The National Investment Trust Limited (NITL.mw) HY2005 Interim Report

first_imgThe National Investment Trust Plc (NITL.mw) listed on the Malawi Stock Exchange under the Investment sector has released it’s 2005 interim results for the half year.For more information about The National Investment Trust Plc (NITL.mw) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the The National Investment Trust Plc (NITL.mw) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: The National Investment Trust Plc (NITL.mw)  2005 interim results for the half year.Company ProfileThe National Investment Trust Plc (NITL) manages a closed-end fund that invests in a diversified of Malawi Stock Exchange listed shares and unlisted private securities. The principle objective of NITL is to provide a vehicle for the public to participate in equity investment in Malawi. The fund is a product of Malawi’s progressive privatisation policy and provides income and capital growth opportunities for investors. Financial gain from investments are tax free if held for more than a year. NITL manages a portfolio of investments with funds raised by selling units allocated according to the amount invested in the fund. The NITL manages two Unit Trusts; the NITL Local Equity Fund and the NITL Global Opportunities Fund. Both provide favourable middle- to long-term performance with controlled risk and tax-free earnings. The holding company is based in Mauritius. The National Investment Trust Plc (NITL) is listed on the Malawi Stock Exchangelast_img read more

National Media Group Limited (NMG.tz) 2019 Abridged Report

first_imgNational Media Group Limited (NMG.tz) listed on the Dar es Salaam Stock Exchange under the Printing & Publishing sector has released it’s 2019 abridged results.For more information about National Media Group Limited (NMG.tz) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the National Media Group Limited (NMG.tz) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: National Media Group Limited (NMG.tz)  2019 abridged results.Company ProfileNation Media Group (NMG) Limited operates as an independent media house in East and Central Africa. Through its subsidiaries, NMG publishes, prints and distributes a variety of newspapers, magazines and online publications as well as manages radio and television broadcasting operations in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania. It also provides courier and third-party printing services. Group publications include The EastAfrican, Daily Nation, Sunday Nation, Business Daily Africa, Daily Monitor, The Citizen, NMG Investor Briefing, Taifa Leo and Zuka. NMG owns a 76.5% stake in Monitor Publications Limited and 93.3% stake in KFM, a Kampala-based radio station in Uganda. It owns two television stations; NT Uganda and Spark TV and has a 60% stake in Mwananchi Communications Limited in Tanzania. In 2016, NMG commissioned a state-of-the-art printing press in Nairobi which has capacity to print 86 000 newspapers per hour. National Media Group Limited is listed on the Dar es Salaam Stock Exchangelast_img read more

Leo says Stander moving back home straight after retirement makes a mockery of the game

