karnataka judicial academykjablr.kar.nic.in/sites/kjablr.kar.nic.in/files/ews... · 2013-06-10 ·...
TRANSCRIPT
December
2012
Karnataka Judicial Academy
Crescent House, Crescent Road, Bangalore 560 001 Tel . : 2238 2894/96 Fax:2238 2895
Email . : d irk jab@gmail .com Www.kjablr .kar.nic . in
CONTENTS
• From the Desk of the
President
• Important Amendments
by Parliament
• Important amendments
by the Karnataka State
Legislature
• Important judgments of
Supreme Court of India
• Important judgments of
High Court of Karnataka
• Articles
• Programmes of Karna-
taka Judicial Academy
• Other News
From the Desk of the President
PAGE 2 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
PAGE 3 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
PAGE 4 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
Important amendments by the Parliament
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
[SECTION 3:- ……….. “Evidence”.- “Evidence”
means and includes –
(1) all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to
matters of fact under inquiry,
such statements are called oral evidence;
(2) *[all documents including electronic records pro-
duced for the inspection of the Court],
such documents are called documentary evidence. *Substituted by Act 21 of 2000 Section 92 and Sched-ule II—1(A), for “ all documents produced for the in-spection of the Court” (with effect from 17-10-2000). ………………[the expressions “Certifying Authority”, **[electronic signature], **[Electronic Signature Certifi-cate], “electronic form”, “electronic records”, “information”, “secure electronic record”, “secure digi-tal signature” and “subscriber” shall have the mean-
ings respectively assigned to them in the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000).] ** Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, sec. 52(a), for
“digital signature” and “Digital Signature Certifi-
cate” respectively (with effect from 27-10-2009).
***[SECTION 45A:- Opinion of Examiner of Elec-
tronic Evidence. – When in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence re-ferred to in Section 79-A of the Information Technolo-
gy Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact.
Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, an
Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert;]
***Inserted by Act 10 of 2009, section 52(b) (with ef-
fect from 27.10.2009)
SECTION. 47A. Opinion as to ****[electronic signa-
ture] when relevant- When the Court has to form an opinion as to the ****[electronic signature] of any per-son, the opinion of the Certifying Authority which has issued the *****[Electronic Signature Certificate] is a
relevant fact.
**** Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, section 52(c)(i), for “digital signature” (with effect from 27-10-
2009).
***** Substituted By Act 10 of 2009, section 52(c)(ii), for “Digital Signature Certificate” (with effect
from 27-10-2009).
SECTION 67A. Proof as to ******[electronic signa-
ture].- Except in the case of a secure ******[electronic signature], if the ******[electronic signature] of any subscriber is alleged to have been affixed to an elec-tronic record the fact that such ******[electronic signa-
ture] is the ******[electronic signature] of the subscriber
must be proved.
****** Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, sec.52(d), for
“digital signature” (with effect from 27-10-2009).
SECTION 85A. Presumption as to electronic agree-
ments.- The Court shall presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing the *******[electronic signature] of the parties was so con-
cluded by affixing the *******[electronic signature] of
the parties.
******* Substituted by Act 10 of 2009 , section 52(e), for
“digital signature” (with effect from 27-10-2009).
SECTION 85 B. Presumption as to electronic record
and ********[electronic signatures].- In any proceed-ings involving a secure electronic record, the Court shall presume unless contrary is proved, that the se-cure electronic record has not been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status re-
lates.
In any proceedings, involving secure ********[electronic signature], the Court shall presume unless the contra-
ry is proved that –
the secure ******** [electronic signature] is affixed by subscriber with the intention of signing or
approving the electronic record; except in the case of a secure electronic record or a
secure ********[electronic signature], nothing in this section shall create any presumption relating to authenticity and integrity of the electronic record or any ********[electronic sig-nature].]
******** Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, section 52(f),
for “digital signature” (with effect from 27-10-2009).
