thelegalleopard

[thelegalleopard]

Explained: Are New Farm Bills Anti-Farmer? All You Need To Know

On Sunday the Parliament gave nod to three farm Bills by passing them in Rajya Sabha. The three Bills – The Farmers (Empowerment & Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, The Essential Commodities Act (Amendment) Bill and Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill – will now become a law as soon as President Ram Nath Kovind gives his assent.

For better understanding let’s peak into the bills and their major points of contentions.

1. The Farmers (Empowerment & Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill: It draws a framework for contract farming agreement between farmers and buyer before sowing of a crop and for dispute settlement prescribes three level mechanisms – the conciliation board, sub-divisional magistrate and appellate authority. However, the points of contention are:

a) Under this law it’s not mandatory for a company to make a written contract with the farmer for any contract farming. So, even if the company violates the terms of the contract, the farmer cannot prove it.

b) It does not have any provision to penalize companies which do not register their contracts. For eg: Last year, Potato farmers from Gujarat witnessed a big issue where Pepsico attempted to penalize potato farmers for growing the same seed varieties. The farmer organizations finally had to knock on the doors of the court and agitate to get justice.

c) Bill does not prescribe or specify that contract price of the crop should be at least equivalent or above the MSP. It means the contractor/companies can pay whatever price they want to the farmer. India’s experience of the contract farming has been poor with farmers getting very low rates through contract farming as compared to selling it in government mandis on MSPs (Minimum Support Price).

2. The Essential Commodities Act (Amendment) Bill: It empowers the Central government to regulate food items in extraordinary circumstances or impose stock limits if there is a steep price rise. However, the points of contention are:

2. The Essential Commodities Act (Amendment) Bill: It empowers the Central government to regulate food items in extraordinary circumstances or impose stock limits if there is a steep price rise. However, the points of contention are:

a) Till now only farmers, farmer cooperatives and Farmer Producer Organisations didn’t have any limit or restriction for stocking, producing or selling their crop. As a result, they take conscious decision of selling their crops only when the market or the buyer is offering good price for the crop. So, under this bill the farmers are not getting any new freedom. On the contrary the government is now removing all the foodstuffs from this category allowing companies and traders to store as much quantity of food as they want which amounts to promoting hoarding.

b) Through this Amendment the government is giving up its power to prevent hoarding and controlling price inflation. According to the law, government can intervene only if there is 50% price rise over previous year’s price in case of non-perishable goods and 100% price rise over previous year’s perishable goods.

3. Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill: It allows intra-state and inter-state trade of farmers produce beyond the physical premises of Agricultural Produce and Livestock Market Committee (APMC) markets. State will be now prohibited from levying any market fees or cess outside APMC areas.

a) The government says that now the farmers will have freedom to sell to anyone. Under the bill, the agri-business companies, corporate and traders will be allowed to open their own markets to purchase from farmers. However, the biggest fear coming from this is that it will destroy the level playing field between the APMC markets and other traders. Under the bill, the trade outside the APMC Mandis is virtually unregulated.

b) Farmers were demanding that in case the government is allowing, new set of farm markets to come up; the state and local government should be given power to oversee their functioning and also regulate them. However, the demand has been ignored.

c) Presently if the farmers feel the traders/corporate/agents working inside the APMC Mandis are involved in any unfair practices, they could complaint to the APMC Officers located in the yard itself. However, with the new Bill, in case of any disputes, farmers would be required to go to a sub-divisional magistrate court – which is beyond the capacity of small farmers to pursue given their financial constraints.

[thelegalleopard]

10 Big Questions About UP Encounter, Former Top Cop Suspects It To Be 'Staged'

1. Why did Dubey travel over 750 km to find a crowded place to surrender?

“The man was on the run for nearly a week. For nearly a week, they didn’t have any information about him. Then he surfaced in Ujjain and surrendered in a cool manner. What does this indicate? Why did he go there? One logic for going to a public place is that he cannot be killed in a fake encounter in a crowded place. But the question is why did he travel more than 750 km from his village to find a crowded place?

2. Is Dubey's surrender a deal gone wrong?

Asthana says that Dubey could have surrendered anywhere in Delhi, but it looks to him as part of a deal.

