Artwork

内容由The Hindu提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 The Hindu 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
Player FM -播客应用
使用Player FM应用程序离线!

Why did the Supreme Court recall its order striking down provisions of the 2016 amendments to the Benami Act, 1988? | In Focus podcast

26:43
 
分享
 

Manage episode 446625501 series 2606066
内容由The Hindu提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 The Hindu 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

Last week, the Supreme Court recalled its judgement of August 23, 2022, wherein it had struck down certain provisions of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act of 2016. Through the 2016 Act, the government had amended the original legislation, the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.

The 2016 law had expanded the original law from nine sections to 72 sections. In 2016, a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana had declared as unconstitutional Sections 3 (2) and 5 of the 2016 Act.

Section 3(2) mandates three years of imprisonment for those who had entered into benami transactions between September 5, 1988, and October 25, 2016—that is, a person could be jailed for a benami transaction done 28 years before the Section even came into existence.

The other provision that was struck down, Section 5, states that “any property, which is subject matter of benami transaction, shall be liable to be confiscated by the Central Government.”

What was the Supreme Court’s reasoning in its 2022 judgement when it struck down these provisions? What is the rationale for the Review Bench to recall the earlier order and refer the case for fresh adjudication? What is at stake for the general public in this case?

Guest: Amit Pai, Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India.

Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.

Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

  continue reading

948集单集

Artwork
icon分享
 
Manage episode 446625501 series 2606066
内容由The Hindu提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 The Hindu 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

Last week, the Supreme Court recalled its judgement of August 23, 2022, wherein it had struck down certain provisions of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act of 2016. Through the 2016 Act, the government had amended the original legislation, the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.

The 2016 law had expanded the original law from nine sections to 72 sections. In 2016, a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana had declared as unconstitutional Sections 3 (2) and 5 of the 2016 Act.

Section 3(2) mandates three years of imprisonment for those who had entered into benami transactions between September 5, 1988, and October 25, 2016—that is, a person could be jailed for a benami transaction done 28 years before the Section even came into existence.

The other provision that was struck down, Section 5, states that “any property, which is subject matter of benami transaction, shall be liable to be confiscated by the Central Government.”

What was the Supreme Court’s reasoning in its 2022 judgement when it struck down these provisions? What is the rationale for the Review Bench to recall the earlier order and refer the case for fresh adjudication? What is at stake for the general public in this case?

Guest: Amit Pai, Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India.

Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.

Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

  continue reading

948集单集

所有剧集

×
 
Loading …

欢迎使用Player FM

Player FM正在网上搜索高质量的播客,以便您现在享受。它是最好的播客应用程序,适用于安卓、iPhone和网络。注册以跨设备同步订阅。

 

快速参考指南

边探索边听这个节目
播放