Blood Bank

http://www.nacoonline.org/upload/Policies%20&%20Guidelines/29,%20voluntary%20blood%20donation.pdf

http://www.webhealthcentre.com/bloodbank/blood_bank_recipients.asp

How much does a unit of blood cost?

The government of India has prescribed rates of blood and blood products. The price list is as follows:

Item	Price
Whole Blood	Rs 500/unit
Fresh Frozen Plasma	Rs 400/unit
Packed Cell	Rs 300/unit
Platelet Concentrate	Rs 400/unit

But most blood banks use these as rough guideline value and charges can vary, depending on the demand. Even where blood is collected free, banks have to spend for processing, storage and testing.

Right to Health

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 (UDHR) encapsulated the ‘right to health’ in the following words:

“1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.”

While Article 12(1) of the ICESCR referred to the ‘right to health’ in aspirational terms, Article 12(2) mandated specific measures on part of the state parties to the covenant. Its language reads as follows:

“1. The State Parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for:

(a) The provision for the reduction of the still-birth rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child;

(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;

(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;

(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.”

Directive principles of State policy has several provisions that touch on the subject of health and one can refer to the text of Articles 39(e), 39(f), 42 and 47.

In India, the theory of the inter-relatedness between rights was famously articulated in the Maneka Gandhi decision. This became the basis for the subsequent expansion of the understanding of the ‘protection of life and liberty’ under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court of India further went on to adopt an approach of harmonization between fundamental rights and directive principles in several cases. With regard to health, a prominent decision was delivered in Parmanand Katara v. Union of India.

In that case, the court was confronted with a situation where hospitals were refusing to admit accident victims and were directing them to specific hospitals designated to admit ‘medico-legal cases’. The court ruled that while the medical authorities were free to draw up administrative rules to tackle cases based on practical considerations, no medical authority could refuse immediate medical attention to a patient in need. The court relied on various medical

sources to conclude that such a refusal amounted to a violation of universally accepted notions of medical ethics. It observed that such measures violated the ‘protection of life and liberty’ guaranteed under Article 21 and hence created a right to emergency medical treatment.

Another significant decision which strengthened the recognition of the ‘right to health’ was that in Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha.

In that case, it was ruled that the provision of a medical service (whether diagnosis or treatment) in return for monetary consideration amounted to a ‘service’ for the purpose of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The consequence of the same was that medical practitioners could be held liable under the act for deficiency in service in addition to negligence. This ruling has gone a long way towards protecting the interests of patients. However, medical services offered free of cost were considered to be beyond the purview of the said Act.

With regard to the access and availability of medical facilities, the leading decision of the Supreme Court was given in Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samiti v. State of West Bengal.

The facts that led to the case were that a train accident victim was turned away from a number of government-run hospitals in Calcutta, on the ground that they did not have adequate facilities to treat him. The said accident victim was ultimately treated in a private hospital but the delay in treatment had aggravated his injuries. The Court realized that such

situations routinely occurred all over the country on account of inadequate primary health facilities. The Court issued notices to all State governments and directed them to undertake measures to ensure the provision of minimal primary health facilities. When confronted with the argument that the same was not possible on account of financial constraints and limited personnel, the Court declared that lack of resources could not be cited as an excuse for non-performance of a constitutionally mandated obligation. The Court set up an expert committee to investigate the matter and endorsed the final report of the said committee. This report contained a sevenpoint agenda addressing several issues such as the upgrading of facilities all over the country and the establishment of a centralized communications system amongst hospitals to ensure the adequacy and prompt availability of ambulance equipment and personnel.

Some commentators have argued that by recognizing a governmental obligation to provide medical facilities, the Court has created a justiciable ‘right to health’.

http://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/speeches/speeches_2008/right_to_health_-_bhopal_14-9-08.pdf

Bail

Bail is some form of property deposited or pledged to a court to persuade it to release a suspect from jail, on the understanding that the suspect will return for trial or forfeit the bail (and possibly be brought up on charges of the crime of failure to appear).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail

The main reasons for refusing bail are that the defendant is accused of an imprisonable offence and there are substantial grounds for believing that the defendant would:
Abscond
Commit further offences whilst on bail
Interfere with witnesses

