爱上海,上海龙凤419,上海419论坛 – Powered by Coral Miller!

Delhi Court Dismisses Mehmood Pracha’s Revision Against Trial Court Order on His Plea for Raid Footage As Not Maintainable

Posted on by

first_imgNews UpdatesDelhi Court Dismisses Mehmood Pracha’s Revision Against Trial Court Order on His Plea for Raid Footage As Not Maintainable Shreya Agarwal6 Jan 2021 5:12 AMShare This – xA Delhi Court has dismissed as not maintainable the Delhi riots lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s revision petition against an order of the Trial Court which had which ordered for the video footage of the raid on his office to be preserved, but made no directions on his demand for a copy of the raid footage.Rejecting the revision, the Additional Sessions Judge has held that under Section 165(5)…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginA Delhi Court has dismissed as not maintainable the Delhi riots lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s revision petition against an order of the Trial Court which had which ordered for the video footage of the raid on his office to be preserved, but made no directions on his demand for a copy of the raid footage.Rejecting the revision, the Additional Sessions Judge has held that under Section 165(5) CrPC, the video footage has to be sent to the Magistrate “forthwith”, however, it does not have to be provided to the “owner” or “occupier” of the place forthwith.The court further held that the challenged order has “not disposed off” Pracha’s plea for a copy of the video footage, and merely ordered for the footage to be preserved. Therefore, the court held that the order was interlocutory in nature, and as per settled principles of law, a revision against an interlocutory order is not maintainable.Having been preferred against what the court has held to be an interlocutory order, the court has held that Pracha’s revision against the Trial Court’s order is legally not maintainable.The operative portion of order of the Trial Court, which the Additional Sessions Judge has upheld, reads as follows: “The Ld. Trial Court has specifically observed that “The applicant raises query as to the duration of video footage and has also requested for supply of the video footage to him. It is imperative to note that the video footage, which is the bone of contention, was recorded to ensure fairness while the search was being made as per the order dt. 22.12.2020 passed by the Ld. CMM,PHC, ND. At this stage, only directions for preserving the video footage is deemed necessary. The concerned court can take a call on supplying the video footage to the applicant at an appropriate stage”.On 25.12.2020, Pracha had moved an application before the Trial Court under Section 165(5) of CrPC, demanding a copy of the raid footage to be supplied to him. The Duty Magistrate vide order dated 27.12.2020 had directed that the video footage of the search be preserved but allowed Pracha’s application only to the extent of providing him with a copy of the report of the search prepared by the police but did not allow him copies of the video footage. Pracha moved the Additional Sessions’ Judge against this order.Click Here To Download Order[Read Order]Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Prisons: The forgotten front in opioid war

Posted on by

first_imgAnd in the two weeks following their release, former prisoners are 129 times more likely to die from overdose than members of the general population. This is despite the fact that we have robust evidence showing that we can decrease the incidence of relapse, overdose, drug-related health complications like HIV transmission, criminal activity after release and recidivism by offering treatment.And unequivocal data highlights that medication-assisted therapy — that is, treatment with methadone or suboxone — in prisons saves lives. A study published recently in the journal Addiction showed that offering medication-assisted treatment in prisons reduced drug-related overdose deaths by 85 percent in the four-week period following prisoner release and reduced mortality from all causes by 75 percent over the same period.Few other medical interventions have demonstrated such success. Unfortunately, however, the majority of correctional facilities in the United States do not offer programs for people addicted to opioids.Out of the 3,200 U.S. jails, only 23 provide maintenance therapy to inmates. Categories: Editorial, OpinionMultiple leaders across the nation, including Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and even President Donald Trump, have declared states of emergency in response to the opioid epidemic.Policymakers claim to be battling this public health crisis on all fronts, but one arena continues to be conspicuously ignored: our prisons and jails. Roughly half of all incarcerated individuals suffer from addiction. And if we want to save lives on the streets, we cannot send people out of prisons untreated and abandon them when they are the most vulnerable to overdose.If we’re serious about addressing the opioid epidemic, we have to pay attention to the evidence demonstrating that opioid treatment in jails and prisons is highly effective.And we must act by quickly expanding such treatment to many more facilities around the country. Current programs offering in-facility treatment should guide the nation, serving as examples of how we can provide vulnerable, disenfranchised people with the care they deserve as fellow humans and members of our society.If we claim, whether as a community, a state or a nation, to be fighting the opioid crisis on all fronts, let us not forget one that offers undeniable evidence of a way to save lives. Dr. Justin Berk is a combined internal medicine/pediatrics resident in urban health at Johns Hopkins Hospital.More from The Daily Gazette:Foss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen?EDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationEDITORIAL: Urgent: Today is the last day to complete the censusEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesEDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motorists This is a critical public health issue, and the benefits of the therapies we can offer to people with opioid addiction who are currently incarcerated reach far beyond those individuals.Our communities benefit too when we help those suffering from addiction get the care they need to survive and live healthy lives. Skeptics will argue against such treatment by asserting that it is too expensive, or that it will be “diverted“ and used inappropriately, or that the people with addictions who end up incarcerated should have taken more personal responsibility.But these interventions have been shown to be cost-effective.Diversion can be minimized, while treatment could actually improve security.And moralizing arguments against a well-recognized psychiatric disorder are antiquated, demonstrating poor knowledge of evidence-based treatment, if not also little compassion for a vulnerable population. I have seen first-hand that suboxone allows many people to concentrate on their lives instead of their addictions upon their release from jail or prison. And out of the 50 state prison systems, only four offer such treatment.This means that people who are fortunate enough to be part of a treatment program before their incarceration are, upon their entrance to a jail or prison, often taken off their medications and forced to endure cruel, painful and dangerous periods of withdrawal. This is not a problem of resources.Many incarcerated patients currently receive appropriate care for other chronic conditions, including diabetes, HIV, cancer and even more-newly-recognized disorders, like gender dysphoria.Our federal and state corrections systems have the capacity to offer this treatment — a treatment defined as “essential medicine“ by the World Health Organization.The inability to access medical treatment with such established benefits is an unacceptable violation of prisoners’ constitutional right to basic health care.But this is not just an issue of rights, and this is not just about prisoners.last_img read more

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , .

Joe Aribo’s Rangers fined £15,000 by Scottish FA

Posted on by

first_img Promoted Content10 Risky Jobs Some Women DoWho Is The Most Powerful Woman On Earth?Who Earns More Than Ronaldo?2020 Tattoo Trends: Here’s What You’ll See This Year14 Hilarious Comics Made By Women You Need To Follow Right NowWhich Country Is The Most Romantic In The World?9 Facts You Should Know Before Getting A TattooThe Most Exciting Cities In The World To VisitA Hurricane Can Be As Powerful As 10 Atomic Bombs7 Mind-Boggling Facts About Black Holes7 Theories About The Death Of Our UniverseBirds Enjoy Living In A Gallery Space Created For Them Loading… There was a mass confrontation at Easter Road, during which coaches from both sides received red cards. Read Also:Rangers appeal against Referee Jacob Gwatsa The Scottish Premiership club have been ordered to pay £10,000 immediately, while the remaining £5,000 is suspended until the end of the season. FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 Rangers have been fined £15,000 by the Scottish FA for failing to act in an “orderly fashion” in games against Celtic and Hibernian in December. The charges relate to behaviour during the wins at Celtic Park and Easter Road. Two-thirds of the fine results from the Old Firm match, for gestures made by Alfredo Morelos and Ryan Kent.Advertisementlast_img read more

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , .