Blogs

Darren Sammy’s 6 sense: How Kieron Pollard stays back and smashes

For a few years now, the old visceral thrill of watching a six has been replaced with a quiet-admiring nod. The first 13 games of this IPL has seen 191 sixes as the science of hitting the maximum has been understood by most batsmen. You could see the method in Kieron Pollard’s four sixes, a hattrick of them came in the final over, against Kings XI Punjab. With his weight on the back foot, he waits for the ball to be released and then drives through the line.

The stance, bat-lift, bat-swing, weight shift, knee-bend – every little detail is now deconstructed and reassembled in a batsman’s technique. Former West Indies skipper Daren Sammy, who has launched 237 sixes in domestic T20s and 149 sixes in international games, gives a masterclass on the art of clearing the boundary.

Banned for congenital heart condition: Let me play, appeals footballer before Delhi High Court

During the course of proceedings before Justice Navin Chawla the counsel appearing for the AIFF submitted that though Ali was a brilliant player, he cannot be allowed to play since there is a risk to his life. He further submitted that Ali was free to appeal before the AIFF’s Sports Medical Committee.

The counsel appearing for Ali pleaded before the bench that Ali should be allowed to continue with the game till the consideration of the medical committee.

Ali has been diagnosed with hypercardio myopathy, after which the AIFF wrote a letter on September 7 to the Mohammedan Sporting Club directing the Club not to allow Ali to train with the team on account of his health condition.

Mohammedan Sporting start playing in the Indian Super League on October 8 and Ali would have been their mainstay in the defence.

What is my legal remedy if my employer does not pay my salary in India?

In cases of unpaid salary, an employee can (i) approach the labour commissioner to reconcile the matter, or (ii) file a suit under Section 33(c) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for recovery of money due from an employer, or (iii) file a case with the competent authority under Payment of Wages Act 1936.

For executives and managers earning above Rs. 18,000/-, a summary suit under order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be pursued, preferably following a legal notice to the company to clear unpaid salaries. A company may also be booked for fraud under Sec 447 of Companies Act 2013 or under the Indian Penal Code.

PIL to probe government’s ‘gross mismanagement’ of pandemic dismissed by Supreme Court

A petition filed in the Supreme Court, asking for an independent inquiry by a commission into the Central Government’s “gross mismanagement” of the COVID-19 pandemic in India, has been dismissed.

The plea was filed by six retired bureaucrats and was moved through Advocate Prashant Bhushan.

Bhushan argued that the reason for seeking a commission of inquiry was for four reasons. They are broadly as follows, he said.

“Despite warning from the WHO and despite an advisory issued against crowd contacts till March 4, 1 lakh people gathered in a stadium on February 24.

“The home ministry had advised not to conduct such gatherings. The experts had advised a total lockdown in the county.

“In the lockdown there has been a 24 percent decline in GDP and 7 percentage of the people lost their jobs.

“We have not been able to control the Covid and our economy has been shattered.

“Lockdown was imposed without consulting experts. That exercise was not done.

We have not maintained any data as on who are the doctors and many healthcare professionals who died. Two crore people have lost their jobs. No planning was done prior to lockdown. How they will travel and how many people died due to the ill management of the situation.”

Justice L. Nageswara Rao said later: “This is a matter of public debate, but the court cannot go into this. The government has to be given latitude. It is a matter of opinion. Nobody knew this would happen.”

He added: “Sorry, we are not inclined to pass any order. Petition dismissed.”

Farm Bills: Save the farmer from vested interests

WHO is a farmer? It is such an omnibus term that without an exact definition the farmer can neither be benefitted nor saved. There are reasons why the farmer needs help. The farm sector is the backbone of the Indian economy. Every election sees political parties float schemes to help farmers. These schemes confuse and confound them, but many non-farmers enrich themselves. And this has gone on since 1952 and even earlier. Farmers have never had a voice in policy making. Farmers are told by experts what their problems are and what the solutions might be. Once upon a time, during the Green Revolution years of 1967-1971, farmers enjoyed great rise in incomes. But some important reforms were also introduced to socialise the economy, nationalise banks and reduce ceilings on land holdings. All very good, but bad for farm economics. Farmers got left behind and farm profitability started slipping, particularly after 1985.

Who, then, is a farmer? One way to determine this is by seeing who tills the land, plants, tends and harvests the crop or plucks the fruit. And look out for calloused hands. This person is the farmer, the tiller, the cultivator. He may not be the owner-proprietor, but could be a mere tenant, sharecropper or servant.

The crop belongs to the farmer. If the owner is not the farmer, then he may receive rent for the land or a share of the crop. The farmer does the hard work through rain, sunshine, cold. He is entitled to the best price for his crop. Don’t forget, these days, cost of inputs has skyrocketed and so has the cost of living. Add to this the farmer’s labour, cost of irrigation, fertiliser and transport expenses. These must also be included in the pricing structure, with wholesale price indexing, which is never done.
Read Related Report: Seeds of Discontent

The Swaminathan report, tasked to find solutions to the problems faced by farmers, had made some sound recommendations which assured farmers realistic prices for their produce, but it has been ignored. Wheat and paddy farmers have been assured minimum support price (MSP), e-trading has been introduced, direct marketing (outside market yards) and private marketing are some of the other features.

The Parliament has passed the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020; Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020, and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020. These laws are awaiting presidential assent.

The first Bill prohibits state governments from collecting market fee, cess or levy for trade outside notified APMC (mandi), removes inter-state trade barriers and provides a framework for electronic trading directly between a buyer and a farmer. In simple words, it breaks the state’s control over farmers, enabling them to choose whom they want to sell their produce to and at what price. This dries up money laundering and other exploitative practices. No wonder the local politician, trader and middleman are fuming.

The second Bill allows farmers to enter into contracts with private corporates at a mutually agreed price. The concern was that this would do away with MSP, leading to exploitation of farmers. The government has confirmed that this is not true and MSP will continue. So the “mutually agreed price” will always be greater or equal to MSP. Problem solved. But would the Opposition explain this to the farmers?

The third Bill removes cereals, pulses, oilseeds, edible oils, onions and potatoes from the list of essential commodities and provides for deregulation of production, storage, movement and distribution of these items. The concern is that this move undermines food security. Governments still hold the power to regularise in case of famine, shortages, wars, etc. This means that, when actually needed, they will act. In normal times, they won’t. So now, the hoarders have a big problem. They cannot dictate terms anymore. Hence, their protest.

In a nutshell, the government is trying to open up the agriculture market, ensuring minimum price and food security. Opposition parties, hoarders, and middlemen are protesting because they will no longer control the transactions nor siphon off subsidies not meant for them. Some farmer organisations are also protesting because they are being misled on MSP. The other problem is tax exemption for agricultural income. Farmers don’t have taxable income because if their expenses are taken into reckoning, their incomes would drop considerably and may not remain taxable at all.

Indian farmers have never been united. All farmers have similar grievances worldwide like exploitation by middlemen, not receiving full price for their produce, inadequate crop insurance and heavy indebtedness. Our farmers are no exception, but they have never been able to articulate their problems in one voice to make the nation sit up and listen. This is one of the traits of every farming community.

Punjabi and Haryanvi farmers may unite (the two states were one from 1849 till 1966), but farmers of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka or Tamil Nadu may not. Language is no barrier at all when two men are facing the same difficulties. But the farmers lobby has been kept divided by the powers that be. Another aspect is that too many people who exploit farmers have got on the bandwagon of protest, diluting the real issues and making a mockery of farmers’ problems.

Recently, all across the board, there was wide debate on many issues like GST, demonetisation, Article 370, CAA, India-China clash, etc. Isn’t it time that farmers grievances are taken up for discussion? Even an actor’s unfortunate death and his ex-girlfriend’s detention have swallowed all the attention, but the picture of a farmer, struggling in the hot sun to feed us, does not appear on TV screens.

Today’s protesters are not farmers at all, but tradesmen, businessmen and middlemen, some of whom may also farm to avoid taxes as farm incomes are tax free. But their cries are loud as they are backed by politicians, making farmers their pawns. This has always been the case in India.

Only a strong rural leader like Chaudhry Sir Chhotu Ram, one of the founders of the Unionist Party in 1924, can champion the cause of farmers. Ram was a statesman of high calibre. He stood like a colossus in support of farmers to protect them from indebtedness and exploitation. He ditched the Congress Party in 1916 to start the Unionist Party on a non-sectarian farmer platform. The party won the highest number of votes in every election till 1946, and Ram remained its undisputed senior statesman.

Ram was born in a small farmer’s family of Garhi Sampla in District Rohtak in 1881, educated at St Stephen’s College (BA 1905) and Allahabad University (LL.B. 1911). In 1915, Ram entered politics as District President of the Congress Party, but soon got disillusioned and started the Unionist Party in 1924. This was a secular outfit which believed in promoting the interests of farmers who had been exploited for too long and had fallen into an ever-spiralling debt trap.

Ram became very influential in Punjab as the champion of farmers. He piloted the Golden Laws which protected farmers through restitution of mortgaged lands, relief of indebtedness, regulation of accounts, registration of money lenders, consolidation of holdings and setting up of the first agricultural produce markets. Ram was knighted in 1937.

Special Court acquits all 32 accused in Babri Masjid demolition case; sweets distributed at Joshi’s house

A special CBI court today acquitted all 32 accused, including BJP veterans LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti, of criminal conspiracy charges almost 28 years after the Babri Masjid was demolished in Ayodhya.

Special CBI Court judge Surendra Kumar Yadav, in his 2,000-page judgment, said that he found that evidences against the accused were not strong enough and that the Babri Mosque demolition incident was not preplanned.

Ayodhya’s Babri Masjid was demolished by kar sevaks on December 6, 1992.

