गुप्ता ने यह भी बताया कि उन्होंने इस मामले की शिकायत पहले तत्कालीन DG (Prisons) को की थी, लेकिन कोई कार्रवाई नहीं हुई। इसके बाद उन्होंने अरविंद केजरीवाल से मुलाकात की और उन्हें पूरी स्थिति बताई। केजरीवाल ने उन्हें वीडियो बनाने को कहा लेकिन गुप्ता ने कहा कि वीडियो बनाना ठीक नहीं है, उन्हें खुद जेल आकर देखना चाहिए।

गुप्ता का कहना है कि उन्हें लगा कि इसके बाद एक्शन लिया जाएगा लेकिन ऐसा हुआ नहीं उलटा उन्हें ही रिटायरमेंट के वक्त फँसा दिया गया। बाद में कोर्ट केस चला वो निर्दोष साबित हुए, लेकिन तब तक उनके लिए चीजें मुश्किल की जा चुकी थीं

The Ministry of Health& Family Welfare, Govt. of India has taken a serious action against Paras HMRI Hospital in Patna. According to an office memorandum issued by Dr. T.A.K. Singh, Addl. Dtr. CGHS, Patna, an Office Order No.- 2-149/2022/Paras Hospital/CGHS/4312 dated – 12-04-2024, several serious complaints and medical negligence etc. received against Paras HMRI Hospital, Patna. As per recommendation of Grievance Section (Hospital Cell), under CGHS Patna and as per recommendation of High Power Committee for action against HCOs under CGHS Patna, the Addl. Dtr. (CGHS Patna) decided to suspend the Paras HMRI Hospital from the panel of empanelled HCOs under CGHS Patna with immediate effect for a period of six months or till further orders.

The CGHS beneficiaries already admitted in the hospital for treatment prior to the issue of this order shall continue to be provided treatment of CGHS rates till their discharge within a period of seven days.

Hit and run cases are one of the most prevalent road accidents in India. According to a report by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Transport² research wing in 2019 road accidents in India kill almost 1.5 lakh people annually which accounts for almost 11 percent of accident-related deaths in the world. Section 161(b) of the Motor Vehicle Act says that a “hit and run motor accident” means an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles the identity whereof cannot be ascertained despite reasonable efforts for the purpose. Section 279, 338 and 304A are imposed in a hit and run incidents.

• Section 279-Rash driving or riding on a public way.-Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

• Section 338-Causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others.-Whoever causes grievous hurt to any person by doing any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life, or the personal safety of others, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

• Section 304A-Causing death by negligence.-Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Facts of the case-

At 4:50 am in the early hours of 10.01.1999, a black BMW car driven by Sanjeev Nanda hit 7 persons killing 6 of them at Lodhi Road, New Delhi. It was alleged that when he hit the people few of them flew in the air and hit the bonnet and a few were stuck under the car and were dragged on to a point where the car hit the central verge. It is also alleged that Sanjeev Nanda saw beneath the car but one of the co-accused named Manik Kapoor asked him to rush, leaving the injured shouting and crying for help. SI Jagdish Pandey followed the oil trail of the car and traced it to Siddharth Gupta’s residence at Golf Links where his father Rajeev Gupta with his servants Shyam Singh and Bhola Nath washed the car and destroyed the evidence. On 11 January 1999 Sanjeev Nanda and his friends were arrested and the following charges were framed :

• Section 201/34 IPC was framed against accused Sanjeev Nanda, Manik Kapur
• Section 201/34 IPC was framed against accused Rajeev Gupta, Shyam Singh Rana and Bhola Nath for tampering with the evidence by washing the car.
• Section 304(I)/308/35 IPC was framed against accused Sidharth Gupta. Which was discharged by the Hon’ble High Court later on.
• Section 304(I)/308/34 IPC was framed against accused Sanjeev Nanda and Manik Kapur for causing the deaths of Rajan Kumar, Peru Lal, Ram Raj, Mehandi Hasan, Nasir and Gulab and for attempting to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder of Manoj Malik.

