Interesting. The plea states that since GOI is not interested in persuing the matter, SC should direct the Govt. The plea has been filed by some of the most reputed and honest citizens of India. How many years will be taken by the court is not known. Further, even if plea is successful, it will be up to GOI to take action which may not help much. It will be interesting to watch GOI response.

If the money is repatriated somehow, it will be huge gain for India.



http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/Finance/SC-admits-plea-to-recover-black-money/articleshow/5720654.cms?curpg=1

MUMBAI: The tricky issue of unaccounted wealth stashed by Indians in Swiss banks and other offshore tax havens refuses to die down, with the
Supreme Court (SC) admitting another petition asking the government to bring back the money.

The apex court has directed that the petition filed by prominent senior citizens that include former Mumbai Police commissioner Julio F Rebeiro, former chief election commissioner JM Lyngdoh, former CAG VK Shungu, former air chief marshall S Krishnaswamy, former Planning Commission secretary NC Saxena, former University Grants Commission chairman Hari Gautam, among others, be tagged along with an earlier petition filed on similar grounds by prominent jurist and former Union minister Ram Jethmalani.

The issue has taken centre-stage in political circles, with NDA working chairman LK Advani demanding that the government come out with a white paper enumerating its efforts to bring back money illegally stashed abroad by Indian citizens.

The petitioners say that over $1.45 trillion belonging to Indians has been lying unreported in Swiss banks alone. The basis of the figure is a widely published “Swiss Bank Report”. Apart from the amount deposited with Swiss banks, the petitioners said, “Huge untold” wealth has been siphoned off to around 70 banks in other tax havens.

“The present petition is focused to recover the untold wealth of this country held in foreign banks in the form of the country’s stolen assets, which legitimately belongs to the people of India,” the petitioners stated.

This amount, according to the petitioners, is sufficient enough to wipe out India’s total external debt of about $222 billion. This amount can be used to create “world class infrastructure such as roads, railways, airports, ports and power and all other developmental activities in urban and rural areas”, the petitioners pointed out.

They, in support of their plea for suitable action by the government to bring back the wealth to India, also cited the recent US drive against
Swiss bank UBS that coerced the bank into revealing the names of American citizens who held illegal accounts with it. The petitioners also referred to the $769-billion penalty UBS had to cough up for the Internal Revenue Service of the US.

The petition also cited the recent LGT Bank (Liechtenstein) episode in which a former employee had sold data of 1,400 accountholders to Germany authorities, following which that country took action against 500 of its taxpayers.

The petitioners believe the Indian government lack the will to chase the wealth concealed in these tax havens. In support of this view, the petitioners have pointed out the recent episode of Pune-based Hasan Ali Khan who was probed by the Income-Tax Department as well as by the Enforcement Directorate, without much success. Instead of initiating criminal action against him, the petitioners said, the government was content with making a demand for a certain amount under the Income-Tax Act.

The petitioners also point out that the Indian law dealing with such issues are not strong enough to deter such crimes. For example, tax evasion in India is not a criminal offence and therefore in the unlikely event of such offenders being caught, the culprits could get away with lighter punishments, such as paying a penalty.

These petitioners also suggested a slew of measures they want the government to adopt, including re-negotiation of existing tax treaties with an accent on exchanging information, prescribing procedures for confiscation of benami properties, publishing names of individuals having accounts
with Liechtenstein and providing teeth to the existing laws covering such malpractice etc.

Brilliant Judgement by the Supreme Court of India.

We need to give a standing ovation for this judgement.

SC on India judges the livein relationship and premarital sex is OKAY !.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Live-in-relationship-pre-marital-sex-not-an-offence-SC/articleshow/5716545.cms

Live-in relationship, pre-marital sex not an offence: SC
PTI, Mar 23, 2010, 08.21pm IST

NEW DELHI: In an observation that will cheer votaries of pre-marital sex and live-in-partners, the Supreme Court on Tuesday opined that a man and woman living together without marriage cannot be construed as an offence .

\"When two adult people want to live together what is the offence. Does it amount to an offence? Living together is not an offence. It cannot be an offence,\" a three judge bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Deepak Verma and B S Chauhan observed.

The court said even Lord Krishna and Radha lived together according to mythology.

The apex court said there was no law which prohibits live-in relationship or pre-marital sex.

The apex court made the observation while reserving its judgement on a special leave petiton filed by noted south Indian actress Khusboo seeking to quash 22 criminal cases filed against her after she allegedly endorsed pre-maritial sex in interviews to various magazines in 2005.

The judges grilled the counsel for some of the complainants in the case and repeatedly stressed that the perceived immoral activities cannot be branded as offence.

The argument of the counsel was that her comments allegedly endorsing pre-marital sex would adversely affect the minds of young people leading to decay in moral values and country's ethos.

\"Please tell us what is the offence and under which section. Living together is a right to life,\" the apex court said apparently referring to Article 21 which granted right to life and liberty as a Fundamental Right.

The apex court further said the views expressed by Khusboo were personal.

\"How does it concern you? We are not bothered. At the most it is a personal view. How is it an offence? Under which provision of the law?\" the bench asked the counsel.

The apex court further asked the complainants to produce evidence to show if any girls eloped from their homes after the said interview.

\"How many homes have been affected can you tell us,\" the bench asked while enquiring whether the complainants had daughters. When the response was in the negative, they shot back, \"Then, how are you adversely affected?\"

Khusboo had approached the apex court after the Madrash High Court in 2008 dismissed her plea for quashing the criminal cases filed against her throughout Tamil Nadu.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sunny Leone a true Canadian DESI now back in India !.