S-400 deal shows highest level of trust between Russia and India: Russian official
Moscow, Oct 5 : Russia's decision to sell the sophisticated S-400 Triumf air defense missile system to India by 2020 testifies to the highest level of trust and understanding between the two strategic partners, a top official of a Russian industrial conglomerate said Friday.
India and Russia concluded the USD 5 billion S-400 air defence system deal, notwithstanding the US warning that the agreement would be a "focus area" for it to implement punitive sanctions against a nation undertaking "significant" business deals with the Russians.
The deal was sealed during the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin for the annual summit with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on Friday.
"The agreement to supply S-400 to India opens up a new era in the history of military-technical cooperation between the two countries," Rostec chief Sergei Chemezov told the media while reacting to the deal.
The agreement testifies to the highest level of trust and understanding between India and Russia, he was quoted as saying by state-run Tass news agency.
"I am certain that this agreement will give a fresh impetus to strengthening and deepening cooperation in civilian industries," Rostec's press-service quotes Chemezov as saying.
Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov said that as a result of the deal India, will obtain an advanced air defense system boasting parameters superior to those of other countries' similar systems."
Under the contract New Delhi will get five regimental sets of S-400s for USD 5 billion, Tass reported.
Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport Director-General Alexander Mikheev said the delivery of the five advanced S-400 Triumf squadrons will begin in October 2020, Sputnik news agency reported.
The S-400 Triumf system is a next-generation mobile air defense system, which is capable of destroying aerial targets at an extremely long range of up to 400 kilometers.
India and Russia concluded the deal notwithstanding the US warning that it would be a "focus area" for it to implement punitive sanctions against a nation undertaking "significant" business deals with the Russians.
Relations between the US and Russia have been strained since Moscow annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 American presidential elections has further fuelled tensions.
Washington has imposed sanctions on several Russian firms. The Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act was introduced in 2017 to target Russia, Iran and North Korea with economic and political sanctions. It also prohibits any country from signing defence deals with these nations.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Umar Khalid seeks review of SC verdict denying him bail, prays for open-court hearing
New Delhi, Apr 13 (PTI): Student activist Umar Khalid has moved the Supreme Court seeking a review of a verdict that denied him bail while observing that there were reasonable grounds to believe the allegations levelled against him in connection with the conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria was requested by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared in the court for Khalid, to list the review petition in open court.
Sibal said the matter is coming up for consideration before the judges in chambers on April 16 and they have filed an application for an open-court hearing.
Justice Kumar said, "We will look into the papers. If required, we will call it."
ALSO READ: SC refuses to entertain plea against deletion of names from WB voter list, terms it ‘premature’
According to the Supreme Court's rules, review petitions are considered by judges who delivered a judgment or passed an order in chambers to remedy an apparent error or a resultant grave injustice that has been the consequence of a decision of the apex court. Parties seeking a review can request judges for an open-court hearing to rectify the grave injustice caused due to the decision under review.
On January 5, Besides Khalid, the top court had refused bail to Sharjeel Imam but granted it to five others, saying all the accused do not stand on the same footing.
Khalid and Imam, who have been incarcerated since 2020, can file fresh bail pleas after the examination of protected witnesses or after a year from the day the order was passed, the court had said, as it rejected their contention of a delay in the trial.
There was a prima-facie case against Khalid and Imam under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the top court had said, noting that prosecution material suggests that they were involved in the "planning, mobilisation and strategic direction" of the riots.
While the two will remain in jail, activists Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad were given bail by the court, which had imposed 11 conditions and said any misuse of liberty would lead to cancellation of bail.
ALSO READ: Nashik court sends ‘godman’ Kharat to seven-day judicial custody in third rape case
The court had noted that the guarantee of liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution is of foundational importance, but at the same time, the security of a community, the integrity of a trial process and the preservation of public order are equally legitimate constitutional concerns.
Khalid and Imam stand on qualitatively-different footing as compared to the other accused, the court had said.
The prosecution had prima facie disclosed "a central and formative role" and "involvement in the level of planning, mobilisation and strategic direction extending beyond episodic and localised acts", the bench had said.
The February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi broke out during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), leaving 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
The Delhi Police had arrested a total of 18 people in the conspiracy case. Of them, 11 have got bail so far.
The apex court's January order had said a delay in the trial does not operate as a "trump card" that automatically displaces statutory safeguards.
"All the appellants do not stand on equal footing as regards culpability. The hierarchy of participation emerging from the prosecution's case requires the court to examine each application individually," it had said, adding that the roles attributed to them were different.
ALSO READ: Commuters bear brunt as labour union protest halts traffic at Delhi-Noida border
"This court is satisfied that the prosecution material disclosed a prima-facie allegation against the appellants, Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.... This stage of proceedings does not justify their enlargement on bail," the apex court had said.
It had cited section 43D(5) of the UAPA, which requires the court to deny bail if, on a perusal of a case diary or a chargesheet, it finds that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such a person is prima-facie true.
Imam was arrested on January 28, 2020, for speeches made during anti-CAA protests. He was later arrested in the larger conspiracy case in August 2020.
Khalid was arrested on September 13, 2020, on charges of delivering provocative speeches on February 24 and 25 when Donald Trump, in his first term as the president of the United States, had visited India.
Strongly opposing the bail pleas, the Delhi Police had then contended that the riots were not spontaneous but an orchestrated, pre-planned and well-designed attack on India's sovereignty.
All seven accused were booked under the stringent anti-terror UAPA and provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the riots.
_vb_77.jpeg)
_vb_67.jpeg)
_vb_65.jpeg)