“He could have surrendered anywhere in Delhi... He could have gone to a mall where he wouldn’t have been killed. Apparently, there could have been a deal that if you surrender, your life will be spared. And in return, you keep mum during the trial about the nexus. It’s a win-win situation for both parties. After that, it seems that they have betrayed him. It’s a case of betrayal,” he says.

3. How come only the car carrying Dubey overturned amid the convoy?

Asthana raises suspicion over the manner in which the story was woven by the police.

“How can you believe the theory that in a cavalcade of nearly a dozen vehicles, only his car was turned? The other vehicles were not affected at all... Did you observe the ground next to the part of the road? If any vehicle skids there, there will be tire marks. There is not a single tire mark there. A vehicle skids only if it goes at high speed... If it skids also, it will drag for some time. The visuals and videos are very much there... There is no skid mark and damage to the car. Even the headlights are not damaged. And the wipers are running... The doors are closed,” he said.

4. Six people in the car but how come none could hold Dubey back?

The police said that Dubey snatched a gun from an injured policeman and opened fire, so the police were forced to fire back. Asthana questions this theory too.

“There were six people in the car. Only one man managed to scramble out of the car and others are dazed so that couldn’t drag him back. How is it possible?"

5. How could he run when there were 50 policemen around?

"They are saying he injured police personnel. A man who is believed to have two rods implanted in his legs and if you observe the scene, it’s a flat field...and he is not a fit man and he has a pronounced paunch also. How could he run when there are 50 policemen around?" Asks Asthana.

6. Why were the cops' weapons not secured?

Asthana also points out that since Punjab insurgency days; the rules say that cops must secure their weapons by lanyards. "Why it wasn’t done?” he asks.

7. Why wasn't he handcuffed?

The former top cop also asks why Dubey wasn’t handcuffed, as dangerous criminals should be according to rules. "Most importantly, a dangerous criminal, a violent criminal should have been in handcuffs... It’s unbelievable!" he says.

8. Dubey ran, exchanged fire with police and was shot at... How was his mask still on?

“If police claims Dubey is shot on pelvis why is there blood on the chest?" Asthana asks. "He scrambled out of the car, ran some distance, and exchanged fire with the police and was shot at... The surprising thing is still his mask was on!"

9. Why were cars stopped behind the police convoy?

"Why vehicles were stopped behind the police convoy?" Asks the former Kerala DGP referring to reports of media vehicles being stopped ahead of the site where the encounter will eventually take place.

“The media is saying that those who were following the car were stopped two or three kilometers behind... Why so? Why was it done?"

10. Why is there an eerie similarity between the killing of Dubey and his aide?

Asthana says “Yesterday, Dubey’s accomplice Prabhat Misra was killed in a similar fashion... In his case also, the story was that he snatched the weapon and then he was shot..."

[thelegalleopard]

The constitutional validity of "SUICIDE": IPC 309

Q- Who can be booked under Section 309 IPC? What punishment does it carry? Why is it there to begin with?

Anyone who survives an attempted suicide can be booked under Section 309 IPC, which deals with “Attempt to commit suicide”.

The section reads: “Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offense, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year (or with fine, or with both)”.

The law, brought in by the British in the 19th century, reflected the thinking of the time when killing or attempting to kill oneself was considered a crime against the state, as well as against religion.

Q- But wasn’t Section 309 repealed a few years back?

No. The section continues to remain in the IPC. What has happened though, is that The Mental Healthcare Act (MHCA), 2017, which came into force in July 2018, has significantly reduced the scope for the use of Section 309 IPC — and made the attempt to commit suicide punishable only as an exception.

Section 115(1) of The MHCA says: “Notwithstanding anything contained in section 309 of the Indian Penal Code any person who attempts to commit suicide shall be presumed, unless proved otherwise, to have severe stress and shall not be tried and punished under the said Code.”

Section 115(2) says that “The appropriate Government shall have a duty to provide care, treatment, and rehabilitation to a person, having severe stress and who attempted to commit suicide, to reduce the risk of recurrence of attempt to commit suicide.”

Q- But this seems as good as repealed, even if the section does continue to be in the IPC?

Not quite. The restrictions put on the use of this section under the provisions of the MHCA — as opposed to it being removed from the statute all together — do not seem to be enough simply because of continued reports of its use by police forces across the country.

