#QaidKePare #VoicesOfWomenPrisoners

" When people demand rights, they are heckled, incriminated against and imprisoned but those who main, lynch, murder, commit crimes against marginalised and minorities they are allowed to go scott free" " In prisons, inmates are not even provided basic facilities. We are not talking about hardened criminals here. Even those who are undertrails are treated without compassion or basic human understanding. Pregnant women are forced to deliver their babies without proper medical care and menstruating women are expected to do their own jugaad in order to clean themselves up. Is this progress? Is this humanity?" "Cops who manage prisoners want ten to fifteen times the cost of a provision if requested for. How does the state expect prisoners to pay for basic amenities when they are imprisoned illegally without being given bail?" #QaidKePare #CitizensForJusticeAndPeace #VoicesOfWomenPrisoners #AIUFWP #DelhiSolidarityGroup #122ndDeathAnniversaryOfKrantijyotiSavitribaiPhule #MarathiPatrakarSangh #TeestaSetalvad #FlaviaAgnes

#AsiaSocietyElectionSeriesDiscussion #MDamodaran #YashwantSinha #KumarKetkar #ChintanChandrachud #RamaBijapurkar

Defending Institutions to Defend Democracy | India Elections Series - Part II | Nehru Centre, Mumbai | Wednesday, February 27th, 6:30 PM #AsiaSocietyElectionSeriesDiscussion #MDamodaran #YashwantSinha #KumarKetkar #ChintanChandrachud #RamaBijapurkar @ #NehruCenter #JuggernautPublications #JohnsonThomas Defending Institutions to Defend Democracy Wednesday, 27th February 2019, 6:30 PM (L - R) Kumar Ketkar, M Damodaran, Yashwant Sinha, Rama Bijapurkar, Chintan Chandrachud (L - R) Kumar Ketkar, M Damodaran, Yashwant Sinha, Rama Bijapurkar, Chintan Chandrachud In his last speech to the Constituent Assembly in 1949, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, propounded several strictures to the people of India to sustain the hard-fought and newly won, independence and democracy. While quoting John Stuart Mill, he cautioned the people “not to lay their liberties at the feet of even a great man, or to trust him with the power which enables him to subvert their institutions.” India’s democracy is its most important appeal, not only amongst Indians but foreign investors and nations wanting to partner with India and Indian corporations. For democracy to thrive, it is essential that the national institutions uphold the values of the constitution and continue to function as independent bodies of investigation and inquiry. Institutional autonomy is, however, not devoid of accountability. It requires a consultative and collaborative approach with the government. From the proclamation of Emergency by late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in June 1975 that lasted for 19 months, and the sweeping changes brought by the 42nd Amendment Act of 1977, the creation of the National Advisory Council in 2004 that undermined the status of the Union Cabinet as the advisor to the Prime Minister, to the recent reports of questionable employment growth data, there have been instances of ruling political parties interfering with the authority of institutions. Parties forming the central government, are often inclined to let the relentless electoral cycles impact policy decisions. How can national institutions stay faithful to their mandates while reflecting flexibility in dealing with current challenges? Join us for a discussion on the responsibility of the government in respecting the independence of our democratic institutions with Yashwant Sinha, former Minister of Defence and External Affairs, Kumar Ketkar, veteran journalist and Member of Parliament in Rajya Sabha, M Damodaran, former Chairman of Securities and Exchange Board of India, and Chintan Chandrachud, Associate at Quinn Emanuel, London moderated by Rama Bijapurkar, independent management consultant. This is the second programme in our India Elections Series, wherein we will be discussing the themes of governance, leadership, and institutions in the run-up to the General Elections. Yashwant Sinha Yashwant Sinha is a former Union Minister of Finance and External Affairs. He has steered the country out of several crises, including the East Asian Crisis of 1997 and the sanctions that the US and other countries imposed on India in 1998 after the nuclear tests. He was a senior leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party before he quit in April 2018. In 2015, he was awarded Officier de la Légion d’Honneur, the highest civilian distinction of France. Kumar Ketkar Kumar Ketkar is a veteran journalist and a sitting Member of Parliament of the Indian National Congress in the Rajya Sabha from Maharashtra. He has been writing for leading newspapers and participated as a panelist on prominent news channels. In the past, he has reported major international events like the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, from Moscow, the unification of Germany in 1990, etc. He was awarded the Padma Shri in 2001. M Damodaran M Damodaran has held a number of important positions in the Central and State Governments and in India’s financial sector, including Chairman, Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI), where he introduced improved corporate governance practices, Chairman, Unit Trust of India (UTI), Chairman, Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI), where he successfully led the turnaround efforts, and Chief Secretary, Government of Tripura. Chintan Chandrachud Chintan Chandrachud is an associate in Quinn Emanuel’s London office. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, tax litigation, and international arbitration. He writes for the Indian Express and The Hindu and is the author of "Balanced Constitutionalism: Courts and Legislatures in India and the United Kingdom" (Oxford University Press 2017). He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge on the subject of judicial review in India and the United Kingdom. He also holds graduate degrees from Oxford and Yale. Rama Bijapurkar Rama Bijapurkar is an independent management consultant, a visiting faculty at Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, and co-founder of think tank and fact tank People Research on India’s Consumer Economy and Citizen Environment, which provides “people level” data and insights for use in business strategy and public policy (www.ice360.in). Rama has served on the boards of several of India’s blue-chip companies, including ICICI Bank, National Payment Corporation of India, Bharat Petroleum, Crisil, Infosys etc.

