Look beyond borders to ensure all out annihilation of terrorism!

In these days, welcome songs are being sung with the full throats and orchestras are blown to the deafening pitch to mark the birth of two new Union Territories viz. One for the Jammu and Kashmir and another for Ladakh on October 31.

In this party, while the local population of Ladakh and Jammu have participated gleefully, in Kashmir region, the abode of homegrown Islamic Jehadi terrorism there is an atmosphere of frightening silence.

However, these Jehadi elements have not given up their Jehadi warfare against India as they are just waiting for a chance to raise their heads.

Yet, what worries the law enforcing agencies more is the support from the vested interests that these gangs enjoy from within the country as well as from Pakistan!

As has been mentioned in these columns time and again, any amount of showering of sops on terrorism affected Kashmir region of newly carved out Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is unlikely to yield the desired results. This conclusion has been now proved beyond doubts.

Taking advantage of relaxation of curbs on movements and communication, the Islamic Jehadi elements, the description which is abhorred by the so-called secular and democratic forces, have shown their ugly face by indulging in senseless killings of innocent people, particularly hailing from other States like lorry drivers and farm labourers.

Indeed, there is no logic in pampering the separatist elements who like their fathers, grandfathers and great grandfathers have shown no concern for the vast, humane, law-abiding Hindus in their region.

They have yet to realise their mistakes and repent for the violence perpetrated by them on Hindus. Going by the Prime Minister's own confession, as many as 40,000 people have been killed by these fanatic, separatist elements.

History is replete with horrendous mass killings of Hindus, their forced conversions to Islam and atrocities on women and children. It is unfortunate that some intellectuals like former judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Markandey Katju, believe that for the crimes of their forefathers, the present generation should not be punished or even blamed.

This perception is far from truth. Genocide of Kashmiri Pandits is not a remote history and the present-day continuing violence by the same people or their children and henchmen also cannot be overlooked.

Therefore, there is nothing wrong in tough handling of these sinners and nobody should shed a tear for their annihilation by our security forces.

Further, in order to ensure total annihilation of the terrorist elements, we should not hesitate to cross the borders and effectively destroy them.

Like introduction of Articles 370 and 35-A in the Constitution of India was as a result of arm-twisting and brow-beating by the fanatic and secessionist elements which have been repealed rightly now, the creation of Pakistan too, was an act of intimidation and violence to which Indian leadership of the day succumbed.

Thus, any act as a result of threats and violence is obviously involuntary and hence, void ab initio and there is no legal impediment in annexing Pakistan to the Union of India.

Let's remember that Britain has not given us freedom in charity. It had no authority to divide India before leaving our country and therefore, partition itself is illegal and not binding on us.

Had stiff stand been taken by our political leaders in 1947, there would have been no Pakistan today and no home of terrorism in our close vicinity.

Justice S A Bobde to be the next CJI

After the present incumbent Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice Ranjan Gogoi, retires on November 17, the senior-most Judge of the apex court, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde will be sworn in as the new Chief Justice of the country.

President Ramnath Kovind has already signed the warrant appointing Justice S A Bobde as the next CJI on October 29.

Justice Bobde will be the 47th CJI and will have a term of one year and five months till April 23, 2021.

SC on limitation and carbon copies

The bench comprising Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M R Shah of the apex court while dismissing the Special Leave Petition filed by Mukesh Ramdevji Agarwal & Anr against Balmukund DruvanarayanAgarwal & Anr have reiterated that the Courts are obliged to compute the limitation on the basis of the endorsements contained in the certified copy.

The court added, "If there is any suspicion of unfair and/or improper practice, the remedy lies in initiating a domestic inquiry or may be criminal investigation against the concerned staff of the Court responsible for supply of certified copies."

This clarification by the apex court comes at a time when in another judgement the court held that signed carbon copy prepared in the same process as the original document is admissible in evidence as the original document as per Section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Adverting to the Explanation 2 to Section 62 which states : "Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of printing, lithography , or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents of the rest, but where they are all copies of a common original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original.'

The Court observed in Mohinder Singh vs. Jaswant Kaur (D) through LRs :" This carbon copy was prepared in the same process as the original document and once it is signed by both the parties, it assumes the character of the original document."

This Judgement would go a long way in cutting down the delays in filing appeals, reviews, revisions etc; to higher courts as the litigant parties will not have to wait for the Certified Copies from the court which usually takes long time.

Consider plaint in entirety before rejecting: SC

In Civil Appeal No. 8197 of 2019 between Shaukat Hussain Mohammed Patel vs. Khatunben Mohammedbhai Polara, the Division Bench comprising Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice R. Subhash Reddy of the Supreme Court vide its Order on October 22 have reiterated that the entirety of averments in the plaint have to be taken into account while considering a plea seeking rejection of plaint.

In this case, a suit was filed by the plaintiff in 2016 to set aside a sale deed executed in 2008. The High Court had held that since litigation was generated after more than a period of 8 years, it is clearly hit by law of limitation and rejected the plaint.

In appeal, while quoting a catena of judgements, the apex court observed that when the plaint is read in entirety, it is clear that the plaintiff had pleaded that the information in respect of the transaction came to his knowledge only in the year 2013-2014, and that the plaintiff was always in possession of the property in the entirety of the circumstances, as pleaded in the plaint.

The issues raised in the matter were certainly required to be considered on merits, the bench added while setting aside the high court order.

Justice Rakesh Kumar transferred to APHC

The High Court of Patna's judge, Justice Rakesh Kumar has been transferred to the Andhra Pradesh High Court, it is learnt.

Justice Rakesh Kumar was recently in news for his bold statements regarding prevailing corruption in judiciary.