Refugee ban granted by US Supreme Court

By the decision of lower court and the justice department, 24,000 additional refugees, who were granted an allowance to enter the US before October, were banned due to Supreme Court Justices grant on Tuesday, September 12, 2017. This was done on the basis of a request from the Trump administration block.

On March 6, 2017, US President Donald Trump had signed a revised order banning travelers and refugees from six Muslim majority countries, namely, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, for 90 days and 120 days respectively. Trump claimed that the reason for this ban was to prevent terrorists. Though there had been no definite information regarding the permanence or the expansion of the limit of the ban.

As the Lower Courts argued that this ban goes against the constitution and feudal immigration law, the High Court agreed to look into the matter, but did not came up with anything constructive. After the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, it has been decided that, people having authentic relationships with legal US residents or with entities in the US, will be exempted from the travel ban. But, nothing has been specified about the refugee allowance.

As reported by Reuters, senior director of campaigns, Naureen Shah of Amnesty International of USA said, “The Supreme Court today had dealt yet another devastating blow to vulnerable people who were on the cusp of obtaining safety for themselves and their families. They continue to be subjected to unimaginable violence and fear while their lives are in limbo.”

Sourced from Reuters and Al jazeera

 

SC lifts ban on Firecrackers in Delhi-NCR region

The Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted the ban on the sale of fire crackers in Delhi and the NCR region for coming time but also passed a verdict that number of licensed sellers should not exceed 500. The License will be issued by Delhi Police to shopkeepers after fulfilling the desired criterion.

The apex Court also added that there will no fire crackers in the silence zones and has also demanded a detailed report on the same by the eight members constituted committee chaired by the chairperson of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The report will be of the health hazards of pollution caused by the fire crackers in the coming festive season.

The earlier order of Supreme court of banning firecrackers in Delhi and NCR region was challenged by The firecracker association and they were joined by the total of 100 fire cracker companies.

Supreme Court also ordered that fire crackers cannot be brought in Delhi-NCR from another states giving the argument of adverse effects of chemicals on humans and their effort to keep it minimum.

Last year, the air quality of Delhi became poisonous after Diwali Celebrations on October 30, 2016. Thick smog was formed all over and schools were closed for 3 days. An environmental emergency was imposed on Delhi, Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and the apex court banned the sale of fire careackers in Delhi-NCR on November 25, 2016.

Sources: ANI, Scroll.in

SC orders Jaypee Associates to pay Rs 2,000 crores in insolvency case

On September 11, Supreme Court ordered real estate firm Jaypee Infratech, an arm of Jaiprakash Associates Limited to deposit 2000 crore, in relation to an insolvency case. Jaypee Infratech has defaulted on Rs. 526.11 crore of loans outstanding to IDBI Bank Ltd. It is one of the 12 large corporates that the Reserve Bank of India has pushed into the insolvency court under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

The apex court has also restricted the managing director and chief executive of Jaypee Infratech and Jaypee Associates from leaving the country and has asked the conglomerate to seek permission before selling any property. Additionally, SC has dismissed proceedings against the real estate company in other forums like Consumer Commission.

Furthermore, the court has asked the Interim Resolution Professional, a body set up by the National Company Law Tribunal, to take over the management of Jaypee Infratech. As per the report in Money Control, around 32,000 homebuyers, who have not yet been given their flats as promised by Jaypee, are facing uncertainty over their investment in housing projects due to the insolvency case.

The next hearing has been set for November 13.

Source: Money Control, Business Standard

Image Source: Hindustan Times

Supreme Court orders Jaypee Associates to pay 2000 crores in insolvency case 

 

On September 11, Supreme Court ordered real estate firm Jaypee Associates to deposit 2000 crore, in relation to the insolvency case against Jaypee Infratech. The next hearing has been set for November 13.

Jaypee Infratech, which is a subordinate of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. has defaulted on Rs. 526.11 crore of loans outstanding to IDBI Bank Ltd.  It is one of the 12 large corporates that the Reserve Bank of India has pushed into the insolvency court under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

The Court has also restricted the managing director and chief executive of Jaypee Infratech and Jaypee Associates from leaving the country and has asked JP Associates to seek permission before selling any property. Additionally, SC has dismissed proceedings against the real estate company in other forums like Consumer Commission.

Furthermore, the court has asked the Interim Resolution Professional, a body set up by the National Company Law Tribunal, to take over the management of Jaypee Infratech.

As per the report in Money Control, around 32,000 homebuyers, who have not yet been given their flats as promised by Jaypee, are facing uncertainty over their investment in housing projects due to the insolvency case.

Sources: Business Standard and Money Control  

100 Indian Army personnel move to SC over discrimination

Over 100 Indian Army personnel have moved to the Supreme Court, alleging discrepancies in the promotion of officers of the services corps. The issue has come to light just days after Nirmala Sitharaman took over as the nation’s new Defence Minister.

