Current affairs 2016-2017 in hindi

osMe keâe 50Jeeb yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe

1.      6 efmelebyej, 2016 keâes De®CeeÛeue ØeosMe mejkeâej ves Skeâ DeefOemetÛevee peejer keâj keâceueebie JevÙepeerJe DeYeÙeejCÙe keâes ‘yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe’ (Tiger Reserve) keâe opee& Øeoeve keâj efoÙee~

2.      Ùen De®CeeÛeue ØeosMe ceW efmLele leermeje yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe nw~ De®CeeÛeue ØeosMe ceW efmLele oes DevÙe yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe nQ :— (i) veceoeheâe yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe SJeb (ii) hekeäkesâ yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe~

3.      2016 ceW Deesjbie yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe (Demece) keâes osMe keâe 49Jeeb yeeIe DeYeÙeejCÙe Ieesef<ele efkeâÙee ieÙee Lee~

4.       

5.      22 ceF&, 2016 keâes hetjs efJeMJe ceW ‘Deblejje°^erÙe pewJe-efJeefJeOelee efoJeme’ ceveeÙee ieÙee efpemeceW hekeäkesâ šeFiej efjpeJe& keâes ‘Yeejle pewJe-efJeefJeOelee DeJee@[&, 2016’ keâe mecceeve Øeehle ngDee~

6.      Deblejje°^erÙe šeFiej efoJeme Øeefle Je<e& 29 pegueeF& keâes ceveeÙee peelee nw~

Øeesšerve Ùegòeâ ÛeeJeue keâe efJekeâeme

ÚòeermeieÌ{ jepÙe ceW efmLele Fbefoje ieebOeer ke=âef<e efJeMJeefJeÅeeueÙe, jeÙehegj  kesâ Jew%eeefvekeâeW Éeje Øeesšerve-Ùegòeâ ÛeeJeue keâer veF& Øepeeefle keâe efJekeâeme efkeâÙee ieÙee nw~

1.    ÛeeJeue keâer Fme veF& Øepeeefle ceW 10 ØeefleMele mes DeefOekeâ Øeesšerve keâer cee$ee nesieer, pees efkeâ ÛeeJeue keâer DevÙe ØepeeefleÙeeW mes 3 ØeefleMele DeefOekeâ nw~

2.    Fmekesâ meeLe ner FmeceW 30 ppm eEpekeâ Yeer GheefmLele nesiee~

3.    Ùen Øepeeefle Yeejle ceW Oeeve keâer ØeLece eEpekeâ yeeÙeesheâesefš&heâeF (bio-fortified) Øepeeefle nw efpemeceW hees<ekeâ lelJe eEpekeâ keâer cee$ee 22ppm nw~

4.     ÛeeJeue keâer Fme veF& Øepeeelf e  mes kegâhees<eCe keâer mecemÙee mes efvehešves ceW ceoo efceuesieer~  I.G.K.V. Éeje efveefce&le Ùen ÛeeJeue, Øeesšerve keâer Deuhelee mes  Glhevve nesves Jeeues cewjsmceme FlÙeeefo jesieeW keâes otj keâjves ceW meneÙekeâ efmeæ nesiee~

5.    kegâheesef<ele yeÛÛeeW keâer henÛeeve kesâ efueS ÚòeermeieÌ{ ceW ‘Jepeve lÙeesnej’ Ùeespevee ÛeueeF& pee jner nw~

6.    ÛeeJeue ceW cegKÙeleÙee keâeyeexneF[^sš heeÙee peelee nw~ keâeyeexneF[^sš Skeâ hee@ueermewkeâjeF[ nw pees Meke&âje (iuetkeâespe FlÙeeefo) keâe hee@ueercej Ùee yenguekeâ nw~

7.    heee@ fueMe ekf eâS ngS ÛeeJeue ceW LeeÙeceerve (efJešeefceve-B1) keâer keâceer heeF& peeler nw, efpemekesâ mesJeve mes yesjer-yesjer jesie nesves keâer mebYeeJevee Øeyeue nes peeleer nw~

Decesefjkeâer #es$e Kemeje cegòeâ Ieesef<ele

1.   Decesefjkeâer #es$e Deye efJeMJe keâe henuee Ssmee #es$e yeve ieÙee nw, efpemes efmelebyej, 2016 ceW Kemeje cegòeâ #es$e Ieesef<ele keâj efoÙee ieÙee nw~

2.   Decesefjkeâer #es$e ceW ÛesÛekeâ, heesefueÙees, ®yesuee Deewj pevcepeele ®yesuee eEme[^esce kesâ yeeo, Kemeje heebÛeJeeb Ssmee jesie nw, efpemekeâe šerkeâekeâjCe mes Gvcetueve efkeâÙee pee Ûegkeâe nw~

3.   Kemeje Skeâ efJe<eeCeg peefvele jesie nw~

4.     Kemeje kesâ efJe<eeCeg keâer peeefle keâes cee@efye&ueer JeeÙejme (Morbilli Virus) kesâ veece mes peevee peelee n w leLee Ùen hewjeefcekeämeeJs eeÙejme keâg ue (Paramyxovirus Family) mes mebyebefOele nw~

5.     DeefKeue YeejleerÙe mlej hej Kemeje Jewkeämeerve keâer henueer Kegjekeâ Je<e& 1985 ceW DeejbYe keâer ieF& Leer~

ßeeruebkeâe ceuesefjÙee cegòeâ je°^ Ieesef<ele

1.    . 5 efmelebyej, 2016 keâes efJeMJe mJeemLÙe mebie"ve ves ßeeruebkeâe keâes ceuesefjÙee cegòeâ je°^ Ieesef<ele keâj efoÙee~

2.     WHO oef#eCe-hetJe& SefMeÙee #es$e ceW ceeueoerJe kesâ yeeo ßeeruebkeâe otmeje Ssmee osMe nw efpemes ceuesefjÙee cegòeâ Ieesef<ele efkeâÙee ieÙee nw~

India and Australia: Ties that bind

STRATEGIC - WORKING TOGETHER

The Prime Ministers committed to deepening the bilateral defence and security partnership. They welcomed the significant progress achieved through the bilateral Framework for Security Cooperation agreed in 2014. The two countries have achieved a broad-based defence and security partnership, which continues to expand.

The Prime Ministers agreed that the bilateral maritime exercise first held in the Bay of Bengal in 2015 (AUSINDEX) will be repeated off Western Australia in the first half of 2018.

As fellow Indian Ocean nations, the two Prime Ministers also underscored Australia and India’s joint commitment to enhancing regional cooperation in promoting maritime safety and security. The leaders welcomed the important role of the bilateral White Shipping Agreement.

Both countries remain strongly committed to the breadth of their defence ties, including through ongoing annual staff talks for Army, Navy and Air Forces. The two Prime Ministers recalled the Special Forces Bilateral Exercise conducted in October 2016 and looked forward to the next iteration of the Exercise later this year. They also welcomed a decision for the first bilateral Army-to-Army exercise to take place in 2018. They looked forward to the inaugural secretaries’ defence and foreign affairs dialogue in the "2+2" format as a new mechanism to build on the deep strategic partnership. As the Defence relations expand, enhanced defence representation is envisaged on both sides over the coming years.

Recognizing that terrorism constitutes one of the most serious threats to peace and stability, the two Prime Ministers reiterated their strong commitment to combat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, and stressed that there can be no justification for acts of terror on any grounds whatsoever. They asserted that the fight against terrorists, terror organisations and networks should also identify, hold accountable and take strong measures against all those who encourage, support and finance terrorism, provide sanctuary to terrorists and terror groups, and falsely extol their virtues. They emphasised the need for urgent measures to counter and prevent the spread of terrorism and violent extremism and radicalization and expressed their determination to take concrete measures to step up cooperation and coordination among the law enforcement, intelligence and security organisations.

Noting that both countries have been victims of terrorism, the two Prime Ministers welcomed the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Combating International Terrorism and Transnational Organized Crime. This overarching security understanding will allow links between Australian and Indian law enforcement, border and intelligence agencies to grow – ultimately improving both countries’ ability to address global and regional security threats.

They also welcomed the Indian Ocean Rim Association’s (IORA) Declaration on Countering and Preventing Terrorism and Violent Extremism, adopted at the IORA Leaders’ Summit. India and Australia already cooperate closely on counter-terrorism through the bilateral Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism.

