|
|
Mulayum advises Govt NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Mulayum Singh Yadav today advised the Government to weigh the pros and cons of any retaliatory .....more Oppn
raps Govt for NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Opposition members in Rajya Sabha today charged the Government with security lapse for the terror attack on Parliament but ...more Sanjay
Dutt puts up MUMBAI, Dec 18: Sanjay Dutt, film star and accused in 1993 bomb blast case, today denied his involvement in the conspiracy and refuted the CBI ....more CPI-M
to postpone NEW DELHI, Dec 18: CPI-M today said it was ready to postpone raising all contentious issues in Parliament, including....more |
|
Vajpayee rejects Pak’s
NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee today rejected Pakistan’s offer of a joint probe into the terrorist attack on Parliament on ..more Take
adequate security NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Asking the Government not to be complacent after the terror attack on Parliament, the Congress today stressed in Lok Sabha that ....more Raj
Kapoor stamp MUMBAI, Dec 18: The release of a commemorative stamp dedicated to the great showman of Indian cinema—Raj Kapoor— was not only a......more Dying declaration must accure confidence of the court: SC NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Laying down the law on the admissibility of a dying declaration as a piece of evidence, the .......more |
 |
Mulayum advises Govt to weigh pros, cons of retaliatory action NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Mulayum Singh Yadav today advised the Government to weigh the pros and cons of any retaliatory action it might consider against Pakistan in the wake of the December 13 terrorist attack on Parliament. Lambasting the Government in the Lok Sabha for not taking appropriate steps to prevent the incident, Mr Yadav said despite intelligence information that parliament was the next target of terrorists, the Government treated the matter in a casual manner. He said the opposition would extend full support to the Vajpayee Government for taking any appropriate action against the terrorists in the national interest. However, Mr Yadav said the Government should keep aside all the controversial issues, including Ayodhya and POTO, and desist from taking political mileage out of the attack. The Government should convene an all party meeting to take them into confidence on matters of national unity, he added. During his 45-minute speech, he said the attack on Parliament as well as the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly clearly showed that "our borders are not safe." Suggesting a guarded approach in destroying terrorist camps in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK), Mr Yadav said the reports indicated that these camps have been shifted to other places. He also suggested the Government to consult the armed forces and politicians before taking any such action. Mr Yadav was critical of India’s foreign policy which he attributed to new delhi abandoning non-aligned movement. No country in the world has openly come out in support of India at this crucial juncture. On the contrary, many countries were advising India to exercise a restraint. He criticised the Government’s policy on Ayodhya, urging it to discipline those who are violating the Supreme Court directive on this issue. Mr Yadav also urged that all Muslims should not be branded as terrorists. A handful of them may be involved and the Government should severely penalise them. Countering allegations that he was involved in appeasing Muslims, he wanted to know which political parties did not want minorities votes in the election. "All political parties seek support from all religious groups," he added. He also asked the ruling party to rein in Bajrang Dal and other such organisations and prevent them from issuing deadlines on resolving the Ayodhya issue which should be left to the court to decide. (UNI) |
|
Oppn raps Govt for security lapse NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Opposition members in Rajya Sabha today charged the Government with security lapse for the terror attack on Parliament but said they were firmly behind it in this challenging hour. The opposition wanted to know why no effective security measures were taken despite Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Home Minister L K Advani having spoken earlier of a likely terrorist attack on Parliament. Raising a discussion on the December 13 attack, opposition leader Manmohan Singh said though the opposition stood firmly behind the Government in this challenging hour, the Centre could have been more alert in preventing such attacks. Stating that most of the information given by the Government in the statement today in the house had already appeared in the press, Singh said the Congress joined the "countrymen in condemning the dastardly terrorist attack on Parliament". Earlier, Chairman Krishan Kant suspended the question hour and took up for discussion the attack on Parliament. Condemning the attack "on the heart and nerve-centre of our democracy", Singh said "we shall not make any compromise with these terrorist gangs." Singh said Home Minister L K Advani while speaking at a gathering organised by FICCI on December 5 had apprehended such an attack. Similarly, he said, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee a day before the incident had spoken of likelihood of an attack on Parliament. Besides, the Maharashtra Government had also informed the centre about the possibility of an attack after interrogation of a suspected Al-Qaida activist. Singh said despite these warnings, the dastardly attack had taken place. Stating that the entire issue should be thoroughly investigated, he said there should be no "loose talk" and "we have to be cool headed in formulating a response". Singh said the international community should be fully apprised of the cross-border terrorism of "the most vicious type" being wrought on India. He wanted to know whether the US gave a restrained reaction on the terrorist attack on Parliament. Demanding that terrorist hideouts be smashed not only within the country but wherever they existed, S S Ahluwalia (BJP) asked "how long can we go