In one recent example, on June 8, a runaway couple allegedly attempted suicide at Ashoknagar police station in Bengaluru by consuming hair dye. Local media reported that they were booked under Section 309. Again, on May 20, an inmate at Gurgaon’s Bhondsi jail who had allegedly tried to kill himself with a pair of scissors was reported to have been booked under Section 309 IPC.

Several senior police officers said that on many occasions, there is a lack of awareness among officers at the level of the police station about the relatively new MHCA, and they simply go by the IPC. However, the charge under Section 309 is often dropped subsequently, following consultations with senior officers, said Harsh Poddar, Superintendent of Police, Beed.

[thelegalleopard]

INVESTIGATION: 

Police officials and

Any third person whom the magistrate will direct to do the investigation can conduct the same.

As per various judgments of various High Courts as well as the Law Commission of India, the Magistrate will always remain to keep an eye on each step of the Investigation and advancement in any case. Sir provided for the judgment of Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP (2007), where the Supreme Court upheld that a Magistrate cannot monitor an investigation, but, one can move an application so that there can be no gross negligence on part of the Police.

Steps in an Investigation –

Registration of an FIR

Recording statements of the witnesses

Search

Seizure

Arrest of the Accussed

Seiure of the weapon of the offence

Preparing the charge-sheet and filing before the Magistrate

Post the above stated, the enquiry or trial begins before the Magistrate.

FIRST INFORMATION REPORT –

Sir provided for the provision of Section 154 of the CrPC, which deals with the FIR. He defines an FIR as, “whenever a cognizable offence has been committed by anyone, then the victim/aggrieved will go to the police station where he will either narrate the story to the police official orally or a written complaint will be given to the Police officials. This will be converted into an FIR by the Police official with the signature of the victim (after it is read over and admitted to be correct).”

Section 154 further states that if the Station House officer (SHO) refuses to register the FIR, the alternative that is provided is that the victim can post the complaint to the concerned DCP or Superintendent of Police so that he can take necessary action against the same by starting the investigation himself or by directing the SHO to start the investigation. Further, an e-FIR can also be filed online which will then go to the crime branch from where the necessary PS will have to take action regarding the same.

OBJECTIVES AND IMPORTANCE OF AN FIR –

An FIR is such a document where one must provide truly or nearby truly all the facts and details of everything that has happened, as an FIR is a very important document in any investigation. Though various Courts have stated that an FIR is not an Encyclopedia and not all facts must be disclosed in the FIR, FIR is a very important document and one MUST give all the details in the FIR as much as is possible. Because, the defense lawyer can use a little bit omission against the victim as a contradiction. Therefore, all the details that the victim has at that time must be provided in the FIR.

For instance, in a case there were four accused but the victim has stated in the complaint that there were three people A, B and C which is recorded and FIR is filed. Later when the statement is given under Section 161 CrPC and there are four names that are given, the same is called improvisation of statement which can be used by the defense counsel during the trial which will create a doubt on the prosecution that this is an after-thought created in the mind of the victim to implicate the new person D in a false case.

In the case of Kapoor Singh Rana v. State of Delhi (2005), the star witness who was the mother of the victim provided all the details in the statement but did not provide the details of the accused as he was the boyfriend of the victim who poured acid on the victim. This created chaos in the case of the prosecution. In light of this, Section 162 provides that any substantive omission of information of the witness will amount to contradiction in the case. Therefore, every detail must be provided during the filing of an FIR and “no spoon should be left unturned”.

REGISTRATION OF AN FIR

An FIR can be registered only in the case of cognizable offences under Section 154 and in case of non-cognizable offences; there will be NCR (Non Cognizable Report) which is registered by the Police under Section 155. In the case of Lalitha Kumari v. Govt of UP (2014), the Supreme Court clearly provided that in cognizable offences police officials are duty bound to register the FIR except in the case of commercial disputes, matrimonial disputes and others.

FIR can be registered as per Jurisdiction in such a Jurisdiction where the offence had been committed by the accused. But, there is a provisio of Zero FIR. Zero FIR as “If an offence has taken place in one place and the person filing the FIR is in another place and he/she wants to provide such information in such a police station where they are, the police is duty bound to record the statement or complaint so that they can lodge a Zero-FIR on the same.” After the same, the case should be sent to the concerned police station for further investigation. The same was held in the landmark case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. Punati Ramula (1993).

