A group of 50 workers from political party Shiv Sena barged into a press conference being held by Pakistani band Mekaal Hasan at the Press Club near Azad Maidan, demanding that the musicians return immediately to their country.

The band, which plays Sufi rock, was scheduled to announce a joint concert with Indian performers at the city’s Press Club.

The Shiv Sena workers were carrying placards and saffron flags; they moved with relative ease past the policemen posted outside, a standard precaution in Mumbai where the Sena regularly disrupts or protests against the presence of Pakistani artists.

“The police did not do very much. They stood around like bystanders,” alleged Gurbir Singh, an official with the Press Club.

Mr. Singh said that the Sena had warned yesterday in its mouthpiece “Saamna” that the press conference should be cancelled.

A police station is right across the road from the Press Club; senior police sources claimed reinforcements were rushed in to handle the Sainiks, some of whom have been arrested.
There were no reports of vandalism, however.

The Shiv Sainiks have always made their views on Pakistan loud and clear. Last year, they had raised objections to hiring Pakistani artists to perform in India.

The CBI on Tuesday sought two-weeks time to file its affidavit in reply to a plea questioning the Maharashtra Governor’s order refusing sanction to prosecute former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan in the Adarsh scam.

The application relied on a Supreme Court order and said that the CBI does not require sanction from the governor to prosecute public servants in cases which are being monitored by the judiciary. A division bench of justices P V Hardas and Ajey Gadkari adjourned the plea for two weeks after CBI sought time to file its affidavit.

“The Supreme Court ruled that there is no requirement of sanction for the CBI under section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act to prosecute government servants in cases that are being monitored by the judiciary,” the application, filed by former journalist Ketan Tirodkar, said.

It further said that the CBI’s compilation of documents submitted to the Governor for sanction to prosecute Chavan were foolproof and point out to the “faulty” decision of grant of additional FSI to the society allegedly by Chavan.

“In return, Chavan’s mother-in-law and brother of his father-in-law were alloted flats in the society,” the application claimed.

Tirodkar filed the application after Maharashtra Governor K Sankaranarayanan refused permission to CBI to prosecute Chavan.

Chavan was accused of approving additional FSI (floor space index) to Adarsh society in exchange of two flats for his relatives. He was also charged with illegally approving as the then revenue minister the allotment of 40 per cent of the flats to civilians when the society was meant for Kargil war widows and defence personnel.

The two-member inquiry commission had in its final report indicted Chavan for alleged favouritism to the society.

“There was certainly a nexus between the acts of Chavan and benefits derived by his close relatives. The membership process clearly indicates that grant of requisite permission by Chavan was by way of quid pro quo,” the report said.

Mumbai anti-terrorism squad (ATS) was today allowed by a Delhi court to arrest Indian Mujahideen (IM) co-founder Yasin Bhatkal and his aide Asadullah Akhtar in connection with the July 13, 2011 Mumbai terror attack case in which over 20 persons were killed and 141 injured.

District Judge I S Mehta allowed the pleas of Mumbai ATS in which it had sought custody of Bhatkal and Akhtar in connection with the case saying their custodial interrogation was required to complete the probe.

“Since ATS Mumbai has filed applications through ACP Mangesh Pote on September 4, 2013 for taking custody and there is production warrant of the accused persons, I allow the applications of ATS Mumbai, Maharashtra, for arresting the accused Mohammad Ahmed Siddibappa alias Yasin Bhatkal and Asadullah Akhtar….,” the judge said.

Bhatkal, who was in custody of Karnataka Police in connection with the 2010 blasts at Chinnaswamy Stadium, was produced before the court.

Mumbai ATS told the court that names of Bhatkal and Akhtar had cropped up during the investigation into the July 2011 blasts cases and both the accused would be brought to Delhi after completion of the probe there.
The court allowed the plea and directed the Tihar Jail Superintendent to hand over the custody of Bhatkal and Akhtar to Mumbai ATS.

“Jail Superintendent Tihar is directed to hand over the custody of accused Mohd Ahmed Siddibappa alias Yasin Bhatkal and Asadullah Akhtar to CID ACP Mangesh Pote…,” it said.

Akhtar is lodged in jail under judicial custody.

Three powerful blasts had ripped through crowded areas in Mumbai on July 13, 2011 evening killing at least 21 people and injuring 141.

The first explosion had rocked Zaveri Bazar, a popular jewellery market, at 6.50 pm and a minute later another blast shook the busy business area Opera House. A third blast ripped through crowded Dadar area in Central Mumbai at 7.04 pm.