on tolerating the proxy war from across the border. Enough is enough." He said a number of peace initiatives were taken in the past, from the days of Nehru to Indira Gandhi and Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, "but what is the outcome?" He asked Congress to take the initiative first in crushing terrorism as it had been the worst victim of the menace losing Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Beant Singh. "Congress should take a firm resolve to fight terrorism," he said, implying that the party should support the anti-terrorism legislation, POTO. When Ahluwalia said one should not try to find fault with security personnel who had done a commendable job, opposition members, particularly those from Congress, took umbrage saying "nobody has said there was a security lapse. Why is he levelling this allegation. It should be expunged". He said even the Prime Minister had spoken about the possibility of a terrorist attack on Parliament just a day before it actually occurred. He suggested that time should not be wasted any more by holding debates, discussions, seminars, conferences and symposia on terrorism. "The need of the hour is to take effective steps," he said adding terrorist hideouts should be smashed not only in the country but wherever they were situated. S Ramachandran Pillai (CPI-M) said the December 13 incident was not a sudden affair and the Government should have been fully prepared to meet such eventuality as october one attack on Jammu and Kashmir was a clear pointer that more such strikes were in store. He said there was a security lapse as the terrorists breached security at the gate to enter into Parliament and wondered what prevented the Government from taking adequate measures. Pillai criticised some of the NDA constituents for making irresponsible statements particularly when the need of the hour was to face the challenge unitedly and resolutely. Senior Congress member Pranab Mukherjee said the statement had belied the hopes of members that it would unveil an action plan to deal with menace of terrorism. Nobody would disagree with the resolve to fight terrorism but Government of the day would have to spell out how the concerns of people about terrorism faced by the country for the last two decades was going to be addressed. "We have to work out own strategy," Mukherjee said adding mere rhetorics like hot pursuits and pro-active measures would not suffice in dealing with terrorism and what was needed was a "clear vision." Though the valour shown by the security personnel was commendable, Government cannot escape the fact there was intelligence failure. Mukherjee wanted the Government to rise above "narrow partisan approach" and take opposition parties into confidence about their plans to deal with the situation. Lamenting the Government for accusing opposition for standing in the way of POTO, he wondered in what way it had helped in preventing this terrorist attack even though POTO was in operation since October 24. "Accusing opposition is not going to help," he said, adding what was needed was a united fight against terrorism. Referring to the certificate given by US to Pakistan that Islamabad had taken action against Pak-based terrorist organisations, Mukherjee wanted to know if New Delhi shared this perception. (PTI) |
|
Sanjay Dutt puts up defence in blast trial, denies involvement MUMBAI, Dec 18: Sanjay Dutt, film star and accused in 1993 bomb blast case, today denied his involvement in the conspiracy and refuted the CBI charge that he possessed an AK-56 rifle and destroyed it. The actor appeared before designated TADA Judge P D Kode to give his point of view on the evidence tendered by CBI. His lawyers Rajendra Singh, Satish Maneshinde and Farhana Shah submitted arguments on behalf of the actor. Dutt denied that film producer Samir Hingora and Ibrahim Moosa Chavan had visited his residence in a car laden with arms and ammunition prior to the 1993 explosions. Dutt’s lawyers said the confession of police constable Pandharinath Shinde in this regard was incorrect. The CBI has alleged that Dutt accepted an AK-56 rifle from the accused and asked them to take away other weapons. When Samir Hingora and his associate Hanif Kadawala were held after the blasts they told the police about the rifle kept by Dutt. The actor was away to Mauritius for a film shoot and instructed his friends on telephone to destroy the weapon from his house. Dutt denied that he had voluntarily confessed before police about accepting AK-56 rifle, 9 mm pistol and bullets from the accused. On statement of confession recorded by police, Sanjay’s lawyers argued that the actor had not made any voluntary disclosure about his involvement in the crime before inspector Valli Shetty or DCP Vishnu Bishnoi or anyone else. Sanjay’s lawyers cited portions from cross-examination of DCP Bishnoi to show that his statement of confession was not voluntary. As regards a spring and a rod produced by CBI to prove allegations that Sanjay had destroyed AK-56 rifle with help of his friend in a foundry, defence lawyers said these articles by themselves could not prove that they were part of the rifle. Dutt also disagreed with CBI’s version that he had seen his friend Yusuf Nullwalla in Crime Branch office when he was arrested. The actor also denied that he had told Nullwalla to tell the police about the weapons and ammunition. The actor also denied that Nullwalla had taken him and policemen to his friend Kersi to whom he had handed over the rifle and pistol. He denied knowledge about Kersi producing a spring and rod from his house and handing them over to police. Dutt said he was not aware about Kersi’s statement that he had handed over the pistol and bullets to his friend Russi Mulla.(PTI) |
|
|
|
|
