RS clears changes to Hindu marriage law

Women Set To Get A Better Deal

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 

New Delhi: In a major step toward making marriage laws more women-friendly, the Rajya Sabha on Monday passed the bill to amend the Hindu Marriage Act (1955) and the Special Marriage Act (1954) that provides for “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as grounds for divorce and also grants women the right to a share in the property of their husbands. 
    The Marriage laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010, will also have to be passed by Lok Sabha before it can become law. Most Rajya Sabha MPs cut across party lines to welcome the “progressive” bill, though some held that it should have been made more “genderneutral”, while a few others expressed reservations about its probable misuse against husbands. 
    Replying to the debate, law minister Kapil Sibal said there was an urgent need to “protect women rights more” because the Indian society was still quite patriarchal. 
    “So let’s be clear. This historic piece of legislation is a message that MPs are on the side of women in our patriarchal society. Even across the world, women constitute 50% (of the population) but own only 2% of the assets,” he said. 
    The minister assured MPs that the “irretrievable breakdown on marriage” clause was “gender-neutral” since even men could move the court for it. 
    Both parties have to live apart for at least three years before filing such a divorce petition. “Don’t worry, we are taking care of both men and women,” he said. 
    Dwelling on the amendments, the minister said courts would decide the “extent” of the wife’s share in her husband’s self-acquired property, both moveable and immoveable, in case of a divorce. While the wife will have no share in inherited property, its value will be taken into account by court while fixing the amount of compensation or alimony to her. “The judge will decide as per the facts and circumstances of each case,” he said. 
    Earlier, participating in the debate, BJP’s Najma Heptulla criticized the UPA government for not bringing in “one law for all women”. Holding that the country’s “100 million Muslim women” were being ignored by the government, she asked, “Have they thought of any reforms for Muslim women?” 

A KNOT IN TIME 
New bill amends Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and Special Marriage Act, 1954 Introduces option of divorce on grounds of  ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’, 

Gives women right to share in husband’s moveable, immoveable property, 

Gives women right to sufficient compensation from husband’s inherited, inheritable property in case of divorce. 

Courts to decide compensation quantum 

Gives adopted children rights equal to natural born children 
Courts can exercise discretion in granting divorce after 3 years if one partner does not move a second joint application for divorce with mutual consent

Source:::: The Times of India, 27-08-2013, p.09, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

A BOOK TO PUT YOU IN TOON WITH THE TIMES

Some of India’s top cartoonists come together at the launch of ‘Jest in Time’, a book that looks at humour through several decades in the pages of the TOI

Saira Kurup | TNN 

New Delhi: It’s a rare event that brings together some of India’s funniest cartoonists. So it was a special Monday when seven of the best gathered to mark the release of “Jest in Time”, a collector’s item of TOI cartoons spanning several decades. The booklaunchwas partof TOI’s 175th year celebrations. 
    Put together by satirist Jug Suraiya, and cartoonists Ajit Ninan and Neelabh Banerjee, the book features priceless selections from the archives. It kicks off with the classics by India’s most celebrated cartoonist R K Laxman, and showcases the best of Ninan and Banerjee. 
    Releasing the book at the event,information andbroadcasting minister Manish Tewarisaid,“Laxman’scartoons haveentrancedthe nation and educated us how you can say a lot in a few words.” 
    He recalled how when he travelled across the then USSR and eastern Europe as a student, he realised the power of humour and its potency to fight totalitarianism. Tewari admitted to being an avid reader of comics like Dennis the Menace, Asterix and Tintin. He laughed that when he goes home Cartoon Network,Pogo andDisney are the channels he first switches on.“IlikethePowerpuff Girls the best, but some of the ‘powerpuff girls’on primetimeTV can give them a run for their money,” he joked. 
    The force of humour is just what “Jest in Time” celebrates. But selecting the best of cartoons was a real challenge, admits Banerjee. “We hadto gothroughthe archives with a fine comb to bring out the most iconic ones. The second challenge was to decide whether we should take it chronologically or make it more relevant to readers of today,” he says. The contemporary reader won, and the book has been divided into chapters with quirky names like ‘Netas and Nataks’, ‘Global Golmaal’, ‘Ghoos Phoos’ and ‘Out of Order’, each of which have cartoons by all three cartoonists. 
    One of the high points of the book launch was an onthe-spotcollaborative artwork by well-known cartoonists Sudhir Tailang from Deccan Chronicle, Manjul from Daily News and Analysis, Keshav from TheHindu,Jayanta from Hindustan Times and Prasad from Mail Today. They were, of course, accompaniedin the jugal bandi of sorts by Ninan and Banerjee. Keshav set the tone by drawing the new common man forced to tighten his belt in difficult times. 
    Tailang followed with an illustration showing Narasimha Rao give his ‘student’ PM Manmohan Singh a poor report card. He said, “Rao has always been my favourite ‘hero’. He was ‘designed’ for cartoonists. But now Singh has beaten him hollow!” On a more serious note, he added, “TOI and R K Laxman have contributed a lot to the art of cartooning. We have had many great cartoonists but Laxman not only established the art of cartooning in India, he made the role of the cartoonist a respected one in the media.” Manjul’s version of the common man was one who doesn’t speak but tweets instead! Jayanta then drew the laughs by drawing a neta with a loudspeaker as his head “because netas are not doing what they are supposed to; they just keep shouting!” 
    To audience applause, Ninan put the artwork in context by sketching Parliament, and Banerjee gave the final touch by showing the common man holding up the House on his shoulders. 
    Tewari took the lighthearted lampooning of politicians sportingly. “It’s an appropriate portrayal of what is happening at this point of time,” he said, probably referring to the ongoing, tumultuous session of Parliament. He added with a smile, “It’s a rare Monday morning that you can start the week with a laugh.”

