Select Page
Contempt case: Supreme Court imposes fine of Rs 1 on Prashant Bhushan, 3 months in jail for not paying

Contempt case: Supreme Court imposes fine of Rs 1 on Prashant Bhushan, 3 months in jail for not paying

Prashant Bhushan Contempt Cases: The Supreme Court has given its verdict today in contempt case against senior advocate Prashant Bhushan. The Supreme Court imposed a monetary penalty of Rs 1 on lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who was convicted of contempt of court for his two tweets against the judiciary. Also, the court said that if they do not deposit this amount, they can be sentenced to three months in jail. Earlier, the Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its decision on the sentence of Prashant Bhushan. Prashant Bhushan, who had already refused to apologize, was given 30 minutes by the court and asked to reconsider his stand. But even after this, the idea of ​​Bhushan did not change, the court even asked what is wrong in apologizing, is this a bad word? A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra pronounced its judgment against Bhushan.

While giving a judgment in the contempt case, the Supreme Court said that if Prashant Bhushan does not pay a fine of Rupees 1, he may face imprisonment for three months or will be barred from speaking for three years.

On August 25, senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan requested the apex court after Prashant Bhushan rejected the court’s suggestion of an apology and that the court should give a message like ‘Statesman’ and not make Bhushan a martyr. Justice Mishra, presiding over the bench of three judges, reserved his judgment that day on the issue of punishment. Justice Mishra is retiring on September 2.

On August 14, the Supreme Court held Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for his two derogatory tweets against the judiciary. Dhawan, appearing for Bhushan, had requested the apex court, citing Bhushan’s supplementary statement, to withdraw his August 14 verdict and not undergo any punishment. He requested that not only this matter should be closed, but also the dispute should be ended.

Attorney General appealed for forgiveness
At the same time, Attorney General K.K. K Venugopal requested the court to forgive Bhushan with the message that he should not repeat such act in future. The bench also consists of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Krishna Murari. The bench had also given Bhushan 30 minutes to reconsider his attitude of not apologizing for the tweets.

Bhushan mentioned Gandhi’s statement in court
Prashant Bhushan told the Supreme Court that he was pained that he was ‘greatly misunderstood’ in the case. He said ‘I have tried to discharge my ultimate duty through tweet’. Quoting Mahatma Gandhi, Prashant Bhushan had said, ‘I do not beg for mercy nor do I appeal to you for generosity. I have come here to execute any punishment, which will be given to me for what the court considers a crime, while it is not my fault in my eyes, but my highest duty towards the citizens. ‘

When is the matter related to tweet
Significantly, the Supreme Court convicted him on August 14 for the comments made on Twitter on the judges. Prashant Bhushan made a comment on the six-year functioning of the judiciary on June 27, while on June 22, the current Chief Justice of the apex court S.K. a. Another comment was made about Bobde and four former Chief Justices.

Fugitive Vijay Mallya gets shock from Supreme Court, reconsideration petition dismissed in contempt case

Fugitive Vijay Mallya gets shock from Supreme Court, reconsideration petition dismissed in contempt case

Fugitive industrialist Vijay Mallya, convicted in the contempt case, has received a major setback from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has dismissed Vijay Mallya’s plea seeking reconsideration of the order passed in 2017 in the contempt of court case. On August 27, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict in the case. In fact, the fugitive businessman Mallya had filed a petition for reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s order dated May 9, 2017, which held him guilty of contempt of court for transferring US $ 400 million to his children’s accounts, bypassing judicial orders. had gone.

On August 27, Justice UU Lalit and Justice Ashok Bhushan reserved the verdict after hearing arguments in the case. The court asked its registry in June to explain why Vijay Mallya’s reconsideration petition was not listed before the court concerned in the last three years. He had asked the registry to provide all the information including the names of the officials who had seen the file related to the petition in the last three years.

Mallya, currently accused in a bank loan fraud case of over nine thousand crore rupees, is currently in the UK. The apex court gave the order in 2017 on a petition by a group of banks led by State Bank of India. The petition stated that Mallya had allegedly “openly violated” various judicial orders and transferred US $ 40 million from the British company Diageo to his children’s accounts.

On the other hand, in another case, the Supreme Court on Thursday said that it would consider the question whether liquidation of the assets of the company attached through legal proceedings to settle its financial liabilities could be considered. A bench of Justices Uday U Lalit and Vineet Saran on behalf of the liquor baron Vijay Mallya’s company United Breweries (Holding) Ltd (UBHL) was informed by senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan that the company’s total assets exceeded its liabilities. . UBHL has challenged the March 6 order of the Karnataka High Court upholding the single judge’s decision to wind up the business of the company.

The bench listed the matter for September 8, stating that if necessary, the parties would have to answer the question whether the attached property could be considered to be liquidated to pay the liabilities. On March 6, the High Court turned down the proposal to settle the debts of the now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines. UBHL claimed that the market value of its assets was more than its liabilities.

Supreme Court’s seal on UGC guidelines, said- universities cannot pass without final year examination

Supreme Court’s seal on UGC guidelines, said- universities cannot pass without final year examination

The Supreme Court has also approved the guidelines of the UGC regarding the final year examinations of undergraduate courses in colleges and universities across the country. The Supreme Court has said that states cannot cancel the exam without the permission of the UGC. Students cannot pass without conducting final year examinations. States will have to conduct the exam by 30 September. The court said that the states which are not willing to take the final year examination by 30 September, they will have to inform the UGC. The apex court in its judgment upheld the UGC’s July 6 circular, stating that under the Disaster Management Act, states can postpone the examination keeping in view the epidemic but they will have to set new dates in consultation with the UGC.