MULTIPLE FIRs and CROSS FIRs

Cross FIRs are basically when one incident has been committed and both the parties to the said incident lodge an FIR against each other, the same is called a Cross FIR. In this case, the Police Officers look into both the cases and act appropriately as needed in the investigation.

Multiple FIRs have two inherent issues to understand which an example was provided –

In case an offence takes place and the victim is bought to the hospital in Mukherjee Nagar where the Police also arrive and take the statement of the victim, converting it into an FIR. Post this, the parents of the victim arrive and shift the victim to Defense Colony where he is in a critical condition. The parents call the Police and provide for another FIR to be filed/ registered with the names of the accused in Defense Colony. Thereafter, the victim is taken back to his residence in GKOne where the victim dies as a consequence of the offence. Another new FIR is filed by the Police in GKOne with the statement of the parents stating that A, B and C have committed the murder of their child. In light of this, there are Multiple FIRs in connection to the same offence in different stations.

With regard to this issue of whether multiple FIRs can run against one accused, the Supreme Court has clearly provided in good judgment that if the facts of the FIRs are different then they will sustain and run as separate cases with different charge-sheets. The same has been reiterated in the case of Shiv Shankar Singh v. State of Bihar (2011). But if the facts are the same, then the accused can approach the High Court under Section 482 CrPC and the High Court will quash all the FIRs, except the first one.  This has been provided in the cases of TT Anthony v. State of Kerala (2001), Mohd. Yusuf v. Afaq Jahan and Anr (2006) as well as Rameshchandra Nandalal Parikh v. State of Gujrat (2006). These cases can be looked into for clear understanding of the concept of Multiple FIRs.

WHEN DOES THE INVESTIGATION START

The investigation can be started before the registration of the FIR, as soon as one knows about the cognizable offence that has taken place. Excise Act and the Arms Act are two cases in which the investigation usually begins without the registration of an FIR. As soon as any illegal weapons are recovered by the Police Officials, the investigation will start from that very moment. The accused is apprehended, the weapon is seized and then the information is provided in the Police Station. Similarly, once an accused is stopped with illicit liquor, the investigation starts from then. As soon as this happens, the IO is called for and then the Ruqa is sent by the constable to the concerned Police Station where the FIR comes into being.

The straight jacket formula for acquittal in the cases dealing with Arms Act and Excise Act –

Once an accused is found with illicit weapon/liquor, the information has to be immediately sent to the Police Station. The DD Entry of such information is not usually maintained and the case of the prosecution starts to crumble here.

The Police officer conducting the recovery, later on also conducts the investigation which is very fatal to the case of the prosecution. No one person can be the informant as well as the IO of the case.

Once the illicit material is found and sealed, the seal is to be handed over for which a memo has to be made as per the law, so that tampering cannot be done by the officer. This seal handing over and taking back memos are not done by the Police Officers. They further do not make a public witness, DD entry. These are the faults that are committed.

CONSEQUENCES OF DELAYING AN FIR

Delay in lodging an FIR can be fatal to the case overall. However, in certain cases like rape, sexual offences the delay is not fatal to the case of the prosecution and is justified. The same was provided for in the case of State of Punjab v. Gurmeet Singh (1996) as well as State of Himachal Pradesh v. Srikanth Shikri (2004).

In a practical experience the girl filed for a rape petition after two years of the incident when they were in a relationship together, and the boy did not give her money and such incidents. Sir believes that there is no sanctity in such a case as there is no evidence that can be collected. In his experience, these judgments are not be blindly followed as there is no practical application of the same and hence, a delay in filing the FIR is fatal to the case of the prosecution.

SECTION 156-159

Section 156 refers to the power of the SHO to investigate cognizable cases without the order of the Magistrate. Thereafter, as soon as any information is made known to the SHO Section 157 comes into play where the occurrence report has to be made, as he is duty bound to do the same. As soon as such a report is made by the SHO he must make the Magistrate aware of the same within a reasonable period of time and the Magistrate can take action against the officer if he fails to do so.

Section 159 comes into play when the FIR is registered but the officer sees no merit in the same and files for closure of the same case. Then, once the Magistrate looks into the contents of the FIR they can give orders to the SHO to take action in the said case. This is the privileged power of the Magistrate itself. The Magistrate can also depute a Sub-ordinate Magistrate to do the preliminary enquiry on it and handover the same to an MM so that appropriate action can be taken.