The two Prime Ministers expressed their support for peace, stability, prosperity, security and integrity of Afghanistan. They emphasized the need for an early peace and reconciliation through Afghan-owned and Afghan-led process; and called for ending external support for terrorism.

TAKING OPPORTUNITIES IN OUR REGION AND BEYOND

Australia and India share a commitment to strengthening the international rules-based system. The two Prime Ministers agreed to strengthen cooperation across regional and multilateral institutions and coordinate more closely on strengthening the regional architecture.

The two Prime Ministers welcomed continued and deepened trilateral cooperation and dialogue among Australia, India and Japan. They agreed to invest in trilateral consultations with third countries to enhance regional and global peace and security.

The Prime Ministers committed to working together to strengthen the East Asia Summit (EAS) - the premier regional forum for leader-led strategic dialogue and addressing strategic, political and economic issues. They reaffirmed that building cooperative maritime partnerships should be a priority area for EAS engagement. Agreeing to share experiences and build partnerships for protection of marine resources, prevent environmental degradation, and tap the potential of the blue economy, the two Prime Ministers took note of the EAS Conference on Maritime Security and Cooperation organised by India in Goa and the EAS Seminar on Maritime Security Cooperation organised by Australia in Sydney in November 2016 which contributed towards realisations of these objectives.

The two Prime Ministers underlined the need to address the challenges of irregular migration, people smuggling and human trafficking. Both countries are committed to preventing the abuse and exploitation of migrants and refugees at the hands of smugglers and traffickers. They recalled that Australia and India had recently signed the EAS Declaration on Strengthening Responses to Migrants and Trafficking in Persons. They committed to deepen efforts to deter and disrupt people smuggling and human trafficking, including to ensure the return of persons, subject to verification by Indian and Australian authorities. They resolved to facilitate investigation and prosecution of offenders and ensure humanitarian treatment of trafficked persons during the pendency of procedures. They agreed to develop guidelines to enhance cooperation, consistent with both countries’ sovereignty, international law and respective domestic laws.

The two Prime Ministers welcomed both countries’ increased engagement with ASEAN, including recent milestones and achievements in their respective relationships, forthcoming Leaders’ Summits in both countries with ASEAN, and noted the growing strategic importance of South-East Asia. They recognised ongoing cooperation in other regional bodies such as the ASEAN Regional Forum, and ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM+), and the Asia Europe Meeting. Prime Minister Turnbull reiterated Australia’s support for India’s membership of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC).

The two Prime Ministers highlighted their shared desire to ensure that Indian Ocean architecture keeps pace with regional issues and addresses emerging threats and challenges in the region. They reaffirmed their strong commitment to IORA and noted with appreciation that Australia and India had co-sponsored the IORA Declaration on Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment in October 2016.

The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed the importance of reform of the UN system, including the Security Council, to better reflect contemporary realities. Prime Minister Modi welcomed Australia’s continuing support for India as a permanent member in a reformed United Nations Security Council.

The two Prime Ministers reiterated their support for continued bilateral nuclear cooperation. Prime Minister Turnbull noted Australia’s strong support for India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Australia welcomed India’s joining of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) which would strengthen global non-proliferation objectives. Australia also expressed its support for India’s membership of the Australia Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement.

The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed the importance of the G20 as the premier forum for international economic cooperation. They discussed the maintenance of efforts towards trade liberalisation and reform and the need to implement G20 anti-protectionist measures.

The two Prime Ministers reasserted their commitment to meeting the challenges of climate change and implementing the Paris Climate Change Agreement. They were pleased to witness the signing of the MOU on Environment, Climate and Wildlife to strengthen collaboration on domestic action on climate change and improve environmental data collection.

SHARED PROSPERITY

Recognising India’s strong economic trajectory, Prime Minister Turnbull informed Prime Minster Modi he would commission an India Economic Strategy to define a pathway for the Australian business community to collaborate with India on its reform agenda. Prime Minister Modi welcomed the announcement and acknowledged Australia as an important partner to support India in its growth path.

The two Prime Ministers agreed that shared prosperity and growth prospects are best served by an open, global trading system and a rules-based international order. India and Australia are keen to secure a timely conclusion of a high quality Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). RCEP can provide a boost to regional economic confidence in a time of global uncertainty – but to do so it needs to deliver commercially meaningful outcomes for business. The Prime Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to the conclusion of a commercially meaningful Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA), which addresses the priorities of both sides.

