Gauri Lankesh murder: Inclined to set aside part of HC order on quashing of charge sheet, says SC
New Delhi, Sep 21: The Supreme Court Tuesday "tentatively" indicated that it is inclined to set aside a part of the high court order quashing the charge sheet against an accused, allegedly involved in the murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh, for the purported offences under the provisions of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act (KCOCA).
A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar told the lawyer appearing for the accused that what has been given to him is "bonus" as the Karnataka High Court has also quashed the charge sheet against him for the alleged offences under the KCOCA.
The apex court observed this while hearing the pleas including the one filed by Kavitha Lankesh, sister of the slain journalist, challenging the April 22 this year order of the high court quashing the August 14, 2018 order of the police authority granting approval to invoke the provision of KCOCA for investigation against Mohan Nayak.
Lankesh was shot dead on the night of September 5, 2017, from a close range near her house in Rajarajeshwari Nagar in Bengaluru.
"We are tentatively indicating to you that we are inclined to quash the last part of the order. On prior approval, even if we uphold the finding given by the high court, the fact remains that nothing prevents the investigating agency to investigate on the factum of whether you are member of that syndicate or not and to present charge sheet after collating the material in that regard," the bench, also comprising justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar, told the counsel appearing for Nayak.
"So far as you are concerned, what has been given to you is bonus. The charge sheet has also been quashed," observed the bench, which reserved its order on the petitions.
The top court also questioned the counsel appearing for the state as to how approval for invoking KCOCA was granted by the authority without there being any prior offence registered against the accused and how could he be levelled as a member of the organised crime syndicate.
The state's counsel said the preliminary charge sheet was filed under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act and thereafter, during investigation the role of accused came to notice of the investigation officer after which the approval was sought.
"This charge sheet material comes after investigation. At that stage, without there being any offence registered against this particular person how can you level him as member of the organised crime syndicate unless there is some material which was placed before the authority to give prior approval," the bench observed.
It said to be a member of the organised crime syndicate, a person has to be part of the continuing unlawful activity of the syndicate.
During the arguments, the counsel appearing for the accused said if the arguments of the prosecution is to be accepted then anyone can be said to be member of the syndicate
When the counsel termed the law "draconian", the bench said, "Once the validity of the Act has been upheld, how can you say draconian?".
"These laws have their own purpose," the bench said.
The lawyer said the law has been misused and that is why they have approached the court.
The bench said on the aspect of prior approval, the counsel for the accused may be right but to say that no offence has been registered in the past, so he cannot be proceeded at all, is not correct.
The counsel appearing for Kavitha Lankesh argued that high court has erred in coming to the conclusion that KCOCA was not applicable against the accused.
He referred to the role of the accused, as noted in the high court order, and said it is alleged that he had taken a house on rent in the guise of running acupressure clinic but it was meant to accommodate the members of the syndicate.
The bench, after hearing the submissions, asked the parties to file their written submissions within a week.
In its order, the high court had said, "If the approval order itself is bad in law, the sanction order, the charge sheet and the approval order so far as the offences under the Act (KCOCA) against the petitioner (Nayak) have no legs to stand."
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.
EC role, Hindu vote consolidation among factors for BJP win in Bengal polls: J-K CM Omar
Srinagar (PTI): Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Tuesday attributed the BJP's West Bengal win to a "significant role" played by the Election Commission (EC), alongside a consolidation of Hindu votes and a fractured minority mandate.
Abdullah also said the INDIA bloc needs to define its role in the political landscape of the country and make it clear whether the opposition alliance was limited to the parliamentary elections or extended to the state elections as well.
Talking to PTI Videos, Abdullah hinted that the EC has compromised its neutrality by conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in West Bengal and linked it to the BJP's gains in the state, claiming large-scale deletion of legitimate voters.
On the performance of the BJP in the just concluded assembly elections, Abdullah said the saffron party has almost nothing to show in southern states.
"So then you look at West Bengal and Assam. Yes, the BJP improved its tally in Assam. There are various reasons for that. You know as well as I do, what those are. West Bengal, I think we need to look at the results very carefully," he said.
"The easiest explanation for the West Bengal result is the serious curtailing of voter list," Abdullah said.
"Voters found their names deleted. People who served in uniform and fought for this country on the borders, who were considered Indian citizens all their lives, were suddenly held to a higher standard and not allowed to vote. Something is not right," he said.
While alleging that the EC played a "significant part" in the results, the chief minister admitted the outcome was multifaceted and noted a consolidation of over 60 per cent of the Hindu vote towards the BJP and a "significant fracture" in the minority vote, particularly in seats where Muslims constitute over 50 per cent of the population.
"There is no doubt that the role of the Election Commission played a significant part in the results but we will also have to look at the other factors," he said.
He said the results of West Bengal cannot be compared to those in other states. "The situation was unique to West Bengal. The SIR that was done, the way in which the voter lists were changed, the sort of minute scrutiny that the Election Commission subjected West Bengal to, the role of the central investigative agencies.
"All of these are situations that at least in recent electoral history of India are unique to West Bengal. So to suggest that we can learn lessons from West Bengal and implement them in other parts of the country, I think would not be correct," he said.
Abdullah had recently said that if the West Bengal results throw a surprise, the role of EC will come under scrutiny.
However, during Tuesday's interview, the chief minister said he still maintains that electronic voting machines (EVMs) do not lead to vote theft.
"What we saw in West Bengal...I know there are a lot of people who believe that the EVMs themselves are flawed. I am not a proponent of that conspiracy theory.
"But I do believe that the Election Commission has done itself no favours in the way in which it has gone about both the process of delimitation and the process of finalisation of electoral rolls," he said and cited the example of delimitation exercise in Jammu and Kashmir or Assam.
"These are clear examples of how the process was done to benefit one party or in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, one party and its allies. And the results speak for themselves. You created seven new seats in Jammu and Kashmir and out of those six seats were won by the BJP. You redrew assembly constituencies to benefit one particular party or its allies. And the same is true for West Bengal as well," he said.
Referring to the INIDA bloc, he said the election results were no new message for the alliance.
"We need to decide what the INDIA bloc is for. Is it only for Parliament or for state elections as well?" he asked.
"What happened in West Bengal is unfortunate. The Congress and TMC fought against each other. Now the Congress agrees with Mamata Banerjee that 100 seats were stolen, but the fact is they fought each other," he said.
Despite the friction, Abdullah reaffirmed the "pre-eminent position" of the Congress within the opposition alliance, dismissing the idea of any other party assuming the mantle.
"The Congress is the only party other than the BJP with a pan-India presence. All of us acknowledge this," he stated.
"To suggest someone else can assume a leadership role would be incorrect. Kharge Sahib is the president of the Congress, and by virtue of that, he assumes leadership of the INDIA bloc meetings. That is the way it should be," the chief minister said.
Abdullah said any 'Common Minimum Programme' would depend on whether the opposition alliance decides to fight state assembly elections collectively, noting that he would share his specific views with the bloc internally rather than through the media.
