These MPs and MLAs were disqualified after conviction

News Network
March 24, 2023

MPMLA.jpg

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi who was suspended from Lok Sabha following his conviction in a criminal defamation case joins an ignominious list of members of Parliament and assemblies who faced similar action in the past.

According to the Representation of the People Act, a person sentenced to imprisonment of two years or more shall be disqualified "from the date of such conviction" and remain disqualified for another six years after serving time.

Here are some of the lawmakers suspended upon conviction and sentencing in criminal cases:

Lalu Prasad:

The RJD supremo was disqualified from the Lok Sabha after his conviction in the fodder scam case in September 2013. He was an MP from Saran in Bihar.

J Jayalalithaa:

AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa was disqualified from the Tamil Nadu Assembly in September 2014 after she was sentenced to four years in jail in a disproportionate assets case. She was the chief minister of Tamil Nadu at the time of her disqualification and had to resign from the post.

P P Mohammed Faizal:

Lakshadweep MP P P Mohammed Faisal of the Nationalist Congress Party stood automatically disqualified after he was sentenced to 10 years in jail in January 2023 in connection with an attempt to murder case. However, the Kerala High Court later suspended his conviction and sentence. According to the MP, the Lok Sabha Secretariat is yet to issue a notification revoking his disqualification.

Azam Khan:

Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan was disqualified from the Uttar Pradesh Assembly in October 2022 after a court sentenced him to three years in jail in a 2019 hate speech case. He represented Rampur Sadar in the Assembly.

Anil Kumar Sahni:

RJD MLA Anil Kumar Sahni was disqualified from the Bihar Assembly in October 2022 after he was sentenced to three years in jail in a case of fraud. He represented the Kurhani assembly seat.

He was held guilty of attempting to avail travel allowance in 2012 using forged Air India e-tickets without having undertaken the journeys. Sahni, who was a JD(U) Rajya Sabha MP at the time of the attempted fraud, had submitted claims of Rs 23.71 lakh.

Vikram Singh Saini:

BJP MLA Vikram Singh Saini was disqualified from the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly with effect from October 2022 after he was sentenced to two years of imprisonment in a 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots case. Saini was an MLA from Khatauli in Muzaffarnagar.

Pradeep Chaudhary:

Congress MLA Pradeep Chaudhary was disqualified from the Haryana Assembly in January 2021 after he was sentenced to a three-year jail term in an assault case. He was an MLA from Kalka.

Kuldeep Singh Sengar:

Kuldeep Singh Sengar was disqualified from the Uttar Pradesh Assembly in February 2020 following his conviction in a rape case. Sengar, who was elected from the Bangarmau constituency in Unnao, was earlier expelled by the BJP.

Abdullah Azam Khan:

Samajwadi Party MLA Abdullah Azam Khan was disqualified from the Uttar Pradesh Assembly in February 2023, days after a court sentenced him to two-year imprisonment in a 15-year-old case. He represented Suar in Rampur district in the Assembly.

The case against Abdullah Azam Khan, the son of Azam Khan, pertained to a dharna on a highway after his cavalcade was stopped by police for checking following an attack on a CRPF camp in Rampur on December 31, 2007.

Anant Singh:

RJD MLA Anant Singh was disqualified from the Bihar Assembly in July 2022 after being convicted in a case related to the recovery of arms and ammunition from his residence. Singh was an MLA from Mokama in Patna district.

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 12,2024

ikramuddinkamil.jpg

The Taliban regime has appointed Ikramuddin Kamil as the acting consul in the Afghan mission in Mumbai, Afghan media has reported.

It is the first such appointment made by the Taliban set up to any Afghan mission in India.

There was no immediate comment from the Indian side on the appointment that came.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan has announced the appointment of Kamil as the acting consul in Mumbai, the Taliban-controlled Bakhtar News Agency reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"He is currently in Mumbai, where he is fulfilling his duties as a diplomat representing the Islamic Emirate," it said.

The appointment is part of Kabul's efforts to strengthen diplomatic ties with India and enhance its presence abroad, the media outlet said

Kamil holds a PhD degree in international law and previously served as the deputy director in the department of security cooperation and border affairs in the foreign ministry, it said.

He is expected to facilitate consular services and represent the interests of Afghanistan in India, the report added.

Kamil's appointment comes days after the external affairs ministry's point-person for Afghanistan held talks with the Taliban's acting defence minister, Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, in Kabul.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's deputy foreign minister for political affairs, also posted on X about Kamil's appointment.

The appointment of Kamil is seen as part of efforts to facilitate consular services to the Afghan population in Mumbai.

There has been almost negligible presence of diplomatic staff at the Afghan missions in India.

Most of the diplomats appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government have already left India.

In May, Zakia Wardak, the seniormost Afghan diplomat in India, resigned from her position after reports emerged that she was caught at the Mumbai airport for allegedly trying to smuggle 25 kg of gold worth Rs 18.6 crore from Dubai.

Wardak had taken charge as the acting ambassador of Afghanistan to New Delhi late last year, after working as the Afghan consul general in Mumbai for more than two years.

She took charge of the Afghan embassy in New Delhi last November, after the mission helmed by then ambassador Farid Mamundzay announced its closure.

Mamundzay, who was an appointee of the Ghani government, had moved to the United Kingdom.

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 22,2024

Mangaluru: A man fell victim to an online scam, losing Rs 1.7 crore after fraudsters posed as officials from TRAI. According to a complaint filed at the CEN police station, the incident began on November 11, when the complainant received a call from an unknown number at 9:49 am.

The caller, claiming to represent TRAI, alleged that another mobile number registered under the complainant's name was involved in illegal activities in Andheri (East), Mumbai. The caller further stated that an FIR was lodged against the complainant for harassment under the guise of marketing. He was instructed to contact Andheri (East) police station immediately or risk his mobile service being deactivated within two hours.

The complainant was subsequently connected to an individual named Pradeep Sawant, who claimed the complainant was implicated in a money laundering scheme linked to the Naresh Goyal fraud case. Sawant alleged that a fraudulent bank account under the complainant's name was opened at Canara Bank, Andheri, and used to purchase a SIM card for illegal activities. He warned that the complainant could face arrest.

Later, the complainant was contacted via WhatsApp video call by individuals posing as Rahul Kumar (a police officer) and Akanksha (a CBI officer). They allegedly sent fabricated CBI documents to his WhatsApp number. The fraudsters demanded money to "resolve" the case. Fearing threats, the complainant allegedly transferred Rs 1.7 crore through RTGS in batches of Rs 53 lakh, Rs 74 lakh, and Rs 44 lakh between November 13 and 19. A case has been registered at the CEN police station and an investigation is ongoing.

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.