first_imgTuesday Mar 16, 2021 Leo says Stander moving back home straight after retirement makes a mockery of the game Pacific Rugby Players Welfare chief executive Dan Leo has questioned rugby’s residency rules after Ireland No8 CJ Stander announced his retirement at the end of the season in order to return to his native South Africa.ADVERTISEMENTIn a Tweet following the Munster back row’s announcement, Leo said that Stander returning to South Africa “makes a mockery of the game far more” than players with Pacific Island heritage seeking to represent a second country during their career.Leo has since deleted the Tweet, but this is a cause he has continuously fought for and discussed at length in his 2020 documentary Oceans Apart: Greed, Betrayal and Pacific Island Rugby.“Congrats on a great career CJ,” he wrote.“But in my mind someone getting residency after 3 years, making a national team then moving back home as soon as they retire makes a mockery of the game far more than Pacific Island heritage players wanting to turn out after a stand down period.”One thing that has been frequently mentioned by fans since Stander dropped his retirement bombshell is how committed and dedicated he has been to Munster and Ireland ever since he moved to Thomond Park in 2012 from the Bulls.ADVERTISEMENTLeo is not arguing against this, but he sees the entire process as a flaw in rugby’s residency rules which allowed Stander to represent Ireland after three years, although they have now been extended to five.Meanwhile, a player like Bristol Bears’ Charles Piutau has fought an exhausting battle in order to compete for Tonga, where his parents are from, because he represented the All Blacks six years ago.Though Piutau is coming close to realising his dream through the Olympic sevens loophole, Wasps’ Malakai Fekitoa faces a similar problem despite being born in Tonga.Given his role, Leo is championing the rights and opportunities for Pacific Island players and may have deleted the Tweet after a backlash. But his comment is not about Stander, rather the rules World Rugby has in place. He emphasised this in another Tweet, saying the rules “make a mockery of the game”.ADVERTISEMENT Posted By: rugbydump Share Send Thanks Sorry there has been an error News Related Articles 12 WEEKS AGO CJ Stander announces retirement with emotive… 13 WEEKS AGO Ireland snatch win but Johnny Sexton admits… 13 WEEKS AGO Tributes pour in as Sonny Bill Williams thanks… From the WebThis Video Will Soon Be Banned. Watch Before It’s DeletedSecrets RevealedYou Won’t Believe What the World’s Most Beautiful Girl Looks Like TodayNueeyUrologists Stunned: Forget the Blue Pill, This “Fixes” Your EDSmart Life ReportsWrinkle Remedy Stuns TV Judges: Forget Surgery, Do This Once DailySmart Life ReportsIf You Have Ringing Ears Do This Immediately (Ends Tinnitus)Healthier Living10 Types of Women You Should Never MarryNueeyThe content you see here is paid for by the advertiser or content provider whose link you click on, and is recommended to you by Revcontent. As the leading platform for native advertising and content recommendation, Revcontent uses interest based targeting to select content that we think will be of particular interest to you. We encourage you to view your opt out options in Revcontent’s Privacy PolicyWant your content to appear on sites like this?Increase Your Engagement Now!Want to report this publisher’s content as misinformation?Submit a ReportGot it, thanks!Remove Content Link?Please choose a reason below:Fake NewsMisleadingNot InterestedOffensiveRepetitiveSubmitCancellast_img read more

New strategy for giving from Biffaward

first_imgTo make funding more accessible to small community groups and to support regionally or nationally significant projects, Biffaward has also made two additions to the fund. The Small Grants Scheme aims to provide funding for smaller community groups within 10 miles of a Biffa operation, who are seeking funding between £250 and £5,000. Decisions on awards are made within eight to 12 weeks.By introducing the Flagship category Biffaward hopes to support regionally or nationally significant voluntary sector led regeneration or biodiversity projects that will make a notable impact on the quality of life of the region. Projects that will have significant added value can apply under this scheme for grants between £150,000 and £500,000.Martin Bettington, Chairman of Biffaward, said: “I am delighted to see Biffaward evolve in such a positive way. The principle of sustainability and sustainable development will remain at the heart of our strategy with specific focus on improving the quality of life and fostering vibrant communities. The two new additions to the scheme are designed with both the applicants and quality in mind. The flagship category will focus on delivering high value environmental projects and the small grants scheme will enable communities to help themselves – two core essentials of the LTCS.” Howard Lake | 21 October 2003 | News Tagged with: Community fundraising  28 total views,  1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis New strategy for giving from Biffawardcenter_img Biffaward, one of the largest schemes set up under the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme (LTCS), has launched a new Strategy for Giving in response to recent government changes to the LTCS.In March 2003 Government announced that category C and CC (sustainable waste management) projects would be removed from the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme and re-channelled through a public spending programme. The move has resulted in Biffaward’s available funds being reduced to around £5 million per annum.Biffaward has taken this change as an opportunity to refine its Strategy for Giving to make Biffaward more effective in improving the UK’s environment and creating sustainable communities. The fund will aim to support innovative projects that provide safe and accessible community facilities that will act as mechanisms for recreation, life-long learning, healthy living, volunteering and community involvement. Advertisement About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThislast_img read more

