Karwar Lawyers Pay Homage to the 26-11 Victims

We, as small Group of Lawyers friends at Karwar paid Homage to the valiant Heroes and the innocent victims of the 26-11 Mumbai Terror Attacks, at the residence/office Mr. Pradeep M Naik Advocate.

Mumbai's prominent landmarks like the Leopold Cafe, Cama Hospital, Oberoi Trident, Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, Taj Mahal Palace and Tower, Nariman House fell prey to the Pakistan based Lashkar-e-Toiba operatives. Several brave officers of the Mumbai Police force like Joint Commissioner of Police, Anti-Terrorist Squad, Hemant Karkare, Police Inspector, Anti Extortion Cell, Vijay Salaskar and Additional Commissioner of Police Ashok Kamte fell prey to the bullets. National Security Guards and Marine Commandos were summoned to bring the situation under control. The NGS also lost its two personnel, Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan and Commando Gajendra Singh. The day is a tribute to all those martyrs who gave up their lives to ensure others could live to tell their tales and a salute to the bravery of those who survived. CNN-IBN

Attending the Homage ceremony at Karwar Lawyer Pradeep M Naik's house, were Anil Mayekar, Anirudh Haldipurkar, Jagadish Harwadekar, Ramnath Bhat, Yogesh Naik, Nagaraj Deshbhandari, Varada Naik, Vinayak Naik, A. D. Naik, Ramnath Parulekar, Jyoti Mirashi, Gajanan P Tarikar, Ashwini Gowda, etc. Advocate Kiran Naik sang patriot songs and 2 minutes of silence was observed.

The first anniversary of the horrific 26/11 Mumbai terror carnage was also the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Indian constitution but sadly, this did not get the attention it deserved, a Rajya Sabha MP lamented Thursday. ‘This morning, when we assembled, we paid tribute to the victims of the 26/11 attack. But we have forgotten that our constitution was adopted on 26th November 1949. Today is the 60th anniversary of that momentous event,’ Bharatiya Janata Party member S.S. Ahluwalia said during zero hour. ‘Sadly, there is no mention of this in the media. Parliament too has forgotten about it. There was not even a bouquet placed in the Central Hall where the constitution was adopted,’ Ahluwalia added.

Source: 26/11 anniversary is also 60th anniversary of constitution’s adoption 60th anniversary, ahluwalia, indian constitution, rajya sabha

A year later, the entire nation has come together to observe the first anniversary of the 26/11 attacks and pay homage to the 166 people who lost their lives. Indian Express
Nation observes first anniversary of 26/11

More money, less proofreading - Legalweek

More money, less proofreading - Legalweek

Stephenson Harwood solicitor Rabia Younus on the transformation from trainee to qualified lawyer

Many of you will have recently received the long-awaited, extremely valuable (and very expensive!) piece of paper known as a practising certificate - proof that you are finally qualified to practise as a solicitor. However, if you were expecting some earthshaking feeling or sudden enlightenment on the mysterious and murky depths of the law, I am afraid you'll have been disappointed. What you will progressively sense, though, is the subtle yet significant transformation of your role within your firm. I qualified in the commercial litigation group at Stephenson Harwood in March this year. Seven months' post-qualification, and the differences between life as a trainee and a newly-qualified solicitor (NQ) are becoming increasingly apparent.

Am I now expected to run matters on my own?

No is the short answer. Nor will you suddenly be expected to know all the answers. In fact, it's likely that you will have almost the same level of supervision as a trainee. You will, however, be expected to be more proactive. Gone are those days as a trainee when you waited for instructions from your supervisor; partners will now expect you to take active steps without being prompted - for example, preparing a draft response to a client query, suggesting a solution to a problem or proposing the next steps in a matter.

A striking difference between life as a trainee and an NQ is the sudden leap in responsibility. Tasks which are not usually entrusted to trainees like conducting meetings on your own, liaising directly with clients, reviewing and commenting on agreements and preparing bills, may now fall upon you. You may also find that partners will rely on you to remember deadlines. As you can no longer hide behind the trainee card if things go wrong, you must be organised, think ahead and, most importantly, diarise deadlines.

What practical changes should I be aware of?

