HIV+
mother cannot be deprived custody of her
child: HC
NEW DELHI, May 4: An HIV positive
mother cannot be deprived custody of her
child, the Delhi High Court has ruled
asking in-laws of a widow to hand over
the two-year-old son to her.
"There
is no law which can deprive a mother of
her child because of AIDS," Justice
Geeta Mittal said when the counsel
appearing for in-laws contended that
custody of the child cannot be given to
their daughter-in-law as she was an AIDS
patient.
"You
are only grandparents while she is the
mother. She is already suffering, why do
you want to make her suffer more by
depriving custody of her child,"
Justice Mittal said.
The court
rejected the contentions of father-in-law
Ram Gopal Verma, his wife Phoolwati and
other members of his family and directed
them to bring the child before it on
Tuesday when custody of child would be
handed over to the mother.
The
in-laws then pointed out that Sunita
Verma, their daughter-in-law, was of bad
character as she was suffering from the
disease prior to marriage and it would
have bad influence on the child.
The court,
however, took strong exception to the
argument and said that the disease was
not inflicted only through physical
relation but it could be transmitted due
to blood transfusion.
"It
is unfortunate that after losing her
husband she has been deprived of her
child. She cannot be deprived custody of
her child just like a convicted father
cannot be deprived custody of his
child," the court said.
Earlier,
26-year-old Verma was allegedly thrown
out of her in-laws home barely 13-days
after her husband died due to AIDS.
The woman,
now living with her old and ailing
parents at Sagarpur in south-west Delhi,
alleged that her son, who is not infected
with HIV, was forcibly taken away by her
in-laws, the day when the rituals
relating to the last rites of her husband
were performed.
She was
married to Satish Verma, a resident of
Panipat in Haryana on June 20, 2005.
Verma gave birth to the boy on July 20,
2006. Her husband died at a private
hospital in 2007. (PTI)
No
time constraints for a President who
spoke from his heart!
NEW DELHI, May 4: Time limit
never stopped him from speaking his heart
out. Dr A P J Abdul Kalam never stuck to
allotted time slots while making speeches
in the country or abroad as President of
India, according to a book written by his
then Secretary P M Nair.
Dr Kalam
was to address the European Parliament,
comprising 27 nations, on April 25, 2007
and had been allotted 25 minutes to make
the speech.
"It
would be first time that a President of
India would address the European
Parliament. It would be a significant
occasion, hence we did not want it spoilt
by exceeding the time allotted for the
speech," Mr Nair writes in "the
Kalam effect: my years with the
President."
"I
made it a point to tell him day after
day, at the risk of being obnoxious, that
he should limit his speech to 25 minutes.
The overrun to the 26th minute would not
exactly bring glory to him or the
nation," he says.
Foreign
Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon told him (Dr
Kalam) the same. Nalin Surie, Secretary
(west) in the External Affairs Ministry,
advised him similarly. Dr Kalam heard
them all quietly.
"Two
days before our departure for the foreign
tour, the draft of his speech to the
European Parliament came to me.
Twenty-nine pages! I stiffened. How could
he read out 29 pages in 25 minutes? I
went to him and reminded him of the time
limit and how his speech did not seem to
fit the time allotted," Mr Nair
writes.
"Okay,
okay. I will edit it, don’t worry. I
will not exceed the time limit," Dr
Kalam assured Mr Nair.
"Thus
assured - but still unsure - I came
back," he adds.
The day of
his address arrived. The European
Parliament hall in Strasbourg, France.
Much bigger than the central hall. The
hall was full. Doordarshan was making
last-minute adjustments to its equipment
for the live telecast of the address.
NDTV was also checking its links.
"We were all in the visitors’
gallery, my colleagues and I. A sense of
expectancy all around," adds Mr
Nair.
Dr Kalam
had the scheduled preliminary meeting
with European Union President Hans-Gert
pottering for about 10 minutes and then
they entered the hall. There was an
introduction of a minute and a half, and
the President began his address.
Minutes
ticked by. The audience rose to applaud
him twice. It was close to 25 minutes and
there was no sign of his stopping.
"The power point slides kept on
coming. I started perspiring."
"The
allotted time was already over. Half an
hour, thirty-five, forty minutes... My
discomfort was all too evident to anyone
who looked at me. Then I heard Dr Kalam
say, ‘I have composed a poem for
you. This is from mother earth to the
European Parliament. Shall I read it out
for you?’ He said in his innocuous
way. And having received assent, he read
it out," Mr Nair says.
Dr Kalam
finished and the members stood up again
and gave a thunderous ovation. Forty-five
minutes had gone by.
"Kalam
said ‘God bless you’ and sat
down. I too relaxed, finally, though
still dazed, and so proud of him as an
Indian," writes Mr Nair.
President
pottering rose to thank Dr Kalam.
"We have never heard such a speech.
Thank you, Mr President," was the
gist of it. The formal lunch followed. It
was a lunch in Dr Kalam’s honour.
Fully vegetarian! Kalam had carried the
day.
"Later
in the day, one to one, I asked Kalam,
‘sir, how did you choose to exceed
the 25 minutes given to you? I was
worried.’ he (Dr Kalam) smiled
benignly and said, ‘you know what I
did. During our introductory meeting. I
told their President that you gave me
only 25 minutes, but I have composed a
poem for you and this may take some more
time. And he said ok, go ahead, you take
my time too’."
