HC to address concerns of ‘gangrape victim’ - Mandi Gobindgarh News

Mandi Gobindgarh News

Mandi Gobindgarh News and Directory

drlalpathlabs.mandigobindgarh@gmail.com

Hot

Post Top Ad

Your Ad Spot

Sunday, May 12, 2019

HC to address concerns of ‘gangrape victim’


HC to address concerns of ‘gangrape victim’

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, May 11

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has done on the administrative side what it found itself unable to do on the judicial side. It has assured the Bathinda “gangrape victim” that the concerns raised by her on the judicial side would be addressed on the administrative side.

The High Court primarily exercises its constitutional function on the judicial side by taking up in the court the petitions filed before it. The High Court also deals with matters in its administrative capacity. Such matters are not placed before the Bench in the courtroom, but decided by the Chief Justice and other Judges on the administrative side.

Taking up three petitions filed by the “victim” in “public interest”, the Bench of Chief Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Arun Palli asserted that bare analysis of the averments in the pleas showed that the pleas were centred on purely personal and private interest of the petitioner.

The Bench added that the petitions, bereft of any public interest, were accordingly dismissed being not maintainable. At the same time, the Bench asserted: “She be assured that her concerns in this regard would be addressed on the administrative side.”

The Bench had added that such matters could be dealt with under the PIL jurisdiction only if the issues involved public at large and the petitioner’s interest also. “Whatever you have suffered, we may have full sympathy with you, but as Judges we are bound by law…” the Bench had added. The “gangrape victim” had accused a sitting and a retired Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge of helping an accused. She had alleged that her matter was listed before no less than six HC Judges from 2012 to 2017. But instead of deciding the cases, the Judges gave threats to “lodge” contempt of court case against her.

Her arguments and three petitions filed in “public interest” indicated that the accused was acquitted/discharged and her appeal before the order was pending before another Bench.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Post Top Ad

Your Ad Spot