Delhi High Court is hearing NIA's plea seeking death penalty for Kashmiri separatist leader Yasin Malik who was convicted in connection with a terror funding case.
Mehta: If this is not rarest of rare where somebody is continuously by armed rebellion and killing army people and advocating for succession....there can never be a rarest of rare case.
Mehta: You get training from Pakistan and then you plead guilty and be in jail to be rescued later, this is thus a statutory appeal under NIA Act which lies for sentence also.
Mehta: Your lordships may recall, because of this kidnapping (of Rubaiya Sayeed), four dreaded terrorists were required to be released and they masterminded the Bombay attacks.
Justice Mridul: Is that in so far as the chargesheet refers to causing death of public functionaries and abducting the individual to force the government to do something, where is that in the order on charge?
Justice Singh to NIA SPP: But charges kaha hain? In the order of charge it should be clear....Take your time and tell us the charges for which he pleaded guilty. Not chargesheet.
As Mehta points out a relevant paragraph, Justice Singh said "This is the judgement."
Justice Mridul: You take a Passover, but what we want to know....In the charge sheet, those accusations have been levelled...the order on charge doesn't mention those allegations.
Mehta and NIA SPP: We will produce those at 2 PM.
Justice Mridul: What we're asking is when an individual is formally charged, charge has to be ascribed. What is the charge, what is it that he did.
Mehta: There seems to be no specific reference on those four individuals but sec 15 uapa is there. And sec 121 IPC there is specific reference. There are more than one references to secessionist and terrorist acts which gives rise to death penalty.
"Having heard SGI and considering the evidence on record, including but not limited to circumstance that the respondent pleaded guilty to a charge made against him under sec 121 of IPC that stipulates among other punishment one of death, the delay in… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Court: in view of the circumstance that Yasin Malik is incarcerated in jail, issue notice to him through Tihar Jail superintendent.
Mehta: I am obliged because your lordships otherwise anyone can plead guilty and avoid death sentence and in future someone can take them back.… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Court: In view of the circumstance that Yasin Malik the sole respondent in this appeal has inter alia pleaded guilty to a charge under section 121 IPC which provides for alternate death sentence, we issue notice to him in both the application and appeal through jail… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Mehta: He is pleading guilty very tactfully.
Justice Mridul: That may be his constitutional right.
Mehta: If osama bin laden was tried here, he would have been permitted to plead guilty....
Justice Mridul: We can't compare this gentleman to osama bin laden because he nowhere… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
#SupremeCourt hears matter pertaining to statements made against a judicial officer.
Justice Bela Trivedi: You cannot malign the judiciary like this. Independence of judiciary doesn't just mean independence from executive but also from outside forces.
Advocate Akshay Sapre: He is extending an unconditional apology. Let him not be arrested. It's about a man's liberty. He is a common man running a temple.
"The allegations are very serious in nature that the excise policy was formed at the instance of South Group with mala fide intention to give undue advantage to them": Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma. #Manishsisodia
"Such a conduct points towards the misconduct of the applicant who was admittedly a public servant and was holding a very high position," Justice Sharma said.
Delhi High Court will today pronounce its decision on the bail plea of #AamAadmiParty leader and former Deputy Chief Minister #ManishSisodia in the CBI case alleging corruption in implementation of excise policy for 2021-22.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma had reserved the order on May 11. Sisodia is currently in judicial custody in the cases registered by the CBI and ED. He was denied bail by the special judge in CBI case on March 31. He was later denied bail in the ED case also by the trial court.
The judgement is expected to be pronounced at 10:30 am. Sisodia had argued that no evidence of money trail has been found from him by CBI in the alleged liquor policy scam case and that the allegations against him are “in the realm of likelihood.”
“The Constitution as adopted on 26th of November, 1949 served as a pledge that the citizens of India made to themselves. A pledge to disassociate ourselves from the parochial notions of society that prevented the ushering of equality,” #DelhiHighCourt#MaternityLeave
Court: It was without any form of equivocation that the people asserted their right to be treated equally. Irrespective of gender, race, religion or caste, citizens were to claim their opportunities.