The landmark judgments in this regard include – State of Kerala v. Nilachandran (2009); Shivlal and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh (2011) as well as the case of SN Sharma v. Vipin Kumar Tiwari (1970)

Section 156(3) is a very important facet that must be discussed as it deals with the measures that can be taken up, if Police officials are not taking the victim’s case. A copy of the complaint must be sent to the SP or the DSP and then a complain under Section 156(3) should be filed before the Magistrate read with Section 200 CrPC. Two things must be proven in order to prove the complaint to the Magistrate –

That an investigation is required in the complaint that has been made.

Complainant cannot bring the evidence himself. If there is no evidence that the complainant is able to produce himself, then the Magistrate will pass the order under Section 156(3).

It is important to note that a judge cannot file an FIR against a government official unless prior approval from the concerned department has been bought forward by the complainant as in the case of Anil Kumar v. Appa (2010).

Before 2008, the Magistrate was a part to register the FIR under Section 482. However after the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of State of UP the MM is also given the power to order regarding the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3).  The case also clarified that the victim can approach the court under Section 156(3) if there is gross negligence in the process of investigation. In this same manner, the same has been given in the case of Babu Bai v. State. In furtherance, a revision can also be filed as in the case of Nishu Wadhwa v. Siddharth Gupta (2018). 

The real issue rises as to whether a revision can be filed after the judge gives an order for the filing of the FIR. There is no landmark judgment on this basis or it is still pending in the apex court of law. The other area where there is a vacuum in law with regard to Section 156 is when the petition has been dismissed and a revision is filed. Then lawyers will misuse the same to state that such a petition has been filed only to harass the defendant. Then the accused must engage a lawyer to defend in him in the revision unlike in the MM Court where there is no need for the same. This is a vacuum that has not been filed by the courts yet.

In the case of Radha v State (2011), Justice Gambhir has clarified that if the MM feels that there is a valid case and the victim is unable to bring in evidence, then he must call for the report within 3-5 days and cannot order for the same in 2 months or any such amount of time.

IMPORTANT POINTS -

Whether a child can lodge an FIR?

If a child can be a competent witness under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, then he can lodge an FIR.

Whether an FIR is a public document or a privileged document?

FIR is a public document.

Whether everything in an FIR can be considered to be genuine or genuine evidence?

No, one cannot presume the genuinity of the FIR as per Section 80 of the Indian Evidence Act. The same has to be proven during the course of the prosecution.

Evidentiary value of an FIR –

FIR is not substantive evidence and cannot be used as substantive evidence.

How can we use an FIR and what is the purpose of an FIR?

FIR can become the primary evidence under few conditions, like in –

Dying Declaration where the complainant dies after giving the complaint. This FIR becomes the Dying Declaration as per Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act and can be considered as primary evidence.

If there is any form discovery based on the FIR, then as per Section 27 of the IEA, this can become primary.

Thereafter, under Section 21 of the IEA admission/ self-incriminating statements can also fall under this purview.

FIR can be used in the process of a trial by the prosecution by providing corroboratory evidence under Section 157 IEA. Further, under Section 159 of the Act the victim can refresh his memory. In the same manner, the defense can cross-examine and contradict the statement of the complainant by under Section 145 of the Act.

Whether an FIR can be registered against a public servant?

Yes, this can be done. However, cognizance cannot be taken against the public servant without permission from appropriate authority. In reality, there is preliminary enquiry that is conducted regarding the same so as to avoid defamation of the servant by the SHO.

Why is there a notion that an accused cannot approach the Court under Section 1576(3)?

As the police, the chief investigating agency in the country has the same notion regarding the accused the same is carried forward. Further, the accused cannot carry forward this as the power according to the courts is that of monitoring the investigation. The Courts often forget that a fair trial is a right of every accused as well as the case of Audi alteram partum.

What are the practical remedies that are available to a person if the police officer files in a diluted FIR as opposed to the facts provided?

If the Police Officer tries to dilute the FIR then you can move to the DCP and make the complaint. Further a lesser known remedy is to move the NHRC as this is a Human Right of a person that is being violated. The NHRC will seek necessary action against the same. Moving to an MM is also a viable option that will then be strict with the police officials and take necessary action.

