CEO addicted to cocaine rehabilitated, given relief

As per the prosecution, by 2014end, Sanjay Bhatnagar came into contact with one Andrew alias Steve of Bengaluru and started sourcing small quantities of cocaine for ‘recreational purpose’. The contraband was delivered by a private courier with him paying Rs 5,000 per gram. This went on for about six months. But with Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) getting a whiff of it, the bureau seized the cocaine package, on June 9, 2015. Akhil was arrested for possessing 3.88 grams of cocaine. However, Bhatnagar admitted to his individual guilt and moved the court saying he was willing to undergo medical treatment for de-addiction at a recognised research institute in Chennai. Section 27 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act makes no distinction about the use of banned substances. But Section 64(A) is a benevolent clause which offers immunity from prosecution of addicts volunteering for treatment. The immunity will, however, be withdrawn if the addict does not undergo the complete treatment for de-addiction as promised. “I was working as CEO of an e-book publishing company. After the incident, I lost my job and now I want to rehabilitate myself in society. Unless the present petition is allowed, I may be put to great hardship and irreparable loss,” he had pleaded citing this provision. Justice CT Selvam, using his inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC, stayed the proceedings pending before a special court and sent Bhatnagar for rehabilitation. Subsequently, after six months, having gone through the entire rehabilitation programme, Bhatnagar approached the court. The rehab centre also certified that he is fully substance-independent and would require only periodical check up, which is routine. Justice Selvam, recording the details, then invoked Section 64(A) of NDPS Act and quashed the narcotics case against him by extending the immunity available to addicts volunteering for rehabilitation.

Woman professor moves contempt plea against IIT-M

A woman assistant professor who had been waging a legal battle against the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M), for the past 19 years and winning two rounds of litigation, has moved a contempt petition seeking to punish the Chairman and Board of Governors, Director and Registrar of IIT-M for wilfully disobeying a court order.

A division bench comprising Justices A Selvam and P Kalaiyarasan before whom the contempt petition filed by WB Vasantha came up ordered notice to the contemnors, returnable by December 8. Vasantha has contended that she had joined IIT-M in 1989 as a teaching faculty. But owing to her being refused promotion despite her qualifications and instead ineligible candidates were favoured, she had approached the Madras High Court in 1997. Based on her plea, the High Court on finding lapses in the promotion procedure ordered a CBI probe into the issue on July 25, 2013. But, IIT-M filed an appeal against the probe and obtained an interim stay. However, the High Court on August 22, 2016 while setting aside the CBI probe on the issue, had directed IIT-M to consider her for the post of Associate Professor from July 27, 1995 and for the post of Professor from January 6, 1997 in the light of the findings made in the appeal, she said. But not withstanding this, IIT-M through a communication on September 28, 2016 resorted to re-enacting the selection process based on advertisements issued in 1994 and 1995 and has called her to appear for interview, she added. Also, noting that the action of IIT-M to convene another meeting of the selection committee and calling her to appear for interview were totally unlawful and contrary to the orders of this court, she submitted that IIT-M continues to persecute her by denying her the benefits of the judgment of this court.

DVK can’t campaign in Pondy: HC

The Madras High Court has refused permission to the Dravidar Viduthalai Kazhagam (DVK) to campaign for the November 19 by-elections in the Union Territory of Puducherry. 

Justice N Kirubakaran dismissed a plea moved by Logu Iyyappan, president of the Puducherry unit of the DVK challenging an order of the District Election Officer refusing permission to hold campaign against Congress candidate and Chief Minister V Narayanaswamy. The judge dismissed the plea after holding that “the EC, rightly, in clause 5.4 of Hand Book of Candidates, has stated that any permission for poll campaign should be obtained only through the candidate or his agent and cannot be held independently owing to have a tab on the candidate’s poll expenses.” However, the judge on considering the petitioner’s plea that the DEO had failed to provide any reason for rejecting their campaign plan through speaker fitted vehicles, pulled up the election officer. He said “for non-stating of reasons, the Court may at times stay the order and consequently stay the poll process. Therefore, onerous responsibility is cast upon the election officer to be vigilant while passing orders.”