USDA Reminds Producers to Pay Their Crop Insurance Premiums by January…

first_img Facebook Twitter SHARE USDA Reminds Producers to Pay Their Crop Insurance Premiums by January 31 The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Risk Management Agency (RMA) is reminding producers that their crop insurance premiums for the 2019 crop year are due January 31. Under this change, policies that do not have the premium paid by January 31, 2020, will have interest attach on February 1, calculated from the date of the premium billing notice.USDA had deferred to January 31, 2020, the accrual of interest on 2019 crop year insurance premiums for most policies with a premium billing date of August 15, 2019, to help the large number of farmers and ranchers affected by extreme weather in 2019.“At USDA, we understood the challenges that farmers and ranchers faced due to inclement weather last year, so we deferred the interest to give producers additional time to pay their premium, which is now due on January 31,” RMA Administrator Martin Barbre said. “We urge producers to make their premium payment on time to ensure they don’t get charged interest back to their premium billing notice date.”The extended interest deferral built on other steps taken by USDA to support farmers and ranchers impacted by flooding and other disasters. As of January 13, RMA has paid roughly $8.1 billion in overall claims for the 2019 crop year.Producers are encouraged to contact their crop insurance agents for more information or assistance. Facebook Twitter By USDA Communications – Jan 16, 2020 Previous articleISDA’s Kettler at White House for Phase One Signing and Farmer Reaction on the HAT Thursday Morning EditionNext articleHoosier Ag Today is Hiring! USDA Communications SHARE Home Indiana Agriculture News USDA Reminds Producers to Pay Their Crop Insurance Premiums by January 31last_img read more

Man charged after reportedly killing wife’s unborn baby

first_img Pinterest Pinterest Facebook Twitter Local NewsCrime Man charged after reportedly killing wife’s unborn baby WhatsApp Joel Luna Odessa police and the United States Marshals Service arrested a man Tuesday afternoon on a charge of felony capital murder.The man reportedly choked his pregnant wife then forced his knee into her abdomen while saying he wanted to kill her unborn baby, an Odessa police news release stated.Joel Luna, 34, was arrested in Midland on Tuesday on a capital murder warrant and taken to the Ector County Law Enforcement Center, the release stated.On May 1, Odessa police responded to Medical Center Hospital in Odessa in reverence to an assault victim, before investigation revealed that Luna had gotten into an argument with his 33-year-old wife, before he began choking her, causing her to lose consciousness, the release stated. Luna then kneeled on her abdomen and repeatedly applied force while stating that he wanted to kill her baby, the release detailed.The release stated that the wife sought medical treatment and was told by medical personnel that she was five weeks pregnant and that she had lost the child she was carrying. Police investigation revealed that she sustained a traumatic miscarriage as a result of the injuries inflicted by Luna. Twitter Facebook By admin – June 19, 2018 Previous articleAnnual Camp SIP inspiring to studentsNext articleHospital board votes to keep current chair admin WhatsApplast_img read more

