31st January – Prelims Booster

Time limit on advance bail violates personal liberty : SC

The protection of anticipatory or pre-arrest bail cannot be limited to any time frame or “fixed period” as denial of bail amounts to deprivation of the fundamental right to personal liberty in a free and democratic country, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court ruled recently.

What is ‘anticipatory bail’?

  • Section 438 of the Code clearly stipulates in the beginning statement itself that when a person has a reasonable apprehension to believe that they can be arrested on an accusation for commitment of a non-bailable offence they can move to the High Court or the Court of Sessions for grant of an “anticipatory bail”.
  • Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with the provisions regarding the Anticipatory Bail. The words “anticipatory bail” have not been defined in the code. The expression “anticipatory bail” is a misnomer and the order becomes operative only on arrest.

Background –

  • The old CrPC of 1898 did not contain any specific provision corresponding to the present Section 438. There was a difference of opinion among various HCs whether court had an inherent power to grant pre-arrest bail.
  • The Law Commission of India in 1969, highlighted the need for introducing a provision in the Code enabling courts to grant “anticipatory bail” as an antidote to detention in false cases.
  • Clause 447 of the Draft Bill of 1970 was enacted with some modifications and became Section 438 of the CrPC, 1973.
  • A five-judge Supreme Court Bench in the 1980 case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v/s State of Punjab interpreted that the power to grant anticipatory bail is “cast in wide terms and should not be hedged in through narrow judicial interpretation”. It held that courts could impose conditions which were appropriate.

Trump’s Peace Plan for Israel-Palestine issue

What’s the plan?

  • The Trump plan seeks to address most of the contentious issues in the conflict such as the border of Israel, status of Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements on the West Bank, Israel’s security concerns and the status of the city of Jerusalem.
  • However, the solutions Mr. Trump has proposed to almost all of these issues favour the Israeli positions. For example, Israel would be allowed to annex the Jewish settlements on the West Bank as well as the Jordan Valley.
  • The Palestinian refugees, who were forced out from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war that followed the declaration of the state of Israel in the historic Palestine, would not be allowed to return. They could move to the future Palestinian state, be integrated into the host countries or settled in other regional countries.
  • Jerusalem, perhaps the most contentious issue, would be “the undivided capital” of Israel, with Palestine gaining its capital in the east of the city.
  • In return, Israel would freeze further settlement activities on the West Bank for four years — the time for negotiations.
  • During this period, the Palestinian Authority should dismiss its current complaints at the International Criminal Court against Israel and refrain itself from taking further actions. It should also crack down on “terrorist” groups such as Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. President Trump has also proposed $50 billion in investment over 10 years should Palestine accept the proposals.
  • In the final settlement, Palestine would get control over more land than what it currently controls. The plan also proposes to enlarge Gaza and connect the strip with the West Bank through a tunnel. The Arab towns in the southeast of Israel, which are close to Gaza, could become part of a future Palestinian state.

Background –

  • The seeds of the conflict were laid in 1917 when the then British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour expressed official support of Britain for a Jewish “national home” in Palestine under the Balfour Declaration. The lack of concern for the “rights of existing non-Jewish communities” i.e. the Arabs led to prolonged violence.
  • Unable to contain Arab and Jewish violence, Britain withdrew its forces from Palestine in 1948, leaving responsibility for resolving the competing claims to the newly created United Nations. The UN presented a partition plan to create independent Jewish and Arab states in Palestine. Most Jews in Palestine accepted the partition but most Arabs did not.
  • In 1948, the Jewish declaration of Israel’s independence prompted surrounding Arab states to attack. At the end of the war, Israel controlled about 50 percent more territory than originally envisioned UN partition plan. Jordan controlled the West Bank and Jerusalem’s holy sites, and Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip.

Operation Vanilla

Indian Navy has deployed its ship in Southern Indian Ocean to Antsiranana based on request received from Madagascar.

About the mission –

The ship will undertake Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Mission as part of ‘Operation Vanilla’ which has been launched to provide assistance to the affected population of Madagascar post devastation caused by Cyclone Diane.

Daily MCQs

[wp_quiz id=”35183″]

Leave a Comment

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