As per the report in Times of India, the officers stated in the petition, “This act of Army and Union Government has created tremendous injustice to them and others which are detrimental to the morale of the officers and, in turn, to the defence of the country.”

In a joint petition, the group of lieutenant colonels and majors affirmed that despite services corps officers being stationed in operational areas and facing issues similar to combat arms corps officers, they are being deprived of promotions, which are available to officers of combat arms. Expressing their disappointment over this discrimination, the petitioners said that this inequality is affecting the morale of officers who have dedicated their service to Indian army for 10-15 years.

In February 2016, the apex court of India settled an earlier petition, wherein services corps officers complained of in adequate allocation of Colonel posts for promotion. However, the officers have stated that this time they are challenging the partial treatment, without questioning the court’s 2016 judgement.

 

Sources: TOI, Zee News

Talaq, Privacy and Dhongi Baba: Justice has been served

The Indian Judiciary has restored the country’s confidence by passing three milestone judgements.

Within the span of seven days, the judiciary delivered three notable decisions in three cases that held the nation’s attention. On August 22, 2017, the Supreme Court struck down the Instant Triple Talaq practice, on August 24, 2017, it announced that Right to Privacy IS a Fundamental Right. To top it all, the CBI court in Panchkula indicted self-styled God-man, Gurmeet Ram Rahim in for the rape of two girls.

The landmark judgement against Instant Talaq, was a much-awaited ruling in favour of Muslim women all across India. A special bench heard the case, comprising Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice RF Nariman, Justice UU Lalit, and Justice Abdul Nazeer, headed by Chief Justice JS Khehar. This decision did ruffle a few patriarchal feathers, but gave women the rights they they are to enjoy under the constitution.

This was not the only Democratic decision passed by the SC. Despite the current Government’s clear-cut saying that ‘Citizens do not have absolute right over their bodies’, the Court ruled that Right to Privacy is a Fundamental Right, thereby giving people of the country the right over their lives and bodies.

The case was heard by Chief Justice JS Khehar, Justice J Chelameswar, Justice SA Bobde, Justice RK Agrawal, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice S Abdul Nazeer.

 

This judgment was steps ahead of the previous verdicts announced in the cases of MP Sharma (1958) and Kharak Singh (1961). These cases were similar as they discussed in length that the Indian Constitution does not protect an individual’s right to privacy.

The Dera Sacha Sauda Chief, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh was convicted of rape, despite the 20,000 protestors standing by him outside the court. The supporters of this ‘Baba’, set public and private property on fire, causing the deaths of 29 people and injuring over 250.

On August 28, 2017, Gurmeet Ram Rahim was sentenced to 20 years in prison, 10 years for each of the two rapes committed.

These judgments bring much-needed sense of hope and justice to India.

 

Right to privacy becomes Fundamental

With a landmark judgement on Thursday, the Supreme Court rule that privacy is a fundamental right. The judgement added that this right is important because of its intrinsic nature to all the other fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution. This order affects 134 crore Indians, especially the ones who have their Aadhar number in the system. However, this judgement is currently not required to make the decision regarding Aadhar.

The apex court’s nine judges ruled that ‘Right to Privacy is an integral part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constituion’, according to FirstPost. There have been previous judgements regarding the case. The current nine member bench overruled the judgement of the previous eight member bench in the MP Sharma case and the earlier six member bench in the Kharak Singh case.

According to The Economic Times, one of the judges, Justice Chandrachud said, “The purpose of infusing a right with a constitutional element is precisely to provide it a sense of immunity from popular opinion and, as its reflection, from legislative annulment. Constitutionally protected rights embody the liberal belief that personal liberties of the individual are so sacrosanct that it is necessary to ensconce them in a protective shell that places them beyond the pale of ordinary legislation. To negate a constitutional right on the ground that there is an available statutory protection is to invert constitutional theory”.

In the matter of the Aadhar card and the details of the citizens in the system, the hearing for the case was put on hold after the government rejected the opposition’s points against its nature. The current ruling government blames the previous one for bringing Aadhaar into the system without drawing lines and making rules.

The ruling cleared up doubts that the new fundamental right is just recognised now but has always been inherently in place due to the Fundamental Right to Life and Liberty and privacy being an intricate part of it. In the statement provided by the judges, the right to privacy is essentially the right to private space by an individual. however, all the conditions and loopholes with this fundamental right has not been released yet. The ruling however, did clarify the threshold of pervasiveness which can exist. This clarification is very important as it makes it clear to the public regarding their rights and not give into any authority’s rules.

This judgement has opened doors to decriminalise homosexuality. The judges’ report recommended to to bring down section 377. Justice Chandrachud wrote that even though the LGBTQ community is a minority in the country, it doesn’t mean that they do not deserve their dignity of privacy with regard to their sexual orientation.

In a week with many major judgements passed, the Indian judiciary has proven to be an example for liberty. However, only time will tell on how the right to privacy will be exercised by civilians as well as the government.

Sourced from India Times and FirstPost