The two Prime Ministers looked forward to the next Australia Business Week in India, planned for the second half of 2017. They recognised the importance of the Australia-India CEO Forum to explore practical measures to support further business engagement.

ENERGY, RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

The two Prime Ministers agreed that energy and resources will continue to remain an important aspect of the bilateral relationship. Opportunities for collaboration will continue to expand as India’s energy mix evolves, including through the Australia India Energy Dialogue. Prime Minister Turnbull underlined Australia’s position as a reliable and innovative partner in meeting India’s energy security needs. The two Prime Ministers agreed to build on collaboration on a wide range of energy resources. Prime Minister Turnbull congratulated Prime Minister Modi on his leadership in advancing solar energy globally through the establishment of the International Solar Alliance. Prime Minister Turnbull announced that Australia intends to join the alliance.

Prime Minister Modi welcomed the passage of the Civil Nuclear Transfers to India Act through the Australian Parliament and both Prime Ministers anticipated commercial exports of Australian uranium could begin soon, opening up a new avenue for Australia to support Indian electricity generation.

Prime Minister Turnbull briefed Prime Minister Modi on the Australia-India mining partnership at the Indian Institute of Technology-Indian School of Mines (IIT-ISM), Dhanbad. Partnership activities with Australian institutions include research and development collaboration, training and technology transfer.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Noting the centrality of education to the bilateral relationship, the Prime Ministers welcomed the growing numbers of students in each other’s countries. Australia is the second most popular destination for Indians studying overseas. An increasing number of Australians are coming to India to study, including under the New Colombo Plan, through which more than 1790 undergraduates have sought the opportunity to study and intern in India since 2015.

The Prime Ministers welcomed the growing opportunities to partner in the skills sector. Prime Minister Turnbull emphasised the role Australia’s industry-led vocational education and training system, qualifications and training providers could play in India’s program to train 400 million people by 2022.

INNOVATION AND SCIENCE

The Prime Ministers celebrated the tenth anniversary of the Australia India Strategic Research Fund (AISRF). Since its establishment, the two governments have committed over $100 million (Rs 500 crore) to the AISRF and the program has supported some 300 collaborative activities including joint projects, workshops and fellowships. Its projects have delivered practical outcomes to improve agricultural productivity, develop vaccines for infectious diseases and advance work on quantum computing. The Prime Ministers were pleased to note that a further seven project teams of Indian and Australian researchers will be supported over the next three years following the successful conclusion of the most recent AISRF funding round.

Recognising the need for innovation in reaching shared aspirations in productivity and efficiency, the two Prime Ministers agreed to continue fostering collaboration between entrepreneurs developing innovative products for commercial application. They also noted both Australia and India were pursuing Smart Cities agendas and had expertise and experience to share.

The two Prime Ministers welcomed the deepening bilateral collaboration to address water management challenges, including sustainable water use. With India launching large-scale infrastructure projects in water, strong existing bilateral cooperation has laid the foundation for building commercial partnerships.

The two Prime Ministers welcomed the signing of the two Implementing Arrangements between Indian Space Research Organization and Geoscience Australia on cooperation in space technology.

SPORTS AND HEALTH COOPERATION

The two Prime Ministers agreed to continue to develop opportunities through connecting Australia’s global reputation for sports excellence and expertise with India’s ambition to improve its sports administration and infrastructure. The two Prime Ministers were pleased that Australian universities were partnering with the Indian Government to establish an Indian National Sports University. The Prime Ministers welcomed the renewal of the Australia-India MOU on Sports Cooperation, expanding cooperation to include sport sciences, sports governance and integrity, athlete and coach training, and grassroots participation. Prime Minister Turnbull was also pleased to invite elite Indian sports teams to train in Australia ahead of the 2018 Commonwealth Games in the Gold Coast.

The two Prime Ministers were pleased to build on longstanding collaboration in the health sector through an MOU and committed to continue cooperation in this field.

BUILDING ON OUR CULTURAL AND PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE LINKS

Prime Minister Turnbull noted the significant contribution of the Indian diaspora in Australia, both in economic and cultural terms. With increasing two-way tourist numbers, both Prime Ministers noted that people-to-people links are vital to promoting mutual understanding and respect between the two countries. Prime Minister Turnbull congratulated Prime Minister Modi on Confluence, the Festival of India in Australia, which toured Australian cities in 2016 to great acclaim.

The two Prime Ministers highlighted the importance of bilateral parliamentary exchanges, and looked forward to greater official parliamentary cooperation in 2017.

AGREEMENTS

The following bilateral memoranda of understanding were exchanged in the presence of the two Prime Ministers:

i. MoU on Cooperation in Combating International Terrorism and Transnational Organized Crime

ii. MoU on Cooperation in the Field of Health and Medicine

iii. MoU on Cooperation in Sports

iv. MoU on Cooperation in the Field of Environment, Climate and Wildlife

v. MoU for Promotion and Development of Cooperation in Civil Aviation Security

vi. Implementing Arrangements on Cooperation in Space Technology

Prime Minister Turnbull renewed his invitation to Prime Minister Modi to visit Australia at a mutually convenient time. Both sides agreed that the visit of Prime Minister Turnbull to India led to strengthening of the cooperative relations between the two countries, and will provide further impetus for the future development 

Income-tax assessment of political parties to be re-looked

Introduction

Political parties in democratic set ups are essential for successful functioning of the Govts. To enable such parties to play their role pragmatically, unmindful of problems concerning their finances, the Income Tax laws of various countries generally exempt the incomes derived by such parties from assets owned, from other sources, from capital gains and from the donations received from payment of income tax. India also follows such wholesome practice.

Section 13A of the I.T. Act, 1961 (Act)

Section 13A of the Act provides that the following categories of income derived by a political party are not included in computing its total income:

(a)  any income, which is chargeable under the heads "income from house property", 'capital gains' and 'income from other sources; and

(b)  any income by way of voluntary contributions.

A political party is not expected to indulge in business activities and hence, business income taxable u/s 28 of the Act has not been mentioned as income exempt from tax.

Meaning of Political Party [PP]

The phrase 'PP' for the purpose of availing of benefit u/s 13A of the Act means an association or body of individual citizens of India registered u/s 29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951, which implies registration with the Election Commission of India also. In other words, those parties, who do not fulfill the abovementioned conditions, cannot claim exemption from tax for any part of their income.

Issues relating to the assessment PPs

The law relating to exemption of income of PPs (supra) raises issues relating to transparency in their functioning, inter-alia, concerning their funding. An important issue in this context relates to limit of Rs.20,000/- mentioned in section 13A to the effect that PPs can claim exemption under the section despite the fact that they have not complied with the conditions mentioned in the section in regard to contributions received upto Rs.20,000/-. Thus, PPs can receive sums upto Rs.20,000/- with no obligation to disclose the identities of the donors. There is no bar for receiving donations upto this limit even from money generated through corruption, illegal activities or as black money. It is irony that those sponsored by such parties and elected as representatives in Parliament and State Assemblies to clean up the corrupt system and unaccounted money from the economy have themselves reached to such august bodies with the help of such tainted money collected by the parties to which they belong. Thus, the limit of Rs.20,000/- in section 13A provides a big lacuna in this provision of the Act and needs to be removed. It is open secret that bulk of donations to PPs comprise of sums of Rs.20,000/- or less. Media reports show that major parties have shown their contributions upto 80 or 85% of total amount to have been received in sums of Rs.20,000/- or less. One major party in UP, showing crores as contributions, has said that it has not received any contribution above Rs.20,000/- and is not required to file any details to the Election Commission.

It is also distressing to note that in most studies and otherwise in common perception, an important cause for generation of black money is said to be contribution to PPs. In early eighties (1984-85), a Committee headed by Dr.Shankar Acharya (with inputs by Dr.Raja Chelliah) under the auspices of IIPFM has said that political contributions have been an important factor for generation of black money. Earlier and later committees, like Wanchoo Committee, A.L. Jha Committee, etc., have also expressed similar views.

