Latest news with #SwatiDeshpande
Time of India
21-07-2025
- Time of India
‘Eyewitnesses recalled faces after 100 days, how,' ask judges
Mumbai: The Bombay HC ripped apart the trustworthiness of the prosecution's witnesses in the blasts case and held that the special executive officer (SEO) who conducted the test identification parade—a primary step following the arrest of an accused—lacked the authority to do so. HC pointed out that two cabbies who claimed to have taken two accused, both alleged planters, to Churchgate station; and four eyewitnesses who claimed to see the accused planting bombs in the trains were silent for over 100 days, which, the court said, was "very abnormal." The court said that with minimum interaction, it was doubtful the the cabbies could identify the accused duo after 100 days, reports Swati Deshpande. The identification parade of various accused in the 11/7 train blasts case was conducted by two special special executive officers or SEOs, one of whom ceased to hold the post in 2005. The Bombay high court said in its judgment that the prosecution failed to bring any evidence on record to show that he continued to be the SEO when the test identification parade was conducted by him on Nov 7, 2006. Hence, the identification of three accused—all alleged planters—stands vitiated and is discarded, it stated. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai However, prosecution witnesses can identify accused in court during the trial, but the high court found such identification lacked the credibility it needed. The HC said the first of six categories of eyewitnesses produced by the prosecution against the accused were two taxi drivers who took two accused, both alleged planters, to Churchgate station; they identified the accused. A total of eight witnesses identified the accused in test identification parades and also in court. Apart from the two taxi drivers, four claimed to have seen the accused planting the bombs in the trains. The seventh one claimed that he saw the accused preparing bombs, and the eighth said he saw the hatching of the conspiracy and identified the accused in court. One witness claimed to have seen the suspects after they alighted from the train. His statement helped in creating two sketches, but he was not asked to identify the accused in court, the HC noted. The HC underscored the part of the brain that helps with face recognition. It said Mumbai cabbies operate in a "manner distinct" from others in India. A passenger states where he wishes to go, and a taxi driver either agrees or disagrees. There is hardly any chance for any taxi driver to have a long interaction with any passenger and to have sufficient and ample opportunity to notice and observe the passengers and their faces, and to store the same in memory for a long period, unless there is some special reason (to do so). The court said neither cabbie went to the police for over 100 days. The defence said they are "got up witnesses." The high court said that with minimum interaction, it was doubtful they could identify the accused duo after 100 days. Accounts of the other four eyewitnesses who claimed to see the accused planting bombs in the trains were discarded by the high court, as three of them were in the test identification parade conducted by the SEO who lacked power. Also, for over 100 days, they too were silent, a fact that the high court said was "very abnormal," and they identified the accused in court after over four years. The high court found no special reason for their ability to recollect the faces after "such a long period. "
Time of India
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
HC rejects city Jain temple trust petition against demolition order
Mumbai: Bombay high court on Tuesday dismissed a challenge by a Jain mandir trust in Vile Parle against a city civil court order, paving the way for the demolition of the temple structure. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now However, the HC extended its status quo on further demolition of the structure to 4 weeks, reports Swati Deshpande. Denying relief against the demolition notice from BMC, Justice Gauri Godse, hearing the appeal filed by Shree 1008 Digambar Jain Mandir Trust and others, said neither the city civil court order nor the civic action could be faulted. Only a wall stands on the property after the demolitions. However, after hearing senior counsel Surel Shah and advocate Nidhi Chheda for the temple trust and Drupad Patil for BMC, the HC extended the status quo for four weeks. Bombay high court has dismissed a challenge by a Jain mandir trust against a civil court order on demolition of the temple structure, although it extended its status quo on further razing by four weeks. On April 7, the city civil court had granted a stay on the demolition for a week. On April 16, the HC had also passed an urgent status quo order staying further demolition. The latest extension of the status quo is, however, subject to an undertaking given by the Trust to BMC to remove a temporary monsoon shed by Oct 31, 2025. BMC had issued a demolition notice in Dec 2024, which the Trust challenged. The HC said the civic notice could not be faulted as an earlier challenge to a notice first issued in 2005 had travelled all the way to the Supreme Court, and the notice was confirmed. Justice Godse, dictating the order, said, "In the absence of any prima facie case made out by the plaintiff (the temple trust), the impugned order passed by the city civil court cannot be faulted." Tired of too many ads? go ad free now She added that BMC had made repeated attempts to implement the notice under the MRTP (Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning) Act, as stated in its affidavit. "I don't see any illegality or perversity in the order; hence, the appeal is dismissed. " After the dismissal, Shah sought an extension of the status quo order. On May 14, the high court had permitted the Trust to file an application before BMC for permission to construct a shed for the monsoon. BMC's counsel Patil informed HC on Tuesday that the civic body, on such a plea, permitted a temporary shed with the condition that it must be removed by Oct 31. The HC said that based on the same condition, the status quo stands extended by four weeks.