What is the difference between an FIR and a Charge sheet?

An FIR is the very first information that is received and the charge sheet is the complete case that is filed by the Police officer to the MM. The Charge Sheet contains the FIR, statement of the witness, Arrest Memo, Seizure Memos, Expert Notices, Bank Notices and others will all be complied to make a charge sheet.

Can an e-FIR be filed in all cases?

Yes it can be filed in all cases. It is mainly used in those cases where the accused is un-known to the complainant.

Can Zero FIR be used as evidence? Is the certificate under Section 65B necessary under Zero FIR? How effective is the zero FIR in comparison to the FIR?

Yes, both normal FIRs and Zero-FIRs have the same value. They are not substantive evidence and only under certain above mentioned sections can it be used as evidence similar to a normal FIR. It is important to understand that an FIR and zero FIR are the same as once the zero FIR is sent to the concerned PS it becomes a normal FIR.

What is the remedy available to the accused if the documents given by the accused have not been included in the charge sheet?

If the accused documents are not included then, the Magistrate is duty bound to include the same at the time of the charge.

What will happen if it is found be a non-cognizable offence during the time of investigation but has been registered as a cognizable offence?

The Explanation of Section 2(d) CrPC provides that if a charge sheet has been filed in the MM based on the investigation carried out as a cognizable offence but is later understood as a cognizable offence, and then the charge sheet is treated as a complaint by the Magistrate.

Can private persons be a part of investigations?

Yes, private persons can be a part of the investigation with the direction of the Magistrate. Section 2(h) provides the Magistrate with such a power.

Where the offence is tried – residence of the person or the place of incident?

Section 177-189 (Jurisdiction), the trial continues in the place of the incident. But there are cases where the consequence of the case in another place, then the jurisdiction includes both the places and the case can be tried anywhere. If an offence takes place on a train, the jurisdiction of the case comes along across every point in the train.

If an FIR is registered regarding a certain offence and there is no mention of the same in the charge-sheet then what are the consequences of such an FIR?

As one case is converted into another based on the change in the facts of the case, there are no specific consequences. However, there should not be much discrepancy between the charge-sheet and the FIR that is filed. Offences can be added on based on the investigation but it must in the course of the same.

If a case under Section 156(3) is pending before court, can an FIR still be filed based on the same?

An FIR can still be filed and there is no bar on the same. If the SHO believes that it is a cognizable offence then, rather than filing the Action Taken Report, a copy of the FIR can be bought in.

How valid is an investigation taken up the relatives of the victim?

The investigation is valid, relevant and admissible the Evidence Act also provides for the same. Any form of evidence from any investigation is valid and admissible.

Can an FIR be filed by way of a telephone or SMS?

Strictly from the perspective of the essentials of an FIR, this cannot be done. However, if it is taken as ‘first’ information then it is always given on the 100 number. This is provided that the information is not cryptic and a cognizable offence is clearly understood. The SHO or 100 number can be called and the information can be converted into an FIR. As a DD (Daily Dairy) Entry is made on the call, the FIR will be registered based on the same.

What is Rukka?

It is basically the information given to the DO and contains all the details regarding the incident including the witness and the other important information that may be relevant to decide the FIR as well as the IO for the case.

In trivial cases like phone robbery, as the police does not take action even after registering the complaint, is there any remedy for the same?

One can file Section 156(3) for fair investigation and the Court will request for the updates on the same. But the police cannot do much more than put the phone on tracking and search a limited area in light of the same.

Is it a right of the complainant to get a copy of the FIR? Is it mandatory to be signed by the SHO and complainant?

Section 154 provides that as soon as an FIR is lodged, the complainant must be given to the complainant free of cost. As far as the signs are concerned, the Stamp of the PS is put on the copy that is given meaning that it is a certified copy.

What is your advice to young lawyers who want to pursue criminal law and what are the methods a female can take up for career in criminal law?

The gender of the person does not matter in the pursuance of Criminal Law. The only point is to be thorough with the cases and statues by putting in necessary hard work. Every statue and law has to be thoroughly read through and not skimmed to be able to become established in this field.

After the MeToo and the Bois Locker Room incident, there was no FIR filed but cognizance is taken. If the victims do not come forward and the State has to take the matters, how does this proceed? How is evidence gathered in such cases?

