1984 Bhopal gas tragedy: SC refuses to entertain plea, grants liberty to move HC
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea claiming that several seriously injured survivors of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy were under-compensated because because they were "misclassified" as having temporary disablement or minor injuries.A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran gave the petitioner organisations the liberty to approach the jurisdictional high court on the matter.The bench also made it clear that the apex court has not considered the merits of the matter.Highly toxic gas methyl isocyanate leaked from the Union Carbide factory during the intervening night of December 2-3, 1984, eventually killing 5,479 people and maiming over five lakh. It is considered to be among the worst industrial disasters in the world.When the matter came up for hearing before the bench, the CJI said decades have already gone by."Do we possess the expertise that a person should have been classified in A category or B category?" the bench asked.The counsel for the petitioner organisations said they have made a limited prayer in the plea and are not seeking to reopen anything.The petitioners sought directions to the Centre and the Madhya Pradesh government to take suitable steps to identify and compensate those who were under-compensated because of them having been misclassified as 'temporary disablement' or 'minor injury' under the provisions of the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 and the scheme.The counsel said a large number of people suffered from kidney failure and cancer due to the gas disaster and were being treated as minor injury cases.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
a minute ago
- Hindustan Times
Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act
Shimla, In a major setback to encroachers on government lands, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday struck down the section 163-A of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act 1954, allowing regularisation of encroachments on government lands, terming the section as unconstitutional. Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act A division bench of the High Court consisting of Justice Vivek Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi ruled that the "Section 163-A of HP Land Revenue Act is manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional and as a consequence the section and the rules framed there under the said section are quashed". Putting an end to long litigation, the judgment directed the state government to initiate eviction proceedings expeditiously against all such encroachments that were to be covered under the section 163A, preferably on or before February 28, 2026. The dimensions of the encroachments can be measured from the reply of the government which said that there were approximately 57,549 cases of encroachment covering an area of about 1,23,835 bighas of government land. The encroached government land is about 10,320 hectares and in terms of the rules framed under the impugned provision, 1,67,339 applications were received for regularisation up to August 15, 2002 and taking into account the magnitude of encroachments, the high court directed the state government to consider an amendment in the law pertaining to "criminal trespass". The high court clearly stated that any stay granted against removal of encroachment shall stand vacated and also directed the government to make suitable changes in law by amending the relevant Act and rules appropriately to assign duty on the office bearers of Nagar Panchayat, Nagar Parishad and Nagar Nigam as well as executive officer/commissioner concerned to report the encroachment for taking action to remove of encroachment. The HC also instructed the advocate general to transmit the copy of the judgment to the chief secretary of the sate government and all concerned with immediate compliance. Since 1983, successive governments issued various notifications for regularisation of encroachments and the July 4, 1983 notification permitted regularisation up to five bighas on a nominal fee of ₹50 per bigha. Section 163-A was introduced in 2002 during the first tenure of the then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal to frame rules for regularising encroachments, with the stated objective of helping small and marginal farmers. However, the High Court on Tuesday ruled that the provision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before law and attempted to legitimise illegal acts. "The impugned provision is in fact legislation for a class of dishonest persons and equality cannot be claimed in illegality," the judgment said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
The Hindu
a minute ago
- The Hindu
Justice delayed yet again