Significantly, on July 6, the UGC had directed universities across the country to conduct final year examinations by 30 September. He had said that if the examinations were not held, the future of the students would be in danger. The guidelines of the UGC were challenged in the Supreme Court by many students and organizations across the country. It was said in the petitions that conducting examinations in the midst of Kovid-19 epidemic is not good for the safety of students. The UGC should cancel the examinations and declare the results based on the students’ past performance and internal evaluation.

The Supreme Court reserved its verdict after completing the hearing on 18 August on petitions challenging the UGC’s instructions to conduct final year examinations by 30 September.

Earlier, the UGC had told the apex court that there was no decree issued on July 6 for universities and colleges to conduct final year examinations between the Kovid-19 epidemic by September 30, but without conducting the state degree examinations. Cannot decide to provide. The UGC had told the court that the directive is for the “benefit of the students” as universities have to start admissions for postgraduate courses (post graduate courses) and state authorities cannot ignore the UGC guidelines.

– The Supreme Court said that the states which are not willing to take the final year examination by 30 September, they will have to inform the UGC.

– The Supreme Court said that to promote the students, the states will have to take exams compulsorily. The court said that under the Disaster Management Act, states can postpone the examination keeping in view the epidemic and set new dates in consultation with the UGC.

– Supreme Court dismisses the petition against the examination. Said – According to the guidelines of the UGC, the exam will be done.

– On July 6, the UGC directed universities across the country to conduct final year examinations by September 30. He had said that if the examinations were not held, the future of the students would be in danger. The guidelines of the UGC were challenged in the Supreme Court by many students and organizations across the country. It was said in the petitions that conducting examinations between the Kovid-19 epidemic is not good for the safety of the students. The UGC should cancel the examinations and declare the results based on the students’ past performance and internal evaluation. Among those who filed a petition in the apex court regarding this subject, the Yuva Sena is the youth wing of the Shiv Sena. It has questioned the UGC’s directive to conduct examinations during the epidemic.

– Some states including Delhi, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh have canceled university examinations including final year exams. However the UGC maintains that the degree cannot be awarded to the graduating students without conducting the final year examinations.

– Some states including Delhi, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh have canceled university examinations including final year exams.

– UGC maintains that the degree cannot be awarded to the graduating students without conducting the final year examinations.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing in the Supreme Court on behalf of the UGC and the Central Government, said on August 8 that the state governments cannot cancel the examinations. This power is with the UGC.

Supreme Court decides on Vijay Mallya’s petition, Defense safe, transferred $ 40 million to children’s account

Supreme Court decides on Vijay Mallya’s petition, Defense safe, transferred $ 40 million to children’s account

The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on a petition filed by fugitive liquor businessman Vijay Mallya. Mallya filed a petition seeking review of the May 2017 order of the Supreme Court. The court convicted them for violating the court order by transferring US $ 40 million to their children’s account.

Let us tell you that the liquor businessman and owner of the closed Kingfisher Airlines, Vijay Mallya has owed about 9 thousand crores of Indian banks. On March 2, 2016, he left India and fled to Britain. Indian agencies appealed to the UK court for extradition of Vijay Mallya and after a long battle, the UK court on 14 May sealed Mallya’s extradition appeal to India.
New order of UK court may affect Mallya loan recovery case

A decision by the High Court of England and Wales on Vijay Mallya could have an impact. A judgment by the England and Wales High Court in favor of the international branch of Punjab National Bank in the recovery of $ 22 million set an example against a businessman Vijay Mallya in a debt recovery bid in the UK by a consortium of Indian banks. The PNB case involves two loans between 2012 and 2013, including Pradeep Aggarwal, a businessman from Superior Drinks Pvt Ltd, India, and had not paid the loan dues to buy and operate the cruise liner, MV Delphin.

You had shut down the entire country: Supreme Court rebuked Center in loan moratorium case

You had shut down the entire country: Supreme Court rebuked Center in loan moratorium case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reprimanded the Central Government in the matter of exemption from interest during the term of the loan moratorium. The court while hearing the case told the central government that it cannot hide behind the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). The Centre’s comment that businesses and banks will be affected, the Supreme Court reacted sharply, saying, “This happened because you shut down the entire country.”

The Supreme Court has asked the government to clarify its stand on the petition by September 1, stating that the loan interest should be canceled during the corono virus lockdown. The court said that the Center has not made its stand clear even though there is ‘sufficient authority’ under the Disaster Management Act to grant exemption.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “One solution cannot be for everyone.” The court said, ‘You can not only take interest in business, you also have to know about the sufferings of the people.’

During the hearing of the case, Justice Ashok Bhushan said, ‘This problem is due to the lockdown of your (Central Government). This is not the time to think about business. The plight of the people also has to be considered. You have to clear your stand on two things: Calculation of Disaster Management Act and Interest on Interest.

In this case, the petitioner demanded that some part of the RBI notification issued on March 27 be canceled so that the interest could be waived. He said that interest creates difficulty, hindrance and objection to the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution. The RBI had earlier told the court that there could not be an interest waiver during the moratorium of a term loan as such a move would threaten the financial health and stability of banks. At the same time, on the Supreme Court’s response of ‘hiding behind RBI’, Mehta replied that My Lord you cannot say that. We are working closely with the RBI.