SECTION 85 C. Presumption as to *********
[Electronic Signature Certificates].-The Court shall presume, unless contrary is proved, that the infor-mation listed in a *********[Electronic Signature Certifi-cate] is correct, except for information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified, if the certificate was accepted by the subscriber. ********* Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, section 52(g), for “Digital Signature Certificates” (with effect from 27-10-2009). SECTION 90 A. Presumption as to electronic rec-
ords five years old.-………………... the court may pre-sume that the **********[electronic signature] which
purports to be the **********[electronic signature] of any particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf. ……………………………………………………………………… **********Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, section 52(h),
for “digital signature” (with effect from 27-10-2009).
PAGE 5 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
Important amendments by the Karnataka State Legislature
PAGE 6 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
The Registration Act Section2: …………… (2) “book” includes a portion of a book and al-
so any number of sheets connected to-gether with a view of forming a book or
portion of a book *[and the information,
storage devices like floppy disk, hard
disk or compact disk, etc., microfilm or
any other device]; *Inserted by Karnataka Act No. 32 of 2001, Sec-
tion 4 (with effect from 3-10-2001).
**[PART XI-A REGISTRATION OF DOCU-MENTS BY MEANS OF ELECTRONIC OR OTH-ER DEVICES 70-A. Application of this part.- This part shall apply only to the areas in respect of which a no-
tification is issued by the State Government un-
der Section 70-C.
70-B. Definition.- In this part, “Process of Reg-istration of documents by means of electronic or
other devices” shall mean and include scanning
and preservation of documents with the help of
computers, scanners, compact disks, printers, micro-filming and any other device used for the
purpose of storage and retrieval when required.
70-C. Process of registration of documents by means of electronic or other device in the areas notified by the State Government.- (1) The state Government may by notification direct
that to any District or Sub-District specified in
this behalf process of registration by means of
electronic or other device shall be applicable and
the documents admitted for Registration under this Act may be scanned or Micro-filmed and
their images stored and preserved with the help
of electronic or any other device.
(2) On the issue of such notification, it shall be pasted in a conspicuous place at each registra-
tion ***[office] affected by the notification.
……………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………….
70-E. Evidentiary value of copy of certain
documents registered through the process of
registration by means of electronic or other
devices or by other methods.-Notwithstanding
anything contained in this Act or any other law
for the time being in force, a copy of any docu-
ment registered through the process of registra-
tion by means of electronic or other devices or by any other method and certified or attested by
the Registering Officer in charge of the office
shall also be received in evidence of any transac-
tion as is described in the said document.
70-F. Saving.-Nothing in this part shall apply,-
(1) to any document which in the opinion of the
Registering Officer is not in a condition fit to be
processed by means of electronic or other devic-
es;
(2) in the case of unforeseen eventuality like
break-down of the electronic or other devices of
registration:
Provided that the Registering Officer shall record in writing the reasons therefor.
Provided further that the Registering Of-
ficer shall ensure that the data and images of the
documents registered during the period of non-application of this part due to a break-down of
electronic or other device are duly incorporated
into the system, after the same is restored in the
manner specified in the rules by the Inspector
General of Registration.
70-G. Powers of the State Government under
this Chapter.-Where for any reason, the State
Government is satisfied that, the process of Reg-
istration by means of electronic or other device is
not possible in respect of all documents in any
office to which this chapter applies, may direct by notification published in the Official Gazette to
copy such documents in the books kept in the
office and in accordance with the rules made for
this purpose.]
**Part XI-A and Section 70-A, 70-B, 70-C, 70-D,
70-E, 70-F and 70-G substituted for Part XI-A
and Sections 70-A, 70-B, 70-C, 70-D, 70-E, 70-F
and 70-G by Karnataka Act No. 32 of 2001, Sec-
tion 4 (with effect from 3-10-2001).
***Substituted for the words “offices” by Karna-
taka Act No. 22 of 2002, Section 2 and shall be
deemed to have come into force with effect from 3
-10-2001.