The court may also refuse bail:
For the defendant's own protection
Where the defendant is already serving a custodial sentence for another offence
Where the court is satisfied that it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information
Where the defendant has already absconded in the present proceedings
Where the defendant has been convicted but the court is awaiting a pre-sentence report, other report or inquiry and it would be impracticable to complete the inquiries or make the report without keeping the defendant in custody
Where the defendant is charged with a non-imprisonable offence, has already been released on bail for the offence with which he is now accused, and has been arrested for absconding or breaching bail

The court should take into account the:
Nature and seriousness of the offence or default (and the probable method of dealing with the defendant for it)
Character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the defendant,
Defendant's bail record, and
Strength of the evidence

Article 21

Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India
http://www.governindia.org/wiki/Maneka_Gandhi_vs_Union_of_India
Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India
Petitioner: Maneka Gandhi
Respondent: Union of India

Headnote
The petitioner was issued a passport on June 1, 1976 under the Passport Act, 1967. On the 4th of July 1977, the petitioner received a letter dated 2nd July, 1977, from the Regional Passport Officer Delhi intimating to her that it was decided by the Government of India to impound her passport under s. 10(3)(c) of the Act "in public interest". The petitioner was required to surrender her passport within 7 days from the receipt of that letter.
The petitioner immediately addressed a letter to the Regional Passport Officer requesting him to furnish a copy of the statement of reasons for making the order as provided in s.10(5). A reply was sent by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs on 6th July 1977 stating inter-alia that the Government decided "in the interest of the general public" not to furnish her copy of the statement of reasons for the making of the order. The petitioner thereupon filed the present Writ Petition challenging action of the Government in- impounding her passport and declining to give reasons for doing so. The Act was enacted on 24-4-67 in view of the decision of this Court in Satwant Singh Sawhney's case. The position which obtained prior to the coming into force of the Act was that there was no law regulating the issue of passports for leaving the shores of India and going abroad. The issue of passport was entirely within the unguided and unchannelled discretion of the Executive. In Satwant Singh's case, this Court bell by a majority that the expression 'personal liberty' in Article 21 takes in, the right of locomotion and travel abroad and under Art. 21 no person can be deprived of his right to go abroad except according to the procedure established by law. This decision was accepted by the Parliament and the infirmity pointed but by it was set right by the enactment of the Passports Act, 1967.
The preamble of the Act shows that it was enacted to provide for the issue of passport and travel documents to regulate the departure from India of citizens of India and other persons and for incidental and ancillary matters. Section 3 provides that no person shall denart from or attempt to depart from India unless he holds in this 'behalf a valid passport or travel document. Section 5(1) provides for making of an application for issue of a passport or travel document for visiting foreign country. Sub-section (2) of section 5 says that on receipt of such application the Passport Authority, after making such enquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, shall, by order in writing, issue or refuse to issue the passport or travel document or make or refuse to make that passport or travel document endorsement in respect of one or more of the foreign countries specified in the application. Sub-section (3) requires the Passport Authority where it refuses to issue the passport or travel document or to make any endorsement to record in writing a brief statement of its reasons for making such order. Section 6(1) lays down the grounds on which the Passport Authority shall refuse to make an endorsement for visiting any foreign country and provides that on no other ground the endorsement shall be refused. Section 6(2) specifies the grounds on which alone and on no other grounds the Passport Authority shall refuse to issue the Passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country and amongst various grounds set out there the last is that in the opinion of the Central Government the issue of passport or travel document to the applicant will not be in the public interest. Sub-section (1) of section 10 empowers the Passport Authority to vary or cancel the endorsement on a passport or travel document or to vary or cancel it on the conditions subject to which a passport or travel document has been issued having regard to, inter alia, the provisions of s. 6(1) or any notification under s. 19. Sub-section (2) confers powers on the Passport Authority to vary or cancel the conditions of the passport or travel document on the application of the holder of the passport or travel document and with the previous approval of the Central Government. Sub-section (3) provides that the Passport Authority may impound or cause to be impounded or revoke a passport or travel document on the grounds set out in cl. (a) to (h). The order impounding the passport in the present, case, was made by the Central Government under cl. (c) which reads as follows :-
"(c) If the passport authority deems it necessary so to do in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of India, friendly relations of India with the foreign country, or in the interests of the general public."
Sub-section (5) requires the Passport Authority impounding or revoking a passport or travel document or varying or cancelling an endorsement made upon it to record in writing a brief statement of the reasons for making such order and furnish to the holder of the passport or travel document on demand a copy of the same, unless, in any case, the Passport Authority is of the opinion that it will not be in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of India, friendly relations of India with any foreign country, or in the interest of the general public to furnish such a copy. The Central Government declined to furnish a copy of this statement of reasons for impounding the passport of the petitioner on the ground that it was not in the interest of the general public to furnish such copy to the petitioner.
The petitioner contended.
1.The right to go abroad is part of "personal liberty" within the meaning of that expression as used in Art. 21 and no one can be deprived of this right except according to the procedure prescribed by law. There is no procedure prescribed by the Passport Act, for impounding or revoking a Passport. Even if some procedure can be traced in the said Act it is unreasonable and arbitrary in as much as it does not provide for giving an opportunity to the holder of the Passport to be heard against the making of the order.
2.Section 10(3) (c) is violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14,19(1) (a) and (g) and 21.
3.The impugned order is made in contravention of the rules of natural justice and is, therefore, null and void. The impugned order has effect of placing an unreasonable restriction on the right of free speech and expression guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 19(1) (a) as also on the right to carry on the profession of a journalist conferred under Art. 19 (1) (g).
4. The impugned order could not consistently with Articles 19(1)(a) and (g)be passed on a mere information of the Central Government that the presence of the petitioner is likely to be required in connection with the proceedings before the Commission of Inquiry.
5.In order that a passport may be impounded under s. 10 (3) (c), public interest must actually exist in present and mere likelihood of public interest arising in future would be no ground for impounding the passport.
6. It was not correct to say that the petitioner was likely to be required for giving evidence before the Shah Commission.
The respondents denied the contentions raised by the petitioner.

