Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Case can be re-opened: Govt

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Government today did not rule out re-investigation into the Jessica Lal murder case after members in both Houses of Parliament made a vociferous demand for retrial, and expressing concern over the acquittal of all the nine accused in the sensational case.
    "As the law exists today, no person should be tried twice in any case...Supreme Court has ordered reinvestigation in some cases and it has become a kind of law also for us. It can be followed," Home Minister Shivraj Patil told the Rajya Sabha during the Zero Hour responding to the agitated members.
    "The matter of this kind is taken up and very rightly taken up on the floor of the House," he said, adding, instead of blaming anybody "we should go to the very root and find out who is really responsible and whatever" in the case.
    He was responding to the demand of agitated members led by CPI-M member Brinda Karat, who wanted to know if the Home Minister would order a time-bound re-investigation into this case and punishment to all the police and other officials involved. She said it has become a "symbol of injustice" and there is national outrage.
    "Whatever is possible as per law to see that justice should be done will be done. Let there be no doubt," Home Minister Shivraj Patil said.
    Noting that the Delhi High Court has suo motu taken cognisance of the matter, he said the court has asked police to look into it.
    Patil said "we would certainly like to see that justice is done in the matter. Whatever is possible, as per the law, will be done by the government. Let there be no doubt about it."
    Observing that the Delhi Police would give its report as per the High Court order, Patil said "whatever can be done in this matter as per the ruling given by the Supreme Court or as per the decision given by the High Court or as per the existing law, we will certainly do it".
    On protecting the witnesses, Patil said the proposed Communal Harmony Bill has specific provisions to provide protection to the witnesses and the government was keen that such provision was incorporated into the criminal procedure code also.
    In the Lok Sabha, Parliamentary Affairs Minister P R Dasmunsi told members that the concern of the House would  be communicated to the Home Minister and "accordingly, we shall act".
    Dasmunsi stated this after members said the acquittal was a "glaring example of miscarriage of justice... justice is being denied in the capital of the country".
    They also wanted government to stop the elevation of the sessions judge, who had delivered the verdict, to the High Court.

    Jessica Lal- Only supreme court will decide.By: hindbloger | 20-Jun-2009 Reply | Forward Case will never be opened- readers here we are talking about MANU who is coming from elite family of not only CHANDIGARH but also linked with ex- President of India. Just see that a girl is raped in mumbai and faSTtraCK COURT is set-up but for Jessica, there is good more than 10 years timepass and Manu once again proved that if you have money and comes from elite class- you have law in your pocket.
    Harmful EmployersBy: S | 16-Jun-2009 Reply | Forward In recent years number of software companies in our cities are on a rise. Many of these companies are started by NRIs returning from the U S of A and would have been educated in premier institutions. Because of need of jobs, many of us are allured to join these companies. Some of these employers and management of these companies turn out to be very harmful and get the employers attacked by their own people. I wouldnt want to elaborate on this further, however my advice to software professionals looking for jobs especially during time of recession, please be careful if you are thinking of joining any of these shops setup in recent years.
    Rural banking By: Sudarshan | 03-May-2009 Reply | Forward Swipe card, withdraw money: bank at villagers’ doorstep Sudarshan Borpatragohain Posted: May 01, 2009 at 0145 hrs IST Pune: Shivaji Gulab Dhegre, 22, owner of a small paan shop in Ghotawade village in Mulshi Taluka, 30 km from Pune, has never had a bank account. With just enough income to make both ends meet, he never thought of opening one. Now, Financial Information Network and Operations (FINO), a Mumbai-based Biometric-enabled smart card solutions provider, along with the State Bank of India (SBI), is making an unprecedented offer to Dhegre and the 2,000-odd inhabitants of the village, mostly farmers and workers at nearby factories: a bank account (without a passbook), where they can deposit an amount as low as Rs 10. What would be of more interest to the villagers is that they would not have to go to the bank to deposit or withdraw money. The bank would reach their doorstep. “The accountholder is provided a biometric smart card, which has personal information and fingerprint details. When the accountholder needs to withdraw or deposit money, all he/she needs is to do is swipe the card on a special machine called the Point of Transfer (POT) machine, and enter the PIN number. All agents of FINO, who go door-to-door, carry the machine,” Ashish Rath, a management trainee with FINO, who is looking after the company’s ground operations in Ghotawade, says. The maximum that can be deposited is Rs 50,000. If a customer deposits an amount over the limit, his account is upgraded to the main SBI branch. Kanhaiya Lal, a factory worker, who is set to open an account, says, “Even if you have a regular bank account, it makes sense to open this account, because the nearest SBI branch is at Pirangut, 8 km away, and the nearest ATM is at Hinjewadi, 25 km away.” The account opening is simple. All one has to do is provide the name, address and the amount of land one owns, if any. Minimal paperwork, or extra documents are asked for. Having started operations in Pune district two months back, the company has 4,500 customers in four talukas, Rajgurunagar, Mulshi, Daund, and Ambegaon, says Sachin Bhahiti, FINO’s district co-ordinator. The first batch of 60 customers got their smart cards at Rajgurunagar last Wednesday. Bhahiti hopes to enroll 2 lakh customers across the district in the next eight months. Rishi Gupta, Chief Financial Officer, FINO adds, “We have a customer base of 5.5 million across the country. We expect Pune region to add to that substantially.”