Important amendments by the Karnataka State Legislature
PAGE 7 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
(A.Shanmugam v Ariya Kshatria Rajakula Vamshasthu Madalaya Nandhavana Paripalanai Sangam) Dalveer Bhandari and Dipak Mish-
ra, JJ. 2012 SCC (6) 430
While considering the scope of grant or refusal of temporary injuncion and the duty of the court to find out the truth, the Apex court has laid down the following principles:- A. In Maria Margarida Sequeria Fernandes, this Court examined the importance of grant or
refusal of an injunction in paras 83 to 86 which
read as under:
“83. Grant or refusal of an injunction in a civil
suit is the most important stage in the civil trial.
Due care, caution, diligence and attention must
be bestowed by the judicial officers and judges
while granting or refusing injunction. In most cases, the fate of the case is decided by grant or
refusal of an injunction. Experience has shown
that once an injunction is granted, getting it va-
cated would become a nightmare for the defend-
ant.
84. In order to grant or refuse injunction, the
judicial officer or the Judge must carefully ex-
amine the entire pleadings and documents with
utmost care and seriousness. The safe and bet-ter course is to give a short notice on the injunc-
tion application and pass an appropriate order
after hearing both the sides. In case of grave
urgency, if it becomes imperative to grant an ex-
parte ad interim injunction, it should be granted
for a specified period, such as, for two weeks. In those cases, the plaintiff will have no inher-
ent interest in delaying disposal of injunc-
tion application after obtaining an ex-parte
ad interim injunction.
85. The Court, in order to avoid abuse of the
process of law may also record in the injunction
order that if the suit is eventually dismissed, the
plaintiff undertakes to pay restitution, actual or
realistic costs. While passing the order, the Court must take into consideration the prag-
matic realities and pass proper order for mesne
profits. The Court must make serious endeav-
our to ensure that even-handed justice is given
to both the parties.
86. Ordinarily, three main principles govern the
grant or refusal of injunction. a) prima facie
case; b) balance of convenience; and c) irrepa-
rable injury, which guide the Court in this re-gard.
In the broad category of prima facie case, it is
imperative for the Court to carefully analyse the
pleadings and the documents on record and on-ly on that basis the Court must be governed by
the prima facie case. In grant and refusal of in-
junction, pleadings and documents play a vital
role.” ……………(Para 33)
B. …….1. It is the bounden duty of the Court to
uphold the truth and do justice. 2. Every liti-
gant is expected to state truth before the
law court whether it is pleadings, affidavits or
evidence. Dishonest and unscrupulous litigants
have no place in law courts. 3. The ultimate
object of the judicial proceedings is to discern
the truth and do justice. It is imperative
that pleadings and all other presentations be-
fore the court should be truthful. 4. Once the
court discovers falsehood, conceal-
ment, distortion, obstruction or confusion in
pleadings and documents, the court should in
addition to full restitution impose appropriate
costs. The court must ensure that there is no
incentive for wrong doer in the temple of justice.
