List of Current Affairs

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News?

The Supreme Court recently modified the punishment in a 24-year-old culpable homicide case, reducing the sentence to the time already served by the convict. The Court reclassified the offense under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code,1860 IPC, citing that the crime was committed in the heat of the moment without premeditation. 

• This decision affiliated with the High Court's view that the incident, which involved a stabbing that led to a death and injury, occurred in the "heat of the moment" and was not preplanned. 
• Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held in the matter of Hussainbhai Asgarali Lokhandwala v. State of Gujarat case. 

What was the Background of Hussainbhai Asgarali Lokhandwala v. State of Gujarat? 

• The incident occurred in November, 2000 and involved a family dispute between the appellant Hussainbhai Asgarali Lokhandwala, his father Asgarali Onali Lokhandwala, and their in-laws. 
• The appellant's sister Oneja was married to Abbasbhai, son of Idrishbhai Fidaali Mithiborewala, but there were ongoing matrimonial tensions between the couple. 
• On the day of the incident, Abbasbhai attempted to retrieve house keys from Oneja, who was staying at her father's house, leading to an altercation between the families. 
• The situation escalated when Idrishbhai Fidaali Mithiborewala (Abbasbhai's father) arrived, resulting in a physical confrontation. 
• During the altercation, the appellant Hussainbhai Asgarali Lokhandwala stabbed Idrishbhai Fidaali Mithiborewala with a kitchen knife, causing fatal injuries. 
• The appellant also stabbed Husseni (Abbasbhai's brother) when he tried to intervene, causing non-fatal injuries. 
• Initially, the trial court convicted the appellant and his father under Section 304-I of the Indian Penal Code, along with other charges, sentencing them to 5 years imprisonment and a fine. 
• On appeal, the High Court altered the conviction to Section 304-II of the IPC, modifying the sentence for the appellant's father but maintaining the 5-year imprisonment for the appellant. 
• Appeal was filled before Supreme Court 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court concurred with the High Court's view that the incident occurred in the heat of the moment, with neither party able to control their anger, resulting in the fateful outcome. 
• The Court noted that the appellant was a young man of 18 years at the time of the incident, and his actions were likely influenced by the emotional distress caused by his sister's alleged ill-treatment by her in-laws. 
• The Court observed that the incident was not premeditated, as evidenced by its occurrence inside the residence of the appellant's family and the fact that only one stab wound each was inflicted on the deceased and the injured party. 
• The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's alteration of the charge from Section 304 Part I to Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, recognizing that the act was committed without premeditation in a fit of anger. 
• The Court emphasized that considerable time had elapsed since the incident, referring to this as "much water has flown down the river," which factored into their decision regarding sentencing. 
• While upholding the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, the Court deemed it appropriate to modify the sentence to the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant, in the interest of justice. 

What is Section 304 of IPC ? 

• Section 304 of the IPC deals with the punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, whereas the same provision has been covered under Section 105 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 
• Section 304 of IPC can be separated into two parts: Section 304 (Part I) and Section 304 (Part II). 
  • Section 304(Part I) states that, Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. 
  • Section 304 (Part II) states that, Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both, if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. 

What is Culpable Homicide?

• Section 299 of IPC deals with Culpable homicide whereas the same provision has been covered under Section 100 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 
• It states that whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide. 

What are the key Differences Between Section 304 Part I And Part II of the IPC? 

• Intention:  
  • Part I: Involves acts done with the intention of causing death or bodily injury likely to cause death.  
  • Part II: Deals with acts done with the knowledge that they are likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death. 
• Degree of culpability:  
  • Part I: Higher degree of culpability due to the presence of intention.  
  • Part II: Lower degree of culpability as it involves knowledge but not intention. 
• Punishment: 
  • Part I: Generally, carries a more severe punishment, which may extend to life imprisonment.  
  • Part II: Punishment is a lesser maximum punishment, often up to 10 years of imprisonment. 
• Burden of proof:  
  • Part I: The prosecution needs to prove the intention to cause death or grievous bodily harm.  
  • Part II: The prosecution needs to prove knowledge that the act was likely to cause death. 
• Application:  
  • Part I: Applied in cases where there's clear evidence of intention to cause death or grievous harm.  
  • Part II: Often applied in cases of negligence or recklessness leading to death.

Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport's (CAS)   

Why in News? 

Vinesh Phogat’s (Indian wrestler) disqualification from the Paris Olympics 2024 due to a failed second weigh-in has been scrutinized by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The sole arbitrator ruled that Phogat did not commit any wrongdoing that led to her disqualification, despite measuring 100 grams over the permissible weight.  

• The decision, published on 14th August2024, clarified that Phogat’s actions did not involve deliberate misconduct, although she was disqualified for failing to meet weight requirements before her final match.  