Raj Kapoor stamp creates history MUMBAI, Dec 18: The release of a commemorative stamp dedicated to the great showman of Indian cinema—Raj Kapoor— was not only a memorable event for the film industry, it created history in more ways than one. Released by Information Technology Minister Pramod Mahajan here, the Rs four denomination stamp with three Raj Kapoor photographs, alongwith an earlier one honouring his father Prithviraj Kapoor, is the second pair of father-son stamps in the history of Indian philately. The first pair of such stamps was issued by the Postal Department to honour leader of the Indian freedom struggle, Pt Motilal Nehru and first Prime Minister of the country, Pt Jawaharlal Nehru. The Kapoors are also the world’s first father-son pair in the film industry, who have been commemorated through stamps. The stamp additionally features Raj Kapoor’s leading lady in many movies—Nargis—thereby becoming the first one that displays an on-screen couple. The Indian Postal Service has already issued a stamp on Raj Kapoor’s on-screen Guru Charlie Chaplin. Mr Mahajan said it was his privilege to release the stamp on the great showman, but lamented that the department had issued only 13 stamps commemorating the Indian film industry, which was every Indian’s lifeline. Four of the 13 honour institutions while the others honour individuals. A look at the stamps released by the Department on Film Industry, reveals lesser known facts. The individuals honoured are doyen of Indian film industry Dadasaheb Phalke, Begum Akhtar, Kundanlal Sehgal, Kannada film maker Bellari Raghav, Oscar Award Winning Director Satyajit Ray, Dinanath Mangeshkar and Nargis Dutt. The stamp on Dadasaheb Phalke was the first in the series, released on April 3, 1971 on his birth anniversary. This was followed by a stamp on world renowned comedian Charlie Chaplin on April 16, 1978. Kannada filmmaker Bellari Raghav was commemorated with a stamp on October 31, 1981. Father of Indian ‘Nightingale’ Lata Mangeshkar, Master Dinanath Mangeskar was honoured with a stamp on December 29, 1993 for his contribution to the Marathi film industry. The next in the series was a stamp on Nargis Dutt, released on December 30, 1993, which also carried a photograph of the Spastics Society of India. The stamp on Satyajit Ray was released on January 11, 1994 and on singer-actor Kundanlal Sehgal on April four, 1995. Earlier on February 22, 1988, the postal authorities issued a stamp honouring popular Marathi theatre personality Bal Gandharva. In what is perhaps the saddest episode in the history of philately, a postal sticker was issued on Begum Akhtar, the singer par excellence, on December two, 1994 at 0900 hrs in the morning and withdrawn two hours later. According to philatelist Jagdish Purohit, the ink used in the stamp was of cheap quality, which would come off at the slightest instance. The stamp was therefore, withdrawn and the Postal Department is yet to release a stamp in her commemoration. The four stamps released on events are on the international film festival of India of January three, 1977, completion of 75 years of the Indian film industry on may 30, 1989, hundred years of Indian cinema on January 11, 1995 and Prithvi theatres, bearing the photograph of Prithviraj Kapoor on January 15, 1995. On a request by Sunil Dutt, MP, to name the Srinagar International Airport after Raj Kapoor, Mr Mahajan promised to pursue the matter. He quipped that he might try to get the international airport at Peshawar, the birthplace of Raj Kapoor, named after the showman. (UNI) |
|
||
Dying declaration must accure confidence of the court: SC NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Laying down the law on the admissibility of a dying declaration as a piece of evidence, the Supreme Court has held that it must be such as to ‘allure the confidence of the court.’ "There is no format as such of dying declarations. Neither the declaration need be longish in nature nor neatly structured. As a matter of fact, a perfectly worded and neatly structured dying declaration may bring about an adverse impression and create suspicion," the court added. The ruling was given recently by a bench of Mr Justice U C Banerjee and Mr Justice K G Balakrishnan, while allowing an appeal by a murder accused. Appellant-accused Panchdeo Singh had been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by a Dhanbad Sessions Court for murdering one Sriram Singh and injuring his companion, Ramsumer Singh, by hurling a bomb on them on December 20, 1980. There were two other accused, who died during the trial. The motive behind the offence was personal enmity. Patna High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant. The conviction of the appellant was based on the dying declaration of Sriram Singh there was a positive statement against the appellant in regard to his presence at the site of occurrence. However, the dying declaration did not involve him in the crime. The Supreme Court in its judgment noted that there was not even a doctor’s certificate in regard to the state or condition of the deceased. Though the doctor was available, there was neither any certification nor even a signature of the doctor on the dying declaration. The court expressed its inability to record its confidence on such a declaration so as to lend support and concurrence to the judgement under appeal. The court was of the view that the High Court fell into a manifest error and its verdict could not be sustained, the court added. The judge noted that admissibility of a dying declaration had judicial scrutiny for over five decades. The earlier view was that it was not safe to convict an accused person merely on the evidence furnished by a dying declaration, subsequently it was held that it could be accepted even without a cogent reason. In yet another decision, the court said that though a dying declaration must be approached with caution, there was neither a rule of law nor a rule of prudence which had hardened into a rule of law that a dying declaration could not be acted upon unless it was corroborated. This court went up to observe that the court must look out for corroboration unless it comes to the conclusion that a dying declaration suffered from any infirmity, the judge further noted. The judge also noted that this court in yet another decision had observed that apart from the care and caution factors, a dying declaration ought otherwise to be treated as trustworthy. The judges concluded that the confidence of the court was the summum-bonum and in the event of there being any affirmation thereto in the judicial mind, the question of any disbelief or distrust would not arise. (UNI) |
||
|
||
|
| home | state | national | business| editorial | advertisement | sports | |
