Supreme Court responsible for economic slowdown, says Harish Salve | WeForNews | Latest News, Blogs Supreme Court responsible for economic slowdown, says Harish Salve – WeForNews | Latest News, Blogs
Connect with us

India

Supreme Court responsible for economic slowdown, says Harish Salve

Published

on

Harish Salve

Sep 17 : Senior advocate Harish Salve has blamed the Supreme Court for India for current economic slowdown, saying the decline began with the apex court judgment in the 2012 2G spectrum case, when it cancelled 122 spectrum licences issued to telecom operators, redrawing India’s telecom industry.

“… I squarely blame the Supreme Court,” he told fellow senior advocate Indira Jaising in an interview for her legal news website, The Leaflet.

“I can understand holding people responsible for the wrong distribution of licenses in 2G… Blanket cancellation of licences where foreigners are investing… See, when a foreigner invested it was your rule which said he must have an Indian partner. The foreigner did not know how the Indian partner got a licence,” he said.

“Foreigners invested billions of dollars, and with one stroke of the pen, the Supreme Court knocked all of them out. That’s when the decline of the economy began.”

In 2010, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) revealed that the 2G scam had caused a loss of Rs 1.76 lakh crore to the exchequer. The Supreme Court had then cancelled 122 licences in February 2012, rejecting the arguments presented by Salve, who appeared for 11 telecom companies in the case.

In December 2017, a CBI trial court acquitted former Union ministers and key accused A. Raja and Kanimozhi, along with 15 others and said that the scam was “conjectured” by some people who created a “scam by artfully arranging a few selected facts and exaggerating things beyond recognition to astronomical levels”.

India

Public comments invited for proposed rules on registering vintage vehicles

The restriction in the definition- no substantial overhaul of the vehicle which includes modification in chassis or body shell, and/or engine.

Published

on

vintage vehicles india

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has published GSR 734 (E) dated 25 Nov 2020 seeking comments and suggestions in regards to Amendment to CMVR 1989 relating to Vintage Motor Vehicles.

Through this notification the Ministry intends to formalize the registration process of the Vintage Motor Vehicles. There are no existing rules for regulating the registration process of vehicles of heritage value. These rules are proposed to be inserted as sub-rules 81A, 81B, 81C, 81D, 81E, 81F, 81G in the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.

The draft rules define Vintage Motor Vehicles as all those vehicles which are two-wheelers and four-wheelers (non-commercial/personal use) and are more than 50 years old from the date of their first registration (including imported vehicle) are proposed to be called as the Vintage Motor Vehicles. The restriction in the definition- no substantial overhaul of the vehicle which includes modification in chassis or body shell, and/or engine.

Procedure: It is proposed that all applications for registration shall be applied on “PARIVAHAN” portal. It is further proposed that:

• All States registering authority will appoint a nodal officer who will process all applications for registration of Vintage Motor Vehicles.

• Further, States will form a Committee which will inspect a vehicle and declare whether the vehicle is fit for registration under Vintage Motor Vehicle.

• If approved, a 10 digit alpha numeric number will be assigned to the respective Vintage vehicle. This registration shall be valid for 10 years. The format for the registration mark will consist of the letters “XX VA YY ”, where VA stands for vintage, XX stands for State code, YY will be a two letter series and “” is a number from 0001 to 9999 allotted by State Registering Authority.

• Fees for a new registration- INR 20,000 and subsequent re-registration- INR 5,000.

• If a vehicle is registered as a Vintage Motor Vehicle, the sale and purchase of the vehicle is allowed under the rules.

• Restricted use of Vintage Motor Vehicle: A Vintage Motor vehicle is allowed to run on Indian roads only for display, technical research or taking part in a vintage car rally, refueling and maintenance, exhibitions, vintage rallies, to and fro to such exhibition / car rally.

Objective is to preserve and promote the heritage of old vehicles in India.

Objections and suggestions to these draft rules, if any, may be sent to the Director (MVL), email : [email protected], Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Transport Bhawan, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110 001 within 30 days of the date of notification.

Continue Reading

India

Public suggestions invited for notifying rules for registering nominees of motor vehicle owners

Nomination facility is proposed to be incorporated at the time of registration of the vehicles.

Published

on

vehicle sales

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has invited suggestions and comments from public and all stakeholders on the proposed amendment to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 to facilitate the owner of the vehicle for nominating a person (Nominee in RC). The draft notification GSR 739 (E) dated 26th November 2020 has been published by the Ministry.

Nomination facility is proposed to be incorporated at the time of registration of the vehicles. This would help the motor vehicle to be registered / transferred in the name of the nominee, in case of the death of the owner of the vehicle. The process is otherwise cumbersome and non-uniform across the country.

