Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Apex court rap for order evasion

Apex court rap for order evasion

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Jan 27, 2012   modified Modified on Jan 27, 2012

-The Telegraph

The Supreme Court today expressed anguish over the tendency to circumvent court orders instead of honouring them.

The court said this while dealing with contempt petitions filed against some gutkha manufacturers for not abiding by its order to switch to non-plastic sachets.

The court had earlier issued contempt notices against Rajeev Kumar, the MD of the Dharampal Satyapal group, which manufactures two popular pan masala brands — Rajnigandha and Tulsi — for wilfully disobeying its orders.

The court had asked all gutkha and pan masala makers to switch to non-plastic pouches for health reasons and on environmental grounds in an order passed on December 7, 2010. The order was to come into effect from March 1, 2011.

However, some gutkha makers, the Centre for Public Interest Litigation claimed, had violated this by not producing sachets of pan masala but instead repackaging it in small zip-pouches.

The order was restricted to sachets and not pouches, the lawyer for the manufacturer, Sudhir Chandra Aggarwal, said. “Even the Government of India understood it to be limited to sachets and not to pouches which are multi-purpose in use,” he claimed.

But the bench, comprising Justices Asok Kumar Ganguly and T.S. Thakur, rejected this explanation. “Do you mean to say that use of small sachets is not permissible but larger ones are?” Justice Thakur asked.

CPIL lawyer Prashant Bhushan said the pan masala makers were “trying to be too clever by half”. If they were not clear on the order, they should have come to the top court for clarifications, he said.

Instead, they wrote to the environment and forest ministry seeking a clarification and then procured some legal opinion to show that the plastic packaging was technically not sachets but pouches and continued to manufacture them in plastic packaging. “This was mala fide,” he contended.

He sought action against the pan masala makers on this count. Contempt of court is punishable with a jail term of up to six months.

After the counsel for Dharam Satyapal assured the court that they had since then switched over to non-plastic packaging, Justice Thakur said they should donate some money to some charity or cancer research by way of reparation.

“You have earned so much money (in the two months you violated the court orders). You should donate some money to cancer research to close this (contempt) case,” Justice Thakur said.Eight per cent of oral cancer cases in India are attributed to long-term tobacco use. But Justice Ganguly did not agree to this. He expressed anguish over the tendency among most not to abide by orders of the court in “letter and spirit”. “What will happen to the institution then?” he wondered.

He then directed that the case be listed again before Justice G.S. Singhvi and himself for further orders.


The Telegraph, 25 January, 2012, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120126/jsp/nation/story_15055211.jsp


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close