theme

which you might consider relevant to the

spirit of the Seminar. We would appreci‐

ate if the title of your presentation and

abstract is communicated to semi‐

[email protected] by 15 October

2014. LINK : http://www.bhu.ac.in/sem‐

inar/sep2014/eme.pdf.

Consumers India Invites Applications

for Autumn Batch Of Internship Pro‐

gramme From October 18, 2014 To

November 30, 2014

Consumers India has taken up several

important campaigns with a view to

safeguard interests of large number of

consumers. Some of them relate to ‘Un‐

ethical Medical Practices’, ‘Misleading

Ads’, ‘Ageing with Dignity’, ‘Access to Af‐

f o r d a b l e M e d i c i n e s ’, ‘ R i g h t t o

Information’, ‘Justice for all…Just Now’,

‘I am a city changer’, ‘Junk the junk food’,

‘Hazards of Electronic Waste’ etc. Fur‐

ther details may be seen on the following

B l o g : h t t p : / /

drjayashreegupta.blogspot.in/. ‘Intern‐

ship’ programme was launched by Con‐

sumers India for students pursuing high‐

er education on 15th September, 2012

and eight batches have since completed

their internship successfully. ey have

studied important consumer issues un‐

der the able guidance of experienced

mentors. Several issues, highlighted by

interns in their studies, have been taken

up with the concerned authorities at the

highest level. Details of studies under‐

taken by interns so far may be seen on

the following link:http://drjayashreegup‐

ta.blogspot.in/2013/02/studies-conduct‐

ed-by-interns.html.

ose interested in joining this pro‐

gramme may note the above schedule

and email their application in prescribed

format, which is given below at the earli‐

est (Not later than October 7, 2014) to

[email protected]

e Date is 7th October, 2014 and the

timing is 5-6.30 PM. All participants will

be given a “Certi$cate of participation”

aer the webinar. ose interested may

send a mail to [email protected].

Prospective participants from all disci‐

plinary backgrounds are encouraged to

take part. Questions/comments from the

audience would be welcome aer all the

speakers have $nished.

Campus Ambassadors will serve as liai‐

son between Adhrit Foundation and

your campus. ey will be required to

promote the aims/objectives and build

awareness about Adhrit Foundation via

Social Media Marketing, organizing

awareness campaigns, Guest Lectures,

newsletters, etc. ey will also be re‐

quired to approach various Institutes/

Schools/ Organizations for the tie-up

and support/funding purpose.

Add Adhrit Campus Ambassador Pro‐

gram experience to your resume. To ap‐

ply, visit : https://docs.google.com/

forms/d/1YOpvqNrrhguDxWqEb‐

JUw4AujM4vki18i2ZI7YDTGjd8/view‐

form .Last date to apply: 15th October,

2014. To know more about Adhrit Foun‐

dation, kindly visit: www.adhrit.in. For

any queries, kindly drop us email at

[email protected].


Upcoming Campus of DSNLU

Law School CoverageDamodaram Sanjivayya National

Law University

If you want to see your law school here, Please

mail us at milapchopra@legaltrig

ger. com.

e DSNLU, Vishakhapatnam, was es‐

tablished under the Andhra Pradesh

University of Law Bill, 2008, has been a

prime institution in terms of providing

legal education in the state of Andhra

Pradesh. e University commenced its

academic activity from the academic

year 2009-10 by offering 5 Year Integrat‐

ed B.A.LL.B (Hons.), Ph.D and LL.D

programs. From the academic year

2010-11, the admission into 5 year Inte‐

grated B.A.LL.B (Hons.) program is

through CLAT merit order and invites

students from all across the nation.

e object of the Damodaram Sanji‐

vayya National Law University is not just

to impart legal education in India, but to

focus on overall development of its stu‐

dents and to focus on various cultural

activities and to shape the students ac‐

cording the needs and desires of their ca‐

pabilities.

With growing importance for quality le‐

gal education, various national law

schools acquired lot of importance. To

meet the requirements of students of this

State, the Government of Andhra

Pradesh decided to establish a new Law

University and as per the decision of the

Council of Ministers meeting held on

30-06-2008 the Governor of Andhra

Pradesh promulgated the Andhra

Pradesh University of Law Ordinance,

2008 on 8th July 2008. Subsequently the

cabinet on 04-08-2008 approved Andhra

Pradesh University of Law Bill, 2008, re‐

placing the Ordinance and this Bill was

passed by the State Legislature on 28th

August 2008 and became an Act aer the

same was assented to by the Governor

on 23rd September 2008. us A.P. Uni‐

versity of Law came into existence with

Visakhapatnam as Main Campus and

two branches at Kadapa and Nizamabad.

Further Andhra Pradesh University of

Law” name changed as “Damodaram

Sanjivayya National Law University”

vide Andhra Pradesh University of Law

(Amendment) Act, 2012 (Act No. 15 of

2012) published in the Andhra Pradesh

Gazette Extraordinary dated 14th May

2012. e Government of Andhra

Pradesh has noti$ed vide G.O. Ms. No.

63 dated 22-5-2012 that the 22nd Day of

May 2012 is the date on which the provi‐

sions of the said Act shall come into

force.

Infrastructure

e University is in the process of con‐

structing state of art and eco-friendly

campus at Asakpalli, Sabbavaram.

Presently, the University functions from

the campus situated in the MVP Colony,

Vishakhapatnam which is a fully air con‐

ditioned leased premises. e students

are provided with world class library in‐

cluding online databases and access to

WiFi and LAN facility.

Library

e institute has its own library and pro‐

vides almost all the necessary books

needed for their legal and literary

studies. e Library also provides access

to several online databases such as, on‐

line access to Cambridge books Manu‐

patra, Hein Online, JSTOR etc. to its stu‐

dents. e Library has a decent collec‐

tion of literary books and books related

to the subjects of law.

Placement Cell

e college has their active placement

cell that aims at inviting law $rms for

campus interview and recruitments. e

Placement cell has been working effec‐

tively in terms of providing necessary in‐

formation and guidance to its students

regarding their internships at various

levels, which would further help them

for their interests and recruitment in the

later stage.

Events/Curricular

e College has been organizing various

activities both on the curricular and the

academics side to impart an overall de‐

velopment of the students. e college

h a s i t s P a r l i a m e n t a r y d e b a t e

competition, ‘Vakta’, September 2014,

which invited a healthy participation of

the students interested in debating. e

college recently also organized its lecture

series on, ‘Dynamics of criminal Justice

System’, having Hon. Mr. Sudhanshu Jy‐

oti Mukhopadhyaya as the chair of the

lecture. e lecture was also organized in

the month of September.

e college also has its functioning com‐

mittees such as the literary and legal aid

committee. Up till now, the college has

shown a very healthy participation at

various events organized at various col‐

leges in India. Recently the DSNLU team

was the runner up at the 6th Symbiosis

B. Krishna Memorial National IPR Moot

Court Competition, held in February,

2014, many further events are there

where DSNL has bagged a record.

Mission Magalyaan Possible!! · 2014-09-29 · proud, Mangalyaan entered the Mars or‐ bit creating history in the words of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In November 2013, various

Documents