One of the main added pressures of qualification is hourly billing targets. Most firms have informal targets for trainees, but upon qualification these will now become official and be used as part of your assessments and possibly be linked to a bonus scheme. Consequently, it is important that you demonstrate enthusiasm to take on as much work as you can manage and that you record time accurately and efficiently.

A further practical change is continuing professional development (CPD). In order to renew your practising certificate each year, you must attend enough accredited courses and events or engage in accredited activity to accumulate the requisite number of CPD points by the end of the CPD year.

Do I need to bring in clients now that I am qualified?

Not exactly, but you may be expected to start engaging in more business development. This may mean attending more client drinks and seminars to work on your networking skills, or you may go a little further and organise a networking event yourself.

What are the perks of being qualified?

While the increased responsibility may seem a little frightening, it goes hand in hand with more interesting work. A bonus of qualification is that you can finally delegate jobs such as bundling and proofreading to trainees and paralegals, leaving you with time to get stuck into the juicier work.

Once qualified, it is important that you start to delegate work. Naturally, you will find this difficult at first as you may be delegating to someone who is only six months your junior or someone who you are friends with, but it's important - not only so that you can concentrate on fee earning tasks, but also because your clients will not be happy if they are being charged at your newly qualified rate for non fee earning tasks.

Lastly, you will notice a nice little increase in your salary that should make all this extra work and responsibility a little less of a burden.

Rabia Younus is an assistant solicitor at Stephenson Harwood

Men harassed by women, raise voice against Anti-dowry law

Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code, Originally framed to shield women from dowry harassment now become a “tool of frame-up”, allegedly being used by women to extort alimony from husbands. At least that seems so from National Crime Record Bureau figures showing 1.65 lakh married men committed suicide between 2005 and 2007 as compared to 88,000 women.

Seeking equality for men, an NGO, ‘Save Indian Family Foundation’ (SIFF), while citing these figures, raised the issue of gender bias on the International Men’s Day today. The SIFF along with Parivar Raksha Samiti, Chandigarh, demanded institution of ‘men welfare ministry’, ‘national commission for men’, abolishment of (anti-male) gender biased laws and replacing the word wife in law with spouse.

Besides, the NGO also insisted on rationalising the working of the National Commission for Women (NCW) and holding it accountable for “false propagandas”, formation of an ombudsman to regulate the anti-male quotient in media, films and TV and generating awareness about health issues related to men like prostate cancer on the line of breast cancer, short life expectancy and high suicide rate.

Vikas Kapur, coordinator of SIFF, said over 22,000 Indian men had ended their life in reverse dowry harassment by their wives against 6,800 suicides by women harassed for dowry. In all the 6,800 suicides by women, their husbands had been sent to jail without any investigation. However, over 68 per cent of the men were later found to be innocent.

And in the 22,000 suicides by men, cases had been registered only in six incidents and not a single woman had been questioned as to why their husbands ended life, let alone any punishment.

The crime against men has increased at a rate of 42 per cent over the past five years. Not only in crime, in lifestyle, too, women are dominating men, said Kapur, citing statistics showing women's average annual earned income was US $1,471 in 2002, almost three times less than the average for income of men at US $4,723. Still, he said, shopping malls were dominated by women.

The representatives of the SIFF stated that though the government earned 82 per cent of taxes from men, it has not spent a single rupee for their welfare or enacted a single law to protect men. On the other hand, more than 98 per cent of men are in armed forces while less than 28 per cent serve in media industry.

The prostitution industry is dominated by 99.98 per cent women against 0.02 per cent of men while 70 per cent of women are employed in reception, office telecom, school, bank, etc, jobs, having ease of work with less burden.

Among the victims who shared their miseries on Thursday  were a former Lt Col from Pathankot, an elderly woman from Chandigarh whose husband died of mental trauma, a software engineer and a man who sought court’s permission to sell off his kidney to raise funds to pay maintenance to his estranged wife.

