Conspiracy behind move to double gas price: PIL

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Centre, RIL and petroleum minister Veerappa Moily and sought their replies on a PIL which alleges conspiracy in the government's decision to double the price of natural gas from April 2014.

Before seeking replies from the respondents within four weeks, a bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justices Ranjana P Desai and Ranjan Gogoi sought clarifications from Colin Gonsalves — counsel of petitioners MP Gurudas Dasgupta and ex-power secretary E A S Sarma — and heard RIL counsel Harish Salve.

To Salve's preliminary objections, the bench said, "We cannot brush aside the assertions of an MP at the preliminary stage. You (respondents) file your replies and we will consider it." It fixed hearing on the PIL for September 5.

The petitioners alleged that KG basin gas exploring contractors, RIL and NIKO Resources, entered into a conspiracy with the Centre "to provide exorbitant, unreasonable and excessive profits to the contractors, which will bankrupt the exchequer and severely affect the Indian economy".

They sought quashing of the gas price hike and requested the court to direct the government to ensure that henceforth "the price of domestically produced gas is fixed in rupees and not dollars or any other currency".

"Appoint a court commission comprising independent and fearless officers and experts having expertise in the area of this dispute to inquire into the real cost of gas at the well-head in the KG basin and also into the capacity of the basin itself and related issues raised in the petition," they said.

Dasgupta and Sarma also alleged that certain benefits were being granted to the contractors by government for mala fide and collateral gain which would increase the subsidy burden enormously. They also said the gas price hike would "enormously impact" food and energy security resulting in higher prices of fertilizers, food products and cooking gas affecting the poor.

Quoting comptroller and auditor general's report, they sought a direction to RIL and NIKO to "forthwith relinquish those areas of KG basin as recommended by the CAG and delineated by the Director General of Hydrocarbon". Salve said RIL was ready to relinquish these and had already written to the government in this regard.

The petitioners quoted DGH to allege that only 18 wells against the required 50 had been drilled by RIL, which incurred expenditure of $5,693 million but till March 31, 2011 had recovered $5,258 million.

The petitioners said the petroleum ministry on May 2, 2012 issued a notice to RIL informing it that breach of production sharing contract and failure to comply with the approved plan had resulted in heavy loss of production and sought to disallow $1005 million from cumulative cost incurred by the contractor.

They said the matter went to arbitration with RIL appointing Justice SP Bharucha as its arbitrator and government choosing Justice VN Khare. When they were in the process of appointing the third arbitrator, the petroleum minister gave an interview saying he intended to junk arbitration and push for a negotiated settlement.

The petitioners said the arbitration must proceed expeditiously and be completed within six months. But Salve objected to it saying both arbitrators were eminent retired chief justices of the Supreme Court and nothing should be said which would hurt them and the process of arbitration.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Conspiracy-behind-move-to-double-gas-price-PIL/articleshow/21474395.cms

Justice Ganguly replies to government posers on Pakistan trip

KOLKATA: A state government questioning the human rights commission (HRC) chief, who enjoys pay parity with a high court's chief justice, about his leave of absence is unheard of. But that's the uncommon situation Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly found himself in earlier this week when the Mamata Banerjee government shot off a letter seeking clarifications about his recent trip to Pakistan.

The West Bengal HRC chief, who visited Karachi in the first week of June to attend a two-day seminar, sent his reply to home secretary Basudeb Banerjee on Friday. The seminar on June 4 and 5 was jointly organized by the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research and the Hamdard School of Law in collaboration with the Human Rights Law Network. Besides Justice Ganguly, others invited from India as speakers were lawyers Prashant Bhushan, Mukul Sinha and Colin Gonsalves. Justice Ganguly returned to the city on June 6 and joined office from June 7.

Since he took charge in April 2012, the WBHRC has proactively taken up cases ranging from the cartoon controversy to the Kamduni rape-murder in which the government has been embarrassed. WBHRC sources felt the letter could be a sequel to that.
The home secretary's letter, which was sent on Monday, "requested" Justice Ganguly to answer five questions about his trip: whether it was official or private, what its purpose was, who funded it, whether there was any FCRA (Foreign Contribution Regulation Act) violation and if prior permission was taken from the governor.