The amendments proposed in the Central Motor Vehicles Rule, 1989 are as under:-

(a) Rule 47. Application for registration of motor vehicles:- An additional clause is proposed to be inserted wherein “proof of identity of nominee, if any” to enable the owner to nominate anyone to be the legal heir of the vehicle in case of death.

(b) Rule 55. Transfer of ownership:- In sub-rule (2), it has been proposed that an additional clause may be inserted wherein “proof of identity of nominee, if any” to enable the owner to nominate anyone to be the legal heir of the vehicle in case of death.

(c) Rule 56. Transfer of ownership in case of death:- (i) In sub-rule (2), which is regarding the process to transfer the vehicle to the legal heir in case there is no nominee has been specified by the registered owner, it is proposed thatAn additional clause may be inserted wherein “proof of identity of nominee, if any” to enable the owner to nominate a nominee.

(d) A new sub-rule for insertion wherein it has been proposed that in case where the nominee is already specified, the vehicle will be transferred in the name of nominee and nominee will have to upload the death certificate on the portal to inform the registering authority and apply for a new certificate of registration in his name through the portal which will be faceless if Aadhaar authentication is chosen by the nominee. For Change in Nominee in Contingency it is proposed the possibility of change in nominee in case of any contingency arising out of special circumstances viz., divorce, division of property, transfer of assets without sale may be arrived at with an agreed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for such nomination, which may be done by such owners.

(e) Rule 57. Transfer of ownership in case vehicle is purchased in public auction:- In sub-rule (1) which is regarding the application for registration of motor vehicles, An additional clause may be inserted wherein “proof of identity of nominee, if any” to enable the owner to nominate anyone to be the legal heir of the vehicle in case of death.

(f) Amendment of FORM 20, Form 23 A, 24, 30, 31 and 32 has also been proposed for amendment to include details of the nominee and the declaration from the registered owner for entering the details of the nominee.

Certificates/orders issued by SDM/DM/Tribunals/ Hon’ble Courts may also be used for facilitating this citizen friendly service and such window would be made available in the proposed amendment.

Objections and suggestions to these draft rules, if any, may be sent to the Joint Secretary (MVL), email: [email protected] , Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Transport Bhawan, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110 001 within 30 days of date of notification.

Continue Reading

India

Arnab Goswami’s interim bail in abetment-to-suicide case will continue till Bombay HC disposes his plea: SC

His interim bail will be operative for another 4 weeks from day HC decides his plea in case: SC

Published

on

Arnab Goswami

New Delhi, November 27

Sixteen days after ordering release of Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami, the Supreme Court on Friday delivered a detailed judgement which said the FIR against him prima facie didn’t establish abetment to suicide charge.

A Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud went to the extent of questioning the FIR against Goswami.

It said prima facie evaluation of FIR about alleged non-payment of dues driving the businessman to commit suicide prima facie didn’t establish a charge of abetment to suicide against Goswami.

It criticised the Bombay High Court for failing to protect Goswami’s fundamental rights.

The Bench – which also included Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Indira Banerjee – said courts must ensure that state didn’t use criminal law as a tool to harass citizens and jeopardise their liberties.

It said the Bombay High Court failed to take a prima facie view of the FIR and the nature of accusation against Goswami and erred in denying him bail.

The Bombay High Court abdicated its duty in protecting the liberties of a citizen (Goswami) allegedly targeted by the Maharashtra government he had been critical of.

The top court ordered that the interim bail granted to Goswami and two other accused – Feroz Mohammad Shaikh and Neetish Sarda -on November 11 would remain operational until the Bombay High Court disposed of their plea for quashing of the FIR.

The interim bail will remain in force for four weeks after the high court’s order and if the high court rejects their plea, they can move the top court.

The Supreme Court had on November 11 granted interim bail to Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami in an abetment to suicide case, saying it would be a travesty of justice if personal liberty of a person was curtailed like this.

“We are of the considered view that the High Court was in error in rejecting the application for the grant of interim bail, it had said.

In its interim order, the top court had ordered the Maharashtra authorities to release the journalist forthwith.

If state governments target individuals, they must realise that there is the Supreme Court to protect the liberty of citizens, it had noted.

A reasoned verdict would be delivered later, it had said on November 11.

Expressing serious concern over state governments targeting some individuals on the basis of ideology and difference of opinion, the top court had said they must realise that there is the Supreme Court to protect the liberty of citizens.

Goswami and the two other accused had challenged the Bombay High Court’s November 9 order denying them interim bail in connection with the 2018 alleged abetment to suicide of an interior designer and had asked them to approach the sessions court.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Most Popular

Corona Virus (COVID-19) Live Data

COVID-19 affects different people in different ways. Most infected people will develop mild to moderate illness and recover without hospitalization.