The Evening Wrap: Tripura violence — SC protects 2 lawyers, scribe from ‘coercive action’

A Special Bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana protected two lawyers and a journalist booked under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) from any “coercive action” by the Tripura police. The lawyers had led a fact-finding mission and released a report on the “targeted political violence against Muslim minorities in the State” in October and the journalist had tweeted “Tripura is burning”. Advocates Mukesh and Ansarul Haq Ansar and journalist Shyam Meera Singh had petitioned the court to quash the FIR lodged against them and for protection from arrest. They said the State of Tripura was “monopolising the flow of information and facts emanating from the affected areas by invoking the UAPA against members of civil society, including advocates and journalists, who have made the effort to bring facts in relation to the targeted violence in the public domain”. The petition, filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan, asked the court to restrict the vague and wide definition given to what amounts to “unlawful activity” under the UAPA. The definition gave a free hand to the State to crush dissent and free speech with the threat of the UAPA, it argued. The Bench, also comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant, issued notice to Tripura. The petitioners said the registration of UAPA cases against them amounted to the “criminalisation of the very act of fact-finding and reporting”. The stringent sections of the UAPA were being used to spread a chilling effect on free speech and expression of civil society. Anticipatory bail was barred under the UAPA and the possibility of bail was remote. “The only facts that will come in the public domain are those convenient to the State due to the ‘chilling effect’ on the freedom of speech and expression of members of civil society. If the quest for truth and reporting itself is criminalised then the victim in the process is the idea of justice,” the petition stated. The shadow of the UAPA would choke the ‘free flow of information and ideas’. Lakhimpur Kheri incident: Supreme Court appoints ex-judge Rakesh Kumar Jain of Punjab and Haryana HC to monitor SIT probe The Supreme Court on Wednesday appointed the former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge, Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain, to monitor the investigation into the Lakhimpur Kheri murders and violence to ensure fairness and impartiality in the probe. A Bench of Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli also reconstituted the Special Investigation Team to include three IPS officers. The appointment of Justice Jain came after the Uttar Pradesh government agreed to the court’s proposal to have a retired High Court judge monitor the probe. October 3 saw vehicles allegedly belonging to a convoy of Union Minister and BJP MP Ajay Kumar Mishra mow down farmers and civilians holding a rally at Lakhimpur Kheri as part of a protest against the Central agricultural laws. The incident led to violence. Eight people, including four farmers, lost their lives that day. Minister’s son Ashish Mishra is a prime accused in one of the two FIRs registered on the incidents. The suggestion to have a retired judge at the helm came after the court expressed its waning confidence about the fate of the investigation at the hands of the police. “The investigation is not going the way we expected... We are here to see that a proper investigation takes place. There is a need to appoint a retired High Court judge to monitor it [investigation] without bias,” Chief Justice Ramana said in the previous hearing. The court had refused to entertain suggestions from some lawyers to order the CBI to take over the investigation from the police. “The CBI is not the solution to everything,” it had remarked. Delhi pollution: Bureaucracy’s ‘inertia’ irks SC Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana on Wednesday reproached the “inertia” of a bureaucracy that waits for the court to pass orders – even if it’s about stopping a vehicle or dousing a fire -- when it comes to tackling the Capital’s air pollution problem. Justice Surya Kant, on the Bench, in his turn, noted that people sitting in five-star and seven-star hotels in Delhi cannot blame farmers for stubble-burning and need to understand their plight. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud asked if the government had any “positive steps” in hand that would help immediately clear the smog currently enveloping the Capital. The Bench raised doubts about the efficacy of the measures adopted by the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) in the National Capital Region and adjoining areas in an emergency meeting. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Meteorological Department scientists, who were a part of the emergency meeting, had assured that the “situation would be better after November 21”. He suggested waiting till then before taking “harsh steps” like a complete lockdown in the Capital. “So you are saying, nature will come to the rescue by November 21,” Justice Kant queried. “In the entire country, what I have observed as a judge, and earlier as Advocate General, is that the bureaucracy has developed an inertia, an apathy... They wait for the court to pass an order even on things like how to stop a car or a fire by using a bucket or a mop... This is the attitude developed by the Executive. The meeting should have decided on the steps and said these are our directions to be implemented. We could have completed this hearing in two minutes... It is unfortunate the Executive has come to this... They just say ‘let the court pass the order and we will sign’,” Chief Justice Ramana said towards the end of the hearing. The court would consider the prospect of ordering a complete shutdown after November 21, he stated, but asked why the government had not taken steps earlier to rein in industrial activity, construction debris, etc, which spew pollutants 365 days a year, unlike stubble burning, which was only seasonal. Mehta acknowledged that “something has been done and more needs to be done”. He complained of “nasty and irresponsible utterances” made in the media to the effect that he had submitted in the last hearing that stubble burning contributed only 10% to the pollution. The government affidavit had clearly pegged the impact of farm fires at 35% to 40% in October and November. “Debates on TV are creating more pollution... Statements are made out of context. Everybody has their own agenda... We are focussing on a solution here,” the CJI advised. Justice Kant, referring to stubble burning, said the question was not about “percentage”. “Irrespective of the percentage of contribution, the cardinal question was what the government had done to incentivise farmers to stop stubble burning. “Whether it is 10% or 5%, have you looked at the plight of farmers and what prompts them to resort to stubble burning? Under what circumstances they do that? People sitting in Delhi in five-star and seven-star hotels need to understand them...”, he stated. The CJI observed, “We cannot penalise farmers. We have asked the States to persuade the farmers against stubble burning... Farmers do not have the money... Firecrackers also see a spurt after Diwali for 10 to 15 days... Can you say firecrackers is not a contributor to pollution?” Justice Kant said, “Every October and November we assemble on this problem of pollution. Every time the court has to take the initiative”. The debate started shortly after Mehta briefed the court about the measures adopted by the CAQM to curb pollution caused by industry, thermal power plants, dust, vehicular transport, including entry of trucks carrying non-essential goods into Delhi. He informed that schools and colleges have been closed. Work from home had been encouraged. The court asked why the Central employees have to come to work. “You do not need 100% staff, all coming in their cars. You had restricted during COVID-19. Instead of 100 people coming, you can have 50,” the CJI said. Mehta stated that restricting the attendance at Central offices in Delhi would have “pan-India ramifications”. The contribution to pollution caused by Central staff attending office would only be minimum. The government was open to car-pooling and arranging public transport for them. Mumbai court declares IPS officer Param Bir Singh ‘absconding accused’ in extortion case A magistrate court in Mumbai on Tuesday declared former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh and two others “absconding accused” in an extortion case against them. The chief metropolitan magistrate allowed an application filed by the Mumbai police to declare Singh, along with businessman Vijay Singh alias Bablu and Riyaz Bhati as absconding accused. Special public prosecutor Shekhar Jagtap told The Hindu, “The court has under Section 82 (proclamation for person absconding) of the Code of Criminal Procedure declared all three as absconding accused.” On November 13, the Mumbai Crime Branch initiated the process to declare Singh an absconding accused and started the process to suspend him. The case is about Bimal Agarwal, a builder-hotelier complaining about alleged extortion by Singh and dismissed assistant police inspector Sachin Vaze. An FIR was filed at Goregaon against all the accused under Sections 384 (punishment for extortion), 385 (putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion), 388 (extortion by threat of accusation of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC. On November 10, a magistrate court had issued the third non-bailable warrant (NBW) against Singh in an extortion case registered at the Marine Drive police station here by real estate developer Shyamsunder Agarwal. The second NBW against Singh in the case was issued on October 30 and the first was issued in another extortion case on October 25. On October 20, the Maharashtra Government had told the Bombay High Court (BHC) that Singh is not traceable and that it cannot give a statement that no coercive action will be taken against him. This statement was made when the court was hearing a plea filed by Singh seeking to quash an FIR filed against him at two places. Two bailable warrants have also been issued by retired judge of the BHC K.U. Chandiwal. The one-member committee was appointed on March 30 by the State Government to inquire into the allegations made by Singh in a letter he wrote to Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray on March 20. The letter mentioned several instances where former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh allegedly directed Vaze to collect ₹100 crore a month from bars and restaurants. Pakistan's Parliament enacts law to give Kulbhushan Jadhav right to file review appeal against conviction Pakistan's Parliament in its joint sitting on Wednesday enacted a law to give Indian death-row prisoner Kulbhushan Jadhav the right to file a review appeal against his conviction by a military court. Jadhav, a 