On 14 January 1999 Sunil Kulkarni, a key witness to the incident recorded his statement which was discharged by the prosecution questioning his credibility but was brought back as a witness on a plea by the prosecution where he identified the accused Sanjeev Nanda. Manoj Malik the survivor testified that the incident took place by a truck rather than a car but the broken number plate and other damaged parts helped prove that the incident took place by a car not by a truck as testified by him. The bloodstains on the steering wheel matched with the blood group of Sanjeev Nanda which were also found on his jersey further proving that the car was being driven by Sanjeev Nanda. It is important to note that many witnesses turned hostile in this case which led to Sanjeev Nanda being relieved on bail in October 1999.

The 2008 Judgement

In 2008 the trial court found Sanjeev Nanda guilty citing Alister Anthony Pareira’s case³ decided by the Bombay High Court.

• Convict Sanjeev Nanda was sentenced to 5 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304(II) IPC with benefit under Section 428 Crpc
• Rajeev Gupta was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and a fine of Rs 10000 under Section 201 of IPC.
• Shyam Singh and Bhola Nath were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and a fine of Rs 100 each under Section 201 of IPC.

The 2009 Appeal and Judgement

In 2009 Sanjeev Nanda filed an appeal in the High Court of Delhi challenging the decision of the trial court.

THE APPEAL

• He challenged that right to a fair trial where the prosecution failed to prove the case and the learned judge didn’t appreciate the facts, misapplied the law and showed prejudice against the rich and mighty.
• A fair trial also includes a speedy trial which is a right granted under the Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and Section 309 of Crpc. He appealed that the trial could have been completed within a period of 4 to 5 years but it took around 9 years which ruined his career educationally as well as professionally.
• The prosecution failed to prove its case through reliable witnesses and all the three witnesses were of questionable character and credit.
• Many facts involved were applied on the basis of circumstantial and scientific pieces of evidence which was avoidation of principles made down by the Supreme Court Jagdish Chander Vs. State of Delhi 1973⁴ and State of Karnataka Vs. Satish (1998)⁵.
• The accused appealed that he was wrongly tried and found guilty for an offence under Section 304 (II) IPC.

The Judgement

• The court acknowledged the fact that the appellant had to undergo a lot of trauma and agony while facing the trial for 9 years but it was all on his own wrongdoings.
• The court was also aware of the Rs. 65 lakh compensation that he paid to the family of the victims but believed it to be an action-driven by personal motives of getting a bail rather than compassion towards them.
• They pointed out the fact that every possible effort was done to destroy the evidence and manipulate the witnesses to escape justice through money
• It was held that the accused does not deserve any kind of leniency in his sentence and sentenced Sanjeev Nanda to two years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304A IPC.
• Since the conviction against Sanjeev Nanda has been converted from 304 (II), 304A so naturally Rajeev Gupta, Shyam Singh and Bhola Nath will be guilty under Section 201 (III) of IPC.
• Rajeev Gupta was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 1 year with a fine of Rs 10,000.
• Shyam Singh and Bhola Nath were sentenced to 6 months of rigorous imprisonment
• Proceedings under Section 340 Crpc were initiated against the witness Sunil Kulkarni for deliberately giving false evidence

The 2012 Appeal and Judgement

In 2012 an appeal was filed by Delhi Police in the Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking to alter his conviction from 304A to 304 (II) IPC and increased his sentence. They appealed that the accused didn’t have an Indian driving license and his negligence along with intoxication is sufficient to prove ‘knowledge’ which is mentioned as an ingredient under section 304 (II) IPC thus he deserves to be held guilty under section 304 (II) IPC.

The respondent replied that the incident took place almost 13 years back and after facing a trial for almost 9 years he also underwent 2 years of imprisonment as sentenced by the Hon’ble High Court. He claimed that over such a long period he has learned his lesson and started to rehabilitate himself into society. He also contended that he also paid compensation to the victims out of compassion and it would be humiliating for him to be sent to jail again.

The supreme court after hearing both sides decided to quash the judgement by the high court and restore the trial court judgement but they felt that the sentence given by the high court was appropriate and the accused does not have to return to jail. In addition to this, they ordered the accused to pay Rs 50 Lakhs to the Union of India which will be used to assist victims of a motor vehicle accident where the vehicle owner-driver etc can not be traced also sentenced him to 2 years of community service.

Conclusion

Whether justice was served or not will always be a matter of debate but one thing is for sure that the Sanjeev Nanda case will go down as another infamous case where people with deep pockets played with the loopholes of the law which brings us to an even bigger debate about strengthening the law and institutions of justice.

