Pages

Sunday 1 January 2012

Indian Current Affairs-December,2011

Lok Sabha Passed the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill
The Lok Sabha on 27 December 2011, approved the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011 with the government making it clear that setting up of Lokayuktas by the states would not be mandatory. However, the Constitutional Amendment Bill, designed to confer constitutional status on the anti-corruption watchdog, fell through, as the government failed to get two-thirds support for it. The Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011 was approved after the government moved a few other key amendments, including keeping the Defence Forces and Coast Guard personnel out of the purview of the anti-graft ombudsman and increasing the exemption time of former MPs from five to seven years. A number of amendments moved by the Opposition, including Corporates, Media and NGOs receiving donations, were defeated. The government rejected the opposition's demand to bring CBI under Lokpal.

The Union Cabinet of India approved 4.5 Percent Quota for Minorities
The Union cabinet of India on 22 December 2011 approved 4.5 percent share for minorities within the 27% OBC quota in jobs and university seats. The approval will come in force from 1 January, 2012. It suggests that minorities can get 4.5 jobs out of every 100 government jobs and university seats.
As per the data released by the National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities, the OBC population was 52 percent of India’s population, of which minorities constitute 8.4 percent.
Justice Rajinder Sachar Committee Report-released in November 2006- had found the minority community under-represented in all spheres of professional and public life. 


Supreme Court: Animals also entitled to Accident Compensation
A bench of the Supreme Court including Justices BS Chauhan and TS Thakur on 16 December 2011 ruled that even animals are entitled to accident compensation. The court upheld an award of 13.48 lakh rupees for the death of a temple elephant. The animal was hit by a KSRTC (Kerala State Transport Corporation) bus. The court refused to accept the contention that the Motor Vehicles Act would be applicable to human beings and not to animals. It clarified that the definition of property in the Motor Vehicles Act is very inclusive and wide. Therefore, animal should be included under this act. The court added that the elephant was owned by the temple and it was God’s property.

Lok Sabha approved the Amendments to the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline Act
The Lok Sabha on 12 December 2011 passed the amendments to the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962.The Bill aims to make provisions for sufficient deterrence to criminals from committing the offence of pilferage or sabotage. The existing sub-section (2) of section 15 provides that whoever willfully removes, displaces, damages or destroys any pipeline, shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment of a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Section 16 provides that offence under sub-section 15 shall be deemed to be cognizable under the Cod of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The proposed amendments provide for higher quantum of punishment in terms of imprisonment and provision for death penalty in rare cases where the Act of sabotage is dangerous and is likely to cause death of any other person. The Bill further proposes to amend section 16 of the aforesaid Act to make the offences under sub-section (2), (3) of section 15 of the said Act to be cognizable and non-bailable. The amendment to the act was necessary to prevent pilferage of petroleum by organized gangs and saboteurs.

Water Level in Mullaperiyar Dam should not exceed 136 Feet
The Supreme Court of India directed Tamil Nadu to ensure that the water level in the Mullaperiyar dam does not exceed 136 feet but declined to entertain Kerala’s plea for reducing the level to 120 feet. A five-Judge Constitution Bench, headed by Justice DK Jain gave the order. The Supreme Court asked Tamil Nadu and Kerala to maintain restraint on their statements on the Mullaperiyar dam row. Urging for sanity and sensitivity, the court lamented that they were adding fuel to the fire instead of dousing it. The Bench also asked the Centre to clarify its position on Tamil Nadu's plea for deployment of Central Industrial Security Force to protect the dam from possible vandalism.

Empowered Committee to send Technical Members to Inspect Mullaperiyar Dam

The Empowered Committee in its meeting on 5 December 2011 decided to send two technical members to inspect the Mullaperiyar dam before finalising its report following apprehensions raised by Kerala about the safety of the dam after mild tremors occurred in the area.
The Empowered Committee is headed by former Chief Justice of India, A.S. Anand. The other members of the committee include Justice K.T. Thomas, a retired Supreme Court judge representing Kerala; Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, a retired Supreme Court Judge representing Tamil Nadu; C.D. Thatte, former Secretary to the Ministry of Water Resources and D.K. Mehta retired Chief Engineer, Central Water Commission. The committee had conducted a spot inspection of the dam in December 2010.
During iots meeting on 5 December, the committee considered the reports of the studies and investigations conducted by various agencies it constituted to study the dam's safety. It also discussed the applications filed respectively by Kerala and Tamil Nadu and took note of their submissions.
Kerala had urged the Expert Committee to review its order rejecting permission for producing additional evidence in respect of the safety, based on the reports of two experts, D.K. Paul and M.L. Sharma. the committee had earlier rejected Kerala's application on the grounds that in 2009, the Supreme Court had not taken on record these reports.
The committee, according to Kerala ought not to have relied on the Supreme Court's order as it was not barred from receiving evidence in respect of seismic threat to the dam. Following Kerala’s argument the committee agreed to hear the State's arguments on this count.
Since Kerala filed an application for bringing on record the recent tremors and sought an oral hearing, the committee decided to send two of its members to conduct a spot inspection of the dam. Kerala's plea for oral hearing was also accepted. The committee directed Tamil Nadu and Kerala to make submissions on 2 January 2012. On 3 January the committee will consider the modalities for finalising its report to the Supreme Court.

Earthquakes in the region

During the months of July-November 2011, 25 earthquakes were reported in the Mullaperiyar dam region . Some of the earthquakes on 26 July and 18 and 26 November were more than magnitude 3 on the Richter Scale. The highest magnitude 3.8 was recorded on 26 July 2011.
The frequent earthquakes caused panic among 50 lakh people in the downstream region of the Periyar dam. The fear was further heightened by the incessant rain in the catchments of Mullaperiyar shooting the storage above 136 feet mandated by the provisions of the Amendment Act of 2006.
If the Mullaperiyar dam breaks due to flood or earthquake, a mass disaster would follow, wherein not only the life and property of 50 lakh people will be affected in Kerala, but lakhs of farmers of Tamil Nadu will also lose irrigation of about 2.5 lakh acres. Kerala therefore feels that Tamil Nadu should agree for the construction of a new dam offered by Kerala as a precautionary measure.

SECTION - 497:Adultery Law Biased against Men
The Supreme Court of India on 1 December 2011 stated that section497 of the Indian penal Code is biased against men. The section punishes a man alone for adultery for having consensual sex with a married woman. As per the observation of the court, the provision of section 497 reduces a married woman to a property of the husband and it punishes man only despite the fact that the woman with whom he had consensual sex was an equal partner in the alleged crime. The court added that the provision is under criticism from certain sections for showing a strong gender bias. A bench of the Supreme Court including Justices Aftab Alam and R M Lodha made the above observation.

Section 497 of IPC

Section 497 of IPC states that whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case, the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.

No comments:

Post a Comment