Truth is the foundation of justice and it has to
be the common endeavour of all to uphold
the truth and no one should be permitted to
pollute the stream of justice. 5. It is the bound-
en obligation of the Court to neutralize
any unjust and/or undeserved benefit or ad-
vantage obtained by abusing the judicial pro-
cess. 6. The watchman, caretaker or a servant
employed to look after the property can never
acquire interest in the property irrespective of
his long possession. The watchman, caretaker
or a servant is under an obligation to hand over
the possession forthwith on demand. According
to the principles of justice, equity and good con-
science, the Courts are not justified in protecting
the possession of a watchman, caretaker or
servant who was only allowed to live into the
premises to look after the same. 7. The watch-
man, caretaker or agent holds the property
of the principal only on behalf the principal. He
acquires no right or interest whatsoever in such
property irrespective of his long stay or posses-
sion. 8. The protection of the Court can be
granted or extended to the person who has a
valid subsisting rent agreement, lease agree-
ment or licence agreement in his favour.” (Para
43)
Important judgments of the Supreme Court of India
DECEMBER 2012 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY Page 6
Important judgments of the Supreme Court of India
Mohan Shantanagoudar, V.Jagannathan, Ravi Malimath JJJ. 2012-ILR(KAR)-0-509 :2011-LAWS(KAR)-12-30 (STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CIRCLE IN-SPECTOR OF POLICE vs. HOSAKERI NINGAPPA) Head notes The full bench of Karnataka High Court has laid down the following principles regarding case and counter case:-
A..……..The procedural laws are de-
signed to further the ends of justice and not to
frustrate them by the introduction of endless
technicalities. The object of the Code is to en-
sure that an accused person gets a full and
fair trial along with certain well established and well-understood principles that accord
with our notions of natural justice. If there be
substantial compliance with the requirements
of law providing the accused a full and fair tri-
al in accordance with principles of natural jus-tice, no order of a competent Court should be
reversed or altered in appeal or revision on ac-
count of a procedural irregularity unless the
same results in miscarriage of justice. The pro-
cedural laws are designed to sub serve the
ends of justice and not to frustrate them. The test to be applied is whether the accused had a
fair trial in spite of the transgression of the
prescribed rule or procedure. In judging the
question of prejudice, Courts must act with a
broad vision and look to the substance and not to technicalities and their main concern
should be to see whether the accused had a
fair trial; whether he knew that he was being
tried for; whether the main facts sought to be
established against him were explained to him
fairly and clearly; and whether he was given a full and fair chance to defend himself.
(Para-13)
B. To sum up, the procedure to be adopted in case and counter case is that the
investigation should be conducted by the same
Investigating Officer and the prosecution
should be conducted by two different Public
Prosecutors. The trial should be conducted by
the same Court. After recording the evidence and after hearing the arguments, the judgment
should be reserved in one case and thereafter
the evidence should be recorded and the argu-
ments should be heard in the other case. It is
needless to observe that the arguments in both
the matters shall be heard by the same Learned
Judge. The judgments should be pronounced by
the same Judge simultaneously i.e., one after the other. In deciding each case, the Trial Judge can
only rely on the evidence recorded in that partic-
ular case and the evidence recorded in the cross
case (or counter case) cannot be looked into. The
Judge shall not be influenced by the evidence or
arguments in the cross case. However, if the evi-dence recorded in one case is brought on record
in another case in accordance with the procedure
known to law, then, such evidence which is legal-
ly brought on record can be looked into. Except
in such situation, the evidence recorded in one case cannot be looked into in another case.
(Para-16)
C. In view of the foregoing reasons, we answer the points referred to us as under: (a) If the case and counter case are not tried simulta-
neously as held by the Supreme Court in the case
of Nathi Lal vs. State of U.P. (Supra) and in the case of Sudhir and others vs. State of M.P (Supra) the proceedings ipso facto do not get viti-ated. But, where the irregular procedure adopted
by the Trial Court has caused prejudice to the
accused and has occasioned failure of justice, the
proceeding and the trial vitiates. Otherwise the
proceedings are protected under Section 465 of
the Code. (b) The evidence recorded in one case cannot be looked into in the other case. The Trial
Judge can only rely upon the evidence recorded
in that particular case and the evidence recorded
in the cross case cannot be looked into. Each
case must be decided on the basis of the evidence which has been placed on record in that particu-
lar case. However, if the evidence recorded in one
case is brought on record in accordance with pro-
cedure known to law in the other case, then,
such evidence which is legally brought on record
can be looked into. Otherwise, the evidence rec-orded in one case cannot be looked into in the
other case. (c) If the Trial Court disposes of the
case and counter case on different dates acquit-
ting the accused therein and no appeal is pre-
ferred in one of the cases and the appeal is pre-ferred in the case decided later, the proceedings
in the later case do not automatically get vitiated.