INDIA ELECTION SERIES: PART I Young Turks on the Political Turf

INDIA ELECTION SERIES: PART I DISCUSSION Young Turks on the Political Turf Wednesday, February 20, 6:30 pm A panel discussion was held with Jayant Chaudhary, Milind Deora, Praful Patel, Shaina NC and Priya Sahgal on the future of India’s political landscape and the emergence of a new generation of leaders. As many as 130 million first-time voters, more than the population of Japan will go to polls due by May. A 2016 survey by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung asked more than 6,100 respondents to nominate the most important issue facing India, and 18% said jobs and unemployment, about 12% said economic inequality and 9% said corruption. India, a country with more than half of the population below the age of 25, a literacy rate of 74% and the highest number of Facebook users at 300 million, is more vocal, more ambitious and more aware than its previous election. Indians want fresher ideas, better solutions and quicker actions. While the countdown to the 2019 general elections has witnessed a proliferation of comebacks, splits and new partnerships; it has also seen the emergence of a new generation of leaders and challengers across party lines who for now seem to offer a youthful and different approach to political life. Whether they are descendants of political dynasties, bureaucrats leaving civil services for politics or newcomers with professional backgrounds, the next generation of India’s leaders are working hard to change public perception about politics. From reaching out to their electorates through social media platforms like Twitter to pushing policy solutions for structured development, this relatively young group of politicians or the ‘under-55’ leaders club, symbolizes new hope and gumption. What kind of politics will these ‘new leaders’ embody? How will they shift focus to core development and employment issues? Will they be able to refrain from realpolitik? What do the prospective alliances for upcoming elections look like? Join us as we discuss the future of India’s political landscape and the emergence of a new generation of leaders. In conversation will be Jayant Chaudhary, National Vice-President, Rashtriya Lokdal; Milind Deora, Former Member of Parliament, Indian National Congress; Praful Patel, Member of Parliament, Nationalist Congress Party as moderator; Shaina NC, Spokesperson, Bharatiya Janata Party and Priya Sahgal, Senior Executive Editor at NewsX and Author of The Contenders. This is the first programme in our India Elections Series, wherein we will be discussing the themes of governance, leadership, and institutions in the run-up to the General Elections. Jayant Chaudhary has served as a Member of Parliament in the 15th Lok Sabha. He contested the 2009 General Election from Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. He is currently the National Vice-President of the Rashtriya Lokdal. He was the Co-chair of the FICCI Indo-British Forum of Parliamentarians and member of the Indo-Venezuela Parliamentary Friendship Group. Jayant did his undergraduate studies from Shri Venkateswara College, Delhi University, and in 2002 completed an MSc in Accounting and Finance from the London School of Economics and Political Science. Milind Deora entered the Lok Sabha in 2004 as a member of the Indian National Congress. He has held various positions in Parliamentary Committees on Defence, Civil Aviation, Estimates, Urban Development and Information Technology. He has also served as India’s Minister of State for Communications and Information Technology and Shipping. Prior to entering politics, Milind worked in the private sector in the United States and India and set up one of India's first digital public-private partnerships to provide economically underprivileged students free access to Information Technology-enabled education. Praful Patel is currently a Rajya Sabha member from the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). A former cabinet minister during the Manmohan Singh led UPA government, he was first the Civil Aviation Minister and later on the Minister for Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises. An industrialist cum politician, Patel was known as a progressive and pro-reforms face of the UPA cabinet. A BCom graduate from the University of Mumbai, Patel was initially with the Congress but left along with Sharad Pawar in 1999. Since then he has emerged as a dominant voice in the NCP, especially in its dealings with the Centre. Shaina NC serves as a member of the national executive council and spokesperson of the Bhartiya Janata Party in Maharashtra. Shaina currently holds the position of Treasurer of the BJP in Maharashtra, the first woman to receive this position. She is also an Indian fashion designer and social worker. Shaina is involved in social work through charity fashion shows and two NGOs, 'I Love Mumbai' and 'Giants International'. Priya Sahgal is the senior executive editor at NewsX channel, where she anchors two political shows: ‘The Roundtable’ & ‘Cover Story'. A political journalist for nearly three decades, Priya has worked at Sunday, Outlook and India Today. She is also a political columnist for The Sunday Guardian. Her forte is explanatory journalism; the tone of her shows conversational and analytical, not confrontational. Her book, The Contenders, profiles 16 GenNext politicians and captures a potentially transformative moment in Indian politics. Venue Hall of Culture, Nehru Centre, Worli, Mumbai, 400018 Time: 6:30 p.m.