Source - Punjab News Line

Civil Nuke Liability Bill cleared for introduction

The Union Cabinet on Thursday cleared the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill. The proposed law will enable India to join the international convention on civilian liability in case of nuclear damage. The Bill will be introduced in the current session of Parliament. Although India has signed bilateral nuclear power agreements with countries like the United States, France, Russia and Kazakhstan, foreign companies would not be able to enter the Indian market in the absence of the liability law. The Bill proposes to cap the level of compensation at $450 million in the event of an accident at a nuclear facility. The responsibility for paying this compensation will rest on the operator and not the supplier or foreign companies building and installing reactors in India. The Bill will also allow monitoring by authorities for avoiding nuclear disasters. Multinational companies who are into nuclear power would never think of doing business without a legislation that limits the compensation and liability to the operator after the claims made in the Three Mile Island accident of 1979. The Three Mile Island plant operator and its insurers paid at least $82 million in publicly documented compensation to residents for loss of business revenue, evacuation expenses and health claims. Also, there were hundreds of out-of-court settlements that were subsequently reached with alleged victims of the fallout, with a total of $15 million paid out to parents of children born with birth defects. Source - Economic Times

HC moots 12-point to plan to improve law education

Madras High Court Justice N Kirubakaran, upholding the BCI rules fixing upper age limit for admission to law colleges, said: "Time has come to revamp and upgrade the entire legal education. Fixing age limit is the first step in the right direction." Among the steps recommended by Justice Kirubakaran is increasing the class hours from the existing four hours to five or six hours a day. Classes shall be held in the morning as well as afternoon so that students would remain glued to their studies. Calling for strict attendance norms, the judge said law classes should not resemble part-time courses conducted in shifts. A qualifying criterion such as a minimum of 60 per cent marks in Plus-Two for the five-year law course or any degree for the three-year stream should be fixed "so that comparatively more competent, bright and intelligent students would join the course." This would enhance the image of the course, reasoned the judge. If necessary, antecedents of the students may be verified before their admission, Justice Kirubakaran said, adding that appointment of competent full-time professors/lecturers too is vital. Stressing the need for law colleges to have adequate infrastructural facilities such as the library, the judge said no new colleges should be opened if the amenities were not available. He favoured the scrapping of the three-year course in a phased manner and said the five-year integrated course must replace the three-year stream. Justice Kirubakaran said legal education should be equipped to face new trends and challenges, and wanted judges of the Supreme Court and high courts to be involved in the process of preparing syllabus or other activities like lectures, seminars and workshops. Besides ethical and moral values, law students should be exposed to mass contact programmes such as court visit, social services and legal workshop. Police officials could be invited to lecture on probe and prosecution, he said, adding that such interaction would bring down the incidence of police-lawyer clashes in future. Justice Kirubakaran made these recommendations while dismissing a writ petition filed by one M Santhosh Antony Vareed, who wanted the court to relax the upper age limit for admission to law colleges. Source - Times of India

India's membership of Asia remains primarily cartographic

http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14915094

There is something to the economist’s complaints. For all the credit that it gets for its recovery, China’s near double-digit show this year is mainly a command-economy extravaganza involving massive state-directed spending. When that show is over, the skew in China’s economy—an undervalued currency, a mercantilist bias in favour of manufactured exports and an obsession with accumulating foreign reserves—remains less the solution to global imbalances than one of the fundamental causes.

By contrast, though India’s annualised growth rate of around 6% this year is below China’s heady levels, it is impressive against a backdrop of global turmoil. What is more, government stimulus plays only a small part in the growth. Levels of capital and infrastructure investment compare favourably with China’s. And, much more than in China, the hot story in India is domestic demand. India is no mercantilist adding to global imbalances. It imports more than it exports, creating much needed global demand. India’s long-run growth will overtake even China’s.

All well and good. But it does not explain how much India is indeed part of Asia. Flows of foreign direct investment (FDI) suggest that the bond is ever tighter. India is now the second-most- popular global destination for FDI, behind only China, and much of this is Asian investment. Total inward investment was $23 billion in 2007 (the latest available figure), up over two-fifths on a year earlier. The target of $30 billion for 2008-09 is unlikely to be met, but inflows into India still defy the global slump.

Moreover, India is playing late catch-up with China, with FDI rising from just a few percent of China’s figure in 2000 to about a quarter today. Much of the increase has come from East Asia. Measured by flows, India is overtaking China as Japan’s biggest destination for foreign investment and, according to a survey by the Japan Bank for International Co-operation, will be the most favoured destination for long-term Japanese investments over the next decade. As for South Korea, consumer-electronics firms are driving a push into India. Cracking the rumbustious market—LG Electronics advertises in a dozen Indian languages—is the kind of offensive that Korea’s shock-troop salesmen relish.

