Bar & Bench News Network
Vice-President Hamid Ansari has reminded the committee investigating charges of corruption against Justice Dinakaran that it has all the powers of a Civil Court under Section 5 of the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968 (Act).
Section 5 of the Act states that a committee appointed under the Act has the powers of a civil court in summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; requiring the discovery and production of documents; receiving evidence on oath; issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents and such other matters as may be prescribed.
The Rajya Sabha Secretariat issued the response based on a clarification sought by the committee. The committee had last met on August 1, 2010 where it had concluded that additional clarifications needed to be sought to frame charges against the impeachment motion. These clarifications maybe sought from MPs who had signed the motion against Justice Dinakaran.
Since seeking additional information or clarification from MPs might throw up issues regarding parliamentary privileges as well as procedural issues, the committee had sought a formal response from the Rajya Sabha. Any further information that is now going to be sought from MPs or any other person will be now entered as evidence. Further, any information given by MPs can now be cross-examined.
The committee, which is headed by Supreme Court Justice V.S. Sirpurkar, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court J.S. Khehar and Senior Advocate P.P. Rao are investigating charges of possessing wealth disproportionate to known sources of income, unlawfully securing five housing board plots in the name of his wife and two daughters, illegal encroachment on government and public property to deprive Dalits. The charges also include abuse of judicial office.
Justice Dinakaran who has denied all the charges against him had repeatedly refused to go on leave following the allegations which had disrupted the Indian judiciary for a considerable period of time. The President finally transferred him to the Sikkim High Court earlier this month. It now remains to be seen how soon the course of justice regarding Justice Dinakaran’s fate will take.
|
Be the first to post a comment 
Related Stories
- No Supreme Court for Dinakaran, for now
- Bar vs. Bench in Karnataka High Court: Protest against Dinakaran turns violent as advocates go on a rampage and assault HC judge
- Dinakaran problem continues: probe panel reconstituted
- Justice Dinakaran: ‘To Court or not to Court’
- After Justice Dinakaran, probe panel in hot water: Forum for Judicial Accountability seeks recusal of Justice Sirpurkar
- Victory for Forum of Judicial Accountability: Justice Sirpurkar recuses himself from Dinakaran probe panel
- Justice Alam replaces Sirpurkar in Dinakaran probe panel
Other News
- Significant amendments proposed to Consumer Protection Act; Online filing to be made permissible, fines for non-compliance enhanced
- ALMT Legal gets four new partners; Total partner strength increases to 18
- Clasis Law gets third new partner in as many months; Maritime law expert Harsh Pratap roped in to head Shipping practice
- Foreign Law Firms Case: Arguments concluded; Judgment reserved
- Conversation with Kartikeya Tanna: “What Vineet Narain and Justice Singhvi have done, Justice Ganguly has undone”
- NALSAR hit by another scandal; Committee finds NALSAR authorities guilty of gross abuse of power (Updated)
- AIBE Update: Results withheld due to Cal High Court injunction; BCI to approach Supreme Court
The Viewpoint - Market Structure and Competitive Bidding
Jan 31, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the seventh article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner J. Sagar Associates. JSA Partners Amit Kapur and Vishnu Sudarsan analyse the recent judgment of Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in the Essar Power case which has clarified the position re. competitive procurement of power. comments (0)