Important Judgments Passed By The Orissa High Court: January 2021

first_imgColumnsImportant Judgments Passed By The Orissa High Court: January 2021 Dr. Anil Kumar Dutta & Jyoti Prakash Dutta17 Feb 2021 9:39 PMShare This – xThe High Court of Orissa has passed several vital judgments in January 2021. This month holds more importance as Hon’ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar took over as the new Chief Justice of the High Court on 4 January. Jurisprudence of several laws was evolved through some remarkable verdicts delivered throughout the month. Some of the most important decisions are briefly discussed below.1….Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe High Court of Orissa has passed several vital judgments in January 2021. This month holds more importance as Hon’ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar took over as the new Chief Justice of the High Court on 4 January. Jurisprudence of several laws was evolved through some remarkable verdicts delivered throughout the month. Some of the most important decisions are briefly discussed below.1. High Court cannot act as a second court of first appeal in disciplinary proceedings. Case Details: Sk. Mohammed Idris v. Life Insurance Corporation of India [Judgment Dated: 4 January 2021 in W.P. (C) No. 18071 of 2009] A Single Judge Bench of Justice Biswanath Rath was considering a writ petition against the decision of disciplinary authority involving an enquiry initiated against the petitioner-employee. While dismissing the petition it relied upon the observation made by the Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. P. Gunasekaran, (2015) 2 SCC 610, to hold that in disciplinary proceedings, the High Court is not and cannot act as a second court of first appeal. The High Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, shall not venture into re- appreciation of the evidence. The High Court can only see whether: the enquiry is held by a competent authority; the enquiry is held according to the procedure prescribed in that behalf; there is violation of the principles of natural justice in conducting the proceedings; the authorities have disabled themselves from reaching a fair conclusion by some considerations extraneous to the evidence and merits of the case; the authorities have allowed themselves to be influenced by irrelevant or extraneous considerations; the conclusion, on the very face of it, is so wholly arbitrary and capricious that no reasonable person could ever have arrived at such conclusion; the disciplinary authority had erroneously failed to admit the admissible and material evidence; the disciplinary authority had erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence which influenced the finding; the finding of fact is based on no evidence. 2. Payment of interest is compensatory in nature; unless demand is raised, payment of interest for period prior thereto would not arise.Case Details: M/s. National Aluminium Company Ltd. v. State of Orissa & Ors. [Judgment Dated: 5 January 2021 in Writ Petition (C) No. 10537 of 2006] A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi was adjudicating a writ petition challenging a notice demanding the payment of interest on the alleged delayed payment of differential royalty by the petitioner. The Bench relied upon decision of the Apex Court in Pratibha Processors v. Union of India, (1996) 11 SCC 101, to hold that interest is compensatory in character and can be imposed on a person who has withheld the legitimate dues. Otherwise, the demand of interest is not justified. Essentially, it is compensatory and different from penalty which is penal in character. Further, it held that if demand is not raised, the question of paying interest for the period prior thereto would not arise. Notably, this is the first reportable judgment rendered by Hon’ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar after assuming the office of Chief Justice of the High Court.3. The Court disposes of PIL for waiver of school fees during COVID-19, based on MoU submitted by institutions for flat rate concession. Case Details: Mohammed Mustaq Ansari v. State of Odisha & Another [Judgment Dated: 7 January 2021 in Writ Petition (C) No. 11299 of 2020] A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi disposed of a batch of PILs seeking waiver of school fees levied by private unaided schools in the State, in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic from March onwards. The matter was closed after 14 private unaided schools submitted a MoU for waiver of fees at a flat rate in different slabs mentioned therein. Terms of MoU: The MoU contemplates waiver of maximum 26% Tuition/ composite fee for institutions where fees is above Rs. 1 lakh per annum. Similarly, there a separat slab rates, based on the fee amount. All schools charging fees upto Rs. 6,000/- shall not be liable to offer any waiver. The institutions have decided to waive of ‘Other Optional Fees’ till reopening of schools. However, the charges on Transport and Food shall remain as per actual.There is a flat waiver of 30% on Hostel fees. The Bench was not persuaded to further issue directions in the matter in light of the MOU arrived at between 14 educational institutions in Odisha on the question of fee waiver during the period of the pandemic. However, it was clarified that if any party to the MoU faces any problem in relation its terms, the same may be agitated in separate proceedings and may be decided on a case-to-case basis.4. Magistrate must give reasons while dismissing a