Kerala High Court quashes FIR registered against Swiss National accused of maoist links

The Kerala High court on Tuesday quashed the case registered against Swiss national Jonathan Baud, who had been arrested by the Kerala police suspecting him to be a Maoist. He had allegedly attended a public meeting held to commemorate a suspected Maoist leader.

 The High Court flayed the approach of the Kerala police, which several times failed to explain before the Court about the alleged crime committed by the Swiss youth. 

A student of International Economic History at Paul Bairoch Institute of Economic History in Geneva, Baud was arrested by the Kerala police, who suspected him to be a Maoist as he had attended a public meeting held for Maoist leader Sinoj at his native place Thriprayar in Thrissur on July 28. 

Baud and his friend Valerie were on tourist visa in India since July 1. While in Kozhikode on July 25, he saw a newspaper report about the commemorative meeting held for Maoist leader Sinoj at his native place Thriprayar in Thrissur. He went to Thriprayar and attended the meeting on July 28.

As the presence of a foreigner created curiosity in the meeting, he introduced himself. Post-meeting, he was arrested by police, who suspected him to be a Maoist. He was later grilled by IB and state intelligence officials.

Post-arrest, he was remanded in judicial custody, but was released on bail after 12 days. Later, he moved the Kerala High Court, seeking an order to quash the case registered against him. When the Prosecution stuck to the stand that Baud had violated visa conditions by addressing the gathering, the Court watched the video of his address. After going through the Malayalam translation of his speech, the Court had observed that there was nothing objectionable in the speech that demands framing of the offence under section 14 (b) of the Foreigners Act. 

Judge P Ubaid, who quashed the FIR, observed that the police had abused the process of law. He was a radical neither in India nor abroad, said the Court.

Petition filed in Madras High Court seeking to restrain the Indian team from continuing its tour of Australia in the wake of Philip Hughes' death

In the wake of the untimely death of Australian cricketer Phil Hughes, K. Praveen Kumar has moved the Madras High Court on Monday for restraining the Indian team from continuing its tour of Australia, saying pitches in that country are bouncy and players could face a threat to their lives. 

(File picture: Philip Hughes)

 __________

Petition also seeks a direction from the court to the Ministry of Culture and Youth Affairs and Sports to take over BCCI management and ensure effective and trustworthy conduct of national and international cricket matches in the interest of the public.

__________ 

 

He avers in his petition that four cricketers had died since 1870 after being hit by a cricket ball. The doctor who attended on Hughes had said the injury he suffered was catastrophic. According to Kumar, the Indian team should not continue the tour unless and until total protection was given to the players. He said the death of Hughes had rekindled the debate on risks to head and brain injuries. Though cricketers wear helmets, they get injured.

He also sought a direction from the court to the Ministry of Culture and Youth Affairs and Sports to take over BCCI management and ensure effective and trustworthy conduct of national and international cricket matches in the interest of the public.

Kumar contended that it was government's duty to protect the lives of cricketers also, adding their safety, liberty and equality should be guaranteed according to the Constitution. He also sought a direction from the court to BCCI to not proceed with cricketing fixtures, considering the players' safety

The petition will come up for hearing before the Bench here next week.

Cabinet clears Bill to replace Ordinance sought to commence auction of coal mines cancelled by Apex Court

The Union Government today cleared a Bill to replace the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Ordinance, 2014 that had been promulgated to begin auction of coal mines that were cancelled by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had in September cancelled allocation of 204 coal blocks, including 42 operational mines and another 32 ready-to-start blocks. Government through the ordinance started the process of auctioning at least 74 operational or ready-to-operate blocks with the target of allocating them by March, well before the deadline set by Supreme Court for companies operating the mines to wind up operations.

The Bill to replace the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Ordinance, 2014 is likely to be brought before the Parliament during the ongoing winter session.

Meanwhile the Government has already specified that the 74 coal mines, which the Government plans to auction to specific end-users in the first phase of bidding on February 11, will not require any green clearances. The auction will be for the private sector, while state-owned companies will get mines via allotment. These blocks have a potential to produce 210 million tonnes of coal. The number of mines a company can bid in the proposed auction will however be capped to avoid creation of a monopoly.

Cabinet okays introduction of a comprehensive Anti-Hijacking Bill, 2014 in Parliament

The Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, today gave its approval for introduction of a comprehensive Anti-Hijacking Bill 2014, says an official Press release published by the Press Information Bureau. The current law, the Anti-Hijacking Act, 1982, was last amended in 1994.

After the hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight IC-814 in December, 1999, it was felt necessary for providing the award of death penalty to perpetrators of the act of hijacking. The incident of 9/11, where aircrafts were used as weapons, also created the need to further amend the existing Act.

The Anti-Hijacking (Amendment) Bill, 2010 was introduced in the Rajya Sabha in August, 2010. During the process of amendment, a global diplomatic Conference was held at Beijing in August-September, 2010. India is a signatory to the Beijing Protocol signed at the Conference. This Protocol brought out new principal offences combined with ancillary offences, enlarged the scope of ‘hijacking’, expanded jurisdiction and strengthened extradition and mutual assistance regimes. The Bill provides death punishment for the offence of the highjacking, where such offence results in the death of a hostage or of a security personal; or with imprisonment for life and the moveable and immoveable property of such persons shall also be liable to be confiscated.

Keeping in view these facts, the Cabinet has given approval for:-

i. Ratification of the Beijing Protocol, 2010;

ii. Repealing of the Anti-Hijacking Act, 1982 as amended in 1994;

iii. Withdrawal of the Anti-Hijacking Amendment Bill, 2010 and

iv. Introduction of a new Anti-Hijacking Bill, 2014