Supreme Court to hear Sumedh Saini’s plea seeking protection from arrest, on October 5

The Supreme Court will resume hearing of the case of former Punjab Director General of Police Sumedh Saini on October 5. Saini has sought protection from arrest in the 1991 case of kidnapping and murder of a junior engineer, Balwant Singh Multani.

On September 15, the Supreme Court had issued notice to the Punjab government on Saini’s petition seeking anticipatory bail and had asked the state government to respond within three weeks. It also included another one week for Saini to file his rejoinder.

While granting an interim protection from arrest to the former Punjab DGP, the apex court had asked him to cooperate in the investigation.

Multani, a junior engineer with Chandigarh Industrial and Tourism Corporation, was allegedly picked up by the police in December 1991. Saini was injured in the attack and three policemen were killed.

On September 8, the high court had dismissed Saini’s two pleas, including the one for anticipatory bail, observing that the same cannot be allowed as there is every likelihood of him stifling fair investigation and trial.

The 1982 batch IPS officer, was booked along with six others on May 6, at Mataur police station in Mohali for the alleged kidnapping of Multani. The murder charge was invoked in August after two of the accused policemen turned approvers and alleged that Saini was a culprit.

This is not the only case in which Saini is accused. He, along with three others, is on trial in a Special CBI Court in Delhi for allegedly abducting automobile businessman Vinod Kumar, his brother-in-law Ashok Kumar and their driver Mukhtiyar Singh. It has been alleged that the police picked up Vinod and Mukhtiyar from the parking lot of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on March 15, 1994.

All practicing advocates who are members of State Bar Councils can now submit details till Nov 15

The Bar Council of India has decided to extend the deadline for submission of details of all practicing advocates enrolled with their respective State Bar Councils as per the requirement of the E-Committee of the Supreme Court of India.

The BCI decided this after considering the requests received from various quarters including various Bar Associations and State Bar Councils to extend the last date for furnishing the information as per the format required by the E-Committee of the Supreme Court.

he General Council of BCI has also clarified that there shall be no further extension granted and any Advocate or Bar Association who/which does not cooperate in this endeavor shall be dealt with firmly.

Babri demolition case: Muslim leaders to challenge verdict; Babri vanished magically, says Owaisi

Hours after the special CBI court pronounced the verdict on Babri Masjid demolition case, acquitting all 32 accused, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said it would appeal against the ruling in the high court.

Special CBI judge Surendra Kumar Yadav in Lucknow, in his 2,000-page judgment, said that the evidences against the accused were not strong enough and the Babri Mosque demolition incident was not preplanned.

The verdict which is both historic as well as contentious has gathered mixed response from different communities and the political parties.

Muslim leaders, who were associated with the Ram Janmabhoomi- Babri Masjid title suits, said that they would challenge the special CBI court’s verdict.

Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) convener Zafaryab Jilani said that he was not ‘satisfied’ with the verdict and that it would be challenged in the high court. Jilani said that the CBI failed to put up a strong case despite there being enough evidence against the BJP and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leaders, who had been charged with conspiracy to bring down the disputed structure.

Mathura court refuses to admit plea wanting removal of mosque adjacent to Krishna Janmabhoomi

The Mathura Civil Court has refused to admit a plea seeking removal of the mosque adjacent to Krishna Janmabhoomi in Mathura.

The Court has dismissed the plea on ground that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, had exempted litigation on ownership over disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid litigation, but had barred any other court from entertaining litigation that would alter the status quo of a religious place as existed in 1947.

A civil suit had been filed before the Mathura civil court to reclaim Krishna Janmabhoomi in Mathura. The suit sought reclamation of the 13.37 acre land along with declarations that the previous compromise deed and Court decrees will not be binding. The Respondents in the suit were the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board and Committee of Management of Trust Masjid Idgah.

The suit sought removal of encroachment and superstructure illegally raised by Committee of Management of alleged Trust Masjid Idgah with the consent of Sunni Central Board of Waqf on land Khewat No.255 at Katra Keshav Dev city Mathura belonging to deity Shree Krishna Virajman.

The suit had been filed on behalf of the deity along with devotees to ensure that Dharshan, Pooja, rituals according to Vedic Sanatan Dharma, faith, belief, usages, traditions and customs guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India are performed at the actual birth place. It also sought that the Sunni Waqf Board, Trust Masjid Idgah and their men, workers, attorneys and every person working under them be restrained from entering into the premises of the 13.37 acres of land in question.

The plaintiffs asked for removal of the construction illegally raised by them without authority of law at the property in question and have claimed their right under Article 26 of the Constitution of India to regain, hold and manage the property belonging to, owned and possessed by deity Lord Shree Krishna Virajmaan.

According to the plaintiffs, the property in question is under the proprietorship of Shree Krishn Janmbhoomi Trust, and the deity and the Trust have infeasible right in the property in question. Therefore no person, body of person, Trust or authority has any right to claim any part of the property in question on the ground that it has been in illegal possession for the last more than 12 years.