Can Secularism Build a Civilization?

Can Secularism Build a Civilization? By CP Op-Ed Contributor Joseph D'Souza| Tue 26 Jun 2018 7:21 EDT Dr. Joseph D'Souza is the Moderating Bishop of the Good Shepherd Church and Associated Ministries of India. Last week, I attended the 2018 Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem. Around 2,000 archbishops, bishops and Anglican church leaders from North and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia came together to pray and consider the future of the global Anglican church. It was the largest international gathering of Anglican leaders in over 50 years — yet there was one conspicuous absence: the 105th archbishop of Canterbury, Most Rev. Justin Welby. Welby's absence is the result of the Anglican church's struggle with an issue that has become the leading cause for disagreement in Christianity: same-sex marriage. It's the reason why hundreds of Anglican bishops in the southern hemisphere — who hold on to the traditional biblical view of marriage — have strongly differed with many of their more liberal counterparts in the West. Still, as important as it might be, the issue of same-sex marriage is only the tip of the iceberg. At heart, the real question Christians all over the world must answer today is whether or not they will hold on to the authority of Scripture and the gospel the church has historically believed in. As an outsider, I've observed how the West — and America specifically — has been steadily inching toward secularism, which is the absence of God in life. The meteoric rise of the religiously unaffiliated over the past few decades combined with social changes such as the legalization of same-sex marriage across all 50 states and the emergence of forced tolerance have augured the end of a "Christian" America. Though it might still be some time away, the American church is now facing the crude reality many Christians across the southern hemisphere know well: becoming a minority religion. Here's the thing though — this is nothing new for Christians. From the very beginning, Christianity has been well acquainted with being a minority. Jesus gave the first believers — about 120 disciples — the job of changing the world. This small community believed Jesus and took him at his word, which was no easy task. The cultural problems and challenges they confronted were similar, if not greater, to ours. They had to contend with the widespread breakdown of the family structure, serious moral decline, a hedonistic lifestyle and religious fundamentalism of its day. If you want to see what real moral decline looks like, open a book on first-century Rome and read about the unbridled paganism, rampant sexual immorality, infanticide and slavery of the Roman Empire. Yet, even when facing such overwhelming odds, the early church did not lose their vision of the Kingdom of God. The early Christians painstakingly developed a counterculture within a hostile environment dominated by despotic Roman emperors such as Nero, who was bent on eradicating this start-up religious movement. No matter who was Caesar in Rome, they honored Jesus Christ as Lord of all. They believed in the resurrection, and in his second coming. And no matter what the culture around them said, they remained committed to the truth in the God-inspired Scriptures, especially when it pertained to issues such as the biblical definition of marriage. They believed the Kingdom of God that Jesus had inaugurated was Spirit-empowered. So, when people accused the early Christians of turning the world upside down, it wasn't a cliché. They were living upside-down lives in a society that was putting immense pressure on them to conform to the culture. Contrary to the short-sightedness that plagues many Western churches today, the early Christians had a long view of the Kingdom of God, and a holistic understanding of Christian discipleship. Their obedience literally changed the world and the flow of history. Coming from a region in the world where Christians face dire persecution, I am disheartened to see such a large group of Christians in the West passively accept the decline of the church and its life-changing impact on society. I find it puzzling when the concept of a post-Christian Europe or United States is stated as an inevitable reality, when history knows that by and large Christianity built the modern West and paved the way for the individual democratic rights they enjoy today. Yes, secularism might be the new religion on the block, but we can't forget it hasn't proved it can build a civilization or a culture capable of holding society together over generations. This is because secularism neither cares for the family unity nor the divine. The civilizations that have survived over millennia — from China to India, the Middle East and the Judeo-Christian world — hold a strong belief in God, no matter which deity they believe in. They know meeting the need of the spiritual is a given factor of life. And these cultures by the same token believe in the traditional family unit as the foundation of society. The tragedy of the Western world is thinking it can survive without its Judeo-Christian foundation, without a commitment to God or the traditional family unit. So, what's the answer for Christians in the West today? It's simple: get back to your roots. Get back to your roots in the timeless gospel of Jesus. Cultural movements come and go. The Kingdom of God will continue forever. Be compassionate to those struggling with same-sex attraction and reject homophobia; Jesus loves them intensely and knows how to minister to them. But stay true to the radical, holistic calling of following Jesus. Jesus' time-tested formula for finding life and happiness is to lose it all for him. It has delivered throughout the centuries more than any other formula, and still delivers today. Most Rev. Joseph D'Souza is the archbishop of the Anglican Good Shepherd Church and Associated Ministries of India. He also serves as the president of the All India Christian Council. He is the recipient of numerous awards and accolades for his work as a human rights activist.