The Criminal Jurisprudence is very clear regarding this; a crime is not an offence against an individual but is against the society at large, the duty of the law enforcers is to ensure that the error is made right with suo-motu cognizance. The evidence will be collected and can be submitted at any given stage. Additionally, one can also proceed using circumstantial evidence in the lack of other evidence. With regard to the evidence, the investigation is the prerogative of the police and how they get evidence. As lawyers one must only fight the case in a court of law.

Can an FIR be filed after a cognizable offence has been proven after 10 years due to a consumer court proceeding?

Information can be given at any given point in time as it is a cognizable offence, information can be given at any time and there is no limitation regarding the same. The delay in the FIR can be explained in any manner by the complainant.

[thelegalleopard]

"How can you object to what people watch on TV?" Supreme Court observes while granting Prashant Bhushan protection from arrest for two weeks

The Supreme Court today granted Advocate Prashant Bhushan two weeks' protection from arrest in relation to an FIR filed against him for allegedly hurting religious sentiments.

The Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and Sanjiv Khanna was hearing a plea filed by Bhushan seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him in Rajkot, Gujarat for “hurting Hindu religious sentiments” by using objectionable language against the Ramayana and the Mahabharata being telecast on Doordarshan.

Bhushan had made comments on Twitter against Union Minister Prakash Javadekar, who tweeted a picture of himself watching the Ramayana serial amidst the national lockdown.

While hearing the plea today, Justice Bhushan observed that no one can direct anyone to watch something on TV.

“Anybody can watch anything on TV. How can you say people cannot watch this and that?"

To this, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Bhushan, said,

“It was not about people watching TV, but the FIR in question.”

Ultimately, the Bench issued notice to the State of Gujarat, which is required to reply within two weeks. Till then the Court has ordered that “no coercive action" is to be taken against Bhushan.

The plea filed through Advocate Kamini Jaiswal states that no offence is made out against Bhushan prima facie, and that the FIR amounts to an infringement of his fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.

Bhushan further stated in his plea that his retweets were valid criticism of the government, and that it cannot be termed as an offence under Section 505 (1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the act of creating alarm or fear to the public inducing them to commit an offence against public tranquility.

Even before this, Prashant Bhushan has hurt Hindu Religious Sentiments many times.

You will remember that even before that he had made an objectionable tweet on Lord Krishna, after which he himself apologized to the whole country and said that my mother has also put photos of Shri Krishna in my house.

[thelegalleopard]

No communal Angel in Palghar Lynching Case ❓ Know the full story of Palghar Lynching Truths .

The hand of CPI(M) in the heinous Palghar lynching of Hindu saints has now emerged. The 5 main accused are said to be activists of the CPI(M). These activists are Jairam Dhak Bhavar from Divashi Gadagpada village, Mahesh Sitaram Rawate from Kinhavali Khoripada, Ganesh Devaji Rao from Divashi Wakipada, Ramdas Rupji Asare from Divashi Sathepada and Sunil Somaji Rawate from Divashi Patilpada village.

On Thursday night, Sushil Giri Maharaj (35), Maharaj Kalpavriksha Giri (70) and driver Nilesh Telgade (30) were lynched to death by a mob while they were on their way to attend the funeral of their Guru Mahant Ram Giri Maharaj at Mumbai.

It is now suspected that the mob was instigated by CPI(M) leaders and the entire incident was a pre-planned conspiracy. The area where the lynching happened is a hotbed of Christian missionary activity who is accused of poisoning the tribals in the area to further their agenda. A lot of religions conversions have happened over the years in this area abetted by the Christian missionaries.

The police had placed all three people in a safe forest post when suddenly a mob arrived at the spot, allegedly at the behest of the leaders of CPI(M) , and attacked the three with sticks as the police remained mute spectators. All the 110 people who have been arrested are all workers of the CPM and those who are absconding too are workers of the CPI(M).

Shiraz Balsara, the head of an NGO named Kashtakari which has links with the Christian missionaries is working to arrange for the bail of those arrested and are in the custody of the police. It is now being alleged that the local CPI(M)MLA Comrade Vinod Bhiva Nikole is the brain behind this incident.

The VHP too has demanded a high-level probe into the involvement of Leftists in palghar mob lynching and had pointed to the ongoing Left activities in the area.