Each case has to be judged on its own merits.
Unless prejudice is shown to have been caused to
the accused, the proceedings in the later case do
not get vitiated…...….(Para-18)
Important judgments of the High Court of Karnataka
PAGE 9 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
Article
Citizenship-Rights and Duties
Excerpts from “CITIZENSHIP-
RIGHTS AND DUTIES” by JUSTICE
E.S.VENKATARAMIAH, JUDGE, SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA, (Justice R.K.Tankha Me-
morial Lecture, 1988 delivered under the
auspices of the Central India Law Institute,
Jabalpur)
THE CONCEPT OF CITIZENSHIP
In essence, citizenship is a bond. Man,
when he comes into this world, is born with a
physical bond. This is towards his parents.
Though biological in origin, it has a deeply rich
emotional content. As he grows, he comes to form a number of other bonds. Some of these
are extra-legal and purely emotional, such as
the bond of friendship. A few of them have
both legal and emotional aspects, such as the
bond of marriage. A few of them, again, have only legal aspects, such as the bond arising
out of contract. But the one bond that arises
on birth and flowing from the law, may govern
the life of an individual throughout his or her
existence is the bond of citizenship. This as-
pect does not become prominent in our static life - a proposition which might be true of
many other legal links. It is only when a prob-
lem of some difficulty arises or a controversy of
some magnitude emerges, that the strength or
weakness of the bond and the manner in which it is binding, becomes crucial.
The concept of citizenship has funda-
mental links with the development of political
thought throughout the centuries. The pre-
sent day word ‘citizen’ itself is derived from the French root word ‘citoyen’. As at present un-
derstood, it has two meanings. According to
the first meaning, it is linked with a particular
city, for example, as when one speaks of
‘citizen of Paris’. In the second meaning, it carries connection with the State or the nation
and indicates a certain type of relationship
with a particular nation. It is for this reason
that the word ‘nationality’ is often used in oth-
er countries to denote the political and legal
link that exists between a particular State and those who owe permanent allegiance to it.
However, the one disadvantage of the expres-
sion ‘nationality’ is that it has a negative and
disjunctive quality about itself. It indicates a
sociological affinity. It emphasizes the demar-
cating barrier between one nation and another
and makes subordinate the philosophical link
between a State and its own nationals. The modern nation States owe their origin to the
idea of nationality like, the French, the Ger-
mans or the Dutch. The idea that a person
who is not a member of a nation can also be a
citizen is overlooked. In contrast, the word
‘citizen’ makes it possible to hint at the fact that within a geographical territory organized
as a political entity, there could be a number of
persons between whom and the political organ-
isation there is affinity. Citizenship in this case
may be acquired by birth or by naturalization. The present day United States of America is an
ideal illustration to explain this concept. Peo-
ple who originally belonged to different nation-
alities have now become citizens of the United
States of America. Citizenship in this case is
an affinity that makes them care for the politi-cal organisation and also makes that organisa-
tion care for them. It is thus a cementing tie,
positive in its content and constructive in its
approach. The fact that citizens may, if neces-
sary, take up arms for the State to which they belong and may be called upon to do so is inci-
dental to this relationship. What is of primary
value is that in their daily life and conduct,
they owe obligations to the State.
It is to the Greeks that we owe the basic concept of citizenship. The Greek States did
not have large territories. Mostly, they were
small city States, ruled by monarchy or, at
times, by some other form of Government. But
the fact was that persons permanently residing within the geographical territories or units
owed an obligation to the State and enjoyed
certain rights and they brought into the fore-
front the intimate relationship between the
State and these residents. Thus was born the
concept of citizen. The fact that the States were also cities might have something to do
with the origin of the word. But once the con-
cept was evolved, it lost the purely local colour
and came to occupy an important place in the
history of philosophical thought.