Justice Ganguly replied the trip wasn't official but was undertaken on a private invitation from Justice Nasir Alam Zahid, dean of the Hamdard School of Law, and its purpose was to attend a law seminar that covered issues like PILs, human rights and judicial activism. The funding, he said, was done by the organizers. To the poser on FCRA, he replied FCRA is applicable only to sitting judges, not retired ones (Justice Ganguly retired as a Supreme Court judge in February 2012). As for permission, he said since the tour was not an official one, the question of obtaining permission did not arise.

"The government probably cannot tolerate the no-nonsense attitude of the commission chairperson. He has never hit the headlines for the wrong reasons through his career. And this letter from the government was only to embarrass him," said a source in WBHRC.

Under Justice Ganguly, the commission has taken up a number of cases, including the arrests of Jadavpur University professor Ambikesh Mahapatra for forwarding a cartoon lampooning the CM and Shiladitya Chowdhury, the Belpahari resident who was branded a Maoist by the CM at a rally, in which its recommendations put the government in a tight spot. The WBHRC's findings in the Kamduni rape-murder case and SFI leader Sudipto Gupta's death in police custody also raised hackles in the government.

The commission had also taken on Trinamool Congress MP Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar for her comments on the Park Steet rape victim, for which the MP later apologized.

Many feel the government's letter to Ganguly was nothing but a move to keep the upright retired Supreme Court judge under leash. During his tenure as the apex court, Justice Ganguly had delivered significant judgments, including the one in the 2G spectrum scam.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-13/kolkata/40553472_1_fcra-justice-ganguly-wbhrc

Assault in Jails: Inform Us on Steps Taken, SC to Centre

Incidents of attack on foreign prisoners have “international ramifications", Supreme Court today said asking the Centre and Jammu and Kashmir government to apprise it of steps to ensure that assaults similar to the one on Pakistani inmate Sanaullah Ranjay do not recur.

A bench of justices R M Lodha and S J Mukhopadhya also voiced displeasure over the pace of progress in investigation into the death of Ranjay at Kot Balwal Jail in Jammu.

“Such incidents have international ramifications. The Government has to tell us that about the certain steps that have been taken and are being contemplated to ensure that such incidents do not recur in future," the court said and asked the Centre and the state government to file affidavits.

“Look, such incidents have happened in Pakistan and in India. In so far as Pakistan is concerned, we have no control and so far as India is concerned, we have got the control. You must tell us about the steps taken to ensure that such incidents do not happen again," it said.

The court, after perusing the affidavit filed by Jammu and Kashmir government, expressed unhappiness there was “not a single word" about investigation into Ranjay’s death though 72 days had passed since the incident.

“You must have held some preliminary inquiry. What are the findings. This (affidavit) is nothing as it does not give as to what had happened? How it happened? It does not even say the date on which the FIR was lodged.

“More than 72 days have passed and the investigation has not completed. The incident occurred inside the four corners of your jail. There is not a word about the investigation. The state must be co-operative and forthright. It is not a complex case. The approach of state is always obstructive," it said.

The court asked the state government to apprise it of actions taken against jail officials in the case.

It, however, said that certain steps have been taken, but the better enforcement was needed to stop such incidents.

It was hearing a plea filed by Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party Chief Bhim Singh seeking repatriation of foreign and Pakistani prisoners, including Ranjay, and those who have already spent over 15 years in detention in India.

Ranjay, however, died on May 9 here after being attacked inside the Jammu jail.

The bench said, “The Jammu and Kashmir government shall keep strict vigil to ensure that foreign nationals prisoners, kept in jails in the state, remains safe and no harm is caused to them."

The court also asked the Centre and the Jammu and Kashmir government to expedite the process of repatriation of those twelve Pakistan prisoners against whom neither any inquiry nor any trial is pending and moreover, they have already served the awarded jail terms.

Meanwhile, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves told the bench that about 400 Indian and Pakistani fishermen are languishing in jails in both countries.

“The Indian government is not taking back Indian fishermen from Pakistan," the lawyer said.

“We cannot ask Pakistan to take their fishermen back. So far as Indian prisoners are concerned, you move an application, we will ask the Centre to respond," the bench said.

Earlier, the bench had asked the Centre and the Jammu and Kashmir government to explain as to why no steps were taken to prevent assault on Sanaullah Ranjay inside the Jammu jail.