National Investigation Agency (NIA) had arrested Bhatkal, wanted in over 40 terror cases and carrying a reward of Rs 35 lakh, and Akhtar from Indo-Nepal border on the night of August 28 last year.

Bhatkal, who hails from Bhatkal village of Udupi district in North Karnataka, is wanted in a string of terror attacks in Ahmedabad, Surat, Bangalore, Pune, Delhi and Hyderabad, the agency had said.

30-year-old Bhatkal, who was earlier associated with banned outfit Students Islamic Movement of India, is suspected to have hatched a conspiracy with others to wage war against India.

A TADA court on Tuesday directed the Thane Police Commissioner to conduct an inquiry after a media report claimed gangster Abu Salem, an accused in 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, had married on a train while being escorted by police to Lucknow for a court hearing.

“The designated TADA court has directed the Thane Police Commissioner to conduct an inquiry as to how an accused, who is in judicial custody, can marry on a train without the permission of the court,” prosecutor Deepak Salvi said.

Special Judge G A Sanap’s directive came after he took suo-motu cognizance of the report that appeared in a tabloid today.

The Thane police chief has been asked to submit his report in 10 days.

According to the report, Salem married a resident of Mumbra in adjoining Thane district last month on a train and that the ‘Nikah’ was performed by a Qazi in Mumbai over phone. Salem’s nephew advocate Rashid Ansari and some policemen were witness to the marriage, it was claimed.

However, Salem, while speaking to reporters outside the courtroom, dubbed the report as “baseless” and a “rumour”.

An accused in 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, Salem was extradited from Portugal on November 11, 2005, after a prolonged legal battle.

The Bombay High Court suggested to Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) not to recommend heritage precinct status for too many sites at a time so as to avoid delay in framing guidelines for redevelopment of buildings in those areas.

The suggestion was made by a division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sanklecha which was hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the August 14, 2013 circular issued by the civic body directing all its officers to refer proposals for redevelopment of any building that falls in the proposed list of heritage precincts to MHCC.

On July 31, 2012, the Corporation had come up with a proposed list of 41 sites to be declared as heritage precincts. The sites included Shivaji Park and Matunga in central Mumbai and suburban Chembur. The list was issued after a recommendation from MHCC in 2008.

The court had ruled that under Development Control Regulation (DCR) rules, it was not mandatory for redevelopment proposals of those buildings which have not been individually declared as Grade I and II heritage structures to be referred to the heritage committee and can be decided by BMC itself.

The bench was today hearing the matter on the issue of guidelines to be framed by the heritage committee for redevelopment of buildings in heritage precincts. The committee today told the court that it would now take the Shivaji Park area as a priority case and then frame guidelines for the other areas.

“If you (MHCC) recommend heritage precinct status for so many areas at a time, you would not be able to spare time to frame guidelines for each and every site. Then the whole purpose is defeated. Why don’t you concentrate on fewer sites at a time,” Chief Justice Shah said.

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the Union government and the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) on a petition by filmmaker Anurag Kashyap challenging the notification that made an anti-smoking disclaimer mandatory during smoking scenes in a movie.

A division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice MS Sanklecha issued notice to the ministries of Health and Family Welfare and Information and Broadcasting besides the censor board and asked them to file their affidavits.

The matter has been posted for March 5. Kashyap had approached the high court in December 2013 after the censor board restrained him from releasing his movie “Ugly” after he refused to comply with the rule that requires for ‘Smoking is injurious to health’ warning to pop up every time a character smokes in a movie.

Kashyap said he did not wish to have the anti-smoking message displayed during the film as it is a gross violation of his creative expression and fundamental rights. The filmmaker, who has films like “Dev D”, “Gulal”, “Black Friday” to name a few to his credit, had informed this to the censor board last September when he submitted his movie “Ugly” for certification.

The censor board refused to certify the movie and in its reply said Kashyap cannot release his movie owing to non-compliance of the rule. Under Rule 4(7) and 8 of the Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, the Union government had written a letter to the censor board asking them to make it mandatory for filmmakers to show the disclaimer during smoking scenes.

Kashyap in his petition has sought for the rule to be set aside and quashed as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Senior counsel Virag Tulzapurkar, appearing for the filmmaker, argued the movie was not advertising smoking. “The rule is only for advertisements. Let the government ban smoking altogether,” he said.