The issue then is as to why this state of affairs should continue when almost the entire currency system of the country has been ravaged by demonetization of Rs.500 & Rs.1,000 notes, making the people of the country stand in long queues for drawing limited amounts from their own money in banks and ATMs – in the exercise, some people dying also in the processes for checking black money and corruption. There seems to be no reason why the provision relating to exemption to PPs i.e. section 13A should not be amended to stop such (mal) practice. It may be mentioned that the Election Commission has already expressed its concern to the present section 13A and has suggested to the Govt. that the limit of Rs.20,000/- in section 13A be reduced to Rs.2,000/-. This limit too is likely to be misused by showing major contributions to have been received in sums of Rs.2,000/- only. Hence, in my view, there should be no monetary limit at all. There is no reason why every rupee received by PPs be not accounted for. However, in deference to the view of the Election Commission, the limit of Rs.2,000/- in place of Rs.20,000/- can be retained. This will also enable PPs to disburse small sums in cash. Hence, Rs.2,000/- limit can be tried for some time and can be removed later, if it is also found to be misused.

Suggested Amendment

The change can be effected by the coming Finance Bill, 2017 by replacing the figure of Rs.20,000/- by Rs.2,000/- in proviso (b) to section 13A of the Act. In the present scenario, when there is so much stress on eradication of corruption and black money from the economy by the PM & FM, there should be no problem in making this change in the I.T. Act by the coming Finance Bill, 2017.

Whole electoral system needs to be cleaned

The suggestion regarding Rs.20,000/- limit is merely one suggestion in view of little time available in the context of Finance Bill, 2017. However, the entire electoral system presently in vogue needs to be cleaned and such operation will not be possible merely through the I.T. Act. Actually for this, strong political will is needed. There is no dearth of suggestions. The Electoral Reforms suggestions by expert bodies like Goswami Committee in 1990, Indrajeet Gupta Committee in 1998, Law Commission's Report on electoral law reforms (1999), Election Commission of India's report on proposed Electoral Reforms (2004) and Administrative Reforms Commission's Report (2008) are some of the attempts made to reform the electoral system in the country but all these are geathering dust as no PP has shown any will or grit to make reforms in electoral system in the country. In this context, it is heartening to find that the Shri Narendra Modi, the PM, has shown will and inclination to make poll reforms as a part of his drive to check corruption saying that his party – BJP – will be proactive in disclosing funds received by it and urged to other parties to follow suit. At the BJP executive meeting on 7.1.2017, he is reported to have said [Times of India dt. 8.1.2017 front page report) that "…. a culture of transparency is emerging in the country and politician should use this wisdom to bring in transparency". Hence, in the coming budget, the change suggested in section 13A (supra) needs to be implemented to start with. Other reforms can follow.

Make PP also adhere to cashless transactions

Another matter, which needs immediate consideration in the context of PPs is adherence to cashless transactions. The PM has been a great votary for making country cashless and exhorting everyone to be digital and avoid cash deals. He has been most enthusiastically advocating payments through internet banking, mobile wallets, IMPs, credit/debit cards, aadhar cards, Paytm, etc. When such is the emphasis on electronic payments, there seems to be no reason why PPs should not adhere to such discipline and continue to receive contributions and make payments in cash. These too should adhere to cashless ways for receipts and expenditure. Making exception in their cases would tantamount to discrimination. To put pressure on them, it could be provided in section 13A that cash receipts and disbursements would not be admissible for income tax exemption benefit.

Electoral Bond

Electoral Bond is a financial instrument for making donations to political parties. These are issued by Scheduled Commercial banks upon authorisation from the Central Government to intending donors, but only against cheque and digital payments (it cannot be purchased by paying cash). These bonds shall be redeemable in the designated account of a registered political party within the prescribed time limit from issuance of bond.

Electoral bond was announced in the Union Budget 2017-18. Required amendments to the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (Section 31(3)) and the Representation of People Act, 1951 were made through Section 133 to 136 of Finance Bill, 2017.

Government is in the process of framing a Scheme in this regard.

Electoral Bond is an effort made to cleanse the system of political funding in India. The scheme of electoral bonds addresses the concerns of donors to remain anonymous to the general public or to rival political parties.

Further, in accordance with the suggestion made by the Election Commission, the maximum amount of cash donation that a political party can receive is stipulated at Rs. 2000/- from one person, pursuant to the announcement in Union Budget 2017-18. However, Political parties will be entitled to receive donations by cheque or digital mode from their donors. Every political party would have to file its return within the time prescribed in accordance with the provision of the Income-tax Act. Existing exemption to the political parties from payment of income-tax would be available only subject to the fulfilment of these conditions.