Last week, a special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court acquitted all the seven accused, including BJP MP Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case. Six people were killed and 95 injured in the bombing that had struck the Muslim-majority town in Maharashtra. The case, which was investigated by two different agencies, triggered accusations of 'saffron terror'. All the accused were charged by the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) in 2008 of being 'Hindutva extremists'. The trial was controversial as Rohini Salian, the former special public prosecutor, had alleged in 2015 that the government had put pressure on her, through the NIA, to 'go soft' on the accused. The case was initially probed by ATS chief Hemant Karkare, who was gunned down by terrorists during the November 26, 2008, terror attack on Mumbai. Eventually, it was handed over to the NIA. While acquitting the seven accused, the court pointed out several lapses in the investigation and criticised the NIA for presenting 'inconclusive', 'unreliable', and 'legally inadmissible' evidence. It said that there were procedural lapses in the invocation of stringent laws such as the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. It added that the investigators had failed to link the motorcycle, allegedly used in the crime, to Ms. Thakur; that there were problems with witness statements; and that there was no proof that Lt Col Prasad Purohit (retired) or the right-wing outfit, Abhinav Bharat, was linked to the blast. In the order, Special Judge A.K. Lahoti observed, 'The testimony of prosecution witnesses is riddled with material inconsistencies and contradictions. Such discrepancies undermine the credibility of the prosecution's case and fall short of establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.' While he said that terrorism has no religion, the Special Judge also added that a court cannot convict someone based on mere perception. Civil society members were critical of the verdict given the allegations that it was politically driven; and also since it came on the back of another verdict acquitting all the accused in another blast case. On July 21, the Bombay High Court acquitted all the 12 accused in the 2006 serial bomb blasts case. Seven explosions had ripped through Mumbai's local trains on the evening of July 11, 2006, killing 189 people and seriously injuring 824. The coordinated blasts had scarred the estimated 70 lakh people of Mumbai who use the local trains, often dubbed the city's lifeline, every day. Many victims feared taking the local train again. This case too was riddled with controversies. While the Maharashtra ATS, which had conducted the probe from the beginning, claimed that the attacks were the handiwork of the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Students' Islamic Movement of India, several other investigating agencies, including the NIA, claimed that the Indian Mujahideen had carried out the terror attacks. While acquitting the 12 accused, the High Court laid bare the inconsistencies, loopholes, and lapses in the probe by the Maharashtra ATS. It asked how key witness statements were recorded after an unexplained delay of 100 days. It questioned the trustworthiness and credibility of witnesses, highlighted deep flaws in both the investigation as well as prosecution, and demanded to know why the circumstantial evidence, such as call detail records, which the investigators had relied on so much, was inconclusive. It pointed out that the witness statements were delayed and inconsistent; that there were procedural lapses and coercion allegations about the confessions retrieved; that there was no proof of actual explosives used; and that the chain of custody of the recoveries was broken. The High Court also rapped the trial court for the conviction order. The judgments on two terror cases in India have left the victims, who have had to wait for nearly two decades for verdicts, without a sense of justice. The investigations raise serious questions about India's criminal justice system and specifically about the accountability of investigating agencies. Who are the agencies answerable to, for their contradictory claims and shoddy procedures, which have allowed extremist organisations to get away with such terrible crimes in Maharashtra? And when — if at all they do — will the victims of these blasts get a sense of closure?
India Today
a minute ago
- India Today
Gujarat set to implement Uniform Civil Code, report likely in monsoon session
After Uttarakhand, Gujarat is poised to become the second state in the country to implement a Uniform Civil Code (UCC). A key meeting was held on Tuesday between Gujarat Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel and the UCC Committee, during which the committee's draft report was to sources, the committee has submitted its report during this meeting. The state government will now review the recommendations, suggest any necessary modifications and finalise the report. advertisementOnce complete, the government is expected to table the UCC bill in the upcoming monsoon session of the Gujarat Assembly. Committee chairperson and retired Supreme Court judge Justice Ranjana Desai described the meeting as a formal interaction to discuss the work done so far. She said that the committee has visited every district, interacted with people from all sections of society, and incorporated their feedback into the report on the Uniform Civil Code. She also added that the final report will be officially submitted in the coming days, following which the government will decide on implementation.A spokesperson for the Gujarat government confirmed that the committee had collected public feedback both online and offline and held meetings across communities. The spokesperson said that the discussions focused on those findings on Tuesday. Once the report is officially submitted, the government will decide whether to introduce it in the monsoon is worth noting that the UCC committee was constituted on February 4 by Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel. The five-member panel, led by Justice Ranjana Desai, was initially given a 45-day timeline to submit its report. However, its tenure was extended three times to ensure wider consultations across all segments of society.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Gujarat