complaint under Section 203, Cr.P.C. Case Details: Lalit Mohan Patnaik v. Sadasiba Mohapatra & Ors. [Judgment Dated: 7 January 2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 1993] A Single Judge Bench constituted of Justice S.K. Sahoo held that when a Magistrate intends to dismiss a complaint petition, he has to give reasons thereof. It observed that Section 203 Cr.P.C. consists of two parts, the first part lays down the materials which the Magistrate must consider, and the second part states that if after considering those materials, there is no sufficient ground for proceeding; the Magistrate may dismiss the complaint. While exercising such power under section 203 of the Code, it is incumbent upon the Magistrate to reflect in his order the basis for arriving at the conclusion that there are no sufficient grounds to proceed with the complaint case. The Court noted that “[t]he emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the “inscrutable face of sphinx”, it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudicating the validity of the decision. Right to reasons is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking order. The “inscrutable face of sphinx” is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.”5. Magistrate is empowered to deal with the seized property under Section 451 or 457, Cr.P.C. where confiscation proceeding is not initiated. Case Details: Priyabrata Sahoo v. State of Odisha [Judgment Dated: 7 January 2021 in CRLMC No. 1451 of 2020] A Single Judge Bench constituted of Justice B.P. Routray was dealing with a challenge against an order of Sessions Judge, wherein the prayer of the petitioner to release his vehicle under Section 457 Cr.P.C. has been refused as involved in commission of offences under Sections 188/269/270/34, I.P.C. and Section 52(a) of the Odisha Excise Act, 2008. The Court, after perusing the relevant precedents and provisions of the Odisha Excise Act as well as of Cr.P.C., observed that (i) Where the owner has not been implicated as an accused; or (ii) Where the properties seized have not been produced before the Collector or the Authorised Officer, as the case may be; or (iii) Where the confiscation proceeding has not been initiated; the Magistrate is empowered under the general provisions of the Cr.P.C. including the jurisdiction and powers under Chapter XXXIV for disposal of the seized property and consequently has also the power to deal with such seized property under Section 451 or 457 of the Cr.P.C.6.If there was no preparation to commit murder and if the offence happened on spur of the moment, it cannot be considered as murder. Case Details: Duryodhan Pahi v. State of Orissa [Judgment Dated: 7 January 2021 in JCRLA No. 87 of 2007] While partly allowing appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC, a Division Bench consisting of Justice S.K. Mishra and Justice Savitri Ratho reiterated that if any of the four conditions, as enumerated below, is not satisfied, then the offence will be culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Those are: The act was done with the intention of causing death; or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knew to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused: or with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person, and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinarily course of nature to cause death; or With the knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as is mentioned above. Further, it held that if there was no preparation on the part of the appellant to commit murder and when it happened on spur of the moment, it cannot be considered as murder.7. Orders are not like old wine becoming better as they grow: Order cancelling license must be a speaking one; reasons cannot be provided later through affidavit. Case Details: Pradyumna Kumar Mohapatra v. State of Orissa & Others [Judgment Dated: 12 January 2021 in Writ Petition (C) No. 32947 of 2020] A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Sanju Panda was hearing a challenge to an order made by the Collector, Cuttack cancelling the licenses granted in favour of the Petitioner in respect five of his IMFL ‘Off’ Shops. It held that while making order, the cancelling authority must disclose the reasons for cancellation in the order itself and he cannot be permitted to provide reasons through a subsequent affidavit filed after notice in the writ petition. The Court relied upon the observation made by Krishna Iyer, J. in Mohinder Singh Gill v. The Chief Election Commissioner, AIR 1978 SC 851: “…when a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by the reasons so mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or otherwise. Otherwise, an order bad in the beginning may, by the time it comes to court on account of a challenge, get validated by additional grounds later brought out… Orders are not like old wine becoming better as they grow.” Hence, it was concluded that as the impugned order cancelling the license in favour of the Petitioner for the ‘Off’ Shop was a non-speaking one, cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the same was set aside on that ground.8. The Court reiterates that proceeding for certiorari is supervisory in nature; hence, the High Court cannot review the findings of lower authorities under such jurisdiction. Case Details: Rajib Kumar Behera v. State of Odisha and Others [Judgment Dated: 13 January 2021 in W.P. (C) No. 671 of 2021] A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi was deciding a petition