In a major reprieve for the two Italian marines facing trial for allegedly killing two Indian fishermen off Kerala coast in 2012, the Centre on Monday informed the Supreme Court that the duo would not be tried under the anti-piracy law (SUA).

This effectively means that the Italian marines would not face death penalty if convicted of killing the two Indian fishermen.

The Supreme Court, meanwhile, agreed to examine the Italian government’s plea challenging jurisdiction of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to probe the marines’ case.

During the last hearing, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Italian government and the marines, had submitted that the Centre has not been able to move in the case despite the apex court’s order and pleaded that his client be allowed to go back to their country till Centre takes a decision.

The bench had said that it will take up the case on February 24 and will then hear the submission.

The bench was hearing a petition filed by Italian government challenging invoking of anti-terrorism law SUA, saying it is against the order of the apex court which allowed proceedings only under the Maritime Zone Act, IPC, CrPC and UNCLOS.

The joint petition, filed by Italian Ambassador Daniele Mancini along with Italian marines Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone, had also sought direction to the Centre and NIA to expedite the proceedings in the case or discharge the marines.

The petition said invoking the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against safety of Maritime Navigation And Fixed Platforms on Continental Shelf Act (SUA) “would tantamount to the Republic of Italy being termed a terrorist state and acts of its organs, which were in repression of piracy, as being deemed as acts of terrorism, which is wholly untenable and unacceptable in the facts and circumstances of this case and in keeping with the comity of nations and international cooperation”.

The case pertains to the killing of two Indian fishermen allegedly by Latorre and Girone on board ‘Enrica Lexie’ off Kerala coast on February 15, 2012.

The two officers contended that they had apprehended a piracy attack. The marines were arrested on February 19, 2012.

The Central government on Monday moved the Supreme Court in a bid to stop the release of seven convicts involved in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the petition and has fixed the next date of hearing on February 27.

The apex court had last week stayed the decision of the Tamil Nadu government to release the three convicts in the case after Centre’s plea last week and asked it to maintain status quo.

However, the Centre wants stay on the release of the four remaining convicts as well, as per news reports.

The decision to release the seven convicts was taken by the Tamil Nadu government soon after the Supreme Court commuted the death sentences of three to life imprisonment on the ground of delay in deciding mercy petition.

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa had even given a deadline of three days to the Centre to respond to the decision else she would go ahead and free the prisoners.

The move on the part of TN government is being seen as politically motivated as the Lok Sabha elections are fast approaching.

Out of the seven convicts, three are Indians while the rest are from Sri Lanka. They have been in prison since Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated in a rally near Chennai in 1991.

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to extend the interim bail of former Gujarat minister Maya Kodnani in the 2002 Naroda Patiya riots case.

During the previous hearing, the Supreme Court had extended the interim bail granted to her till Feb 24 on medical grounds but also made it clear that it won’t be further extended if she fails to file an affidavit stating the kind of burn injury she suffered.

The apex court, while rejecting the plea of her advocate Ram Jethmalani who pleaded for bail on the ground that she is suffering from suicidal impulse, asked him to file affidavit of burn injury that she suffered recently due to which it extended the interim bail twice.

“Don’t ask us to do what is impermissible in law. We have seen the photograph and we are not satisfied,” a bench of justices HL Dattu and SA Bobde said, asking him to file affidavit giving details of her burn injury.

When Jethmalani pleaded for regular bail on ground of her mental condition, the bench said, “You should go back to custody and then seek regular bail.”

The bench had earlier extended her interim bail which was expired on February 12 saying that “She is in a pitiable condition and she needs some relief.”

It had directed her to file affidavit stating injury suffered by her.

BSP MP Dhananjay Singh was on Monday put on trial by a Delhi court for allegedly raping a 42-year- old woman for nearly four years.

Additional Sessions Judge Sarita Birbal framed charges against Singh under various provisions of the IPC relating to rape, voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation.

The court has fixed April 1 for commencement of trial in the case by recording of statements of prosecution witnesses.

In its charge sheet, police has arraigned 13 persons, including three doctors, as prosecution witnesses.

It also dismissed the bail plea of Singh on the ground that he can influence the witnesses.

Earlier, during arguments on framing of charges against Singh, a sitting MP from Jaunpur constituency in Uttar Pradesh, police had said they had the evidence which showed the involvement of the accused in the crime.