The need to amend section 304A has been raised several times in the courts and the parliament the supreme court favored amending this section in 2007 and then again in 2019 a bill to amend this was also tabled in the parliament in 2007, 2015, 2016 and the latest being in 2019 but remains to be a long-awaited reality.

According to a court filing, Chippewa’s amended plan will reorganize Mesabi Metallics with a $1 billion proposal from a consortium of investors. The proposal includes project completion commitments and provides over $350 million of distributable value to the pending debtors for work already done on the site. In the court filing, Chippewa also indicated that they wish to build three DRI plants in Minnesota, and that they will pay back up to $65 million to the state for Essar-related infrastructure investments.

Chippewa also has control of ERP Iron Ore, formerly owned by Magnetation, and has agreed to join forces with the Essar project.

The confirmation hearing on the reorganization plan and state’s mineral leases are scheduled for May 22. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has filed for the leases to be released from the bankruptcy proceedings.

According to Forbes, Essar Steel Minnesota went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Friday as the State of Minnesota withdrew the state licences for the taconite the company was preparing to mine. It might seem a little odd that an Indian owned mine in Minnesota will go out of business as a result of the Chinese steel industry slowing down but that is what has happened. This globalization thing really does mean that the international markets are connected in this manner. The basic background here is that taconite is a low grade form of iron ore used to make steel. As China’s steel industry has grown less fast than other iron ore miners thought it would the price of high grade ore has fallen. That in turn has knock on effects on the low grade ore. There is a way out of this but not for the current owners, Essar.

The story:

Essar Steel Minnesota, a sister company to Essar Steel Algoma and an expected future supplier of taconite to the Sault steelmaker, has filed for U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, Minnesota news media are reporting.

The action was taken after Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton terminated Essar’s lease agreements with the state Friday.

The company pretty much ran out of development money a year back and has littered the area with unpaid bills. So, the Governor gave them a warning that unless they showed they could finance the project to completion then those leases would be pulled:

Essar Steel Minnesota, which once promised the state’s first new taconite plant in decades and the state’s first direct-reduced iron plant, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Friday after falling short of both of those promises.

The company filed in federal court in Delaware on the same day that Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton refused to extend a deadline to terminate Essar’s state mineral leases that gave the company access to the iron ore at the proposed mine site outside Nashwauk.

No real evidence of being able to complete the financing arrived and thus the pulling of the leases.

In his statement, Gov. Dayton said Lourenco Goncalves, the chief executive of iron-ore miner Cliffs Natural Resources CLF +11.80% Inc., has expressed a “strong desire” to take over the existing Essar Steel Minnesota project if Cliffs is assigned the state mining leases. Negotiations continue, the governor said, adding that he and Mr. Goncalves will meet again Tuesday.

Here’s what the essential problem is:

The difference this time is the Chinese economic juggernaut has slowed, says Andrew Lane, an analyst for Morningstar MORN +0.04%.

“The significant decline in iron ore spot prices since about 2011 is largely a function of fading Chinese demand,” he says.

At the same time, Lane says, the world’s three largest iron ore mining companies have all ramped up production over the past decade.

Everyone thought China would keep growing as it has done, keep swallowing the iron ore to build a new economy. So, production of the high grade ore that China generally uses was increased. And increased rather faster than China’s consumption, leading to a price crash. $190 a tonne to, at some points, $50 a tonne.

These Minnesota mines produce taconite pellets. That’s a lower grade ore worth a little less and it’s not quite a prefect substitute. You can’t just switch from one to another although with a little adjustment a blast furnace can take either. What has happened here is that the price that can be gained for taconite pellets has fallen below the cost of developing the new mine. Thus no more money is being spent upon developing it of course, investors aren’t willing to put in more money.

Reuters reports that the CBI has registered cases against the two operators and two former telecoms ministry officials, among others. The case relates to alleged irregularities in spectrum auctions under the previous government (formed by the Bharatiya Janata Party, which is now in opposition), which stands accused of showing “undue favour” to some operators and costing the government about INR5.08 billion (US$98 million) in lost spectrum revenue between 2001-2007.