Bhim Singh, in his plea, has also sought repatriation of all the mentally challenged prisoners, who are not wanted in any case in India but are lodged in different jails in the country, to their respective countries without any delay.

The petition also sought a direction to the Centre and the Government of Jammu and Kashmir to complete trials of all the foreign prisoners within six months.

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=804053

SC notice on proposed bodies for plaints against cops

The Supreme Court Monday issued notice to the central and and state governments on a petition seeking direction to set up Police Complaint Authorities (PCA) to deal with public complaints related to law enforcers.

The authorities comprising competent and independent people were mandated by the apex court by its 2006 verdict related to police reforms.

The apex court bench of Chief Justice Altamas Kabir, Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla and Justice Vikramajit Sen issued notice as senior counsel Colin Gonsalves pointed to the court the "poor state of the implementation of the directions of the apex court for pushing police reforms".

The petition was filed by Sarfraj Mulla, Kavesh V. Gosavi, Abdul Allbaksh Gaffar Shirogod and Khalil Tannub Mohammed, who were all allegedly ill-treated by Goa Police, urging the court to direct all states and union territories to set up a PCA each and make it functional within three months.

The petitioners urged the court to direct the central government to frame model rules to be adopted by states and union territories on establishing the proposed complaint authorities.

They alleged that they were "tortured by the police, stripped naked, racially abused and maliciously prosecuted" by Goa Police.
As they filed a complaint on their torture by police before the PCA, it (PCA) allowed their cross examination by counsel for police and disallowed their counsel to question the police personnel who allegedly ill-treated them.

The PCA conducted proceedings in a manner openly favouring police and appeared to be labouring under a very wrong legal notion as to the scope of its authority, the petition said.

The petition sought direction to state governments that they should treat the apex court's directions on setting up the complaint authorities as "binding".
http://newindianexpress.com/nation/SC-notice-on-proposed-bodies-for-plaints-against-cops/2013/07/16/article1686154.ece

Legal fees are on the house

Corporate Social Responsibility has entered India's legal corridors. Top law firms and lawyers are doing pro bono so that they can give back to society.

A man phones a lawyer and asks, "What's your fee for answering three simple questions?" The reply is: A thousand dollars. "Whoa! That's very expensive, isn't it?" exclaims the man. "It certainly is, now what's your third question?" asks the lawyer.

Expensive legal fees have been the butt of many jokes but not all lawyers are the sharks they're made out to be. There are a number of socially aware and generous souls who are increasingly lending their expertise for pro bono work. Short for the Latin term pro bono publico, 'for the public good', pro bono means a case is taken up for free or the rates are deeply discounted. I n India, traditionally, pro bono legal work was carried out by lawyers who had dedicated themselves to helping society. Take senior advocate Colin Gonsalves who, in the early 1980s, co-founded the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) to provide free legal access to the needy. Since then HRLN has expanded the scope of its legal offerings to include filing PILs, legal clinics and advocacy. Pune-based advocate Asim Sarode set up Human Rights and Law Defenders in 2002, which won accolades for providing free legal service to prisoners.

Yet, given the need for proper legal help for a diverse section of society — ranging from NGOs to social entrepreneurs; from sex workers to child labourers; and from battered women to helpless prisoners — even the PM, in his address at the Bar Council's centenary celebrations earlier this year, urged lawyers to take on more pro bono cases.

Cyber-platforms such as the international Lex Mundi Pro Bono Foundation and i-Probono are already helping connect law firms with social projects. Then there are organisations such as Ashoka which, through its 'Law for all' initiative, ensures that Ashoka Fellows (social entrepreneurs) have access to the most appropriate law firms. "In addition to meeting regulatory hurdles, this initiative also aims at providing emergency support to Ashoka Fellows, who given the nature of their work sometimes face threats and intimidation from vested interests," says an Ashoka spokesperson.

Currently, the Lex Mundi Foundation works exclusively with law firm Amarchand Mangaldas in India. Ashoka relies on lawyers such as Gonsalves and Sarode who are also Ashoka fellows. In addition, it connects with a handful of topnotch law firms.

At online forum i-Probono, pro bono initiatives are supported by a clutch of top law firms as well as individual lawyers and law students.
The Society of Women Lawyers (SOWL), India has also set up a pro bono committee. "Its objective is to act as a forum to link deserving women focused probono projects with domestic and international lawyers or law firms. While several law firms do have their internal systems and engage in pro-bono projects, SOWL-India seeks to 'institutionalise' this culture," explains Priti Suri, President, SOWL India and founder partner of PSA, a law firm.

