Jharkhand Coal Scam: Delhi High Court suspends the sentence, issues notice in Dilip Ray’s appeal against conviction
Today, the Delhi Court revoked the judgement of former EU State minister Dilip Ray in the Jharkhand Coal Scam (Dilip Ray versus CBI) concerning his conviction in 1999.
According to Sections 120-B, 409, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Dilip Rays was found guilty of conspiracy, stealing, and criminal confidence violations. He was also found to have breached the rules of the Act to avoid corruption; the transfer of property for his use and unlawful gratuity.
Along with Ray, two formers Coal Ministry Senior Officials, Mr. Kumar Banerjee, and Mr. Nand Gautam, and Mahendra Kumar Aggarwal, Managing Director of Castron Technologies Limited, were also convicted.
PNB Scam: U.K. Court Rejects Nirav Modi’s Latest Bail Attempt PTI
The court of Kingdom rejected the fugitive diamond merchant Nirav Modi’s latest appeal for bail, who has been held at a Londoner prison since his arrest in March last year on an extradition warrant. The appeal had been lodged with the “fresh evidence” because of the failure to reverse previous refusals in the case of Modi by Samuel Goozee, District Judge of the Court of Westminster magistrates.
A senior CBI official said in New Delhi, commenting on Monday’s development “The repeated disagreement of the bail is the product of the excellent cooperation between the British CBI, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Crown Prosecution Service.” In March of this year Modi’s final High Court bail hearing.
Modi’s legal team issued a set of steps including a 24-hour electronic tag, and a private security guard, and strict control of access to telephones and gadgets. The Court has also been told repeatedly that Modi’s fragile mental health was “deteriorated by increasing detention.”
The case is heard in a partial remote environment to follow social distance requirements related to coronavirus.
Reliance – Future Retail: Amazon Wins Interim Order To Stall Deal
Kishore Biryani’s Future Group has been ordered to terminate its transaction with Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Retail Ltd. The Arbitral Tribunal of Singapore International Arbitration Center passed the interim path after Amazon.com Inc. had brought an action against the Future Group earlier this month.
Also, Future Retail Ltd. argued that an emergency arbitrator order should be reviewed on the relevant site under the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act. It said that Future Retail was not a party to Amazon’s arbitration agreement.
Future Retail has legally argued that the action taken by FRL / its Board in full compliance with the relevant Agreements and particularly on behalf of all stakeholders is not appropriate in an arbitration proceeding initiated in a settlement with FRL that is not a party to FRL.
The agreement to acquire Future Retail Ltd’s properties and businesses “is completely implementable under Indian law through suitable legal advice and rights and obligations. Under the scheme and agreement to Future party RRVL aims to extend its rights and complete the transaction without delay. “Progress will now depend on the complicated juridical question whether the international interim arbitration order is enforceable in India.