It had said the forensic and medical reports of the victim corroborated the statement given by her before a magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC.

The police had said the victim has given all the details of the incident in her statement under 164 CrPC.

Senior advocate Hariharan and advocate S P M Tripathi, who appeared for Singh, had said there were inconsistency and improvement in the statement of the alleged victim and police cannot solely rely on her statement.

The charge sheet was filed against Singh for offences under various penal provisions of the IPC, including 376(2)(h) (rape knowing that a woman is pregnant) and 376 (2)(n) (repeatedly raping the same woman), 377 (unnatural offence), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506(criminal intimidation).

In a huge setback for the Aap Aadmi Party (AAP), the Supreme Court on Monday refused to issue a notice to BJP and Congress in response to its petition challenging the imposition of President’s rule in Delhi.

The apex court also sought a response from the Centre in this regard within ten days.

A bench comprising justices RM Lodha and Dipak Misra issued notice to the Centre asking it to respond within 10 days on the issue raised by the AAP.

The bench, which posted the matter for hearing on March 7, refrained from issuing notice to BJP and Congress which were made party in the petition, saying it only wants to deal with the constitutional issue and does not want to have a political contest.

“It is a constitutional issue so whoever has passed the order has to answer,” the bench said and added, “We don’t want it to be a political contest”.

When it was stated that allegations have been made against the two parties, the bench said it will see when it will come. Senior advocate Fali S Nariman appeared for the AAP and explained the facts which led to the filing of the petition.

Earlier, on February 21, the apex court had agreed to hear on Feb 24 the petition seeking a direction to the Lieutenant Governor to dissolve Delhi Assembly and hold fresh polls along with Lok Sabha elections.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who had appeared for AAP, had said there was no possibility of any alternate government in Delhi and the Lieutenant Governor should have dissolved the Assembly.

The joint petition filed on the basis of newspaper reports and documents available in public domain by AAP and Saurabh Bhardwaj, who was the Transport Minister in Kejriwal Cabinet, challenged the decision to impose President’s rule in Delhi on the recommendation of the Lieutenant Governor alleging it was done to protect Congress leaders and former Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit from corruption charges.

It contended that the February 16 order imposing President’s rule was with a motive to frustrate the ongoing investigation in those corruption cases in which FIR has been lodged by the Arvind Kejriwal government.

Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad’s plans for a comeback as a major political player in Bihar in the national elections, due by May, have been dealt a severe blow with a split in his party. 13 of his 22 legislators have announced that they are quitting.

The rebels, led by the RJD’s chief whip in the Bihar assembly Rakesh Kumar, better known as Samrat Choudhary, met speaker Uday Narain Choudhary this afternoon. The Speaker immediately recognized the breakaway faction as a separate group, declaring them “unattached” from the RJD.

One of the rebels, Javed Ansari, said the group would support the ruling Janata Dal (United), which will firm up the position of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who has 115 legislators in the 243-member House.

“Whatever we need to do to help Nitish we will, if we need to merge with his party, we will,” Mr. Ansari said.

The rebel RJD legislators are said to be among those who wanted ticket for the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections, but believed that they would not get them as Lalu Prasad would offer these seats to the Congress as part of an expected pre-poll alliance.

Most of them are likely, said sources, to be offered Lok Sabha tickets by the JD(U) or then be given important roles in the Bihar government. “The party has become a B-team of Congress, we don’t feel like working with them,” Mr. Ansari said.

“Have heard about it. It’s not true. I will find out,” said Lalu Prasad, also refuting speculation that longstanding partner Ram Vilas Paswan of the Lok Janshakti Party or LJP is looking to walk out on him.

Seat-sharing with the Congress has already put a huge question mark on Mr Prasad’s equation with Mr Paswan, who is said to be exploring rekindling his old ties with the BJP; he is reportedly worried that if the 40 Lok Sabha seats from Bihar have to be divided up between the Congress, RJD, Congress-ally Nationalist Congress Party and him, his party will get to contest very few.

In the 2010 assembly polls, the RJD was almost routed, managing to win only 22 seats in the 243-member assembly. The JD(U) had won 115 seats, and its alliance partner, the BJP, 91. The JD(U) parted ways with the BJP in June last year in protest against Narendra Modi’s elevation in his party.