Trace them: Supreme Court orders government to hunt for Russian woman, child
As part of a child custody deal, the Supreme Court had said that the child should stay with the father for 20 hours a day and the remaining four hours with the mother. This order was for two months.After this, the top court amended its order and allowed the custody to be with the mother for three days a week and the remaining four days with the father.However, when Saikat Basu did not get the custody of the child from Victoria Basu earlier this month, he filed an application in the Supreme Court. According to the application, there was no trace of Victoria Basu and her child.On the father's application, the top court directed the Delhi Police to investigate the matter and inform the status and get a look-out circular issued against Victoria Basu.According to reports, Saikat Basu claimed that his estranged wife - whose divorce proceedings are pending before a family court - was seen entering the Russian Embassy in Delhi from the back gate with luggage earlier this month.He also alleged that Victoria Basu had been accompanied by an embassy official and feared that she and her child may have since fled India.The Supreme Court will resume hearing the matter on Friday.- Ends
IN THIS STORY#Supreme Court#Delhi
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
India-UK Free Trade Agreement: A $34 billion game-changer for exports and employment
A positive outcome of the tariff saga started by the US is that countries are getting together to sign deals with one another. The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United Kingdom was finalised in May and has been consummated by the signing of the deal. This would be India's biggest deal signed in 10 years and UK's fourth since its exit from the EU. India has signed, with alacrity, a deal with the UK which will raise the total volume of trade to around $34 billion per annum from the present levels of around $2-25 billion. More importantly, it represents the first of many steps undertaken to sign deals with other nations to leverage mutual benefits. The India-UK FTA would eliminate duties on 99 per cent of Indian exports to England. India will gain mainly through higher exports in fish products, chemicals, jewellery, leather products, readymade garments and electronics, which are largely labour-intensive, and will in turn benefit the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) specialising in these products. Intuitively, this will be a boost for not just the SME group per se but also for employment, as such treaties are signed with other countries, too. Units in Tirupur, Surat, Ludhiana, Chennai, and cities in Assam and elsewhere would stand to gain. The present deal seeks to eliminate tariffs on a majority of products that previously faced duties ranging from 4 to 16 per cent. Exports could rise potentially by 20-40 per cent, depending on the responses of the concerned industries. From the UK's point of view, there would be free flow of goods such as automobiles, whisky and gin, among others, which will also help push up employment, thus bringing about symbiotic benefits to both countries. There would be easier access to around 64 per cent of UK's exports to India. Further, as Indian companies invest more as part of the expansion plans in the UK — it can go up to £6 billion — there would be more jobs created which can cross the 20,000 mark. The effective tariff rate for goods from the UK would come down from 15 per cent to 3 per cent, which includes duty on whisky coming down from 150 per cent to 75 per cent immediately and to 40 per cent over a period of 10 years. One area that will work well for India is agriculture, covering various crops as well as fisheries. This includes spices, vegetables, fruits and pulses. As India works to leverage the strength of its agriculture, this FTA provides space for expansion and will take us closer to the target of $100 billion which has been targeted by 2030. At the ground level, there would be streamlining of the sanitary and phytosanitary regulations in the UK, which has hitherto been a major hurdle in the export of farm products. The other significant benefit for us would be in textiles where duty-free exports would be permitted. This is significant as countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan and Cambodia have had the advantage of similar structure, making it tough for our exports, presently in the region of just $1.5 billion. This comes at an opportune time when there could be other pressures on our textile exports to the US. A similar gain can be seen in the case of engineering, where our exports were just $3.7 billion to the UK, which imports as much as $195-200 billion from the world. With the free trade agreement in place, it should be possible to double our exports to the UK. Similar benefits can be seen in pharma, electronics, software, jewellery, etc. In fact, the NHS would start to use generics manufactured by India — a big boost to the industry. At the individual level, there has also been a deal on allowing Indians to work in the UK on a temporary basis with fewer pressures on paying for social security being one of the main gains. Indians would gain from cheaper import of higher-end cars as well as chocolates and whisky, with the duties coming down substantially, thus making them more affordable. How can this deal be viewed? First, it is something which provides a thrust to our exports and hence employment. Second, furthering relations with the UK opens the door to negotiate with other nations and the EU should be next on the radar. Third, such a deal also provides a template to be followed when it comes to negotiating one with the US, already in the discussion stage. Fourth, the deal has focused on an entire array of goods and while manufacturing always looked to be on the cards, the fact that agriculture has a lot to gain is significant as we are harnessing the strength built in this sector. This will help to make the sector more commercial and farming more remunerative as such deals are struck with other nations. Finally, this deal reflects the government's strong commitment to boosting exports as part of its broader effort to integrate the Indian economy into global supply chains. The writer is chief economist, Bank of Baroda, and author of Corporate Quirks: The Darker Side of the Sun. Views are personal