Three years ago the then Japanese government defined a wide “arc of freedom and prosperity”, one end anchored in Japan, that took in India on its path. The new government of the Democratic Party of Japan has dropped the arc in name, but it survives in practice. India and Japan are strengthening economic and security ties. Japan sends 30% of its official aid to India and has promised over $4 billion for a “Delhi-Mumbai industrial corridor”. In South Korea, a finance-ministry bigwig says his urgent priority is to persuade young ministry high-flyers, who invariably apply for an American posting, to go to India instead.

And yet. India’s economic ties with East and South-East Asia fall short. For this columnist flying the free, prosperous arc from Tokyo to Delhi means an 18-hour schlepp via Hong Kong and Bangkok. Direct flights between Delhi and Beijing began only three years ago, and run to only four a week, with the odd supplement provided by Ethiopian Airlines.

And although India is opening some sensitive industries, such as telecoms and retail, to foreign investors, ownership limits remain. The obstacles work both ways. India’s information-technology giants, stars of international outsourcing, bang their heads in Japan and South Korea, where conglomerates’ ingrained habits of managing IT in-house persist. In trade (both goods and services), a welter of impediments persist. For instance, India’s drug companies are shut out of Japan, the world’s second-biggest market for pharmaceuticals. Auditing, advertising, textiles, medicines, you name it: one or other country has objections. Free-trade negotiations between India and Japan have dragged on for years, with no deal in sight.

The missing link

Most glaring of all, India is largely absent from those supply chains in East and South-East Asia that have come to exemplify globalisation itself. Partly that is because by the time India started to open up in the 1990s they were already established. Partly it is because Indian elites have long looked to America and then Europe for their education and business opportunities. But partly it is because of abiding suspicions of China, which happens to lie at the heart of the networks.

Some suspicions are economic. At home, small Indian businesses have lobbied to block the negotiation of a China-India free-trade agreement for fear of Chinese competition. But they are mainly geopolitical. Indeed, China’s preponderance in East Asia seems to provide the rationale for India’s “Look East” policy, and its encouragement by Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, which also seeks closer ties with India. India is welcomed in the region as China’s counterweight. On security grounds, the impetus may be justified. On economic grounds, unless surviving trade impediments are broken down, it makes for pretty lousy policy.

Source - Economist

Protesting lawyers assault scribes in Karnataka High Court

Collected from News Sources

Bangalore, Nov 9 (IANS) A senior television journalist and a cameraman of a leading English news channel were beaten up Monday in the Karnataka High Court by a group of lawyers protesting the continuation of controversial Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran, who faces allegations of land-grabbing and amassing disproportionate assets.
The incident occurred in Dinakaran’s courtroom amid chaos when cameraman Venkatesh was talking on his mobile as the lawyers had laid a siege to prevent the proceedings.

As cameras are not allowed inside courtrooms, some lawyers thought Venkatesh was capturing the scuffle that broke out between the advocates on his mobile and started beating him. In the melee, his shirt was torn and he was injured, suffering bruises on his neck and back.

When the journalist, who declined to be named, rushed to Venkatesh’s rescue, he too was assaulted by a group of advocates.

After a miffed Dinakaran left the courtroom in a huff, expressing displeasure over the lawyers’ boycott call, a section of advocates turned their ire on media personnel covering the event.

Condemning the assault, about 60 media persons, including photo-journalists, television cameramen and reporters staged a demonstration outside the high court and called for action against the advocates who beat up Venkatesh and the journalist.

As the high drama and the ugly scenes in the high court premises were relayed on local channels, state Law and Parliamentary Affairs minister S.Suresh Kumar rushed to the spot to inquire into the incident and pacify the media.

Regretting the incident, the minister told reporters the assault on scribes was unfortunate and should not have happened.

“It is not befitting for a noble profession. I will look into the matter and direct the police to nab the culprits,” Kumar said.

A complaint was also filed in the police station against the unidentified advocates who assaulted the duo.

