Rajiv case: CBI seeks dismissal of Perarivalan's plea

Agencies
March 12, 2018

New Delhi, Mar 12: The CBI has told the Supreme Court that AG Perarivalan's plea seeking the recall of its May 1999 judgement upholding his conviction in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case should be dismissed as it was devoid of any merits.

In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the CBI's Multi-Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA), probing the larger conspiracy aspect behind Gandhi's assassination, has said that the role of convict A G Perarivalan in the conspiracy resulting in the killings of the former prime minister and others have already been upheld by the top court.

The agency said that the application seeking the recall of May 11, 1999, apex court judgement was not maintainable since it seeks to reopen the whole matter on merits which cannot be permissible.

The MDMA also said that Perarivalan's petition seeking review of the apex court's order upholding his conviction in the case has already been dismissed.

"It's, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this court may be pleased to dismiss the application for recall of judgement dated May 11, 1999, in the interest of justice and impose heavy cost 0n the applicant (Perarivalan) herein," the agency said in its affidavit.

The affidavit was filed in pursuance of the apex court's January 24 direction asking the CBI to respond to Perarivalan's plea seeking the recall of the May 1999 order upholding his conviction.

The court had termed as "serious" and "debatable" the questions raised by Perarivalan.

He has sought the recall of the apex court's order, saying he was not aware of the conspiracy.

Former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated on the night of May 21, 1991, at Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu by a woman suicide bomber, identified as Dhanu, at a poll rally.

Fourteen others, including Dhanu herself, were also killed.

Gandhi's assassination was perhaps the first case of suicide bombing which had claimed the life of a high-profile leader.

In its May 1999 order, the top court had upheld the death sentence of four convicts -- Perarivalan, Murugan, Santham and Nalini -- in the assassination case.

In April 2000, the Tamil Nadu governor commuted the death sentence of Nalini on the basis of the state government's recommendation and an appeal by former Congress president and Rajiv Gandhi's widow Sonia Gandhi.

On February 18, 2014, the top court had commuted the death sentence of Perarivalan to life imprisonment, along with that of two other prisoners - Santhan and Murugan - on grounds of a delay of 11 years in deciding their mercy pleas by the Centre.

In his application, 45-year-old Perarivalan has said that he was held guilty of supplying two nine-volt batteries which were allegedly used in the improvised explosive device (IED) that killed Gandhi.

The reasons due to which his conviction was sustained by the apex court would "vanish completely" in the wake of the affidavit by V Thiagarajan, a former CBI officer, it said.

Thiagarajan, then a superintendent of police of CBI, had recorded Perarivalan's confessional statement under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act.

The application claimed that in his affidavit the former CBI officer had stated that Perarivalan had expressly stated in his confessional statement that at the time of purchase of the batteries, he had absolutely no idea for what purpose these were going to be used.

While hearing Perarivalan's plea earlier, the top court had observed that the probe by CBI's Multi-Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA) in the larger conspiracy aspect behind Gandhi's assassination did not appear to have achieved "much headway" and could be "endless".

The MDMA, set up in 1998 on the recommendations of Justice M C Jain Commission of Inquiry which had probed the conspiracy aspect of Gandhi's assassination, is headed by a CBI official and comprises officers from IB, RAW and Revenue Intelligence and other agencies.

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 26,2024

DKudupi.jpg

Mangaluru: The coastal districts of Dakshina Kannada and Udupi are witnessing a fascinating weather pattern, with chilly early mornings giving way to dry, sweltering afternoons. Over the past two days, dense fog blanketed the rural landscapes, while urban centers like Mangaluru felt the stark contrast of brisk mornings and peak afternoon heat.

The India Meteorological Department (IMD) noted that in rural areas, the morning chill caused temperatures to dip by one to two degrees Celsius below the seasonal norm, intensifying the fog. Monday saw Mangaluru recording a maximum temperature of 33.3°C and a minimum of 22.6°C, reflective of the sharp day-night variation.

While mornings painted a serene picture with mist-covered trees and a cool ambiance, the afternoons proved relentless, with temperatures soaring between 11 am and 3 pm, offering little respite. Currently, there are no signs of rainfall, with forecasts predicting the continuation of this dual weather pattern for the coming days.

Local residents have mixed feelings about this weather trend. Farmers in rural areas appreciate the cool mornings that ease early chores but express concerns over the dry afternoons, which may affect crop irrigation if the dry spell prolongs. In contrast, urban dwellers are enjoying the foggy mornings but brace for the scorching afternoons.

Meteorologists attribute the sudden chill to shifts in atmospheric pressure along the coast, a precursor to possible weather transitions in December. Whether this pattern persists or leads to unexpected changes remains to be seen, but the twin districts are clearly caught in nature's dramatic play of contrasts.

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 12,2024

HDKzameer.jpg

Mysuru, Nov 12: Zameer Ahmad Khan, the Tourism and Waqf minister of Karnataka, who stirred a controversy by addressing the Union Minister HD Kumaraswamy as ‘Kaala Kumaraswamy’ has tendered apologies for his remarks.

Speaking to reporters in Mysuru on Tuesday, Minister Zameer stated that he will apologise if remarks have hurt JD-S workers.

“We both are very close. Then, in a total of 24 hours, we were together for 14 hours. He used to fondly address me as “kulla” (shorty) and I used to address him as “kariyanna” (blacky, kaalia),” Minister Zameer stated.

“I am not addressing him as ‘kaalia’ for the first time. I have not said something highly derogatory. It is being made as big in the backdrop of elections. With love, he used to call me a shorty and I called him a blacky. If I had caused pain to anyone by my words I apologise,” he said.

He further stated: “Kumaraswamy had said that he didn’t want the votes of the Muslim community. But now they are attempting to purchase Muslim votes. Against this backdrop, I have made the remark.”

Minister for Home G. Parameshwara stated on Tuesday, “Minister Zameer and Kumaraswamy are close friends. Their comments against each other are not significant.”

Zameer Ahmad Khan, the Tourism and Waqf minister of Karnataka stirred a controversy on Monday as he addressed the Union Minister as ‘Kaala Kumaraswamy’.

JD-S on Tuesday demanded a public apology and resignation of Minister for Waqf and Tourism Zameer Ahmad Khan over his ‘racist’ remarks.

“Remember, there is no place here for your divisive policies. You have insulted the people by making ethnic, racist and discriminatory statements. You should apologize to the people of the state and resign,” the JD (S) demanded in the post.

Union Parliamentary Affairs and Minister for Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju reacted sternly to the racist jibe and stated, “I strongly deplore Congress Minister Zameer Ahmed calling Union Minister and former Chief Minister of Karnataka Kumaraswamy as 'Kaalia Kumaraswamy'.

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.