Source:::: The Times of India, 27-08-2013, p.10, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Your bank charges you for SMS alerts

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 

New Delhi: Did you know that your bank just debited money from your account for providing SMS alerts? Well, if you haven’t, it’s time you checked your last bank statement. 
    Banks, led by SBI, ICICI Bank and Axis Bank, charge Rs 60 annually to send messages informing you about cash withdrawals and other facilities. Others such as Canara Bank charge over Rs 100, while HDFC Bank said they levy Rs 60 only for “special alerts” such as bounced cheques, salary credits or when the balance going below a specified level — all optional. IDBI Bank and Vijaya Bank have excluded savings accounts from the paid SMS alert service. 
    Finance minister P Chidambaram told Parliament on Friday that there were five public sector banks charging for SMS alerts. However, enquiries by TOI showed it isn’t just state-run players, but even private banks such as ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank who charge for the service. 
    An private bank executive said they charge for SMS alerts as mobile operators raised the fee for bulk message from 2 paise per SMS to 20 paise, making the service “unviable”. Banks said they had sent out a message saying the service will be charged. Most customers either ignored the SMS or didn’t respond. 
    While most banks have shifted to a paid SMS alert system only this year, there were a few, which passed on the cost as far back as 2010-11. 


PAY TO KNOW SBI, ICICI and Axis charge 60 a year to send alerts. Canara Bank charging 100 
HDFC says it charges 60 
only for “special alerts” such as salary credit, bounced cheques and account balance falling below a level 
IDBI, Vijaya have excluded savings accounts from charge.


Source:::: The Times of India, 24-08-2013, p.13,  http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Can’t tell graft accused who whistleblower is: SC

Dhananjay Mahapatra TNN 

New Delhi: In what is sure to encourage whistleblowers, the Supreme Court has ruled that identity of persons who tip off anti-corruption agencies about corrupt deals of bureaucrats can never be revealed to the accused facing prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act. Anti-Corruption Bureau of Maharashtra had investigated a case of disproportionate assets against a public servant on the basis of a complaint filed by “unknown person” and chargesheeted the accused. The accused wanted a copy of the original complaint on the ground that it was essential for a fair trial. 
    Rejecting his plea, an apex court bench of Justices K S Radhakrishnan and A K Sikri said it failed to see how the accused was prejudiced by non-disclosure of the name of the person who sent the complaint and the original copy of the complaint received by the ACB. 
    “Situations are many where certain persons do not want to disclose the identity as well as the information/complaint passed on by them to the ACB. If the names of the persons, as well as the copy of the complaint sent by them are disclosed, that may cause embarrassment to them and sometimes threat to their lives,” said Justice Radhakrishnan, who authored the judgment for the bench. 
    The bench said what is to be borne in mind is that it was a complaint given by some person to the ACB which triggered the investigation. “Thus, this complaint simply provided information to the ACB and is not the foundation of the case or even the FIR,” it said. 


