LAW
Supreme Court
On Financial Facilities for the Riot Affected
Harjit Singh v. Union of India.
Article 14- Bank loans to riot victims - Reduction in Interest rate - Government/Reserve Bank of India directed to extend benefit to those victims who obtained loan from other financial Institutions - Spirit of circular is to benefit riot victims No discrimination.
A tragic event beyond belief in the history of India took place on 31st October, 1984 when Smt. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister was assassinated. The inflamed feelings resulted in the breaking out of riots, large scale arson, looting, systematic violence, and attacks on Gurudwaras. Many families became homeless, lost their kith and kin and bread-winners. Government agencies subsequently went about assessing damage and providing of aid to the affected persons etc. for resettlement. Accordingly, petitioners were provided with loans from banks which would subsequently be converted into grants so that they could start life afresh.
Contrary to the assurances banks started initiating processes for recovery of the amounts advanced.
This step by the Banks, petitioners allege, would render them destitutes. The right to livelihood is part of right to live.
As regards the discrimination with regard to reduction of interest rate to riot victims this is a human problem. Humanity is above law. The petitioners are in plightful state. To them, the language of humanity must be spoken.
The benefit of the circular will have to be extended vis-a-vis, the loans advanced by the financial institutions, having regard to the circumstances in which the petitioners are placed. The spirit of the circular is to help the petitioners. Therefore, it could hardly matter whether loans are from the Banks or financial institutions. To us, it appears, the failure to refer to the financial institutions, is an inadvertent omission. The prayer is just and reasonable. Accordingly, the Court directs the Union of India as also the Reserve Bank of India to include all financial institutions in the definition of 'banks' both. State and Central - in its 'Central Interest Subsidy Scheme for November, 1984 Riots Affected Borrowers'.
(Source: AIR 1994, Supreme Court 1433).
It is as if the Government is saying, if you want to become a Hindu, we have something for you. If you want to become a Muslim or a Buddhist, we will give you something. But if you want to become a Christian, sorry.
Bishop Vincent Concessao,
Convener, National Coordination Committee for
SC Christians in The Asian Age
Supreme Court On Complete Justice
In re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (the alleged contemner)
KULDIP SINGH, J.S. VERMA AND P.B. SAWANT, JJ.
Constitution of India, Articles 142, 129 - Powers of Supreme Court under Article 142(1) Cannot be diluted by statutory provisions.
The jurisdiction and powers of Supreme Court (SC) under Article 142 which are supplementary in nature and are provided to do complete justice in any matter, are independent of the jurisdiction and powers of the SC under Article 129 which cannot be trammeled in any way by any statutory provision including the provisions of the Advocates Act or the Contempt of Courts Act. The Advocates Act has nothing to do with the contempt jurisdiction of the court including of the SC and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 being a statute cannot denude, restrict or limit the powers of the Supreme Court to take action for contempt under Article 129. It is not disputed that suspension of the advocate from practice and his removal from the State roll of advocates are both punishments. There is no restriction or limitation on the nature of punishment that the SC may award while exercising its contempt jurisdiction and the said punishments can be the punishments the Court may impose while exercising the said jurisdiction.
(Source: AIR 1995, Supreme Court 2348)
Press Council Reprimands 12 Papers
The Press Council of India has reprimanded 12 newspapers published in various languages for violating journalistic ethics and other guidelines... The newspapers Ernakulam, Dopehar Ka Saamna, Saamna, The Daily, include Nakkheeran of Madras, Rashtra Deepika of Suvvy, Nav Shakti, Samachar all published from Mumbai, Sandesh of Ahmedabad and Gharrahat of Aurangabad.
Dopehar Ka Saamna was reprimanded for publishing. news items blemished by obvious overtones. The newspaper did not verify the facts from the complainant, CID, of Mumbai before publishing an exaggerated figure the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Special Branch (1). of casualties and arrests of Muslims.
(1), In the complaint moved by the DCP, Special Branch CID, Mumbai against Saamna, a Marathi daily. regarding publication of an editorial titled "Shaitancha Sukravar", the Council was of the view that the writings had offended the sensibilities of the Muslim community and had the effect of creating the two communities.
The Daily failed to observe the council's guidelines while publishing a front-page news item 'Street namaz on December 6. At any cost in its issue of 24 No., 1993. The Council noted that the news item was published without checking the facts and that the clarification. issued by the Raza Academy was published in a remote. corner without any expression of regrets/apology.