Christian Council Appeals for Peace and Harmony among the Communities in Shillong

Christian Council Appeals for Peace and Harmony among the Communities in Shillong Hyderabad, 7 June, 2018 The All India Christian Council expresses its heartfelt pain and anguish on the recent events and violence in Shillong. Christian Council urges the Christian community in Meghalaya as well as other communities to find solutions to the problems and issues through peaceful dialogue rather than resort to violence. Violence only begets more violence. Opponents of the Church in India are already misusing these incidents for propaganda as a case of Christian majority community attacking Dalit Sikhs. The Church across India is deeply in solidarity with all marginalized groups including Dalit Sikhs. As the nation is being actively polarized based on caste, religions, and tribes it is important that Christians everywhere demonstrate that they resort to peaceful methods of resolving complex social problems. The All India Christian Council at numerous occasions worked to find peaceful solutions in the midst of social conflict and will work with all parties to bring peace in the region. The All India Christian Council is a registered inter-denominational body of over 2,000 member groups working with local, state and the national government in the areas of development, protection, and education of the girl child, anti-human trafficking, and religious freedom and protection for people of all faiths. The All India Christian Council takes initiative in communal peacemaking and reconciliation. It has associate members who are leaders of other faiths. The All India Christian Council works to uphold the integrity and unity of India and its Constitution. Released by: Bishop Paothang Haokip North East India Coordinator – All India Christian Council (9440061775) Rev. Madhu Chandra Singh Administrator – All India Christian Council (9100952490)