Time of India
31-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
After L&T's challenge, MMRDA scraps tenders for 14k cr road projects
Mumbai/New Delhi: In a major relief for construction major Larsen & Toubro, MMRDA informed a Supreme Court vacation bench that it has in public interest scrapped its tenders for the Thane-Ghodbunder- Bhayandar twin tunnel and elevated road projects — estimated together at Rs 14,000 crore — and that it would possibly reissue fresh ones, but added it is for the state govt to take a call on, reports Swati Deshpande. The matter reached SC after L&T challenged MMRDA's decision to reject its technical bids for the projects. Megha Engineering and Infrastructure, which was a prominent purchaser of electoral bonds prior to being scrapped by SC, was declared the successful bidder. CJI B R Gavai remarked Friday this is the era of transparency and that the court was concerned with the larger public interest. The bench had Thursday also expressed surprise that technical bids of a firm which had built Central Vista and Atal Setu were rejected. After a Supreme Court bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justices A G Masih and A S Chandurkar was informed Friday about scrapping of the bidding process for the two projects, the SC disposed of the L&T's appeal as infructuous. "It is for the Maharashtra govt to take a call on whether to invite fresh tenders for the two projects," said MMRDA counsel solicitor general Tushar Mehta and Mukul Rohatgi. The elevated road project proposed a 9.8km overbridge along Vasai Creek and is part of an extension of Mumbai Coastal Road Project. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Что происходит при сжигании лаврового листа? Undo The Road Tunnel Project involved design and construction of a five-km long twin road tunnel from Gaimukh to Fountain Hotel junction on Thane Ghodbunder Road. The Supreme Court in its order noted both Mehta and Rohatgi for MMRDA "fairly submitted that the state has decided to scrap the entire tender process in the larger public interest and will take such steps, as are advised". The SLPs were thus rendered infructuous, said SC. L&T went to the high court on May 13, the day the financial bids were to be opened for the second-largest road project after Atal Setu. It said MMRDA was flouting instructions to bidders and PWD and CVC guidelines of informing bidders of the technical bid round outcome, which precedes the opening of price bids. In court, MMRDA said L&T and two others of the five bidders were found "non-responsive" or disqualified, and it was not mandatory to intimate the results to the bidders before the final winning or lowest bidder (L1) was selected post the last and financial round. L&T senior counsel A M Singhvi and Kapil Sibal informed the Supreme Court the difference between the L1 and its client was over Rs 3,100 crore. No other bidders were made party by L&T to its petitions. Before the Bombay High Court, L&T senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas also said "hypothetically" if in one project there were two tenders—one for the tunnel and one for the elevated road—the difference was over Rs 2,000 crore, would the public exchequer not suffer? The high court vacation bench dismissed the L&T petitions on May 20, citing MMRDA's argument of it being a large public infrastructure project which could brook no delay and the fact that the company participated in the bidding process and did not challenge the terms of the tender. L&T immediately challenged the high court order before the SC. On Monday, the Chief Justice-led bench wondered aloud in court how L&T could have been found technically disqualified and asked MMRDA to consult the state and see if it was willing to re-tender the project, else it would pass orders on Thursday. On Thursday, MMRDA counsel, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Mukul Rohatgi, informed the high court that it was in touch with the govt top brass and sought a deferment to Friday. Last Oct, after L&T moved HC, MMRDA extended the tender deadline by 60 days for its two mega projects. Pic for representation
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Bombay HC halts MIAL tender move on Celebi's plea
MUMBAI: Bombay HC's vacation bench on Monday restrained Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL) from making a final decision on bids invited on May 17 to replace a Turkiye-based company's Indian arm for ground and bridge handling services, reports Swati Deshpande. The decision will remain in effect till a regular bench, after reopening, hears the challenge raised by the entity to its security clearance revocation. On May 15, BCAS, citing security concerns, had revoked the clearance granted to Celebi Airport Services. Celebi Airport Services India and Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India then petitioned Delhi HC. Last week, Celebi NAS Airport Services India Pvt Ltd approached Bombay HC against the revocation.
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC grants four week status quo on proposed demolition of dargah near Mumbai
Swati Deshpande Mumbai: The Supreme Court Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai, on Monday granted a four-week status quo over claims of a proposed demolition near dargah at Uttan, near Mumbai. A petition filed by Balepeer Shah Charitable Trust stated that on May 16, the vacation bench of Bombay HC declined to intervene, but one of its members was informed of the impending demolition on May 20. The HC vacation bench of Justices Kamal Khata and Arif Doctor declined to intervene, stating that urgency was not made out since no demolition notice was issued by the state authority to the trust. The trust then moved the SC for orders to direct the state to follow due process of law. Its counsel, V Navarre, with advocate Prashant Pandey, contended there was an impending threat of demolition of the structure, which was in existence for more than eight decades. The urgency was wrongly ignored by the HC, said lawyers for the Trust, citing a notice dated May 15, 2025, received by its member from a senior police inspector of Uttan Sagari police station of the Mira Bhayandar and Vasai Virar commissionerate under Section 168 of BNSS. The notice stated that the state govt declared the unauthorised construction of the dargah would be removed on or before May 20, 2025, and that the members of the petitioner's trust were warned against creating any law and order situation. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Here's What a 6-Hour Gutter Upgrade Should Cost You In 2025 HomeBuddy Undo Recently, revenue minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule, in response to a question raised on the issue of the dargah by legislator Niranjan Davkhare in the state Legislative Council, assured its demolition. It has been alleged that the Bale Shah Peer Charitable Trust encroached upon protected mangrove belts located on govt-owned land parcels near the sensitive Chowk jetty in Uttan near Bhayandar. The Trust denied the allegations and said the HC erred by "adopting a hyper-technical approach" and ignored the fact that the police authorities stated in their notice that the authorities would remove the structure and render its plea before the court infructuous unless a stay is granted. The Dargah is of "Hazrat Sayyed Peer," the Trust said. The trust also informed the SC that Bawankule mentioned before the Maharashtra state assembly on March 29, 2025, that the structure would be demolished. The trust has already approached the chief minister, revenue minister, and the state secretary and has claimed it is being arbitrarily targeted by the govt without following the due process of law. Fearing it may be too late if illegally demolished, the trust sought a stay from the SC. The top court posted it after a month but said a status quo would be maintained till the matter is heard.