The Advocates Association of Bangalore (AAB), which gave the boycott call, apologised to the media for the unfortunate incident.

“Those lawyers who assaulted Venkatesh and the journalist are not members of our association. In fact, we were protesting against their presence in the courtroom as none of their cases were listed or were being heard by Dinakaran. We have learnt later that about 30-40 advocates, sympathetic to Dinakaran, had assembled in the courtroom to create trouble,” AAB general secretary R. Rajanna told IANS.

In the ensuing chaos, Justices Gopla Gowda and B.V. Nagarathna were also manhandled by a section of the lawyers.

Read more: http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/protesting-lawyers-assault-scribes-in-karnataka-high-court_100272360.html#ixzz0WR5DXuMJ

Miffed Dinakaran leaves court amidst lawyers' melee

2009-11-09 23:31:00

A miffed Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran Monday walked out of the court amid chaos when lawyers protesting against his continuation in office laid a siege to his courtroom and refused to withdraw their boycott call. The controversial top judge, who is facing allegations of land-grabbing and amassing disproportionate assets, tried to dissuade the lawyers from disturbing the proceedings, as the high court stayed Saturday the boycott call given by the Advocates Association of Bangalore (AAB) Nov 4. When the lawyers refused to relent, Dinakaran stopped hearing a case and called the association's representatives to tell them that he should be allowed to discharge his constitutional duties. 'What sin have I committed? Why are you protesting against me? Allow me to do my duty. The court cannot tolerate such acts,' Dinakaran said. Rejecting Dinakaran's plea, the advocates continued to shout 'Resign chief justice' and 'Down, down Dinakaran' inside and outside the courtroom and prevented the proceedings. After Dinakaran left for his chamber in a huff, the agitated lawyers rushed to the adjacent courtrooms of Justices Gopala Gowda and B.V. Nagarathna to stall their proceedings. The advocates also prevented the judges from leaving the courtrooms and locked up their chambers subsequently. In the melee, Gowda got hurt when he tried to dissuade the advocates. About 60,000 lawyers abstained from courts across the state in protest against the continuation of Dinakaran in office. 'The boycott of proceedings from lower courts to high court has been total and successful. Though courts were functioning, about 60,000 advocates stayed away from all proceedings,' Advocates Association of Bangalore (AAB) general secretary R. Rajanna told IANS. Though Dinakaran's elevation to the Supreme Court has been put on hold, the lawyers wanted the apex court collegium to give its verdict on the charges submitted by advocates of Tamil Nadu High Court. 'Since the collegium has not completed the probe even 40 days after we first gave a call for Dinakaran's resignation, the association has decided to boycott his court,' Rajanna noted. A section of lawyers, who are not members of the AAB, disagreed with the boycott call. 'There is no legal provision for lawyers to adopt such a resolution for abstaining from courts in protest against a functioning judge or chief justice even if allegations are levelled against him,' D.V. Rajesh, a high court advocate, said. A senior television journalist and a cameraman of a leading English news channel were beaten up by a group of lawyers in the high court premises during the lawyers' agitation against Dinakaran. The incident occurred in Dinakaran's courtroom amid chaos when cameraman Venkatesh was talking on his mobile. As cameras are not allowed inside courtrooms, some lawyers thought Venkatesh was capturing the scuffle that broke out between the advocates on his mobile and started beating him. In the melee, his shirt was torn and he sustained bruises on his neck and back. When the senior journalist, who declined to be named, rushed to Venkatesh's rescue, he too was assaulted by a group of advocates. After Dinakaran left the courtroom, expressing displeasure over the lawyers' boycott call, a section of advocates turned their ire on media personnel covering the event. Condemning the assault, about 60 media persons, including photo-journalists, television cameramen and reporters, staged a demonstration outside the high court and called for action against the advocates who beat up Venkatesh and the journalist. Lawyers assemble before the Karnataka High Court in Bangalore on Monday to protest against Justice P.D. Dinakaran. BANGALORE: In an unprecedented incident, agitating advocates on Monday disrupted the proceedings in the court hall of the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, P.D. Dinakaran. They also raised slogans against him and forced him to adjourn the court for some time.Around 200 advocates also gheraoed Justices V. Gopala Gowda and B.V. Nagaratna when the latter did not heed their