As per Section 29C(1) of The Representation of People Act, 1951, the political party needs to disclose the details of non-governmental corporations and persons who donate more than Rs. 20,000 to it in a financial year. Vide the Finance Bill 2017, it has been specified that no report needs to be prepared in respect of the contributions received by way of an electoral bond.

This reform is expected to bring about greater transparency and accountability in political funding, while preventing future generation of black money.

SECTION 123(3) OF REPRESENATION OF PEOPLE ACT,1951

Section 123(3) of RPA Act, 1951 declares a corrupt practice if:

“The appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of his religion, race, caste, community or language…..”

The word “his” was included through an amendment in 1961.

A seven-judge Supreme Court bench ruled by a 4-3 majority that “religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process”

 It also said that election of a candidate would be declared null and void if an appeal is made to seek votes on these considerations.

The Judgement

 The judgment was handed out as an interpretation of Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

 Section 123(3) deals with abiding to “corrupt practices” for canvassing votes in an election.

 The bench had at hand the task of the interpreting the word “his” in section 123(3) in RPA.

The majority believed that “his” here refers to the any candidate or his agent or any other person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or the elector. To justify this interpretation, the bench took cues from various amendments of RPA.

It also said that to maintain the “purity” of the electoral process; certain arguments must be taken off the table such as religion, caste and language.

The dissenting judges on other the hand believed that Section 123(3) of the RPA does not require such a broad interpretation and the word “his” does not include the elector/voter.

The dissenting judges remarked that markers such as religion are deeply rooted in the structure of the Indian society.

The bench abstained from commenting on the “Hindutva” case.

Criticism

 It is difficult to define what kind of an appeal is religious appeal.

 This interpretation violates the right to freedom of speech under Article 19.

 RPA already has provisions to curb hate speech or speech that spreads enmity.

 A broad interpretation “outlaws” parties like Akali Dal whose very name violates this interpretation.

The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2013 and proposed 2015 amendments

Highlights of the Bill

1.      The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2013 amends the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Certain amendments to the Bill were circulated by the government in 2015.

2.       The 1988 Act defines taking a bribe by a public servant as accepting any reward other than a salary for performing one’s official act. The 2015 amendments replace this to cover acts where a public servant

accepts any undue advantage other than legal remuneration. Anyone who performs his public function honestly    would not be penalised.

3.      Under the Act, a bribe giver is charged with abetment. The 2013 Bill makes giving a bribe to a public servant a direct offence. The 2015 amendments add that if a person gives a bribe to assist law enforcement authorities, he will not be punished.

4.      The Act defines criminal misconduct to covers six types of offences including: (i) abuse of position; (ii) use of illegal means; (iii) disregard to public interest. The 2013 Bill retains only two offences: (i)

misappropriating property; and (ii) amassing disproportionate assets.

5.      Under the 2015 amendments, prior sanction from the Lokpal or Lokayukta must be obtained before investigating a public servant. Key Issues and Analysis

6.      A public servant will not be charged with taking a bribe if he proves that he did not ‘perform his public functions dishonestly’. As this term has not been defined, the circumstances under which a public servant’s actions would qualify as ‘honest’ is unclear.

7.      The 2013 Bill makes giving a bribe a direct offence. There are diverging views on whether bribe giving under all circumstances must be penalised. Some have argued that a coerced bribe giver must be distinguished from a collusive bribe giver.

8.      The requirement of prior sanction for investigation may be considered necessary to protect a public servant from harassment. However, it could delay investigation into genuine cases of corruption. The Supreme Court had also observed that such a provision could affect the efficiency of the investigation process.

9.      The Lokpal, and Lokayuktas in some states, have not been constituted. This may affect the obtaining of prior sanction for investigation.

