Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

India Judiciary Taking over Executives's Functions: Govt to SC

Discussion in 'Breaking News' started by Archived_Member16, Jul 16, 2011.

  1. Archived_Member16

    Archived_Member16
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,451
    Likes Received:
    3,761
    July 16, 2011

    Judiciary taking over executive's functions: Govt to SC

    Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN - Jul 16, 2011, 01.10am IST

    NEW DELHI:
    The Centre on Friday vented its strong opposition to what it termed the judiciary taking over the executive's function and moved the Supreme Court seeking recall of the black money order to oversee a probe that includes alleged hawala operations of Hasan Ali Khan and Kashinath Tapuria.

    "The order completely eliminated the role and denuded the constitutional responsibility of the executive which itself is answerable to Parliament," the UPA government said, reflecting its growing irritation about judiciary inserting itself in the black money probe and also its growing frustration over setbacks in cases like Salwa Judum and the 2G scam.

    Although it has been chafing for a while now, this is the first time the government openly termed an SC order delivered on July 4 on black money as a clear instance of judicial overreach and sought stay of its operation.

    The courts do not substitute their views and judgment in matters which squarely fall within the executive's domain, the government said and alleged that the black money order completely erased the executive's role.

    "It is contrary to settled legal principle that the function of the court is to see that lawful authority is duly exercised by the executive, but not to take over itself the tasks entrusted to the executive," the Centre said.

    Referring to SC's comments on the Union government's policy decision on Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty, the Centre said the judgment "impinges upon the well settled principle that courts do not interfere with the economic policy which is the domain of the executive and that it is not the function of the court to sit in judgment over the matters of economic policy, which must necessarily be left to the expert bodies."

    Reflecting the deep resentment against the July 4 order of Justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar, it said: "The said order impinges upon the principle that in matters of utilities, tax and economic policy, legislation and regulation cases, the court exercises judicial self-restraint if not judicial deference to the acts of the executive, since the executive has obligations and responsibility both constitutionally and statutorily."

    The SC had set up a SIT headed by a retired Supreme Court judge accusing the government agencies of probing the black money, an issue of national importance, laggardly.

    It said: "The discussion of economic theories and the wide ranging criticism of the state in paras 1 to 20 is uncalled for, unjustified and made without any discussion in court or material therefore."

    It objected to the SC's criticism of Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty (DTAA) and said: "The order so far it purports to subject the treaty making powers of the sovereign countries to judicial review impinges upon the legal and constitutional principles that such treaties are not subject to judicial review of courts."

    source:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-functions-Govt-to-SC/articleshow/9241091.cms
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Loading...


  3. ac_marshall

    ac_marshall
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    255
    Well, it's good to see that the Judiciary in India is intervening to fairly investigate the matter of black money in a situation where the legislature and executive have failed. I hope this continues and applies to crimes and genocide also.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. kds1980

    kds1980 India
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,504
    Likes Received:
    2,738
    The problem is even judiciary is not free from corruption or political andand media influence.Just look at the cases of 1984 killers.Judges just converted them into life sentences while in the case of Bhullar they just ignored all evidence and gave him Death penalty
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. ac_marshall

    ac_marshall
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    255
    Yes Kanwardeep Singhji, the judiciary also is not completely free. In Mr. Bhullar's case, Justice MB Shah had actually acquitted Mr. Bhullar dismissing the Police Theory and the presented confession as "teller made confession". Despite that, the other 2 judges convicted him. In case of 1984 riots, only some pawns were convicted. The Bishops, Knights and Rooks of the genocide had a good escape. Despite Justice Nanavati's findings no action against the congressmen has ever been initiated. They have rather been protected well. Take the case of Kamalnath himself. He claimed diplomatic immunity while he was summoned by a US court. Sajan Kumar, Tytler, Oscar Fernandes, etc will continue to roam free and enjoy power.

    One can also observe that 90% of those executed and those condemned are poor. In Mr. Bhullar's case, if he had really killed any non-Congress person probably there would have been no political interference. In this case it appears to me that his clemency plea was rejected because he is alleged to have carried out the bomb blast to kill MS Bitta (a congress man).

    The case of Mahendra Nath Das, a death row convict from Assam charged with murder was also destined to the gallows on the same day as Bhullar may be compared with that of Manu Sharma and Sushil Sharma. Both of them are related to congress leaders. People had to take to streets of Delhi to get Manu Sharma arrested. Despite the conviction in the heinous rape and murder of model Jessica Lal he was given only life sentence. Same with Tandoor case murderer Sushil Sharma, then youth congress leader who was initially sentenced to death and later commuted. Manu was even given a parole by the Delhi CM ad he roamed free till a news channel exposed him.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. kds1980

    kds1980 India
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,504
    Likes Received:
    2,738
    Whether someone is pawn is no justification of not giving him death sentence .Forget about India I don't think Politicians anywhere in world which are in power get punished as long their party remains in power.Many people still believe That Stalin was the biggest mass murderer yet he died as unpunished and as role model for many people,I am sure if the result of second world war would had been in favour of Hitler in Soviet then we all have been cursing Stalin and communists the way we curse Nazi's
     
  7. ac_marshall

    ac_marshall
    Expand Collapse
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    255
    I didn't say that a pawn deserved commutation of death sentence. I just pointed out at the fact of the conviction. I would rather say that those involved in genocide should be executed immediately.

    Even if pawns, if a murder was targeted at congress members or even at a goon who carried out violence for congress (the then and present ruling party) they would have been executed long ago.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page