Slowly but steadily, the pro bono culture is gaining ground. It now extends beyond serving needy individuals to providing legal services to the social sector (viz: non-profits and social entrepreneurs) thereby accelerating the pace of social good.

However, some challenges do remain in scaling up. As Swathi Sukumar, India country director, i-Probono says: "Building commitment to probono work in a systematic way in the legal profession has been a challenge. Likewise, working with the social sector organisations of all sizes is also challenging because they vary widely in terms of their professionalism, communication styles and internal organisation." Yet progress has been steady. i-Probono's India operations began in 2010 and last year it matched 53 projects with a value to the Indian social sector of over Rs 1.2 crore.

Chole B Holderness, MD, Lex Mundi Foundation points out that in developing countries, pro bono lawyers play a critical role in helping to build the organizational capacity of social entrepreneurs and innovators. "Some key areas of the law aimed at impactful social change include: Intellectual property advice for protection and licensing of innovative ideas; advice on structuring and registrations of social sector entities; advice on how to navigate and surmount government regulations that threaten to restrict the achievement of social goals."

In India, where doing business isn't easy (it ranked a poor 132 out of 185 countries on ease of doing business during the last annual survey of the International Finance Corporation) such pro bono legal assistance is much needed, especially as the same complex commercial laws extend to the social sector.

"Advising the social sector can involve navigating a maze of laws such as foreign exchange regulations, tax laws, state legislations for public charitable trusts, the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act etal and in sectors as diverse as education, microfinance and social venture funds (a class of funds now recognised by SEBI)," says Bahram N Vakil, one of the founder partners at law firm AZB & Partners.

Sometimes regulatory complexities result in a social project not taking off. Anand Prasad, partner, Trilegal, has a case in point. "A foreign NGO wanted to set up medical support facilities to provide quality healthcare to the poor. Since the project involved an element of investment in real estate by a foreign player, RBI's approval was required. Despite our best efforts to persuade the regulator, the approval wasn't forthcoming and the project had to be abandoned," says Prasad.

Given their commercial expertise, these law firms also engage actively with regulatory bodies, various ministries and policy makers to present the challenges faced by social entrepreneurs and usher in regulatory changes.

Internationally, there is a debate on whether pro bono should be mandatory or left to the individual and his conscience. Recently, the New York bar mandated that from January 2015, all applicants must have carried out at least 50 hours of legal pro bono work before they are approved to practice law. The potentially revolutionary change is aimed at providing assistance to low-income residents. Yet most jurisdictions, including India, do not make it compulsory.

Nishith Desai Associates (NDA), an international legal firm, has carved out a separate social sector practice. "We have created a dedicated team, led by a surgeon turned lawyer, which focuses on the social sector and related areas. In addition around 60-70 hours are devoted annually to such work by our employees, giving us ample human capital and capability to fulfil our passion of contributing to change," says Nishith Desai, founder of NDA.

Suri is not averse to introduction of mandatory pro bono hours, given that the legal environment as it stands today is driven towards attaining revenue targets. "At PSA, even before we gave a formal structure to the firm's pro bono policy, 60 hours annually towards pro bono work was contained in the firm's HR policy. Time spent on such projects is counted towards an individual's performance."

In India, most law firms prefer to keep things flexible, rather than dedicating a certain percentage of revenue or a certain number of hours. Sukumar agrees with this approach: "Mandatorily imposed conditions tend to often degenerate into some form of tokenism, which we would not want to encourage."

There is however an increasing realisation of the benefits of engaging in such work. "Such assignments often involve thinking out of the box and devising creating solutions. Lawyers engaged in pro bono assignments are given full credit for time spent on it," says Vakil. "Pro bono work exposes lawyers to areas of law that they would otherwise not encounter, and this helps them become more rounded professionals. Interaction with the social sector also fosters empathy," adds Prasad. Pallavi Shroff, partner, Amarchand Mangaldas, says: "With profit generating firms increasingly looking at best practices in corporate citizenship, and we are seeing resurgence in the level of community engagement of law firms."