Key changes proposed in the Bill compared with provisions of the Act:

Key Features	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988	Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2013 [as modified by the 2015 amendments]
Definition of a ‘bribe’	§ Any reward other than a salary.	§ Undue advantage which is any gratification other than legal remuneration.
Acts that qualify as taking a bribe by a public servant	Covers any of the following acts: § Accepting or attempting to obtain any reward, other than a salary.  § Accepting a reward to favour or disfavour anyone.  § Accepting a reward from another person to exercise personal influence over a public servant.	Covers any of the following acts:  § Attempting to obtain or obtaining, or accepting an undue advantage;  § Attempting to obtain or obtaining, or accepting an undue advantage, i) with the intention of, or ii) as a reward for, or iii) before or after, the improper performance of a public function.
Exceptions to taking a bribe	§ No provision.	§ If a person does not perform a public function dishonestly, it would not qualify as taking a bribe
Giving a bribe to a public servant	§ No specific provision.  § Covered under the provision of abetment.  § If a bribe giver makes a statement in court that he gave a bribe it would not be used to prosecute him for the offence of abetment.	§ Offering or giving an undue advantage to another person, intending to: i) induce, or ii) reward, the public official to perform his public duty improperly; or  § Offering an undue advantage to a public official, knowing that such acceptance would qualify as performing his public duty improperly;  § A person would not have committed the offence of bribe giving if he did so, after informing a law enforcement authority, to assist in its investigation of a public servant.
Giving a bribe by a commercial organisation to a public servant	§ No specific provision.   § Covered under the provision of abetment.	§ Offering a reward for obtaining or retaining any advantage in business. § Central government to prescribe guidelines for adequate procedures for commercial organisations to prevent bribing of public servants.  § If a commercial organisation is held guilty of giving a bribe, and it is proved that it was committed with the consent of the director, manager, secretary etc., they will be punished.
Abetment	§ Covers a public servant abetting an offence related to influencing another public servant.  § Covers any person abetting offences like: i) taking a bribe and ii) obtaining a valuable thing from a person engaged with in a business transaction	§ Covers abetment by any person for all offences;  § Excludes the offence of attempting to misappropriate property (covered under criminal misconduct).
Criminal Misconduct by a public servant	Covers 6 types of offences:  § Fraudulent misappropriation of property in the control of a public servant.  § Possession of monetary resources or property disproportionate to known sources of income.  § Habitually taking a bribe or valuable thing for free.  § Obtaining a valuable thing or reward illegally.  § Abuse of position to obtain a valuable thing or monetary reward.  § Obtaining valuable thing or monetary reward without public interest..	Covers 2 types of offences:  § Fraudulent misappropriation of property entrusted to a public servant.  § Intentional enrichment by illicit means during the period of office. This would involve amassing resources disproportionate to one’s known sources of income. [It shall be presumed that the person intentionally enriched himself.]
Habitual Offender	§ Habitually taking a reward to either influence a public servant or abet in the taking of a bribe.	§ The committing of any offence under the Act by a person who has previously been convicted.
Presumption of guilt Trivial rewards	§ The guilt of the accused would be presumed for the following 3 offences: i) taking a bribe, ii) being a habitual offender and iii) for abetting an offence.  § Such a presumption of guilt would not apply if the reward obtained is considered ‘trivial’ by the court.	§ The guilt of the accused would be presumed only for the offence of taking a bribe.  § The provision related to trivial rewards has been omitted.
Attachment and forfeiture of property	§ Not provided in the Act.	§ The provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 would apply.  § In place of a District Judge (as in the Ordinance), cases will be referred to a Special Judge.
Prior approval for investigation	§ Not provided in the Act	Before a police officer conducts any investigation into an offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant, prior approval of Lokpal/lokayukta to be taken.  § Such approval would not be necessary in certain cases which involves the arrest of a person on the spot on the charge of taking a bribe, either for himself or another.
Prior sanction for prosecution	The prior sanction from the appropriate authority is required for prosecution of public servants.	§ Extends the requirement of prior sanction to former public servants, for any act committed in office.
Time period for trial of cases	§ No time period mentioned.	Trial by special judge to be completed within 2 years.  § If not, reasons for the delay must be recorded, for every six months of extension of time obtained.  § Total period for completion of trial not to exceed 4 years.
Penalties*:  § Habitual offender  § Criminal Misconduct  § Taking/giving a bribe, abetment	§ Imprisonment of five years-10 years and a fine.  § Imprisonment of four years-10 years and a fine.  § Imprisonment of three years-seven years and a fine.	§ Same as the 1988 Act, for all offences.

civil law,women development, islamic marriage,civil war uniforms,women and child development,civil air patrol ,uniforms,सैक्स करने के तरीके,criminal records,woman and child development, muslim divorce,islamic divorce, indian penal code book,supreme court judgement ,498a ipc,muslim marriage ac