seeking issuance of the writ of certiorari against an order of the Odisha Human Rights Commission. The Court while relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Chitra Venkata Rao, AIR 1975 SC 2151, held that since the function of the superior Court in a proceeding for certiorari is supervisory and not appellate, the superior Court will not review in intra vires findings of the inferior tribunal, even if they are erroneous. Further, it observed that Certiorari, under Article 226, is issued for correcting gross errors of jurisdiction, i.e., when a subordinate Court is found to have acted (i) without jurisdiction by assuming jurisdiction where there exits none, or (ii) in excess of its jurisdiction by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction, or (iii) acting in flagrant disregard of law or the rules of procedure or acting in violation of principles of natural justice where there is no procedure specified, and thereby occasioning failure of justice.9. Non-release of payment to job card holders/rural job seekers after completion of their work under the MGNREG Act is violative Article 21 of the Constitution. Case Details: Purna Chandra Sahoo v. State of Odisha and Ors. [Judgment Dated: 19 January 2021 in W.P. (C) No. 17859 of 2013] A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi was dealing with a writ petition challenging non-release of payment under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (MGNREGA). It held that non-release of payment to job card holders/rural job seekers affects their livelihood and right to live with dignity, therefore, violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court relied upon Centre of Environment and Food Security v. Union of India, (2011) 5 SCC 676, wherein the Apex Court held that the legislative scheme of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act places the “Right to Livelihood” at a higher pedestal than a mere legal right by ensuring that a minimum of 100 days of employment to one person in the family is given so that the members of the family are able to take care of their bare minimum requirement for existence.10. Notice must be issued to the accused before granting extension beyond 180 days under Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act for completing investigation. Case Details: Naresh Digal v. State of Odisha [Judgment Dated: 27 January 2021 in BLAPL No. 4652 of 2020] While allowing a bail application under Section 439, Cr.P.C., a Single Judge Bench of Justice S.K. Sahoo held that even though sub-section (4) of section 36-A of the NDPS Act does not specifically provide for issuance of notice to the accused on the report of the Public Prosecutor before granting extension beyond 180 days for completing investigation, but it must be read into the provision both in the interest of the accused and the prosecution as well as for doing complete justice between the parties and since there is no prohibition to the issuance of such a notice to the accused, no extension shall be granted by the Special Court without such notice. And the report has to be filed by the Public Prosecutor in advance and not on the last day, so that on being noticed, the accused gets fair opportunity to have his say and oppose the extension sought for by the prosecution. To substantiate this proposition, the Court relied upon the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1994 SC 2623, which is reiterated by the High Court in Lambodar Bag v. State of Odisha, (2018) 71 OCR 31.11. State is strictly liable for death of a person in police custody even though it is not proved that police has caused the injuries leading to death. Case Details: Purna Chandra Mohapatra & Another v. State of Odisha & Others [Order Dated: 27 January 2021 in Writ Petition (C) No. 13774 of 2005] A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Biswajit Mohanty was hearing a writ petition filed by the petitioners seeking compensation for the custodial death of their son. The Court held that the law in regard to the liability of state functionaries for acts of negligence has been well settled in a series of decisions, many of which deal with deaths of persons while in judicial custody. These would apply with equal force to a situation of proven case of death while in police custody as a result of negligence of the police. Once a person is in the custody of the police, the security of that person’s life and liberty is in their hands. They are answerable for whatever happens to the person in their custody. The Court further observed: “Even if it is not established that the ante mortem injuries found on his person during post-mortem were caused by the Police, the law of strict liability for the negligence of the police in not meeting the basic minimum standard of care in providing him prompt medical attention would stand attracted. The police have to be held liable for the avoidable death of Manoj, while in their custody, on account of their negligence.” The Court noted that the claimants belonged to economically weaker section of the society and have had to suffer the agony of an extraordinarily long wait of over 15 years for justice. Therefore, it directed that a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) be paid by the State of Odisha to the Petitioners as compensation for the death of their son while in police custody.(Dr. Anil Kumar Dutta is a Judge at Family Court ,Keonjhar, Odisha & Jyoti Prakash Dutta is a Final Year Student at University Law College Utkal University Bhubaneswar)Next Storylast_img read more