demand not to conduct the proceedings.The lawyers locked the doors of the hall where the judges were sitting and cut off power supply. The two judges were able to leave Court Hall No. 2 only after Mr. Justice Dinakaran and several other judges came and escorted them through the jostling crowd.The advocates had turned up in force to ensure that the boycott of all court proceedings in the State, called by the Advocates Association of Bangalore (AAB), was heeded.Tension began building up in the High Court around 11 a.m. when the lawyers found that the proceedings were going on. They began raising slogans against Mr. Justice Dinakaran and asked their colleagues to abstain from the court.The advocates then barged into the court hall and raised slogans against the Chief Justice. They abused the lawyers present in the court, assaulted some, and physically removed them from the court.Mr. Justice Dinakaran urged the agitators to let him speak. He said he had no occasion to speak of the “pain and suffering” he had undergone in recent days. “I have given my explanation. My silence should not be construed as admission of guilt. As a judge, I have to function and discharge my constitutional obligation and that is what I am doing.”With the lawyers refusing to permit him to continue, the Chief Justice left the court hall only to return in the afternoon.Two journalists were also assaulted by the advocates. Karnataka lawyers boycott Dinakaran, go on rampage TNN 10 November 2009, 12:17am IST BANGALORE: All hell broke loose in Karnataka High Court on Monday morning with rowdy elements and angry lawyers creating a ruckus and virtually forcing Chief Justice P D Dinakaran, facing land-grab charges in a village in Tamil Nadu, to suspend proceedings. Worse, members of the Advocates' Association of Bangalore (AAB) kicked up a huge row and locked up two judges when they found they were conducting hearings in a court hall unmindful of their call to stop work. The AAB, which had decided to abstain from court proceedings, wanted to halt business and prevent fellow lawyers from appearing in court. Chief Justice Dinakaran began the day hearing cases amid tight security at the Chief Justice court hall 1. He began proceedings at 10.30am but around 11.25am, nearly 200 lawyers swarmed into the hall, led by AAB president K N Puttegowda. The lawyers began shouting slogans against the CJ and asked him not to preside, in the wake of the Supreme Court Collegium `delinking' his name from the panel of judges short-listed for elevation to the apex court. Justice Dinakaran was initially unmindful of the protest and moved on with the hearing, but the lawyers stepped up their protest. One mediaperson was roughed up in the melee, as lawyers objected to his shooting the proceedings. Dinakaran appealed to the lawyers to maintain silence, but they paid no heed. To maintain peace, he addressed the gathering: ``I have the highest regard for all of you. I had no opportunity to interact with you all. Earlier, I did not have an opportunity to explain the suffering and pain I went through. Now, I am breaking my silence. Tell me, what sin have I committed? Where can I go? I am also one amongst you. I have my own constitutional commitments, allow me to discharge them. I have given my explanation and they (collegium) are seized of the matter.'' Later, with the lawyers unrelenting, the Chief Justice suspended the proceedings and left the court hall. After forcing his exit, the lawyers turned their ire on two judges in court hall 2 - Justice V Gopala Gowda and Justice B V Nagarathna. The unruly group entered the court hall around 12.15 pm and began demanding that the judges wind up proceedings, but they did not budge. This enraged the advocates, who shouted high-pitched slogans, and even tried tricks like singing the National Anthem to make the judges rise from the chairs, but they stood their ground. Some persons tried to ransack the bookshelf and even threw a book towards the judges. Having failed to make the judges leave, the lawyers closed the four doors of the court hall, locking up the two judges, court officers and clerks inside. The police watched helplessly as the lawyers cut off power supply to the court room. A pensive hour-and-half passed before CJ Dinakaran himself arrived at the court hall amidst deafening jeers, and led the judges out of the court hall around 2 pm. As the judges were led away, the lawyers almost roughed them up, but the policemen managed to help the judges to a safe exit. At 3.30 pm, the Chief Justice restarted the hearing with heavy police security around the court premises, and this time, things went off smoothly. The Bench wound up for the day. City police commissioner Shankar Bidari and additional commissioner of police (law and order) M R Pujar visited the Chief Justice at his chamber. Later in the afternoon, when mediapersons went to meet the Chief Justice, he refused to speak on any issue, and stated that there