Mr Nair
says the incident was reminiscent of a
similar situation when Dr Kalam was to
attend a meeting of the Pan-African
Parliament in Johannesburg in 2005. There
was, however, no address scheduled.
"But
Kalam told me, ‘you just get me
inside the Parliament and leave the rest
to me.’ and sure enough the Chairman
introduced him to the Pan-African
Parliament and invited him to address the
House," he adds.
In his
address, Dr Kalam laid out his plans to
set up the Pan-African e-network with
India’s help and expertise.
"This
project, which showcases India’s
expertise in the field of it, will
provide tele-education, tele-medicine and
e-connectivity to all the 53 countries of
the African continent. And all this
because of a short but well-thought-out
statement to the Pan-African
Parliament," writes Mr Nair. (UNI)
BJP,
Sena expresses resentment over
Chatterjee’s move
NEW DELHI, May 4:Lok Sabha Speaker
Somnath Chatterjee’s unprecedented
action against a large number of
opposition MPs for their "disorderly
conduct" is expected to snowball
into a major row, with BJP and few other
parties expressing resentment over the
move.
An
indication to this effect was available
from the BJP as also Shiv Sena, a day
ahead of the crucial meeting of the NDA
leaders to discuss the issue.
NDA’s
decision to hold the meeting soon after
the Speaker cracked the whip against 32
MPs was a pointer that the shadow of the
action is expected to fall on the
proceedings of the Lok Sabha tomorrow.
Former
Union Minister and senior BJP leader
Shahnawaz Hussain, who is among the MPs
whose cases have been referred to the
privileges committee, said that the
meeting is expected to decide the future
strategy on the issue.
Asserting
that members could raise such issues in
Parliament, he said on the issue of price
rise, there could be "no
compromise" by the opposition, a
view echoed by the Shiv Sena.
Hussain
said he was surprised to see his name
among the unruly MPs when the opposition
was raising the issue of price rise in a
big way to focus on the Government’s
failure to check rising prices.
He also
said that the Left parties too had raised
the issue in a similar manner earlier.
Samajwadi
Party has also lamented Chatterjee’s
action with its chief whip Samajwadi
Party Mohan Singh saying that the Speaker
should not have resorted to such an
action. "I am sad," he said
adding it was the duty of the chair to
regulate.
Shiv Sena,
a constituent of NDA, whose two members
have also been proceeded against, said
there was no question of being apologetic
about a "burning" issue
affecting the people.
"Parliament
is temple of democracy and in temple the
devotees ring the bell to invoke the
blessings of the God. So in the houses,
members do raise voice to get the
attention of the presiding
officers," sena’s spokesman
sanjay raut said.
Bsp member
brajesh pathak, who is also in the list
of 32 members, insisted that he had not
done anything wrong.
Pathak,
who is a member of the privileges
committee, told pti that he had only
pointed out "some misleading"
information being given by fertiliser
minister ramvilas paswan and had not even
moved out of his seat.
The main
opposition BJP has not revealed its
strategy but only said it will raise it
at the appropriate forum at the
appropriate time.
Congress,
heading the coalition, is downplaying the
development with its party spokesman
maintaining that the Speaker has only
referred the matter to the Privileges
Committee and has not meted out any
punishment. (PTI)
No
tax relief on interest on loans taken for
buying shares
NEW DELHI, May 4: Investors who buy
shares with borrowed money from
institutions cannot claim tax deduction
on interest paid on such borrowings, a
tax tribunal has ruled.
Giving its
ruling in a case where two companies had
claimed tax deduction on interest paid
over the sum borrowed from Reliance
capital, the Mumbai bench of the
Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal had held
that "no deduction is allowable to
the assessee in respect of interest paid
on borrowed funds".
Nikhil
investments and Kankhal investments and
trading borrowed funds from Reliance
capital and subsequently bought shares of
construction major Larsen & Toubro.
While
Nikhil investments borrowed about Rs 25
crore, Kankhal had borrowed about Rs 5.08
crore and later they claimed tax
deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the
Income-Tax Act.
Under the
Income-Tax act, a firm, or an individual
can claim a tax deduction on the interest
paid in respect of capital borrowed for
the purposes of business or profession
while the investment in shares could not
be considered a business or profession,
said the order.
"The
assessee could not be said to be engaged
in the business of investments as shares
were acquired as not stock in trade but
as investments", said the tribunal.
The
tribunal in its order also underlined the
rule for accounting that when income
earned under one head, the related
deduction has to be made in the same
head.
In line
with the norm, the tribunal held that the
"assessee is not entitled to deduct
the interest payment from interest income
from holding of debentures as there is no
nexus between the borrowed funds and
investment in debentures".
Besides,
the borrowing of funds in both the cases
had no relation with investment in shares
or debentures, it added. So the companies
cannot deduct the interest payment from
interest income.
Giving its
order in favour of the Commissioner of
Income Tax (Appeals) and Assessing
Officer the Tribunal upheld the
contentions of both of them .
The issue
had come earlier before the Commissioner
of Income Tax (Appeal) who had ordered
that interest paid on borrowings utilized
for acquiring shares are not liable for
deduction under the Income Tax Act. (PTI)
|