Jurisdiction of the district forum

11. Jurisdiction of the district forum.
http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/consumerprotectionact/s11.htm
(1) Subject to other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the Compensation if any, claimed 1[does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs].

(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, -

(a) The opposite party or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or 2[carries on business or has a branch office, or] personally works for gain; or

(b) Any of the opposite parties where there are more then one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, or 2[carries on business or has a branch office], or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the District Forum is given, or the opposite parties who do not reside, or 2[carry on business or have a branch office], or personally works for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution; or

(c) The cause of action, wholly or in part arises.

1. Substituted by Act 50 of 1993, sec.9 for "is less than rupees one lakh"(w. e. f. 18-6-1993) and again subs. by Act 62 of 2002, sec. 7, for "does not exceed rupees five lakhs" (w. e. f. 15-3-2003)

2. Subs. by Act 50 of 1993, sec.9 for "carries on business or" (w. r. e. f. 18-6-1993).

Examination in chief

Examination in chief

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l15-Examination-in-chief.html
I kept six honest serving men.
They taught me all I knew.
Their names were what and why and when
And how and where and who - - Rudyard Kipling

Introduction
It's been said, "A good lawyer turns evidence into fact and fact into truth." Because they bear the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt, prosecutors must call witnesses in every trial. Examination in Chief is the keystone in the prosecution's arch. It is also important to the defender who will call witnesses in support of the defensive theory. Direct examination is a vastly overlooked skill. Unlike cross-examination, there is very little written material to guide practitioners through the examination of their own witnesses. This is surprising because cases are actually won or lost on the fruits of direct examination.

Examination in Chief is one of the most subtle and sophisticated forms of advocacy. It is subtle because a good chief examination focuses entirely on the witness and their evidence. The evidence should appear to be flowing effortlessly from the witness. It should look easy. Whereas the witness should be memorable, the lawyer should not. Chief examination is sophisticated advocacy because during its course counsel is actually presenting their case, while trying to satisfy a multitude of objectives, such as maximizing the potential of each witness to present all relevant evidence in as logical, credible, persuasive and accurate manner as possible, while knitting all witnesses' evidence together in a coherent fashion in order to prove all the elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. Examination in Chief thus becomes a starting point for any litigation. In the adversarial system of our country, it becomes a tool of extracting truth from the facts.

Hence it becomes quintessential at this juncture to define what “Examination in Chief” really means. Section 137 of the Indian Evidence Act defines the term “Examination in Chief.”