51-year-old retired Indian Navy officer, was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of espionage and terrorism in April 2017. India approached the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Pakistan for denial of consular access to Jadhav and challenging the death sentence. After hearing both sides, the Hague-based ICJ issued a verdict in July, 2019, asking Pakistan to give India consular access to Jadhav and also ensure review of his conviction. On Wednesday, the joint sitting comprising members of the Senate and the National Assembly was called to pass a set of laws which were passed by the latter in June this year, including one to enable Jadhav to appeal against his conviction, but those laws failed to get the nod of the upper house. The International Court of Justice (Review and Re-consideration) Bill, 2021 aimed to fulfill the obligation under the verdict of the ICJ and was presented by Law Minister Farogh Nasim and was passed by the joint sitting of the House through voice vote. The law allowed Jadhav to challenge his conviction in the high court through a review process which was a requirement of the ICJ verdict. The joint sitting is called when the differences between the National Assembly and Senate are unbridgeable. The current impasse was due to the fact that the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and allied parties enjoy majority in the National Assembly but are in minority in the Senate or the upper house. Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The number of reported coronavirus cases from India stood at 3,44,75,266 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 4,64,570. In Brief Punjab Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi on Wednesday said all the FIRs registered by the Punjab Police against the farmers, who had been protesting against the Centre’s farm laws within the State, would be cancelled. The Chief Minister asked the police to cancel the FIRs after following the prescribed procedure with due diligence. The announcement was made after meeting the representatives of the 32 farm unions of the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) in Chandigarh Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 17 NOVEMBER 2021 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Tripura violence: SC protects 2 lawyers, scribe booked under UAPA from ‘coercive action’ A Special Bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana [protected two lawyers and a journalist booked under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) from any “coercive action” by the Tripura police](. The lawyers had led a fact-finding mission and released a report on the “targeted political violence against Muslim minorities in the State” in October and the journalist had tweeted “Tripura is burning”. Advocates Mukesh and Ansarul Haq Ansar and journalist Shyam Meera Singh had petitioned the court to quash the FIR lodged against them and for protection from arrest. [Journalist Shyam Meera Singh. Photo: Twitter/@ShyamMeeraSingh]  They said the State of Tripura was “monopolising the flow of information and facts emanating from the affected areas by invoking the UAPA against members of civil society, including advocates and journalists, who have made the effort to bring facts in relation to the targeted violence in the public domain”. The petition, filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan, asked the court to restrict the vague and wide definition given to what amounts to “unlawful activity” under the UAPA. The definition gave a free hand to the State to crush dissent and free speech with the threat of the UAPA, it argued. The Bench, also comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant, issued notice to Tripura. The petitioners said the registration of UAPA cases against them amounted to the “criminalisation of the very act of fact-finding and reporting”. The stringent sections of the UAPA were being used to spread a chilling effect on free speech and expression of civil society. Anticipatory bail was barred under the UAPA and the possibility of bail was remote. “The only facts that will come in the public domain are those convenient to the State due to the ‘chilling effect’ on the freedom of speech and expression of members of civil society. If the quest for truth and reporting itself is criminalised then the victim in the process is the idea of justice,” the petition stated. The shadow of the UAPA would choke the ‘free flow of information and ideas’. [underlineimg] Lakhimpur Kheri incident: Supreme Court appoints ex-judge Rakesh Kumar Jain of Punjab and Haryana HC to monitor SIT probe The Supreme Court on Wednesday [appointed the former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge, Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain]( to monitor the investigation into the Lakhimpur Kheri murders and violence to ensure fairness and impartiality in the probe. A Bench of Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli also reconstituted the Special Investigation Team to include three IPS officers. The appointment of Justice Jain came after the Uttar Pradesh government agreed to the court’s proposal to have a retired High Court judge monitor the probe. October 3 saw vehicles allegedly belonging to a convoy of Union Minister and BJP MP Ajay Kumar Mishra mow down farmers and civilians holding a rally at Lakhimpur Kheri as part of a protest against the Central agricultural laws. The incident led to violence. Eight people, including four farmers, lost their