INDIA: Acquittal of Pramod Muthalik and others is a shocking travesty of justice

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission INDIA: Acquittal of Pramod Muthalik and others is a shocking travesty of justice On March 13 2018, the Third Judicial Magistrate at the First Class Court in Mangalore acquitted Pramod Muthalik, and 25 other members of the Sri Rama Sene of the 2009 assault of several women in a Amnesia, a Mangalore pub. The Sri Ram Sene is a right-wing Hindutva group that has previously been involved in incidents of moral policing in Mangalore. The incident, which took place on January 24, 2009, involved women being slapped and dragged out from the pub by their hair; the assailants, who were allegedly members of the group, also verbally abused the women as “loose”. The assault was captured on camera, and the existence of video evidence was considered as irrefutable proof of the accused’s guilt. Yet, over nine years after the incident, and after Muthalik publicly admitted to it being a “big mistake”, he and his henchmen have been absolved of guilt in the case. The failure to convict cannot be laid solely at the feet of the prosecutor or the Magistrate; instead, it can be attributed to the scare tactics used to dissuade witnesses from testifying, and the lack of protection for the victims of the assault. None of the victims of the assault testified in the case, with sources claiming that they were too afraid to testify against their attackers. While 30 men were involved in the attack, only 26 were actually in court during the trial; two were deceased, while the other two were absconding. Muthalik, in the meantime, launched the Karnataka Unit of the Shiv Sena in January this year, aiming to contest about 50 seats in the upcoming State elections. This move has attracted suspicion as convicted persons are not permitted to stand for election under the Representation of People Act. A large part of Muthalik’s acquittal was the presumably, the exclusion of the video from admissible evidence; since the judgment passed by the Magistrate is presently unavailable, one can only speculate as to why the video was deemed inadmissible. The likely reason is that, while videos are admissible as “electronic evidence” under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, their authenticity must be proven by a competent witness, preferably the maker of the video [Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer, AIR 2015 SC180]. By creating an extra-legal and extra-judicial culture of fear, Muthalik and his followers were able to subvert the legal system, ensuring that witnesses were too afraid to authenticate the contents of the video while validating hooliganism and assault in the name of ‘culture’. While the two main factors in his acquittal were the inadmissibility of the video, and the refusal of witnesses to testify, the latter could be due to the political power and fear that Muthalik and his men command in the area, along with the stigma and fear that victims of violence internalise. Prior to his founding of the Ram Sene, Muthalik worked closely with the Bajrang Dal and the Shiv Sena; in the aftermath of the 2009 attack, Muthalik’s group did not lay low, instead threatening to attack unmarried couples on Valentine’s Day. While incidents of moral policing are not uncommon in India, this acquittal has only emboldened fundamentalists to indulge in violence against citizens, particularly women. It must be noted that in the aftermath of the attack, Muthalik was given patronage by the BJP in 2014, only being dropped after the national leadership objected. The lackadaisical investigation into the attacks, and the rise in such attacks across the country, shows that the government is not interested in combating violence against women, moral policing, or religious fundamentalism. Nor has any political party actively evinced an interest in this; while the BJP was in power during the attack, the Congress Party formed a government in the state soon after, and, has been in power for the pendency of the trial. This case puts the spotlight back on the crumbling and ineffective system of public prosecution in India. The great power wielded by the prosecutor to prove a case is usually destroyed by ineffective investigation and corruption by the police. Many a time, the police and prosecution are in collusion with each other to ensure that the accused persons is acquitted or conversely, an innocent person is framed and found guilty. Majoritarian and populist demands are essentialised by the police and the prosecution resulting in insufficient evidence and the failure to prove a case. In cases of sexual assault and gender-based violence, these majoritarian demands take the form of existing patriarchal norms and structures, internalised by law enforcement officials and the prosecution as well as defence lawyers. The Supreme Court of India in the judgment in Justice K.S. Puttusamy & Anr. v. UOI. & Ors ruled that the right to privacy is a fundamental right. The right to privacy is the right to bodily integrity and human dignity and therefore in its basic form it is the right against moral policing, the right to partake in ‘wine culture’ and behave with ‘loose morals’ if one so wishes. The likes of the Sri Ram Sene and Pramod Muthalik must be prevented from threatening and attacking hapless individuals, usually women, going about their lives, and attempting to live with the freedom they are entitled to, as human beings. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) stands in solidarity with the victims of moral policing, and with everyone who is demanding that the verdict is appealed by the State Government. The judgment of the trial court must be swiftly appealed and if a higher court finds that the prosecution, the police and lower judiciary failed in its duty by bypassing due process, they must be duly penalised. The acquittal of Muthalik and his men is an unfortunate validation of a violent patriarchy that is so endemic in India and every effort must be expended to cull it. # # # The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) works towards the radical rethinking and fundamental redesigning of justice institutions in order to protect and promote human rights in Asia. Established in 1984, the Hong Kong based organisation is a Laureate of the Right Livelihood Award, 2014. Read this Statement online

INDIA: Breaking down the Supreme Court judgment in the Babri Masjid demolition case

