Legal Circles 29-10-2023

History does not excuse those who do not learn a lesson from the past. Since Independence Bharat has been wearing a misfitting hat of non-alignment; as a result of which the nation has suffered a lot!

Actually, in foreign affairs the concept of so called non-alignment is totally absent. Still either very poor countries who do not have any wherewithal to offer a country at war or political upheavals or filthily rich countries who can live like the Alice on the wonderland independently own their own, often wear the utopian hat of non-alignment. In fact, such an attitude does not serve any useful purpose.

Prior to the China war, our rulers committed the blunder of remaining non -aligned. Except rendering lip service and indulging in goody -goody talks in the matters of war between different countries, we had done nothing significant. With the result, when we were at war with China in 1962, our cry for international support was ignored by the comity of nations. The same response was witnessed from the major countries during three wars with Pakistan. Except Russia no other country had stood with us during the 1971 war with Pakistan. During Kargil war it was Israel which supported us immensely.

Certainly nobody likes a war. Atleast, the common man is deadly against all forms of violence. The wars are at times imposed and at times, invited. The folly of going to war is realised mostly after the end of a war. But by that time enormous damage would have been done to all parties at war and even the non- indulging ones.

Considering the present day scenario in Israel -Hamas war, undoubtedly the war has been imposed on Israel. Without any immediate provocation, the Hamas terrorists located in Gaza strip, attacked Israel from air, land and water routes and indulged in large scale violence. Besides killing hundreds of innocent people including women and children, the Hamas also caused a rampant damage to property. This forced Israel to retaliate against Hamas.

Seen from these simple facts, no sensible person would bring in the religion. Israel has a dominant religion, called Zionism while Palestine has been largely inhabited by the followers of Islam. A terrorist organisation like Hamas attacks a neighbouring country, called Israel without any provocation and causes irreparable loss to its life and property, should be in one voice condemned by all countries irrespective of their religions. Instead, almost the whole Islamic block has given the Hamas attack of October 7, the communal colour which shows the bankruptcy of its ruling minds. Further, this support has been extended to the non-state player, Hamas while the lawful government of Palestine is totally missing from the picture!

And what we have done is certainly a laughable thing ! We were quick enough to condemn the Hamas violence. It is no doubt a good thing to do. But we dragged our feet from extending unconditional support to Israel in its retaliatory action. No self respecting country will keep quiet when it has been attacked by an external group. Israel actually did the same thing as a sovereign nation. We, instead of solidly standing behind Israel, like the USA, Britain, France, Germany and others, changed the gears and started delivering sermons on humanity. Not contend with such an ostrich-like behaviour, we also sent humanitarian aid to Palestine, the lawful government of which has gone incognito! Obviously, the medical aid and tents etc, sent by us has fallen in the hands of the Hamas, the terrorists!

Even now, it is not too late to review our stand. Not only the ethics and concern for humanity but also our bounded duty to reciprocate the timely help rendered by Israel on several occasions dictates that in this hour of need we should stand by Israel solidly like a rock. Our diplomatic relations with the Islamic countries, their awards showered on our prime minister, should not be allowed to shake our conscience.

· SC HOLDS A HIGHER THRESHOLD MUST FOR MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES

A division bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Misra in an appeal entitled M.A Biviji v/s Sunita and Others, held that to safeguard medical practitioners and to ensure that they are able to freely discharge their medical duty, a higher proof of burden must be fulfilled by the complainant. The bench also hailed that the complainant should be able to prove a breach of duty and the subsequent injury being attributable to such a breach as well, in order to hold a doctor liable for medical negligence.

In the instant case, Dr.M.A Biviji was fined by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case filed by Mrs.Sunita Parvate, alleging that due to medical negligence in her treatment, she had suffered permanent damage to her respiratory tract and permanent voice loss. The doctor was directed by the National consumer Redressal Commission to pay a sum of Rs. 6,11,638 for the proven medical negligence.

· TWO TS-HC JUDGES TRANSFERRED

Justice M.Laxman and Justice G.Anupama Chakravarthy, have been transferred to the Rajasthan High Court and Patna High Court respectively, accordingly, notification is issued by the High Court.

· FORMER AP-HC JUDGE EXPIRED

Justice V.Bhaskar Rao, former judge of erstwhile High court of Andhra Pradesh, who died recently will be given a Full Court Reference by the Telangana High Court on November 2.

· P&H-HC ON PROCLAIMED OFFENDER

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a recent judgment has held that a proclaimed offender cannot seek quashing of the FIR on the basis of a compromise, more so, when he is absconding in multiple cases pending against him. The Court also observed that a proclaimed offender cannot short circuit the system by filing petitions through powers of attorney unless he was a minor, insane, suffering from disability or for certain compelling circumstances making him unable to appear in person.

The above judicial observations were made by the court while dismissing a quash petition in a case titled, Sukhvinder Singh through his SPA and others v/s State of Punjab and another.