MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court Monday has ruled that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has acted in haste by terminating the franchise agreement of crisis-ridden IPL franchise Deccan Chargers.

However, the HC also gave a green signal to the BCCI to add a tenth new team to the cash rich league.

The court had on 17 September directed BCCI to maintain status quo by not invite bids for a new franchise on a petition filed by DCHL seeking to restrain BCCI to add a new team.

Reiterating what it said on 26 September, the court passed an order directing the franchise to furnish an irrevocable and unconditional bank guarantee of Rs 1 billion on or before 9 October which would be in force for one year.

If DCHL manages to furnish the bank guarantee before the deadline, it will be allowed to participate in the season 6 of the IPL and also renew contracts with players. All the franchises are expected to renew contracts with players before 31 October.

However, the court clarified that the order will cease to be in effect in the event DCHL fails to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs 1 billion.

While delivering the order, Justice SJ Kathawala said: "Though I find that the balance of convenience is more in favour of DCHL, I am of the view that the following protective orders will take care of the interest of both the parties."

The BCCI will be entitled to invoke bank guarantee only in the event of any default on the part of DCHL and only to the extent necessary, the court said.

The court also told the BCCI that it will not act on the termination of franchise agreement pending the arbitration proceedings and making of an award by the arbitrator.

It also told the BCCI that it will not act on the termination for a period of seven days if the award is in their favour.

The court had earlier appointed retired Supreme Court judge CK Thakkar as the sole arbitrator for the dispute between BCCI and DCHL.

The court disposed of the arbitration petition with a clarification that all the observations are prima facie and the arbitrator shall make his award without being influenced by any of the observations made in the order.

While directing DCHL to clear all outstanding dues includes players fee, the court told the BCCI to deposit the amount payable by the board to DCHL and payable in future to DCHL with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of the court which the Prothonotary and Senior Master shall invest in a fixed deposit of a nationalised bank from time to time until further orders of the court.

It needs to be noted that Yes Bank had filed a plea in the Bombay High Court that the receivables due to DCHL from BCCI be deposited in the media company‘s Yes Bank account. DCHL had also told the court that the money from central pool be paid to its Yes Bank account. The BCCI, however, contended that it can‘t do so since other lending banks are making similar claims.

The BCCI had on 15 September terminated the franchise agreement with Deccan Chargers for breach of contract terms. The cricket board had along with DCHL, the owner of Deccan Chargers team, called for bids to sell the Hyderabad-based franchise.

DCHL had rejected the lone Rs 9 billion bid of PVP Ventures despite the bidder meeting the eligibility criteria of the BCCI.

New Delhi: Any attempt to justify the conduct of the news television channels for their live coverage of the terrorist attack in Mumbai on 26 November 2008 by citing the right to freedom of speech and expression would be totally wrong and unacceptable, the Supreme Court has said.

In its judgment confirming the death sentence of Mohammed Ajmal Kasab, the court said ?the freedom of speech and expression, like all other freedoms under Article 19, is subject to reasonable restrictions.?

In a strong rebuke of the electronic media, Justices Aftab Alam and CK Prasad said ?an action tending to violate another person?s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy can never be justified by taking the plea of freedom of speech and expression?.

?It is beyond doubt that the way their (security forces) operations were freely shown made the task of the security forces not only exceedingly difficult but also dangerous and risky.?

?It is in such extreme cases that the credibility of an institution is tested. The coverage of the Mumbai terror attack by the mainstream electronic media has done much harm to the argument that any regulatory mechanism for the media must only come from within.?

The Judges said the shots and visuals that were shown live by the TV channels could have also been shown after all the terrorists were neutralised and the security operations were over. But in that case the TV programmes would not have had the ?same shrill, scintillating and chilling effect and would not have shot up the TRP ratings of the channels?.

NEW DELHI: Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan‘s appeal challenging the probe by the Election Commission into the authenticity of his expenses during the 2009 state assembly polls allegedly involving paid news will be heard on 3 February.

The directive by Justices Altamas Kabir and S S Nijjar came when counsel Gopal Subramaniam and Abhishek Manu Singhvi said the matter should be heard early as written submissions in the case had already been filed by all the respondents.
 
On 3 November 2011, the apex court had stayed the probe by the Election Commission on Chavan‘s appeal against a Delhi High Court order of 30 September 2011 which had allowed the probe.

While staying the EC probe, the Supreme Court also issued notices to the Commission, the Maharashtra unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party and other complainants including BJP leaders Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, Kirit Somaiyya and Madhav Kinhalkar on whose plea the probe was launched.

The complainants include former state minister Madhav Kinhalkar who was defeated by Chavan from Nanded assembly constituency. The Commission had begun proceedings against Chavan on 2 April 2011 on the complaints which alleged he had claimed a poll expenditure of merely Rs 11,000 despite paying money to various newspapers for favourable coverage of his election campaign.

NEW DELHI: Justice Markandey Katju, retired judge of the Supreme Court, has been appointed chairman of the Press Council of India.

Katju succeeds Justice G N Ray, whose term has come to an end.

The appointment has been made under sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Press Council Act, 1978.

Justice Markandey Katju was born on 20 September 1946. He is son of the late Justice S.N. Katju who was a former judge of the Allahabad High Court, and grandson of Dr. Kailash Nath Katju one of India?s leading lawyers who participated in the country?s freedom movement. Dr. K N Katju later became the chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, the Governor of West Bengal and Orissa, as well as the Union Law, Home and Defence Minister at various times.

After practicising law in the Allahabad High Court, Justice Markandey Katju was appointed Judge of the Allahabad High Court in 1991. He became its acting chief justice in August 2004, and was the chief justice of Madras High Court in November 2004. He became the chief justice of Delhi High Court in October 2005. He was appointed Judge of the Supreme Court of India in April 2006 and retired on 19 September this year.

Justice Markandey Katju has written several books which include publications such as ?Law in the Scientific Era?, ?Interpretation of Taxing Statutes?, ?Mimansa Rules of Interpretation? and ?Domestic Enquiry?.