Athens was a model city State. The pe-
riod between 460 B.C. and 430 B.C. during
which Pericles ruled was perhaps its best peri-
od. Those years have been ideally called as the
classical Greek period during which period the Greek culture blossomed. It gave a stimulus to
the entire European world in all departments of
life and art – literature, philosophy, art, sculp-
ture, drama, science and medicine. This was
followed by the era of Aristotle and Alexander.
PAGE 10 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
W.H.Auden writes:
“There could be no stronger proof of the riches and depth of Greek
culture than its powers of appeal
to every kind of personality. It
has been said that every one is
born either a Platonist or an Ar-
istotelian; but it means to me that there are more contrasted
and significant divisions than
this, between for instances, the
lovers of Ionia and lovers of
Sparta, between those who are devoted to both Plato and Aristo-
tle and those who prefer Hippoc-
rates and Thucydides to either.”
Proceeding further Auden said:
“Had Greek civilization never ex-
isted, we might fear God and
deal justly with our neighbours,
we might practice arts and even
have learned how to devise fairly simple machines, but we would
have never become fully con-
scious, which is to say that we
would never have become, for
better or worse, fully human.”
This is the tribute paid by a modern Eu-
ropean to the ancient Greek civilization which
was dependent on the practice of good citizen-
ship and observance of equality in political life.
This Greeks themselves were great thinkers. Unlike the modern intellectuals, they did not
divide life into segments. Nor did they divide
knowledge into compartments. They regarded
life as one integral whole, to be lived to the full.
It was a rich life, not devoid of pleasures of the
senses, but, at the same time, not wanting in the refinements of civilisation. The body, the
mind and the soul went together. The family,
the society and the State supplemented each
other.
With this approach towards life, it was inevita-
ble that knowledge was also regarded as inte-
gral. It was to be an instrument for living the
full life, enriched with subtle thinking and occa-
sional philosophical excursions. It was in this
climate that Greek drama, history, poetry, rhet-oric and other intellectual achievements were
born and took shape. This naturally made it
possible for the Greeks to accept the thinking of
philosophers who offered deep insights into re-
ality and a co-ordinated approach. The famous
trilogy of Greek philosophers-Socrates, Plato
and Aristotle-wonderfully enriched Greek think-
ing. Each of them viewed life as a whole and
took all knowledge as his province. Socrates stood for free thinking. Plato’s thinking which
probably will survive for a few more centuries,
has a stamp of originality and depth, of which
the finer nuances have not yet been grasped,
even though a hundred generations have
passed. Aristotle, the last of these three great philosophers, tried to systematize, collect and
co-ordinate knowledge. He had the advantage
of the abstract doctrines of Plato and could
make concrete many of the abstractions. Cov-
ering almost all branches of knowledge, Aristo-tle did not leave out politics and ethics. In
Book III of Politics Aristotle tries to give some
idea of the organisation of the State. A portion
of the discussion is devoted to the citizen.
Here, he mentions the essential attributes of a
citizen as one who takes part in the process of judgment and in the deliberations of the As-
sembly. Because of the peculiar nature of the
city States in Greece, Aristotle’s emphasis on
these two functions is understandable. Even
though the citizen in the modern State has no direct role to play in law-making or in the mak-
ing of political decisions by representative as-
semblies, Aristotle’s formulation about the citi-
zen has not lost its significance. It serves to
highlight the basic postulate of a democratic
State, namely, that every citizen has some part to play in the governance of the country. Simi-
larly, Aristotle’s mention of the role of the citi-
zen in the administration of justice, though it
may now appear to be only of historical value,
serves the important function of reminding us that the administration of justice is an essential
function of the State. It also reminds us that
even if a court of law may be primarily con-
cerned with disputes between the individuals
who are parties to the dispute, every citizen is
interested in the process of justice. Academic though it may appear, this aspect has been
known to assume considerable practical im-
portance from time to time, in modern legal
doctrines and decisions. Not unoften, legal
controversies arise as to how far the principle of open trial can be properly departed from. Legal
controversies inevitably arise as to the consid-
erations on which exceptions, if any, could be
made to the principle that the proceedings of a
court shall be open to the public (including the
press) and the reporting of judicial proceedings is to be regarded as a matter, not only of legal
right, but also of relevance as a means of edu-
cation and information for the citizens.