“Amicus Can’t Run The Govt, CBI Administration”:SG Tushar Mehta Requests Court To Demarcate Role Of Amicus Curiae

first_imgTop Stories”Amicus Can’t Run The Govt, CBI Administration”:SG Tushar Mehta Requests Court To Demarcate Role Of Amicus Curiae Srishti Ojha17 March 2021 4:35 AMShare This – xSolicitor General Tushar Mehta on Monday while addressing Supreme Court’s Bench led by Justice NV Ramana urged the Court to demarcate lines upto which the Court can be assisted by Amicus.”I request Your Lordships to demarcate lines upto which the Court can be assisted by Amicus. I’ll move an application. We’ve been seeing this for decades” SG Mehta submitted.SG Mehta also said “I’m not…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginSolicitor General Tushar Mehta on Monday while addressing Supreme Court’s Bench led by Justice NV Ramana urged the Court to demarcate lines upto which the Court can be assisted by Amicus.”I request Your Lordships to demarcate lines upto which the Court can be assisted by Amicus. I’ll move an application. We’ve been seeing this for decades” SG Mehta submitted.SG Mehta also said “I’m not imputing motives on any Individual. But role & ambit of their assistance needs to be decided by Court. They cannot be running the government “SG Mehta made these statements while making submissions before the Top Court in a PIL regarding killings in fake encounters by police personnel and personnel in uniform of the armed forces of the Union.With regards to the issue of discharge of an officers from SIT probing the alleged extra judicial killings, SG Mehta said ‘On these issues, the Amicus can have nothing to say.””They’ve been appointed by the Court” the Bench said.”They are for purpose of assisting when assistance is required. They cannot run CBI’s administration. I am a little blunt, but deliberately blunt. Your Lordships can they can’t. ” SG Mehta submitted.”They can assist on question of law, and they have assisted substantially ” He added.SG Mehta further submitted that the Amicus cannot run CBI, and their role should be demarcated.SG Mehta added ” This is not in this matter, this is happening every day in every matter with everyone. The amicus is a concept where your lordships needs some assistance on proposition of laws, when there are divergent views. They are not supposed to be telling that you shouldn’t do this or that”The Bench asked SG Mehta to reserve that argument for when he makes submissions.”You are a senior counsel, Solicitor General of India. We know, the Amicus also knows what extent they can make submissions. Don’t bring other things to this present day matter.” the Bench observed.SG Mehta clarified that his statements are general statements and were not about Sr Advocate Maneka Guruswamy, the amicus curiae in the present matter.”What’s the interest of Amicus. They’ve been appointed by the Court” the Bench asked.”I’m not imputing motives on any Individual. But role & ambit of their assistance needs to be decided by Court. They cannot run the govt” Mehta said.The Supreme Court was hearing applications filed in the PIL regarding killings in fake encounters by police personnel and personnel in uniform of the armed forces of the Union.The Bench was considering request of Senior Superintendent of Police Mahesh Bhardwaj in the NHRC seeking discharge from the SIT formed to investigate alleged fake encounters in ManipurA three judge Bench led by Justice Ramana allowed the officer to he discharged to his parent department to join on his promoted post, and has directed the Centre provide a suitable officer to the NHRC expeditiously.Next Storylast_img read more

Gardai confirm increase in burglaries in Donegal ahead of festive season

first_imgAudioHomepage BannerNews Twitter There has been an increase in burglaries in the county in recent days, with thieves said to be targeting the Finn Valley, Convoy, Manor, Killea and other border areas.As a result, Gardai in Donegal are urging home and business owners to be on alert and to take all precautions over the festive season.People are being reminded to keep a sharp eye on strange vehicles in the locality and report suspicions to Gardai while also maintaining a high level of security around their home or business.Donegal Crime Prevention Officer Sgt Paul Wallace:Audio Playerhttp://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/paulwallace1pm.mp300:0000:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume. By News Highland – December 20, 2018 Derry draw with Pats: Higgins & Thomson Reaction Pinterest Gardai confirm increase in burglaries in Donegal ahead of festive season WhatsApp Google+ Journey home will be easier – Paul Hegarty Harps come back to win in Waterford News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24thcenter_img RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR WhatsApp Facebook Google+ DL Debate – 24/05/21 Twitter Pinterest FT Report: Derry City 2 St Pats 2 Previous articleDonegal IHF Chair says no-deal Brexit would hit the hotel sectorNext articleSeanad told Mica redress scheme must be delivered ASAP News Highland Facebooklast_img read more

Donegal on alert for more snow today

first_img By News Highland – January 31, 2018 Important message for people attending LUH’s INR clinic News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24th Google+ Loganair’s new Derry – Liverpool air service takes off from CODA Nine til Noon Show – Listen back to Monday’s Programme Pinterest Pinterest Donegal and parts of the country are on alert for more snow today.A status yellow warning for snow and ice is in place for Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Leitrim with accumulations of up to 3 centimetres possible on higher ground.There are reports of treacherous roads across the county this morning. In Meenaroy a car is currently off the road which has led to a backlog of traffic there.Meanwhile it’s reported that Letterkenny to Lifford and Drumkeen to Letterkenny roads are particularly affected with black ice. Facebook WhatsApp Google+center_img Previous articleRoad improvement works get underway on major border roadNext articleCouncil considering emergency taskforce to tackle rural deprivation in Donegal News Highland Twitter RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Homepage BannerNews DL Debate – 24/05/21 Facebook Arranmore progress and potential flagged as population grows WhatsApp Twitter Donegal on alert for more snow todaylast_img read more