Examination in Chief-
The Examination of a witness by a party who calls him shall be called his examination in Chief. Examination in Chief is the first examination after the witness has been sworn or affirmed. It is a province of a party by whom the witness is called to examine him in chief for the purpose of eliciting from the witness all the material facts within his knowledge which tend to prove the party’s case. Examination in Chief is also known as Direct Examination.

Legalities involved in Examination in Chief.
a) A question based on supposition of fact not proved is improper.
b) Counsels are allowed to ask apparently irrelevant and consequentially inadmissible questions upon the promise to follow them up at the proper time by proof of other facts, which true, would make the question put legitimately operative.
c) The party examining a witness in chief is bound at his peril to ask all material questions in the first instance, and if he fails to do this, it cannot be done in reply.
d) If a question as to any material fact has been omitted upon the examination in Chief, the usual course is to suggest the question to the court which will exercise its discretion in putting it to the witnesses
e) There was no question of cross-examining the plaintiff travelling beyond the evidence of the plaintiff given in examination-in-chief and thereby giving an opportunity to make out a case in cross-examination
f) The corollary of it is that if a judge felt that a witness has committed an error or a slip it is the duty of the judge to ascertain whether it was so, for, to err is human n the truth and the chances of erring may accelerate under stress of nervousness during cross-examination.
g) But in exceptional circumstances there can be a cross examination of witnesses whose chief examination has been not been done.
h) But this situation is uncertain to quite an extent and there have been descending opinion regarding this.
i) On the examination-in-chief, a witness can only give evidence of facts within his own knowledge and recollection.
j) In all cases the facts from the examination in chief must be relevant. The answer must be upon a point of fact as opposed to point of law.
k) The conlusions of a witness as to the motives of other persons are inadmissible, motives being eminently inferences from conduct.
l) Leading questions may not ordinarily be put in examination in chief.
m) In cases where the witness proves to be hostile, he may be cross examined by the party calling him.
There are other legal provision of the Indian Evidence Act which are applicable here and are referred to in the later part of the project.

Objectives Of Examination In Chief
(1) Legally sufficient to meet the burden of proof, (2) understood and remembered, (3) convincing, (4) able to withstand cross-examination, and (5) anticipatory and contradictory of evidence that the opposition will present. Think of direct examination as your opportunity to construct persuasive arguments. The questions that will be asked shall subtly convey your argument. Conversely, use the arguments that you want to make at the end of the case to guide you in planning and preparing the questions you will ask on examination in chief.

(2) There are multiple objectives to examination in chief. The more significant are as follows:
A. Major Objectives
(a) the evidence must be admissible;
(b) the witness needs to present as persuasive and credible;
(c) each and every element of the offence must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt through the witnesses oral evidence and exhibits.

B. Minor Objectives
In addition, you are also trying to achieve the following slightly less essential, but still important, objectives:
(1) present a logical, complete and coherent theory of the offence;
(2) present each witness in the best possible light;
(3) use the evidence of one witness to support another so that a seamless cloth may be woven of the proven fact;
(4) fill in gaps in the evidence and attempt to explain any inconsistencies;
(5) shut down potential cross-examination thereby limiting the exposure of witnesses.
(6) allow the defence as little room to move as possible by minimizing the possibilities of a defence being supported through cross-examination of witnesses

Legal requirements for an examination in chief
Competency of your witness - The first legal requirement is that your witness must be competent to testify. To qualify as competent, a witness must have: (1) Understanding of the nature and obligation of the oath or affirmation to tell the truth, (2) Perception (knowledge) of the the relevant event, (3) Recollection (memory) of the relevant event, and (4) Ability to communicate

Relevance of your witness' testimony - The second legal requirement for your direct examination is that your witness' testimony must be relevant. Relevant evidence is evidence that has some (any) tendency; however slight, to make the existence of a fact of consequence to the case more or less probable than it would be without it.

Authenticity of matters of evidence to show that the item in question is what its proponent claims it is - The third requirement for your direct examination is that matters of evidence must be authenticated. You authenticate an item of evidence by making a prima facie showing that it is genuine.

Proper evidentiary foundation or predicate for the admissibility of the evidence - Certain items of evidence require special foundations to establish admissibility. For example, if your evidence is hearsay and, thus, presumptively inadmissible prima facie, but will be required to establish its admissibility under one of the hearsay exceptions.