was no confrontation between the Bar and Bench. He also said: ``Administration of justice has been rendered without hurting the rights of lawyers or litigants.'' City court complex The scene was no different at the city civil court complex on Monday morning, with lawyers boycotting the court proceedings. They assembled in front of the front door at the complex and raised slogans against the CJ. The protest went on for nearly two hours and around 12.30 pm, policemen who had entered the premises were shooed away by the lawyers. Later, they marched towards the High Court from the civil court complex, sloganeering all along the way. In contempt? Justice Gopala Gowda and Justice Nagarathna, who resumed their duties at court hall 2, vented their dismay at the turn of events. Senior counsel Ravivarma Kumar said: ``The Bar Association has been hijacked by rowdy elements. The lawyers have thrown the respect of the judiciary to the winds, with this kind of incident happening for the first time in its history.'' Senior counsels urged Justice Gopala Gowda and Justice Nagarathna to take up a `suo motu' case of contempt against the lawyers. Justice Gopala Gowda, who was visibly upset, said: ``They (lawyers) tried to hurl chairs towards us and used abusive language. We will not be cowed down by these people and will discharge our duties as per the Constitution.'' CJ, judges seek police protection After the day's fiasco, the CJ held a meeting late in the evening with seven other judges. Said Registrar-General Justice R Budhihal said: ``When the CJ was conducting court proceedings, nearly 150 lawyers barged in from the back door, creating a ruckus. In the melee, the CJ was manhandled and he also suffered a minor cut between his fingers. Later, he was given medication. Now we have given a detailed report about the day's events and what exactly happened. We are seeking extra protection from the police.'' Lawyers protest outside Dinakaran's courtroomBy Indo Asian News Service | 09 November 2009 | 1:35pm Bangalore, Nov 9 (IANS) Hundreds of lawyers Monday laid siege outside Karnataka High Court chief justice P.D. Dinakaran's courtroom, protesting his continuation despite serious allegations of land grabbing and holding of disproportionate assets against him. Bangalore, Nov 9 (IANS) Hundreds of lawyers Monday laid siege outside Karnataka High Court chief justice P.D. Dinakaran's courtroom, protesting his continuation despite serious allegations of land grabbing and holding of disproportionate assets against him. Senior lawyers term HC incident 'unfortunate' Bangalore, Nov 9 (PTI) Expressing regret over the unruly scenes witnessed in Karnataka High Court today, some senior lawyers termed it as an "unfortunate" incident. "It is unfortunate that this kind of violent protest has taken place. If there were any issues they could have resolved it without resorting to violence or physical attack", Advocate General Ashok Haranahalli said. "It is an unfortunate incident that has happened today. The Advocate Association has not authorised its President to violate high court orders. The President conducted himself in the most irresponsible and unbecoming manner", charged senior lawyer Prof Ravivarma Kumar. "Judges being locked up to prevent discharge of their constitutional duties has never happened", he said demanding that association President Putte Gowda take the blame entirely or quit the post. More trouble in store for Dinakaran The controversial Karnataka High Court Chief Justice, P.D. Dinakaran, whose promotion to the Supreme Court has been put on hold following allegations of corruption, is headed for double trouble on Monday. A leading Bangalore-based lawyers body has decided to abstain from work in the Karnataka High Court and district courts on November 9, to press for an early decision on Justice Dinakaran’s promotion. The same day, a group of farmers in Tiruvallur district of Tamil Nadu, who had filed a police complaint against Justice Dinakaran on October 28 for alleged land grabbing, have threatened to forcibly enter the disputed land and distribute it among the landless poor. The Advocates Association of Bangalore, in a letter to the Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan, has said the delay in deciding whether Justice Dinakaran would be promoted has “eroded the confidence of the public in the high court.” The association, in three resolutions passed so far in its meetings, has asked Justice Dinakaran not to attend the court till his name was cleared. “We do not want a tainted judge…” association president, K.N. Puttegowda said. All India Kisan Sabha, a frontal wing of the CPI(M), has said it would lead a demonstration in Dinakaran’s village in Tiruvallur on Monday. “…the protesters would forcibly enter the land allegedly encroached by Dinakaran and distribute it among the poor,” peasant leader Tulsi Narayanan said. Did proxy counsel argue Dinakaran case? BANGALORE: While the special