At least 61 killed in clashes in Yemen's Hodeida
Hodeida, Nov 11 : At least 61 combatants have been killed in clashes in Yemen's flashpoint Hodeida, medics and a military source said Sunday, and dozens of wounded taken to hospitals outside the city.
Medics in the Red Sea city reported 43 Huthi rebels and nine loyalists killed in clashes over the past 24 hours. Another nine loyalist fighters were reported killed by medics at a hospital in government-held Mokha, south of Hodeida. A government military source confirmed the toll.
Dozens of wounded rebels were transferred to hospitals in the provinces of Sanaa and Ibb, further inland, a source at the Hodeida military hospital said.
A pro-government alliance, led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are pushing to seize Hodeida from Yemen's Shiite Huthi rebels, who are linked to Iran.
More than 400 combatants have been killed in 10 days of clashes in Hodeida, a city on Yemen's Red Sea coastline that is home to the impoverished country's most valuable port.
Government forces have pressed further into the strategic port city, seizing its main hospital in heavy fighting Saturday, as they try to advance on Hodeida's vital docks Hodeida has been controlled by the Huthis since 2014, when the rebels seized the capital Sanaa and a string of port cities.
The World Health Organisation estimates nearly 10,000 people have been killed since 2015, when Saudi Arabia and its allies joined the government's war against the Huthis, driving the insurgents from the Red Sea coastline but failing to retake Hodeida.
Other rights groups believe the toll may be five times as high.
The conflict has triggered what the UN calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis, with 14 million Yemenis facing mass starvation.
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.
Delhi HC Judge Justice Sharma to pass order on recusal plea by Kejriwal at 4.30 pm
New Delhi (PTI): Delhi High Court Judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday said that she would pronounce her verdict at 4.30 pm on pleas by Arvind Kejriwal and others seeking her recusal in the liquor policy case, as she took on record additional pleadings by the AAP chief on his plea.
Justice Sharma said although the pronouncement was scheduled for 2:30 pm, she was "going out of her way" in accepting Kejriwal's rejoinder as a written submission in the matter.
The former chief minister virtually appeared before the judge through video conferencing and urged her to take on record his rejoinder to the written submissions filed by the CBI.
Even as Kejriwal asserted that the registry's refusal to take his rejoinder on record was "miscarriage of justice", Justice Sharma remarked that since he was not being represented by a lawyer, the court went "out of its way" for him when it permitted him to file his additional affidavit last week even after the order on the recusal issue was reserved.
The judge said that as per the registry's rule, a party in-person must take permission from the court to file anything and since the present case was not "extraordinary", the same practice was being followed.
She added that in law, there is no concept of filing a "rejoinder" to the opposite party's written submissions, and she would permit Kejriwal to tender his pleadings as written submissions instead, so that he does not feel that he was not heard.
"You say you have respect for me. I have respect for every litigant. The rule of court will not be changed for anyone so I will treat it as written submissions. I am taking it on record. I am giving the indulgence to Mr Kejriwal," the court stated.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI and opposed Kejriwal's request to file rejoinder. Mehta said nowhere in the country were pleadings taken on record after order was reserved a court.
He also said there is no concept of filing rejoinder to a written submission, and the court should do what it would do for any ordinary litigant.
Kejriwal had raised several objections against the judge hearing the CBI's plea against his discharge in the liquor policy case, including that she had earlier denied him relief on his petition challenging his arrest and refused to grant relief on the bail pleas of other accused, including Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha.
He also claimed that Justice Sharma had made "strong and conclusive" findings.
The former Delhi chief minister further alleged a "direct conflict of interest", claiming that the judge's children are empanelled central government lawyers who receive work through the solicitor general, who is appearing in the matter for the CBI.
Besides Kejriwal, the applications for recusal of the judge were also filed by AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak.
Other respondents, including Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai, have also sought her recusal.
Solicitor General urged Justice Sharma to initiate contempt action against Kejriwal and others for seeking her recusal.
Terming concerns by Kejriwal and others as "apprehensions of an immature mind," Mehta told the court it was a matter of "institutional respect" and Justice Sharma should not succumb to pressure as her recusal on "unfounded allegations" would set a bad precedent.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and others in the Delhi liquor policy case, saying that the CBI's case was wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.
