32 years after Mumbai serial blasts, court orders release of Tiger Memon's properties to Centre
Mumbai (PTI): A special court here has ordered that 14 properties belonging to Tiger Memon, one of the alleged masterminds of the 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts, and his family be handed over to the central government.
These properties were in possession of the Bombay High Court's receiver since 1994 following an order of the TADA (Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act court.
The 14 properties include a flat in a building in Bandra (West), an office premises in Mahim, an open plot in Mahim, a vacant plot and a flat in Santacruz (East), two flats in a building in Kurla, an office on Mohammed Ali Road, a shop and plot in Dongri, three shops in Manish Market and a building on Sheikh Memon Street, Mumbai.
On March 12, 1993, a series of 13 blasts rocked various parts of Mumbai, claiming 257 lives and injuring more than 700 others. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) later conducted a probe into the blasts case.
In an order passed last week on March 26, special TADA court judge V.D. Kedar said the "possession of the immovable properties needs to be handed over to the central government".
The properties forfeited to the Centre are "free from encumbrances" and as such the "Central government through the competent authority is entitled to get possession of 14 immovable properties," the order said.
The competent authority, under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, SAFEM (FOP) Act, had sought the release of the properties.
The plea said the function of the SAFEM (FOP) Act is to trace the illegally acquired properties of smugglers and drug traffickers and order for their forfeiture to the central government.
The forfeiture proceedings were initiated against Memon on the basis of a detention order issued by the Maharashtra government in 1992 under provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Act, 1974, it said.
Thereafter, the competent authority in 1993 ordered the forfeiture of various properties under the SAFEM (FOP) Act.
However, subsequently the said properties were in 1994 attached by the special TADA court, conducting trial in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts case, and were in the possession of the high court since then, it said.
The court had issued notices to Tiger Memon and his family in regard to the competent authority's plea. They, however, did not file any response.
The special judge, then, after going through the documents on record, held that it is necessary to set aside the attachment (order) passed in 1994.
The possession of the immovable properties needs to be handed over to the central government through the applicant (competent authority) in view of the forfeiture order passed in the year 1993, the plea added.
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.
Speaker Khader dismisses BJP's charges of 'delay' in swearing-in of Jeevaraj as MLA
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday rejected opposition BJP's allegations of delaying the swearing-in of D N Jeevaraj as MLA, asserting that the process was being handled strictly in accordance with constitutional provisions and rules.
BJP candidate Jeevaraj, who had lost the 2023 Sringeri Assembly election to Congress leader T D Raje Gowda, was declared elected late Sunday night after reverification and recounting of postal ballots in compliance with a High Court order.
The recount reduced 255 votes from Gowda's tally, overturning his earlier victory margin of 201 votes and reversing the result.
The recount followed an election petition filed by Jeevaraj.
Addressing reporters, Khader maintained that there was no delay in administering the oath to Jeevaraj, who was declared elected from the Sringeri Assembly constituency after a High Court-ordered recount of postal ballots.
“Where have we delayed? The application was submitted at 11 am. If an application is given in the morning and by evening someone says it’s delayed — how is that a delay?” he said, dismissing the allegations.
The Speaker said the matter involved 'technical issues' that required examination before fixing a date for oath-taking.
“When such a matter comes, we also need to examine it and take a decision as per rules. If an application is given in the morning, at least 24 hours must be given,” he said.
Khader stressed that his role was bound by the Constitution and not influenced by political considerations.
“When an elected MLA asks for time, we must give it under the Constitution and law. Can we refuse? No, we have to give it,” he said, rejecting suggestions that he was acting under party pressure.
He also underlined the need for trust in democratic institutions amid the controversy.
“A democracy and parliamentary system must function on trust. Without that, how can democracy be strengthened? Trust is essential,” he said, cautioning against creating suspicion around constitutional positions.
On claims that the delay was linked to the ongoing political and legal dispute over the recount, Khader said the issue did not fall within his purview.
“My responsibility is to act as per the Constitution and rules. I will ensure that whatever is due to them is done as soon as possible,” the Speaker explained.
He said he had already communicated his position when contacted and would formally inform the concerned parties. “There is no delay, nor any intention to delay. I will discharge my duties as per the Constitution,” he said.
Khader also pointed to possible legal complications in hastily administering the oath.
“If I give the oath to one person and tomorrow the court declares someone else the winner, what happens then? Will it automatically cancel? Will confusion arise?” he asked, indicating the need for due diligence.
On concerns that Jeevaraj had lost over two years of tenure, the Speaker said representation was linked to that constituency rather than an individual.
“Whoever becomes the MLA represents the constituency. Benefits are not given to an individual,” he said, adding that issues of alleged irregularities should be examined by the Election Commission.
The remarks come after the Leader of Opposition BJP in the Karnataka Assembly, R Ashoka on Wednesday accused the Speaker of 'deliberately' delaying the oath and approached Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot seeking intervention, even suggesting that the Governor administer the oath if required.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah termed the process 'Vote Dacoity' by Jeevaraj and said an FIR has been registered against the newly elected Sringeri MLA.
Defending the recount process, Jeevaraj denied allegations of tampering, while the High Court has stayed an FIR filed against him in connection with the postal ballot issue.