26 April 2017 An Article by the Asian Human Rights Commission INDIA: Breaking down the Supreme Court judgment in the Babri Masjid demolition case On April 19, 2017, the Supreme Court of India(SC) passed an important judgment with respect to the fraught Babri Masjid demolition case. The matter in question pertained to FIR 198 of 1992 which was one of many FIRs filed on Dec 6, 1992 after the demolition of the Babri Masjid. FIR 198/92 was lodged against 8 persons, which included prominent leaders from the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP namely LK Advani, Uma Bharti, Murli Manohar Joshi and Kalyan Singh. By exercising its powers, the Supreme Court under Art.142 of the Constitution of India, ordered the case, under FIR. 198/92, to be transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge(Ayodhya Matters), at Lucknow. It directed the Court to frame an additional charge under S.120-B for criminal conspiracy. This case was pending earlier before the Court of the Special Judicial Magistrate in Rae Bareilly. The said court at Lucknow had before it Case no. 197 of 1992 which are the offences detailed against the Kar Sevaks who were allegedly involved in the actual demolition of the Masjid. The reason for this confusing situation is that Case. No 197/92 is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation(CBI) while case no. 198/92 was being investigated earlier by the Crime Branch, Crime Investigation Department (CB CID) that is part of the State Police. As per S.11(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure(CrPC), 1973 “1. Courts of Judicial Magistrates.- (1) In every district (not being a metropolitan area), there shall be established as many Courts of Judicial Magistrates of the first class and of the second class, and at such places, as the State Government may, after consultation with the High Court, by notification, specify.” (emphasis supplied) On 9th Sep, 1993, principal notification was passed by the Uttar Pradesh(UP) State Government through the Governor, after consultation with the Allahabad HC. It established a Special Court at Lucknow for the disposal of all the cases under Crime No. 197/92. This was in keeping with the procedural requirements under S.11 (1) of the CrPC as shown above. On 8 Oct, 1993, an amendment was made to this notification by the Governor of UP, adding the cases under Crime no. 198/92. The Special court took cognizance of the offences and committed the case to the Sessions Court on Aug 27, 1994. To cut a long and complicated story (with many subsequent events) short, a criminal revision petition challenging the amendment was filed in the High Court of Allahabad. It considered the notification and the framing of charges against the accused persons (under S.120 B of the IPC read with other sections 147/153-A/153-B/295-A/505 of the IPC), as illegal. The petitioners claimed that the amendment was passed by the Governor without consulting the High Court, as per the provisions of S.11(1) of the CrPC. The HC on Feb 12, 2001, held that the amendment to the notification was illegal and therefore the order dated Sep 9, 1997 which framed charges against all the accused was also held to be illegal. However, it was stated that State Government can cure the infirmity by issuing a new notification. In essence, it held that the Special Court did not have jurisdiction to inquire into and commit the case to the Court of Sessions in FIR no. 198/92. On 16th June, 2001, the CBI requested the State government to rectify the defect but on 28th Sep 2002, it refused to do so. The CBI did not challenge this and instead filed a supplementary charge sheet against the 8 accused persons in FIR 198/92 at the court in Rae Bareilly but without adding S.120-B. Now, on 4th May, 2001, the Special Court dropped the proceedings against the 21 persons including the 8 accused. This was challenged and the HC upheld the earlier order of May 2001 vide judgment dated 22nd May 2010. It held that there were “two classes of accused – the leaders who were on the dais exhorting the Kar Sewaks….and the Kar Sewaks, themselves” and that the offence of criminal conspiracy was never made out against the 21 persons as the CBI did not add it in the supplementary charge sheet. This article will not go into the specifics of the offence of criminal conspiracy but suffice it to say that the multiple and confusing proceedings in this case, with long gaps in time as shown, have only led to continued obfuscation of the reasons for the long delay in proceeding against the eight accused. The SC in the latest judgment held the HC judgment to be erroneous and that “..it is clear that the said accused could not possibly have been discharged, as they were already arrayed as accused insofar as the charge of criminal conspiracy was concerned..” The SC also held that the HC made an artificial division of the offences and offenders. The AHRC welcomes the SC’s statement that the CBI has caused a lot of confusion by not challenging the order and filing a supplementary charge sheet instead, and has “ ..completely derailed the joint trial envisaged, resulting in a fractured prosecution going on in two places simultaneously based on a joint charge sheet filed by the CBI itself…” The SC has passed this order in pursuit of “doing complete justice” as set out in Art.142. Complete justice will be done only if the lower courts follow the SC orders completely as detailed i.e. take up matters on a day-to day basis until the conclusion of the trial, no transfer of judges until the conclusion, no adjournment unless it is impossible to carry on the trial. The CBI must ensure that some prosecution witnesses are present and the Sessions Court must complete the trial and present its judgment within 2 years. The rule of law tenets, that no person is above the law. It is up to our lower judiciary to prove that this is indeed still possible in India, especially when some of its most prominent politicians are in the dock on very grave criminal charges. # # # The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) works towards the radical rethinking and fundamental redesigning of justice institutions in order to protect and promote human rights in Asia. Established in 1984, the Hong Kong based organization is a Laureate of the Right Livelihood Award, 2014.