Over and above this, the lawyer conducting examination in Chief must also be careful to stick to the legalities as mentioned above.

Lawyers’s Preparation For The Examination In Chief:
(A) Planning Ahead: What is the Witness’ Role?
1. The Theme of the Case.
2. The Order of Witnesses
3. What witness says

(B) Preparing the Witness.
1. Prior Testimony.
2. Current Testimony.
3. The Use of Documents to Refresh Recollection.
4. The Cross-Examination Drill.
5. The Rules of Evidence and the Need for Objections

(C) The Direct Examination:
1. Organizing the Direct.
2. The Form of the Question.
3. The Use of Non-Verbal Evidence.
4. To overcome with the mistakes that the witnesses have made.

Art Of Preparing A Structure For Examination In Chief:
1. Outline. The questions should be written in the lingo of the ear, not the eye. There needs to be a trial book maintained whose help needs to be taken. The entire process must look impressive and spontaneous to some extent. Maintaining eye contact is necessary.
2. Clarify. To make your questions clear, add only one new fact to each question. Compound questions invite objections. So do questions that are vague and ambiguous.
3. Build evidentiary bridges. There needs to be a connection between the witnesses one wants to present in the examination in chief. One needs to inter relate the witnesses to make it easy for the judges.
4. Employ transitions and signposts. There needs to be proper use of phrases to connect the matter in issue. Use of conjunction and transitions like “From here we move to” would help the judges understand the matter in a better way.
5. Make repetition persuasive. Repetition must be artful. There must be a repetition of things which are necessary. But such a repetition must be in such a way the opponent cannot object to the repetition.
6. Stretch the important parts. To dramatize a key point in examination in chief, learn how to "stretch-out" your questions. The things which are important should continue for a long time. At the same time, these aspects should remain fresh in the judges mind due to its prolonged nature of presentation.
7. Learn to mirror. Mirror some of the good characteristics of the witness. Adopting some of the characteristics of the witness, e.g., language, smile, tone of voice, eye-contact, etc. puts the lawyer on a better conversational level with his witness.
8. Have your foundations ready. Be prepared to authenticate and lay foundations for any exhibits that are going to be introduced to the witnesses. The goal should be smooth introduction of your tangible exhibits and a persuasive "tell and show" as you use the exhibits to add to the issue concerned.
9. Make your witness' personal knowledge clear. The non-expert witness must speak from personal knowledge. The lay witness can give lay opinion rationally based on the witness' personal perceptions. But a lay witness is not allowed to draw conclusions that call for technical, scientific, or other specialized knowledge.
10. Deflate the potential cross-examination. The examination in Chief must indirectly counter all the rebutting or all probably questions which may crop out of the cross examination. Hence one has to be cautious with the questions put forward.
12. Utilize open-ended questions for the important parts of the story. Questions starting with what, when, how, where etc are open ended questions. They help in giving a vivid description of the issue. And it also benefits the witness to answer at ease.
13. Avoid questions that suggest the answer to your witness. Leading questions should not be allowed to ask in the court, except for certain circumstances.

There are Golden Rules given by David Paul Brown for the Examination of witnesses: These golden rules alert the lawyer to ask questions according to the type of their witnesses. He has given several guidelines which a lawyer can follow for a worthwhile examination in Chief.

Dealing with the direct examination of a hostile witness, adverse party, or a person identified with an adverse party.
A hostile witness can be as unpredictable as a wild mustang stallion. If you don't rein him in, he can do more damage than good. The hostile witness can be asked leading questions with the permission of the court.

Critical Appraisal Of The System
The examination in Chief is one of the methods of finding truth from the facts. But this system has been corrupted to an extent that the witnesses have merely become puppets whose threads are with the lawyer.

Moreover since already discussed earlier examination in chief requires a lot of skill, hard work and art. A lawyer who may possess it shall be successful in his endeavor of reaching his aim. But in the entire scenario, what seems to be missing is the sense of justice involved. The technicalities involved and high pressure preparations quite often defeat the entire purpose of the activity, which was to reach the ends of justice.