[thelegalleopard]

How India lost behind many countries in the battle of CoronaVirus due to Tablighi Jamaat?

(Analysis: The Legal Leopards)

Coronavirus cases in India took 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000.

Cases in India took 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000, only 4 of the other 19 countries saw a slower doubling rate, 3 more countries saw the same growth in 6 days, and 12 countries saw cases doubling in less than 6 days.

1-For the first phase doubling (750 to 1500) the case count in India took 5 days this was longer than in any other country.

Comparatively countries such as Iran 🇮🇷, Spain 🇪🇸, and Turkey 🇹🇷, took only 1 day double in this range.

2-The second phase of growth in India (1500 to 3000) India had jumped to the middle of the pack, with cases in seven countries growing slower than in India, and those in 12 countries growing either faster or in the same number of day three, The countries where doubling rates in a phase were longer than India's are: UK, Austria, Portugal, Russia, Netherlands, Brazil and Ireland which witnessed the slowest growth, with the rise from 1500 to 3000 cases, taking six days,

3-The Third phase doubling( 3000 to 6000 ) the case count in India took 5 days, apart from Ireland 🇮🇪 where doubling rate took 8 days, all the other countries saw this phase of doubling takin either less time than or the same time as in India. In Spain, 🇪🇸 it took only one day.

4- In the final phase of growth cases in India took six days to Double 6000 to 12000, wherein Israel 🇮🇱 it took 13 days, in Austria, 🇦🇹 it took 10 days.

In the first phase of coronavirus case in India, it takes a total of 5 days for the coronavirus to be 750 to 1500, due to the negligence by the Tablighi Jamaat, it takes only 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000.

Today, India would have won the victory of the war of virus, but India has gone backwards due to the Tablighi Jamat, it could have been that today we would have been living a normal life and Lockdown would have been ended.

Source - John Hopkins University database

[thelegalleopard]

How India lost behind many countries in the battle of CoronaVirus due to Tablighi Jamaat?

(Analysis)

Coronavirus cases in India took 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000.

Cases in India took 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000, only 4 of the other 19 countries saw a slower doubling rate, 3 more countries saw the same growth in 6 days, and 12 countries saw cases doubling in less than 6 days.

1-For the first phase doubling (750 to 1500) the case count in India took 5 days this was longer than in any other country.

Comparatively countries such as Iran 🇮🇷, Spain 🇪🇸, and Turkey 🇹🇷, took only 1 day double in this range.

2-The second phase of growth in India (1500 to 3000) India had jumped to the middle of the pack, with cases in seven countries growing slower than in India, and those in 12 countries growing either faster or in the same number of day three, The countries where doubling rates in a phase were longer than India's are: UK, Austria, Portugal, Russia, Netherlands, Brazil and Ireland which witnessed the slowest growth, with the rise from 1500 to 3000 cases, taking six days,

3-The Third phase doubling( 3000 to 6000 ) the case count in India took 5 days, apart from Ireland 🇮🇪 where doubling rate took 8 days, all the other countries saw this phase of doubling takin either less time than or the same time as in India. In Spain, 🇪🇸 it took only one day.

4- In the final phase of growth cases in India took six days to Double 6000 to 12000, wherein Israel 🇮🇱 it took 13 days, in Austria, 🇦🇹 it took 10 days.

In the first phase of coronavirus case in India, it takes a total of 5 days for the coronavirus to be 750 to 1500, due to the negligence by the Tablighi Jamaat, it takes only 6 days to double from 6000 to 12000.

Today, India would have won the victory of the war of virus, but India has gone backwards due to the Tablighi Jamat, it could have been that today we would have been living a normal life and Lockdown would have been ended.

Source - John Hopkins University database

[thelegalleopard]

Johnson & Johnson will have 600-800 million coronavirus vaccines by 2021.

Johnson & Johnson says it aims to have more than half a billion coronavirus vaccines ready early next year.

The pharmaceutical giant will have 600 million to 800 million vaccines available in early 2021, when it expects the US government to approve the drug it plans to start testing in humans this September, chief financial officer Joe Wolk said Tuesday.

“The timeline still is pretty certain,” Wolk told Yahoo Finance in an interview. “We’re manufacturing at risk to ensure that should the clinical development and the trials be successful, we are in a position to kind of flip the switch and ready to go to create great access across the globe.”