New Delhi:

The Supreme Court has held the Aircraft Act was “a complete code” to deal with the safety and security of civil aviation and aerodrome whereas the state police could only forward probe material to the authorised officer to decide on lodging a complaint.

The significant verdict, ruling out any significant role of a state police in dealing with the airport violations cases, came from a bench comprising Justices A S Oka and Manmohan on an appeal of the Jharkhand government.

The state government challenged the Jharkhand High Court judgement which quashed the FIR against BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Manoj Tiwari and others.

They were accused of allegedly forcing the Deoghar air traffic control to allow their aircraft to take off after sunset in 2022.

The judgement, authored by Justice Manmohan, and made available on Wednesday said, “The Aircraft Act, 1934 as well as the rules framed thereunder…is a complete Code which deals with safety and security of civil aviation and aerodrome.” It added, “The Aircraft Act also prescribes a special procedure for taking cognisance of any offence punishable under the Aircraft Act, 1934, i.e., the complaint must be made by or with the prior sanction of the Aviation authorities. Section 12B is in the nature of a pre-condition for taking cognizance by a court.” The bench referred to the relevant provisions of the Act and the rules and said a complaint could be filed by an authorised officer alone under the Aircrafts Act before the court concerned.

“The local police can only forward the material collected by it during the investigation to such authorised officers. It shall be open to the authorised officer to take a decision in accordance with law with regard to filing or non-filing of a complaint,” it said.

The bench said it was a settled law that in the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution or the inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC, it was open to a high court to quash an FIR either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

“Keeping in view the findings, the present appeals are dismissed with liberty to the appellate-state of Jharkhand to forward the material collected by it during investigation to such authorised officer under the Aircraft Act within four weeks, who shall take a decision in accordance with law as to whether a complaint needs to be filed under the Aircraft Act and the rules framed thereunder,” the bench said.

The verdict said there was no evidence that the MPs acted rashly or negligently to endanger lives and hence no offence under Section 336 IPC (endangering human life) was made out against them.

It also held that no offence of Section 447 (criminal trespass) was made out as there was no allegation of forcible entry, intimidation, or annoyance by the lawmakers.

On invocation of Section 448 (house trespass) IPC, the bench ruled that the ATC office, not being a dwelling or place of worship, does not fall under this provision.

The top court, in December 18 last year, reserved its verdict on the appeal of the state government against the Jharkhand High Court judgement.

The case relates to an FIR lodged at Kunda police station in Deoghar district of Jharkhand against nine people, including Dubey and Tiwari.

They had allegedly forced Deoghar ATC personnel to clear their chartered flight to take off after the scheduled permitted time on August 31, 2022 in violation of security protocol at airports.

The flight reportedly departed at 6:17 PM, 14 minutes after sunset.

The top court’s verdict came on a petition by the Jharkhand government challenging a March 13, 2023 high court ruling which quashed the FIR on grounds that no prior sanction was taken from Lok Sabha secretariat as per the Aircraft (Amendment) Act, 2020.

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked whether the money from the state exchequer should be used for creating housing, health and educational facilities for the poor or laying cycle tracks in the country.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, which heard a plea for creating separate cycle tracks across the country, observed development in the country was not uniform.

“Tell us, whether money from the state exchequer be used on creating residential and educational facilities for the poor or for this (creating separate cycle tracks)?” the bench asked the petitioner’s counsel.

It went on, “In all major cities, there is acute problem of housing facilities for the poor. People are living in slums. There is lack of health facilities, educational facilities for the poor. Should all these elementary facilities be provided or these cycle tracks?” The court in the beginning referred to the petitioner’s prayer and wondered if such a relief could be granted.

“You want separate cycle tracks to be created across India. Very ambitious,” it said.

The counsel for the petitioner said several states had cycle tracks.

He said a cycle track was even there outside one of the gates of the top court but wasn’t available on taking a turn.

The petitioner’s counsel referred to the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation scheme focusing on development of basic infrastructure in selected cities and towns.

“How can we issue such a writ (for creating separate cycle tracks),” the bench said, “this is day-dreaming of the petitioner”.

The counsel referred to the issue of pollution in Delhi-NCR during winters and said having separate cycle tracks could help mitigate the problem.

The bench posted the arguments on February 10.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

Terming it as a sensitive issue, the Supreme Court on Friday said it will devise an effective mechanism to combat caste-based discrimination in educational institutions in the country.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to notify draft regulations to ensure no caste-based discrimination happened with students in the central, state, private and deemed universities.

It directed the UGC to furnish data on the number of institutions which had established equal opportunity cells in compliance with the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions Regulations) 2012, popularly called “UGC equity regulations”.

“We are equally conscious of this sensitive issue. We will do something. We will have to find out some effective mechanism and modalities to see that the 2012 regulations are translated into reality,” the bench said.

It sought Centre’s response on the issue and asked the UGC to furnish data within six weeks on the complaints over such discrimination among students in all universities and higher education institutions besides the consequent action.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the mothers of students Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, who allegedly died by suicide after facing caste-based discrimination, said from 2004 till now over 50 students (mostly from SC/ST) had killed themselves in IITs and other institutions after facing such discrimination.

While Vemula, a PhD scholar at Hyderabad Central University died on January 17, 2016, Tadvi, a student at TN Topiwala National Medical College, died on May 22, 2019, after she was subjected to purported discrimination by three doctors in her college.

The bench said a PIL was filed in 2019 but no substantial hearing had taken place on the issue so far.

“From now on we will list this petition periodically so that some effective solution could be found in the matter as since 2019 nothing much has happened,” said Justice Surya Kant.

The UGC counsel submitted a committee constituted by it gave recommendation and the commission drafted new regulations to stop caste-based discrimination.

“The draft regulations need to be put on the website to invite objections and suggestions from the public in a month’s time and thereafter it will be notified,” he said.

The bench questioned the UGC over the delay and said it had been sleeping all this while and not come up with new regulations.

“How much time is needed to notify the new regulations? You do it in one month and place it on record,” the bench said and posted the matter after six weeks.

It sought the assistance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on the matter along with the response of the National Assessment and Accreditation Council, an autonomous institution under the UGC which assesses and accredits higher education institutions.

On September 20, 2019, the top court issued notice on the PIL which also sought to enforce the fundamental rights, particularly the Right to Equality, Right to Prohibition of Discrimination against caste, and the Right to Life.

The plea alleged “rampant prevalence” of caste-based discrimination in higher educational institutions throughout the country.

The petitioners sought directions to the Centre and the UGC to strictly ensure the enforcement and compliance of the 2012 regulations.

Seeking directions to the Centre and the UGC, the plea asked to ensure all the educational institutions, complied with the regulations in “letter and in spirit” apart from establishing equal opportunity cells on the lines of similarly existing anti-discrimination internal complaints mechanisms, and have representation from the SC/ST, NGOs or social sector to ensure objectivity and impartiality.

Further, a direction was sought to all universities to take strong disciplinary action against victimisation of students or staff over caste-based discrimination and protecting students from any hostility in campuses.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)