Moreover the complicated justice system and even more complicated lawyers leave the witnesses baffled, confused, perplexed and lost. The advocate’s object is to elicit all the facts relevant to the case s/he is presenting. How far does the adversarial type of litigation helps the purpose is still something to be ascertained.

Conclusion
An examination in chief must appear fresh, interesting, flowing, and conversational. This sounds easy, but requires a lot of work, research and preparation. The importance of Examination in Chief must never be underestimated. .A strong direct examination is an important building block that can lead to the success at the trial. Direct examination does not exist in a vacuum. It must be part of a coherent story told inside and outside the courtroom.

Effective examination in chief builds on a solid case foundation, and establishes client credibility and judge empathy. Like any performance, it requires good preparation; with the lawyer listening to the client first and then teaching the client how best to present himself. Then, at trial, the lawyer has to get out of the way of the relationship between the jury and the client. Turning over responsibility to the client may seem unnatural, and is always uncomfortable, but it is the best way to accomplish the goals of examination in chief, and the ultimate goal of winning the case for your client. Thus the skill of extracting information form one’s own witness also requires a great amount of skill, labor, art, hard work.

What needs to be determined is the fact that not undermining the defects of the examination in chief, is there an alternative? Probably our country is not accustomed to the inquisitorial system. But at the same time, with the development of the alternative dispute resolution system like mediation, arbitration and negotiation, there can be things which can be incorporated in this system of rigorous truth finding mechanism.

Consumer Protection Act

Introduction
The year 1986 is a Magna Carta in the history of Consumerism. It was this year that witnessed the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act. The first ever legislation in India of its kind which solely aimed at the grief staken consumers who the victims of the unfair trade practices and substandard services rendered to them. The preamble to this Act reads as follows: An Act to provide for better protection of the interests of the consumers and to make provisions for the establishment of consumer councils and other authorities for the settlement of consumers disputes and for matter connected therewith. Thus the preamble to this Act makes the intention of the framers of this Act crystal clear . The setting up of the dispute redressal machinery was only to secure and enable speedy justice to the aggrieved consumers. The enactment of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, a milestone in the history of socio-economic legislation in India, has considerably consolidated the process of consumer protection and has given rise, during the past few years, to new consumer jurisprudence. The act introduced a three-tier quasi-judicial consumer disputes redressal mechanism at the district, state and national level for dispensing inexpensive and time-bound consumer justice. Though passed in 1986, its effective implementation started only in 1990 when the institutions envisaged under the act were established throughout the country, thereby enabling a large number of consumers and organisations to approach these forums for the redressal of their grievances.

The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 underwent some amendments. Among them the important and latest amendment is of 2002. So we can say that the Act is in focus to the needs of the time. With this introduction, let me explain my assignment topic i.e, State Commission under Consumer Protection Act.

1. Composition of the State Commission (Section 16)
Each State Commission shall consist of One President and two or more other members.

1.1 The President
The President shall be a person who is or has been a Judge of a High Court, appointed by the State Government. His appointment should be made in consultation with the Chief Justice of High Court.

1.2 Members
In the state commission there should be not less than two, and not more than such number of members, as may be prescribed, and one of whom shall be a woman.

1.2.1 Qualifications of members
The members should have the following qualifications in order to be a member in the state commission for consumer disputes redressel
(i) be not less than thirty-five years of age;
(ii) possess a bachelor's degree from a recognised university; and(iii) be persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have adequate knowledge and experience of at least ten years in dealing with problems relating to economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration:

Provided that not more than fifty per cent. of the members shall be from amongst persons having a judicial background. Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, the expression 'persons having judicial background'' shall mean persons having knowledge and experience for at least a period of ten years as a presiding officer at the district level court or any tribunal at equivalent level.

1.2.2 Disqualifications of Members (Section 16(1))
A new proviso has been added to Section 16(1), by the Consumer Protection Amendment Act, 2002. They are as following
(a) has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for an offence which, in the opinion of the State Government, involves moral turpitude; or
(b) is an undischarged insolvent; or
(c) is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court; or
(d) has been removed or dismissed from the service of the Government or a body corporate owned or controlled by the Government; or
(e) has, in the opinion of the State Government, such financial or other
interest, as is likely to affect prejudicially the discharge by him of his functions as a member; or
(f) has such other disqualifications as may be prescribed by the State Government.