lives that day. Minister’s son Ashish Mishra is a prime accused in one of the two FIRs registered on the incidents. The suggestion to have a retired judge at the helm came after the court expressed its waning confidence about the fate of the investigation at the hands of the police. “The investigation is not going the way we expected... We are here to see that a proper investigation takes place. There is a need to appoint a retired High Court judge to monitor it [investigation] without bias,” Chief Justice Ramana said in the previous hearing. The court had refused to entertain suggestions from some lawyers to order the CBI to take over the investigation from the police. “The CBI is not the solution to everything,” it had remarked. [underlineimg] Delhi pollution: Bureaucracy’s ‘inertia’ irks SC Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana on Wednesday [reproached the “inertia” of a bureaucracy]( that waits for the court to pass orders – even if it’s about stopping a vehicle or dousing a fire -- when it comes to tackling the Capital’s air pollution problem. Justice Surya Kant, on the Bench, in his turn, noted that people sitting in five-star and seven-star hotels in Delhi cannot blame farmers for stubble-burning and need to understand their plight. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud asked if the government had any “positive steps” in hand that would help immediately clear the smog currently enveloping the Capital. The Bench raised doubts about the efficacy of the measures adopted by the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) in the National Capital Region and adjoining areas in an emergency meeting. [A Metro train passes on a smoggy day as the air pollution level remained in Delhi-NCR recorded its air quality in the very poor category on Wednesday, November 17, 20201 morning.]  Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Meteorological Department scientists, who were a part of the emergency meeting, had assured that the “situation would be better after November 21”. He suggested waiting till then before taking “harsh steps” like a complete lockdown in the Capital. “So you are saying, nature will come to the rescue by November 21,” Justice Kant queried. “In the entire country, what I have observed as a judge, and earlier as Advocate General, is that the bureaucracy has developed an inertia, an apathy... They wait for the court to pass an order even on things like how to stop a car or a fire by using a bucket or a mop... This is the attitude developed by the Executive. The meeting should have decided on the steps and said these are our directions to be implemented. We could have completed this hearing in two minutes... It is unfortunate the Executive has come to this... They just say ‘let the court pass the order and we will sign’,” Chief Justice Ramana said towards the end of the hearing. The court would consider the prospect of ordering a complete shutdown after November 21, he stated, but asked why the government had not taken steps earlier to rein in industrial activity, construction debris, etc, which spew pollutants 365 days a year, unlike stubble burning, which was only seasonal. Mehta acknowledged that “something has been done and more needs to be done”. He complained of “nasty and irresponsible utterances” made in the media to the effect that he had submitted in the last hearing that stubble burning contributed only 10% to the pollution. The government affidavit had clearly pegged the impact of farm fires at 35% to 40% in October and November. “Debates on TV are creating more pollution... Statements are made out of context. Everybody has their own agenda... We are focussing on a solution here,” the CJI advised. Justice Kant, referring to stubble burning, said the question was not about “percentage”. “Irrespective of the percentage of contribution, the cardinal question was what the government had done to incentivise farmers to stop stubble burning. “Whether it is 10% or 5%, have you looked at the plight of farmers and what prompts them to resort to stubble burning? Under what circumstances they do that? People sitting in Delhi in five-star and seven-star hotels need to understand them...”, he stated. The CJI observed, “We cannot penalise farmers. We have asked the States to persuade the farmers against stubble burning... Farmers do not have the money... Firecrackers also see a spurt after Diwali for 10 to 15 days... Can you say firecrackers is not a contributor to pollution?” Justice Kant said, “Every October and November we assemble on this problem of pollution. Every time the court has to take the initiative”. The debate started shortly after Mehta briefed the court about the measures adopted by the CAQM to curb pollution caused by industry, thermal power plants, dust, vehicular transport, including entry of trucks carrying non-essential goods into Delhi. He informed that schools and colleges have been closed. Work from home had been encouraged. The court asked why the Central employees have to come to work. “You do not need 100% staff, all coming in their cars. You had restricted during COVID-19. Instead of 100 people coming, you can have 50,” the CJI said. Mehta stated that restricting the attendance at Central offices in Delhi would have “pan-India ramifications”. The contribution to pollution caused by Central staff attending office would only be minimum. The government was open to car-pooling and arranging public transport for them. [underlineimg] Mumbai court declares IPS officer Param Bir Singh ‘absconding accused’ in extortion case A magistrate court in Mumbai on Tuesday [declared former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh and two others “absconding accused”]( in an extortion case against them. The chief metropolitan magistrate allowed an application filed by the Mumbai police to declare Singh, along with businessman Vijay Singh alias Bablu and Riyaz Bhati as absconding accused. Special public prosecutor Shekhar Jagtap told The Hindu, “The court has under Section 82 (proclamation for person absconding) of the Code of Criminal Procedure declared all three as absconding accused.” On November 13, the Mumbai Crime Branch initiated the process to declare Singh an absconding accused and started the process to suspend him. The case is about Bimal Agarwal, a builder-hotelier complaining about alleged extortion by Singh and dismissed assistant police inspector Sachin Vaze. An FIR was filed at Goregaon against all the accused under Sections 384 (punishment for extortion), 385 (putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion), 388 (extortion by threat of accusation of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC. On November 10, a magistrate court had issued the third non-bailable warrant (NBW) against Singh in an extortion case registered at the Marine Drive police station here by real estate developer Shyamsunder Agarwal. The second NBW against Singh in the case was issued on October 30 and the first was issued in another extortion case on October 25. On October 20, the Maharashtra Government had told the Bombay High Court (BHC) that Singh is not traceable and that it cannot give a statement that no coercive action will be taken against him. This statement was made when the court was hearing a plea filed by Singh seeking to quash an FIR filed against him at two places. Two bailable warrants have also been issued by retired judge of the BHC K.U. Chandiwal. The one-member committee was appointed on March 30 by the State Government to inquire into the allegations made by Singh in a letter he wrote to Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray on March 20. The letter mentioned several instances where former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh allegedly directed Vaze to collect ₹100 crore a month from bars and restaurants. [underlineimg] Pakistan's Parliament enacts law to give Kulbhushan Jadhav right to file review appeal against conviction Pakistan's Parliament in its joint sitting on Wednesday [enacted a law to give Indian death-row prisoner Kulbhushan Jadhav the right to file a review appeal]( against his conviction by a military court. Jadhav, a 51-year-old retired Indian Navy officer, was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of espionage and terrorism in April 2017. India approached the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Pakistan for denial of consular access to Jadhav and challenging the death sentence. After hearing both sides, the Hague-based ICJ issued a verdict in July, 2019, asking Pakistan to give India consular access to Jadhav and also ensure review of his conviction. On Wednesday, the joint sitting comprising members of the Senate and the National Assembly was called to pass a set of laws which were passed by the latter in June this year, including one to enable Jadhav to appeal against his conviction, but those laws failed to get the nod of the upper house. The International Court of Justice (Review and Re-consideration) Bill, 2021 aimed to fulfill the obligation under the verdict of the ICJ and was presented by Law Minister Farogh Nasim and was passed by the joint sitting of the House through voice vote. The law allowed Jadhav to challenge his conviction in the high court through a review process which was a requirement of the ICJ verdict. The joint sitting is called when the differences between the National Assembly and Senate are unbridgeable. The current impasse was due to the fact that the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and allied parties enjoy majority in the National Assembly but are in minority in the Senate or the upper house. [underlineimg] Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The [number of reported coronavirus cases from India]( stood at 3,44,75,266 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 4,64,570.  [underlineimg] In Brief Punjab Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi on Wednesday said all [the FIRs registered by the Punjab Police against the farmers]( who had been protesting against the Centre’s farm laws within the State, would be cancelled. The Chief Minister asked the police to cancel the FIRs after following the prescribed procedure with due diligence. The announcement was made after meeting the representatives of the 32 farm unions of the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) in Chandigarh [underlineimg] Evening Wrap will return tomorrow.  Today's Top Picks [[India and COVID-19 in images] India and COVID-19 in images]( [[Number of people fully vaccinated against COVID-19 surpasses those partially vaccinated] Number of people fully vaccinated against COVID-19 surpasses those partially vaccinated]( [[‘Two Indias’ monologue by comedian Vir Das sparks sharp debate, police complaints] ‘Two Indias’ monologue by comedian Vir Das sparks sharp debate, police complaints]( [[Very heavy spell of rain forecast for Chennai, surrounding districts on November 17, 18] Very heavy spell of rain forecast for Chennai, surrounding districts on November 17, 18]( Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](