Name-lending lawyers turned noble profession into cheating, says SC New Delhi: The SC on Thursday found that the advocate-onrecord system it had devised nearly 50 years ago to ensure efficient legal assistance to litigants and judges was getting “converted into a profession of cheating”. A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and S A Bobde found an advocate-on-record filing a large number of cases yet not being in court when the case was called for hearing. The apex court was told that a section of advocates-on-record has made it a habit to lend their name to the petition for filing purposes. TNN


Source:::: The Times of India, 23-08-2013, p.18, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Bill to change system of judicial appointments cleared

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 

New Delhi: The Union Cabinet on Thursday cleared the National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill, which proposes to change the current collegium system of judges appointing judges by a commission with representation from the executive and non-judicial members. 
    Despite the fact that the higher judiciary, led by the Chief Justice of India, has opposed any changes in the collegium system, the government is serious about bringing in the constitutional amendment and has mobilized support from other parties, including the main opposition BJP. 
    The proposed JAC will be headed by the CJI and will comprise the two senior-most judges of the apex court, the law minister and two eminent personalities to be selected by a committee consisting of the PM, the opposition leader and the CJI. The government has also introduced a clause in the JAC Bill that will empower the law ministry to initiate a list of names of judges for the commission to consider after inviting suggestions from other forums besides the Supreme Court and the high courts. 
    However, there was an important change from the earlier draft of the JAC Bill. In the new draft, the opposition leader has been dropped as member of the proposed JAC. Instead, the leader of opposition of either House of Parliament has now been included as part of the committee to be set up to nominate two eminent persons to JAC. The panel will have the CJI and the PM as members.

Source:::: The Times of India, 23-08-2013, p.18, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Convicted netas: Cabinet blunts SC order

Lawmakers To Retain Seat But Will Lose Vote

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 

New Delhi: The Union Cabinet on Thursday cleared the proposal to allow convicted lawmakers to retain their membership till their appeal is pending before a court while suspending their voting rights. 
    According to the law ministry’s proposal to amend the Representation of People Act, a member of Parliament or legislature can retain membership even after conviction if his or her appeal is pending before a higher court and the sentence is stayed. He or she, however, shall neither be entitled to vote nor draw salary and allowances. 
    The move was necessitated after the Supreme Court ruling disqualifying a legislator in the event of a conviction for an offence attracting a sentence of over two years. 
    The proposal also suggests adding a new clause to the Constitution to say that a person can contest elections even if he can’t vote. It states that a person cannot cease to be a voter while in detention as his or her right is only temporarily suspended. 
    It was argued that as the name of the person in jail continues to be on the electoral role, he or she also continues to be an elector and can file nomination for election. 
    The amendment to the RP Act shall come into effect from July 10, 2013, the day the SC gave the landmark judgment. Political parties across the board opposed the order, arguing it could be misused to settle scores. They voiced concerns about “judicial overreach” and argued that the supremacy of Parliament must be maintained and if required, amendments must be brought in the Constitution.

A STEP BACKWARD? The SC ordered disqualification of MPs/MLAs if convicted for an offence attracting a sentence of more than two years.

Source:::: The Times of India, 23-08-2013, p.18, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Students can now pursue two degree courses at same time

The University Grants Commission has finally given the go-ahead to students to pursue two degree programmes simultaneously. 

Giving in to long-standing demands from universities and students, the apex higher education regulator, at a meeting on July 31, decided to accept its expert panel’s recommendations on permitting pursuit of an additional degree programme. 

This will allow students enrolled in a regular full-time degree programme to pursue one more additional degree programme simultaneously on open/distance learning mode from the same university or another institution. A student pursuing a regular degree will also be allowed to pursue an additional certificate/diploma/advanced diploma/PG diploma programme simultaneously either in regular or open/distance mode from the same university or another institution. 

The UGC expert panel headed by Dr Furqan Qamar, Vice Chancellor, Central University of Hyderabad, had made these recommendations “in view of the changing scenario and flexible guidelines”. Saying that “more choices to the students need to be given”, the panel was of the view that joint degree programmes need to be encouraged by the UGC. 

UGC Chairman Prof Ved Prakash said the idea was to allow new opportunities to students who wish to expand their skill set and have the will to stretch themselves beyond their comfort zones. Universities have been asked to modify their ordinances to facilitate the joint degree programmes. 

Currently, no student in India can legally pursue more than one degree simultaneously either from the same institution or from any other institution. The restriction is applicable irrespective of the mode of pursuing degrees — open/distance learning/part-time/private or full time. To ensure compliance, students are required to submit in the original the migration certificate issued by the previous institute. 

While there has been a lot of interest to pursue two or more degree programmes simultaneously to help students improve their knowledge, skill and employability, the present UGC guidelines are silent about the pursuit of a certificate/diploma course alongside a degree programme.

Source:::: Financial Express, 14-08-2013.