Scroll.in
17 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
SC rejects plea seeking delimitation of Assembly seats in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking directions to the Union government to conduct the delimitation process in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, reported Live Law. Delimitation is the process of redrawing the territorial boundaries of electoral constituencies. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh rejected the petitioner's argument that holding the exercise only in Jammu and Kashmir last year and not in the southern states was ' arbitrary or violative of the Constitution', according to Bar and Bench. The Union government had started the delimitation process of Assembly constituencies in Jammu and Kashmir in February 2020. In May 2022, the number of elected Assembly seats in the Union Territory was increased from 83 to 90 in the final delimitation order. Of the seven new seats, one was given to Kashmir, taking its total to 46, and six were given to Jammu, which now has 43 seats. K Purushottam Reddy, a professor, had approached the Supreme Court stating that excluding Andhra Pradesh and Telangana from the exercise 'created an unreasonable classification and was therefore unconstitutional', reported Live Law. Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated in 2014 to create Telangana. The Assembly of the undivided state had 294 seats. After the bifurcation, the Assembly in Andhra Pradesh was allocated 175 seats and Telangana 119. On Thursday, the Supreme Court stated that allowing the delimitation process in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana 'will open floodgates for all states to approach seeking parity'. The bench also said that the provisions dealing with delimitation in states were different from Union Territories.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
17 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SC allows Kerala govt to withdraw pleas against guv over assent to bills
The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Kerala government to withdraw its pleas against Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar passed the order after senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought withdrawal of the plea and said the issue had turned infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case. Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the submission and urged the court to await the top court's decision on the reference of President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills. On April 22, the top court said it would examine whether the recent judgement on a plea of Tamil Nadu, fixing timelines for the grant of assent to bills, covered the issues raised by the Kerala government in its pleas. Acting on a plea of Tamil Nadu government, an apex court bench on April 8 set aside the reservation of the 10 bills for President's consideration in the second round holding it as illegal, erroneous in law. The bench, for the first time, also prescribed a time limit for President to decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by Governor. It set a three-month timeframe from the date on which such reference was received. Kerala sought similar directions in its petition. In 2023, the top court expressed displeasure over then Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan "sitting" for two years on bills passed by the state legislature. Khan is currently Governor of Bihar. The top court, on July 26, last year, agreed to consider the plea of opposition-ruled Kerala alleging the denial of assent to bills passed by the legislative assembly. The Kerala government alleged that Khan referred certain bills to President Droupadi Murmu and those were yet to be cleared. Taking note of the pleas, the top court issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala Governor. The state said its plea related to the acts of Governor in reserving seven bills, which he was required to deal with himself, to the President. Not one of the seven bills had anything to do with Centre-state relations, it argued. The bills were pending with the Governor for as long as two years and his action "subverted" the functioning of the state legislature, rendering its very existence "ineffective and otiose", the state added. "The bills include public interest bills that are for the public good, and even these have been rendered ineffective by the Governor not dealing with each one of them 'as soon as possible', as required by the proviso to Article 200," the plea said. The state government had said the home ministry informed it that President had withheld assent to four of the seven bills -- University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021; Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022; University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022; and University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 2022. The Constitution is silent on how much time the President can take in granting assent to a bill passed by a state legislature and referred to the Rashtrapati Bhavan for presidential consideration or for denying consent. Article 361 of the Constitution says the President, or Governor of a state, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.