1.2.3 Selection committee for appointment of members (Sec.16 (1A))
Every appointment under sub-section (1) shall be made by the State Government on the recommendation of a Selection Committee consisting of the following members, namely:
(i) President of the State Commission........... Chairman;
(ii) Secretary of the Law Department of the State ....Member;
(iii) Secretary incharge of the Department dealing with Consumer Affairs in the State..... Member:

Provided that where the President of the State Commission is, by reason of absence or otherwise, unable to act as Chairman of the Selection Committee, the State Government may refer the matter to the Chief Justice of the High Court for nominating a sitting Judge of that High Court to act as Chairman.

1.2.4 Term of Office (Section 16 (3))
Every member of the State Commission shall hold office for a term of five years or up to the age of sixty-seven years, whichever is earlier: Provided that a member shall be eligible for re-appointment for another term of five years or up to the age of sixty-seven years, whichever is earlier, subject to the condition that he fulfills the qualifications and other conditions for appointment mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) and such re-appointment is made on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee. Provided further that a person appointed as a President of the State Commission shall also be eligible for re-appointment in the manner provided in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of this section.

A member may resign his office in writing under his hand addressed to the State Government and on such resignation being accepted, his office shall become vacant and may be filled by appointment of a person possessing any of the qualifications mentioned in sub-section (1) in relation to the category of the member who is required to be appointed under the provisions of sub-section (1A) in place of the person who has resigned.

2 Jurisdiction of the State Commission
Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State Commission shall have jurisdiction

2.1 Pecuniary Jurisdiction
Complaints where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed exceeds rupees twenty lakhs but does not exceed rupees one crore, then it comes under the pecuniary jurisdiction of State Commission.

It may be noted that prior to amendment the pecuniary jurisdiction of state commission was upto 20 lakhs. By the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002, the jurisdiction of the State Commission has been increased to Rs. 1 Crore. The change is likely to be beneficial to the consumer. It will reduce the number of complaints to the National Commission.

2.2 Territorial Jurisdiction
A complaint shall be instituted in a State Commission within the limits of whose jurisdiction:
(a) the opposite party or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the State Commission is given or the opposite parties who do not reside or carry on business or have a branch office or personally work for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.

2.3 Appellate Jurisdiction (Section 15)
Section 15 of the Act gives the right to prefer an appeal to the state commission within a period of thirty days from the date of order of the District Forum to any person who has been aggrieved by the order. The time limit may be extended by the state commission on showing sufficient cause.

The person making an appeal should deposit 50% of the decreed amount or Rs.25000/- whichever is less. This requirement has been introduced by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002.

3. Transfer of cases (Section 17 A)
This section is also inserted by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002. This section enables the State Commission to transfer a Case from one District Forum to another within the state. On the application of a complaint or of its own motion, the State Commission may, at any stage of the proceeding, transfer any complaint pending before the District Forum to another District Forum within the State if the interest of justice so requires.

4. Circuit Benches (Section 17 B)
This is a new provision inserted in the Act by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002. Section 17 B, provides for establishment of Circuit Benches of State Commission. The State Commission shall ordinarily function in the State Capital but may perform its functions at such other place as the State Government may, in consultation with the State Commission, notify in the Official Gazette, from time to time.

5. Expeditious hearing of appeal (Section 19 A)
A new section, 19A, has been inserted by the consumer protection (Amendment) Act, 2002. It provides that endeavour shall be made to dispose of appeals filed before the State Commission or the National Commission within ninety days from the date of admission. It provided for expeditious hearing of appeal, quicker decision and restriction of adjournment.

Conclusion
The scope of the Consumer Protection Act is widening in the society which is pro to globalization, industrialization and Privatization. So the Legislature has taken all the possible steps by making timely amendments to the Act in accordance with the needs of time. In fact all the amendments made to the Consumer Protection Act by the 2002 Amendments aim at furthering the efficiency of the Act and doing away with procedural delays which render the consumers disillusioned and dissatisfied. These Amendments have been fruitful in providing protection to the consumers in the real sense of the term and served the purpose of the Act. It is hoped that further amendments would aim at even more efficiency and render the position of the consumers much stronger in this era of globalization and privatization where the sudden unchecked advent of Multi National Companies has to be balanced with the protection of the rights of the consumers by the legislature and the judiciary.