This resurgence will help accelerate the pace of social entrepreneurship in India where a maze of complex laws can daunt even the bravest.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Legal-fees-are-on-the-house/articleshow/21293375.cms

Torture and Sexual Assault in Police Custody

Here Justice dies ……

By Adv. Suma Joseph

When Delhi was boiling after the December 16 gang rape just fews days later on 27th  December a 55 year old woman was tortured and sexually assaulted in police custody. On 27^th December 2012, the old lady along with her grand daughter arrived at Nizammudin Railway Station. She had come to see her daughter and son in law who had lost both his legs in an accident.

She was taken into police custody on false charges of kidnapping. There were 7 police officers and no female constable to accompany her. She was beaten up all night by these police officers with no specific evidence or reason to do so. She was battered with belts and sticks by the officers. Also one of the police officer sexually assaulted her and forced her for unnatural sex.

The poor 60 year old lady was harassed for 4 days at stretch and her grand daughter left alone on the railway station. She was threatened for life and respect. When HRLN Lawyer met her in prison she was covered with bruises and wounds all over her body. The tragedy of the case is that even when she was taken before the Magistrate, he failed to see the bruises on her face and marks on her body.

What can be worst is that a poor lady was asked to submit Rs. 10, 000 as bail bond for the first time by the duty magistrate on January 1^st and later in the concerned court , the magistrate asked for furnishing surety amount of Rs. 15000. An urgent application was moved by HRLN in the high court for a fresh medical and action to be taken against the police. The court issued notice to file status report and production of the petitioner. The next date of hearing is on 21^st February 2013.

Delhi HC orders for entitlements to Below Poverty Line Women within 6 weeks

11 January 2013, NEW DELHI

In a contempt hearing initiated by the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), the Delhi High Court gave the Union of India and the NCT of Delhi “a final opportunity” to fully implement the Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) and National Maternity Benefit Scheme (NMBS) within six weeks.  If the NCT Delhi fails to fulfill its obligations by 7 March 2013, the Respondents will have to answer to the Court. The contempt petition emerges from the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Laxmi Mandal vs. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital & Ors. (W.P. (C) 8852/2008).  In its landmark decision, the Delhi High Court became the first national level court to hold that maternal mortality is a violation of a woman’s fundamental right to life. The petition outlines the circumstances leading to the preventable maternal death of Shanti Devi and the degrading conditions under which Fatema delivered her daughter, Alisha.  The High Court passed extensive orders to award compensation to the families and to ensure meaningful implementation of government schemes for Below Poverty Line women.  To date, the Respondents have not complied with these orders.

Broadly, JSY establishes cash incentives for delivery care and NMBS provides Rs. 500 to all pregnant women 8-12 weeks prior to delivery.  Because the Government of Delhi has failed to implement these schemes, homeless pregnant and lactating women like Fatema and Priya Kale, have been unable to access the government entitlements that provide them with the minimum nutritional and financial support they need to survive.

The original Writ Petition,Laxmi Mandal vs. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital & Ors. (W.P. (C) 8852/2008), details grave violations of Shanti Devi and Fatema’s fundamental rights. Shanti Devi had no choice but to carry a dead fetus in her womb for 5 days, as multiple facilities refused to treat her.  She only received medical care after the Delhi High Court intervened. While the High Court considered the petition, Shanti Devi became pregnant again, and died after giving birth to a pre-mature baby. The baby, Archana, survived and currently lives with a neighboring family. Fatema delivered her daughter, Alisha, in full public view under a tree in Jangpura, New Delhi. In both cases, the government failed to provide the women with their financial or nutritional entitlements under myriad Union of India sponsored schemes. The Court ultimately found that the Respondents violated both Shanti Devi and Fatema’s fundamental rights to life and health under the Constitution.  In addition to providing compensation to both Shanti Devi’s family and to Fatema, the Court ordered the Respondents to comply with a 2007 Supreme Court order directing all state governments and Union Territories to implement both the NMBS and JSY schemes.

HRLN will continue to pursue this matter until the most marginalized women in Delhi can fully realize their right to healthy and dignified, pregnancy, delivery, and post-partum period.

For more information, please contact:
Kerry McBroom, Director, Reproductive Rights Unit, HRLN (+91 9650316596)
or
Advocate Jayshree Satpute (+91 9871155098)

Read the order here