Babri Masjid case became weaker as CBI did not probe Pakistan’s role in demolition: Special Judge!

News Network
October 1, 2020

babri.JPG

Lucknow, Oct 1: A special court here has said the Central Bureau of Investigation did not probe on an “information” that people from Pakistan intelligence agency may have also entered and damaged Babri Masjid in Ayodhya to foment communal disturbances in the country.

Special Judge S K Yadav referred to inconsistencies in testimonies of several prosecution witnesses while holding that the charge of criminal conspiracy to demolish the structure and other charges were not proved against 32 high-profile accused in the case.

In the 2,300 page-long verdict written in Hindi, the judge said the CBI case became weaker or "forceless" in view of the fact that it did not probe and ruled out the Pakistan angle to the demolition to make the criminal conspiracy charge stand the judicial scrutiny. 

The special CBI judge observed this on Wednesday in the judgement while acquitting the accused, including veteran BJP leaders L K Advani and M M Joshi, of conspiring to raze the structure among other charges.

The court said the CBI's allegations against the accused persons "become forceless also because it did not investigate a report sent by Local Intelligence Unit (LIU) on December 5, 1992, that on December 6, 1992, some persons from Pakistani intelligence agencies may cause damage to the disputed structure after merging with the local crowd".

It noted that there were local intelligence reports that on December 2, 1992, itself some 'mazaar' (shrine) were broken and set on fire by persons from the Muslim community with an aim to vitiate the communal atmosphere so that 'kar seva' may be interrupted.

It cited an LIU report, which was signed by Inspector General (security), Uttar Pradesh, that said "persons related to Pakistani intelligence agencies have merged with the masses in Ayodhya and they may create unrest in the state and the country by damaging the disputed structure with explosives and other means".

The court also noted that there were reports that explosives originated from Pakistan had reached Ayodhya via Delhi, while another intelligence report had warned the administration that "about 100 persons, including anti-social/anti-national elements, from Udhampur area of Jammu and Kashmir are coming to Ayodhya in the garb of kar sevaks."

The reports were received by authorities concerned and acted upon, the court observed.

"This information was sent to Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, and the state's all security agencies were informed about the same in written form. "Despite having such crucial information, these aspects were not investigated," the judge said.

The case is related to the razing of the disputed structure in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992, which triggered riots for several months leaving nearly 2,000 people dead across the country.

The structure was demolished by self-proclaimed 'kar sevaks' who claimed that the 16th century Babri mosque in Ayodhya was built on the site of an ancient Ram temple.

The 32 accused include former deputy prime-minister Advani, former Union ministers Joshi and Uma Bharti, former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh during whose tenure the structure was pulled down, besides Vishva Hindu Parishad leaders Vinay Katiyar and Sadhvi Rithambara.

Charges were framed against 49 people, but 17 (including stalwarts like Ashok Singhal, Balasaheb Thackeray, Vijayraje Scindia) have died during the course of the trial.

The serious criminal conspiracy charge against the accused was first dropped by the trial court in 2001. The verdict was upheld by the Allahabad High Court in 2010, but the Supreme Court ordered restoration of the conspiracy charge against the accused on April 19, 2017.

The charge of conspiracy was in addition to other charges, including promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion.

The CBI had argued that the accused conspired and instigated 'kar sevaks' to demolish the 16th century mosque.

However, the accused had pleaded innocence, maintaining there is no evidence to prove their guilt and claiming that they were implicated by the then Congress government at the Centre as political vendetta.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 21,2024

adani.jpg

Shares of Adani Group companies lost about $28 billion in market value in morning trade on Thursday after US prosecutors charged the billionaire chairman of the Indian conglomerate in an alleged bribery and fraud scheme.

Gautam Adani's flagship company Adani Enterprises tumbled 23 per cent, while Adani Ports, Adani Total Gas, Adani Green, Adani Power, Adani Wilmar and Adani Energy Solutions, ACC , Ambuja Cements and NDTV fell between 20 per cent and 90 per cent.

Adani group's 10 listed stocks had a total market capitalisation of about $141 billion at 0534 GMT, compared to $169.08 billion on Tuesday.

US authorities said Adani and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar Adani, agreed to pay about $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials to obtain contracts expected to yield $2 billion of profit over 20 years, and develop India's largest solar power plant project.

Adani Green in a statement on Thursday said the US Justice Department had issued a criminal indictment against board members Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani and the Securities and Exchange Commission had issued a civil complaint against them.

The US Justice Department also included Adani Green board member Vneet Jaain in the criminal indictment, it said.

Adani Green's units had decided not to proceed with the proposed US dollar denominated bond offerings due to developments, it added.

"Investors will shy away from Adani Group stocks ... and that's what this sharp selling is signifying," said Saurabh Jain, assistant vice president of retail equities research at SMC Global Securities.

"This could hurt the credibility of the group and maybe borrowing costs will rise," he said.

The indictment comes nearly two years after US shortseller Hindenburg Research alleged that Adani had improperly used tax havens and was involved in stock manipulation, allegations the conglomerate denied.

Also in early Asian trading on Thursday, Adani dollar bonds slumped, with prices down 3c-5c on bonds for Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone. The falls were the largest since the Adani Group came under a short-seller attack in February 2023.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 19,2024

pool_0.jpg

In the wake of the tragic drowning of three students at a resort near Ullal on the outskirts of Mangaluru city, the tourism department in Dakshina Kannada is set to implement comprehensive safety guidelines for properties with swimming pools or beach access. This initiative aims to ensure guest safety and prevent similar incidents in the future.

New Safety Mandates for Resorts and Homestays

Rashmi S.R., deputy director (in-charge) of the tourism department, announced, “We will instruct all homestays and resorts to enforce precautionary measures, especially those with pools or direct beach access. Properties must ensure 24/7 supervision, particularly during guest hours. This tragedy highlights the importance of having trained personnel on-site.”

Key Safety Guidelines

The district, home to around 150 homestays and 130 resorts, will see the following measures enforced:

  • Clearly displaying pool depths.
  • Installing adequate safety equipment, such as life buoys.
  • Employing trained lifeguards at all times.
  • Establishing clear pool operating hours.
  • Reviewing and implementing standard operating procedures (SOPs) for pool and beach usage.

Booming Beach Tourism Calls for Vigilance

Manohar Shetty, president of the Association for Coastal Tourism (ACT), Udupi, highlighted the growing popularity of beachside resorts, particularly during peak seasons. Properties in Udupi, often fully booked with tourists from Bengaluru, Mysuru, Kodagu, and Shivamogga, face increasing pressure to maintain safety standards.

Udupi district boasts 22 beachside commercial properties catering to this rising demand.

Shetty emphasized, “Authorities must scrutinize safety measures and carefully evaluate guidelines before issuing new resort licenses. Panchayats should rely on the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act when handling such cases.”

Long-Term Solutions for Water Safety

Recognizing the need for a cultural shift in water safety, Shetty proposed integrating swimming lessons into school curricula. This move would not only equip students with essential skills but also encourage safe participation in water-based activities.

A Safer Tomorrow for Coastal Tourism

As the tourism sector thrives, Mangaluru’s proactive approach underscores its commitment to visitor safety. The tragic incident serves as a wake-up call, propelling the industry towards stricter regulations and better preparedness, ensuring that coastal vacations remain both enjoyable and safe.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.