* * * * * *
Programmes of Karnataka Judicial Academy
PAGE 11 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
ForCivilJudges2008-2009Batch,VIandVIIthreedaysRefresherCoursewas
conductedfrom05.11.12to07.11.12and19.11.12to21.11.12–20JudicialOf&icers
participatedineachRefresherCourse.
IX,XandXI3daysRefresherCoursesforSeniorCivilJudgeswasconductedfrom
08.11.12to10.11.12,15.11.12to17.11.12and22.11.12to24.11.12–20Judicial
Of&icersparticipatedineachRefresherCourse.
PAGE 12 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
Two-days workshop for Judicial Officers on
``Perspectives of Marginalized Women & Law:
was conducted at the Karnataka Judicial Acad-
emy on 03.11.12 and 04.11.12. The workshop
was organized by Karnataka Health Promotion
Trust under a Project called Samvedana, in
partnership with the National Law School of
India University and Karnataka Judicial Acade-
my. More than 165 judicial officers attended the
inaugural event. Hon’ble Justice Nadoja Dr.
V.S. Malimath, Chairman of Karnataka State
Law Commission, while inaugurating the pro-
gramme said that ``no woman enters prostitu-
tion by choice and most of them are either
forced, tricked or trafficked into the profession
and are rendered helpless victims.’’
``This kind of a workshop is very important to
sensitise the judges as their role is not just in-
terpretation or implementation of law, but to
provide dignity while delivering justice to the
marginalized women,’’ said Justice Malimath,
former chairman of National Human Rights
Commission. ``After watching the brutal as-
saults on their rights and life in an incident in
Goa, I have interacted with them and realized
how they live on the fringes without access to
any entitlements. On that occasion as chairman
of NHRC, I have stopped their houses from be-
ing demolised,’’ he added.
Justice N Kumar, President of Karnataka Judi-
cial Academy & Hon’ble Judge, High Court of
Karnataka, said that the workshop would pro-
vide clarity and better understanding of the role
judges can play in providing protection to sex
workers who face violence. ``The main goal is to
give the judges a first-hand view of the plight of
sex workers so that they can be sensitive in
providing dignity to marginalized women while
delivering justice to the victims’’ he said.
Dr Sarasu Esther Thomas, Co-ordinator, Centre
for Woman and Law, National Law School of
India University said that ``Sex workers do not
get access to simple social entitlements like ra-
tion cards or voter identity cards and are usual-
ly seen as illegal citizens. The Indian constitu-
tion is more for the poor and marginalized sec-
tions and it is our duty as members of society
to provide dignity and respect to these victims.’’
Earlier, Dr Srinath Maddur, Project Director,
Karnataka Health Promotion Trust, who intro-
duced the project said: ``Any kind of violence is
a human rights violation and a public health
issue especially in the context of HIV.’’ Mr
Ashokanand, IAS Director (Advocacy), wel-
comed the guests and judges.
Other News
2daysworkshopforJudicialOf�icerson“PersepctivesofMarginalizedWomenand
Law”on03.11.12and04.11.12atKarnatakaJudicialAcademy.
Other News
PAGE 13 KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY DECEMBER 2012
2daysworkshopforJudicialOf�icers on
“PersepctivesofMarginalizedWomenandLaw”on03.11.12and04.11.12atKarna-
takaJudicialAcademy.
GOVERNANCE
KARNATAKA JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikramjit Sen
Patron-in-Chief
Hon’ble Chief Justice,
High Court of Karnataka
Hon’ble Mr. Justice N. Kumar
President
Board of Governors
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok B. Hinchigeri
Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna
Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.V. Pinto