bench of the High Court was hearing the petition against lawyers abstaining from court proceedings in protest against Chief Justice P D Dinakaran sitting in judgment, advocate Laxminarayana appeared for the president of Karnataka Advocates Society. He argued that the association has no power to pass such a resolution. While the court was dictating the order, Ramesh Babu, president of the association told the court that he had not entrusted Laxminarayana to argue on his behalf, but had engaged Ashwathanaraya as his advocate. The court wondered at the statement. There was high drama after the court passed the interim order. Advocates geraohed Babu and took him to task for opposing the resolution by filing an interlocutory application in the High Court. Later, Babu apologised for his act. CJI seeks report from Survey of India J. Venkatesan As Dinakaran denies Collector’s version Land in question to be surveyed CJI calls for Tamil Nadu’s views on Collector’s report New Delhi: In a new twist to the controversy over allegations against Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran, Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan has sought the Survey of India’s assistance to ascertain whether the judge encroached upon a large extent of government land as stated by the Tiruvallur (Tamil Nadu) Collector. The decision to seek a report from the scientific mapping organisation under the Government of India’s Department of Science and Technology is a sequel to Justice Dinakaran meeting the CJI during the recent all-India Chief Justices conference and stoutly denying the Collector’s version. According to highly placed sources, the Collector, in his report, said Justice Dinakaran put up a barbed wire fence around patta land and government land. Justice Dinakaran, in his reply, was understood to have denied this charge. One of the lawyers’ associations in the Madras High Court also sent a memorandum denying the allegations of land encroachment. In the light of Justice Dinakaran’s denial, the Surveyor-General’s office has been requested to conduct a survey of the area in question and submit a report. It will take into consideration the Collector’s report and the reply by Justice Dinakaran and his family members. The CJI has also sought the views of the Tamil Nadu government on the Collector’s report and enquiries reveal that it is yet to send its response. The Supreme Court collegium of judges headed by the CJI has decided to put on hold the elevation of Justice Dinakaran to the Supreme Court and the next course of action will be taken after reports from the Surveyor-General and the Tamil Nadu government. Dinakaran should go, say top jurists Fresh from their victory in having forced the panel of senior most judges (collegium) to roll back its recommendation for promoting the controversial Karnataka High Court Chief Justice PD Dinakaran to the Supreme Court, top jurists have now said he cannot continue as a judge. Following a series of representations by 10 senior lawyers of the Madras High Court, backed by documentary evidence on the alleged land grabbing — confirmed by the Tamil Nadu government —and passing of orders in favour of his friends by Justice Dinakaran, the collegium finally conceded to the growing public pressure. The lawyers have now questioned his position as a high court chief justice. “Justice Dinakaran’s continuation in the judicial system jeopardizes the integrity of the entire system and in order to prevent any further damage, he should not be permitted to function now,” Madras lawyers have said in a letter to the collegium. Led by jurists R Vaigai and Sreeram Panchu, the lawyers have asked the CJI to order a CBI probe into the allegations against Justice Dinakaran. “…the Supreme Court must ask the CBI to register an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and other relevant Laws against Justice Dinakaran,” the letter said. Justice Dinakaran’s name has been “delinked” by the collegium from the list of four other judges, recommended along with him for promotion to the Supreme Court on August 27. Decks have now been cleared for the four to be promoted to the top court. The collegium, responsible for the appointment and promotion of judges, met thrice during the last two months to decide the issue, following serious allegations of corruption by top jurists, led by Fali S. Nariman and Shanti Bhushan, against Justice Dinakaran. HT was the first to report about the objection by top jurists in their meeting with the Chief Justice of India (CJI), K. G. Balakrishnan on September 8. Supporting the lawyers, the Campaign for Judicial Accountability said Justice Dinakaran’s position “had become untenable.” “The very fact that the collegium which recommended his name in the first place, had to meet thrice, and finally tried to hide under a confused terminology for an escape route shows Justice Dinakaran should be asked to go,” said the campaign convenor, Prashant Bhushan.