    A COUNTRY WITHOUT NATYIONALITYBy: RAJU | 19-Mar-2009 Reply | Forward It appears to be the widely accepted and official position that India and therefore Indians have no nationality. What they have, according to written word and how that word has been taken to mean, is merely citizenship of India. Because the part II of the Constitution of India bears the heading ‘Citizenship’ and everywhere in the entire text of the supreme statute any reference made to an Indian (to whom else pray tell me, the reference would be, in the Constitution?) has been made, the word used is ‘person’. That the word ‘Indian’, which denotes our identity and our nationality is missing from the title, the preamble and the rest of the text of the Constitution has been taken to mean the Indians do not exist in there own country! You only hear of Indians when they feature in news from abroad. As if this state of affairs were not dismal enough, none in a country of a billion plus seems to have read Art9 of the Constitution. According to it any person who voluntarily acquires citizenship of a foreign state shall not be a citizen of India. Those very writers, who considered that a person acquiring foreign citizenship would be loyal to his adopted country and therefore his loyalty to his own country must extinguish in law and who had memories of foreign rule very fresh in their minds, could not have been remiss in making provisions that ensure and keep the foreigners out of the Constitutional framework. And they have indeed not been so. Having included Art9, they went about laying down the Qualification Ratings for the President and Vice President, assuming that the relevant portions will be applicable to other Constitutional posts. Art58 reads (1) No person shall be eligible for election as President, unless (a) he is a citizen of India. (The other QRs are not relevant to this topic). An elementary knowledge of English language makes it clear that this is meant to be a disabling piece of legislation intended to prevent a certain category of people from ever becoming President and as a corollary from occupying any Constitutional post. Who are the people who constitute this category? The writers of the Constitution must have intended to prevent certain mischief by inserting this provision. What was that mischief? Can it be anything other than outsiders or foreigners that were meant to be kept out? If the answer to this question, for a moment is assumed to be negative, then it will become necessary to add the words ‘anywhere in the world’ after ‘No person’ in Art 58 and elsewhere. In actual fact that is how our eminent jurists have been reading these particular provisions of the Constitution for last one decade. How else one would have seen Mr Jyoti Basu in that May month of year 2004, roaring on the TV screen “Show me one article of the Constitution that says She cannot become PM.”(Meaning of course the Congress president) The genesis of the entire issue lies in the English language, which actually is a foreign language, but nobody considers it as one. There is nothing wrong in doing so, as it has been the language of law in this country for over 200years. But the trouble starts when the basics of the language are not understood by those who are supposed to be Constitutional experts. For instance, everyone refers to it as the Indian Constitution and that should indeed have been its title, but that is not the title that Dr Ambedkar and his companions gave it. They named it as ‘The Constitution of India.’ Then the Preamble reads ‘We, the people of India…’ What kind of usage is this? ‘We the people’ is a term employed while the forum is a world body. The correct wording would be ‘We, the Indians’ of course, the final nail in the proverbial coffin of our nationality comes in the form of Part II of the Constitution. It bears the heading ‘Citizenship’. The content makes it evident that entire part was added to cover the post-partition situation. Otherwise the native does not require a citizenship in the country of his birth. He automatically acquires a nationality that also means citizenship. In any case, the writers of the Constitution had left it to the parliament to enact a Citizenship Act. (Art 11). It is obvious that the very purpose of enacting Indian Citizenship Act was to lay down the provisions to deal with the foreigners who take up residence and citizenship here. Even if the provisions are to be applied as written in the Constitution strictly, then also the term ‘citizen of India’ cannot be taken to include those who do not find a mention in Part II of the Constitution, because doing so will be ultra vires. And if there is any doubt that the aforesaid is not the case, please note what the PM told Mr Bush-“People of India love you.” Again the people of India, not the Indians. Jai Hind.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.