The CBI said the former telecoms ministry officials (with approval of the then-telecoms minister Pramod Mahajan, who died in 2006) took an alleged “hurried decision” in 2002, to grant additional spectrum beyond 6.2MHz to the two operators in violation of the report of a technical committee.

According to Reuters, Bharti Airtel said over the weekend that all spectrum allocated to it had been in line with government policy, while Vodafone said its documents were in “complete compliance with the governing laws.” However, the report notes that shares in Bharti – India’s largest mobile operator – fell as much as 3.6 percent this morning following news of the CBI probe.

The latest investigation comes on the back of a high-profile investigation by India’s Supreme Court into the separate (and much more serious) licensing scandal concerning the sale of 2G spectrum in 2007 and 2008, which is estimated to have cost the government up to US$39 billion in lost potential revenue. Reuters notes that a trial recently began in this case, which involves a former telecoms minister, a lawmaker and several other government and company officials.

TIMELINE

• January 10,1999: the accused Sanjeev Nanda in an inebriated state, without an Indian driving licence while driving a brand new BMW car bearing registration No. M 312 LYP caused an accident at the Lodhi Road in which 6 persons, including three police officers were trampled to death and one person was injured. After causing the accident, the accused Sanjeev Nanda fled away from the accident spot and parked the accidental car at 50 Golf Links at the residence of his friend Siddharth Gupta.
• Apr 7, 1999: Police file chargesheet under section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 201 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC.
• Aug 3, 1999: Charges framed against the accused.
• Sep 30, 1999: Mumbai-based businessman Sunil Kulkarni, who claims to be an eye-witness, is dropped as prosecution witness after being condemned as a won-over man.
• May 14, 2007: Kulkarni records statement as a court witness. He identifies Nanda as one of the occupants of the car but says he did not see him on the driving seat.
•  May 30, 2007: A news channel airs a sting operation showing collusion between Nanda’s counsel, R K Anand, and prosecutor I U Khan to subvert administration of justice.
• Aug 21, 2008: HC holds Khan and Anand guilty of contempt and bars them from appearing in courts for 4 months.
• Sep 2, 2008: Trial Court convicts Sanjeev Nanda for mowing down six persons. Three others, including businessman Rajeev Gupta and his two employees Bhola Nath and Shyam Singh, convicted for destruction of evidence. Another co-accused Manik Kapoor acquitted.
•  Sep 5, 2008: Trial court awards Nanda five years jail term. Gupta and his employees — Bhola Nath and Shyam Singh — get one year and six months prison terms, respectively.
• Sep 16, 2008: Gupta and his two employees file their appeal in the High court challenging the trial court’s conviction order.
•  Sep 17, 2008: HC issues notice to city police.
•  Sep 22, 2008: Nanda approaches the HC challenging lower court’s decision.
•  Sep 23, 2008: HC issues a notice to the police on Nanda’s appeal.
•  Sep 30, 2008: HC grants bail to Gupta.
•  Oct 4, 2008:   HC rejects Nanda’s bail plea.
•  Dec 19, 2008: HC grants three-week interim bail to Nanda to meet his ailing grandfather.
•  Jan 9, 2009:   HC rejects Nanda’s plea to extend his interim bail.
•  Mar 6, 2009: HC grants one week interim bail to Nanda to meet his ailing grandfather.
•  May 12, 2009: HC reserves its verdict and grants three weeks interim bail to Nanda to attend the funeral of his grandfather and former Naval Chief S M Nanda, who died on May 11.
• July, 20, 2009: HC upholds conviction against Nanda and three others. However, it reduces Nanda’s jail term from five to two years.
• August 3,2012:  The Supreme Court has ruled that Sanjeev Nanda will not have to put in any more jail time. He has been asked to do two years of community service and to donate 50 lakhs which will be used to help victims of road accidents.

His questioning comes a day after ADAG Chairman Anil Ambani was called to the CBI in connection with its probe into the 2G scam as the agency has to inform the Supreme Court by March 1 about the beneficiaries in the case.

According to official sources, Ruia was quizzed about the alleged association of Essar with Loop Telecom which came under the scanner in the CBI case registered in October 2009.

The Essar CEO was called amid allegations that Loop Telecom acted as a front company for Essar which has nearly 33 per cent stake in Vodafone-Essar joint venture.

If the allegation were found to be true, it would make Loop Telecom ineligible to get telecom licences.