What was the Background of Vinesh Phogat v. United World Wrestling and Anr.? 

• Vinesh Phogat was competing in the women's 50kg wrestling category at the 2024 Paris Olympics. 
• Under United World Wrestling (UWW) rules, wrestlers must weigh-in and make weight on both days of competition. 
• Phogat successfully made weight and competed on the first day, winning her matches to reach the gold medal final. 
• On the second day, before the final match, Phogat failed to make weight at the official weigh-in, coming in 100 grams over the 50kg limit. 
• As per UWW rules, failing to make weight on either day results in disqualification from the entire competition and loss of ranking/results. 
• Phogat was thus disqualified and rendered ineligible for any medal, despite having reached the final through fair competition on day one. 
• Phogat filed an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), challenging her disqualification and seeking to be awarded a silver medal. 
• The key issues were the interpretation of UWW rules on weigh-ins and disqualification, and whether the consequences could be mitigated given the circumstances. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Sole Arbitrator found that the Applicant (Phogat) indisputably failed the second weigh-in, exceeding the 50 kg limit, which under the UWW Rules results in disqualification from the entire competition. 
• While acknowledging the consequences as "draconian," the Arbitrator concluded that the UWW Rules provide no discretion or tolerance regarding weight limits or mitigation of disqualification effects. 
• The Arbitrator observed that the Rules treat both days of competition as a single event, thus precluding the possibility of maintaining results from the first day despite second-day ineligibility. 
• The Arbitrator noted that the disqualification constitutes an eligibility issue rather than a sanction, distinguishing it from situations where proportionality considerations might apply. 
• Despite recognizing merit in arguments for limiting disqualification effects to the final round only, the Arbitrator held that such an interpretation was not permissible under the current UWW Rules. 
• The Arbitrator emphasized that while the Applicant's circumstances were sympathetic, and no wrongdoing was implied, the clear language of the Rules left no basis for granting the requested relief or awarding an additional silver medal. 

What is CAS ? 

• The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is an independent entity established to resolve sports-related disputes through arbitration or mediation.  
• It operates under procedural rules tailored to the needs of the sports community. 
• CAS is headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, with additional offices in Sydney, Australia, and New York, USA.  
• Founded in 1984, CAS is overseen by the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS), created by the Paris Agreement of 1994.  
  • This agreement led to the establishment of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration, which governs CAS’s operations. 
• CAS's decisions are final and binding, and they have the same enforceability as court judgments.  
  • These decisions are recognized and enforced under the New York Convention, which has been ratified by over 125 countries. 

What are the Functions of CAS? 

• The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) serves as the primary forum for arbitration in sports-related legal disputes. Its arbitral awards carry the same enforceability as judgments rendered by ordinary courts of law. 
• In cases where permissible, CAS facilitates mediation to assist parties in reaching amicable resolutions to their disputes. 
• CAS establishes temporary tribunals, known as ad hoc divisions, for major sporting events such as the Olympic Games and Commonwealth Games. These divisions are tasked with expeditiously resolving disputes arising during the events, typically within a 24-hour timeframe. 
• Pursuant to the World Anti-Doping Code, all signatories, including Olympic international federations and National Olympic Committees, have acknowledged CAS's jurisdiction over anti-doping violations. 
• As stipulated by the CAS, a party seeking to initiate proceedings must submit either a request for arbitration (under the ordinary procedure) or a statement of appeal (under the appeals procedure) to the CAS Court Office. The content requirements for these submissions are delineated in the Code of Sports-related Arbitration. 
• In matters subject to the appeals procedure, a party may only file an appeal after exhausting all internal remedies available within the relevant sports organization. 

What are the Jurisdictions of CAS?

• Arbitration by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) requires written consent from all parties involved, which can be provided through a one-time agreement, a contractual clause, or stipulated in the governing documents of a sports organization. 
• Parties may agree to CAS arbitration either proactively for future disputes or reactively after a dispute has already arisen. 
• The jurisdiction of CAS extends to any dispute directly or indirectly related to sport, encompassing both commercial matters (such as sponsorship agreements) and disciplinary issues (including doping violations). 
• Standing to bring a case before CAS is granted to any natural person or legal entity with the capacity to act, including athletes, clubs, sports federations, event organizers, sponsors, and media rights holders. 

International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) 

• The International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) is the 20-member governing body of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), tasked with ensuring CAS's independence and protecting the rights of the parties involved. 
• The members, all distinguished jurists with expertise in arbitration and sports law, also elect the President of ICAS, who concurrently serves as the President of CAS.  
• ICAS is responsible for approving amendments to the Code of Sports-
  • related Arbitration
  • appointing CAS arbitrators
  • approving the CAS budget.