Denied ambulance, UP man forced to carry son's body

Etawah (UP): A labourer was forced to carry the body of his 15-year-old son over his shoulder after he was allegedly denied help by doctors at a government hospital here on Monday.

The incident brought back memories of Odisha's Dana Majhi, who carried his dead wife on his back last year when he was allegedly denied a hearse by a hospital.

In a video which went viral on social and electronic media, 45-year-old Udayveer alleged that doctors at the Etawah government hospital did not treat his son Pushpendra and turned him away.

"My son just had a pain in his legs. The doctors spared only a few minutes to see my child and said take him away, there is no life in the boy," a weeping Udayveer told reporters here.

He alleged that the doctors did not offer the services of a hearse or an ambulance, which are meant to be provided free of charge.

"No one told me that I was entitled to an ambulance to take my son's body back," the grieving father said.

Chief medical officer of Etawah, Dr Rajeev Yadav, said, "The boy was brought dead to the hospital on Monday afternoon. I am told the doctors were busy with a bus accident case and so they could not ask him (Udayveer) if he needed transport. There will be action... no doubt it is a blot on the reputation of this hospital and the fault is ours."

In August last year, the nation was shocked by the image of Odisha farmer Majhi walking with his wife's body on his shoulder for 10 kilometres. He was accompanied by his 12-year-old daughter, after being allegedly denied a hearse by the hospital authorities.

This is India my friend where humans are not offered ambulance service but cows have it.

Humans are killed because cows should not be disturbed.

Sacred cow ambulance service launched in India for ill, injured or abandoned cattle

Robert Reich Makes a Fool of Ann Coulter and Dismantles Trump's Attacks on the Press at Once

Economist Robert Reich suggested to Ann Coulter on Sunday that the fight to defend free speech was not limited to her campaign against the college campuses which have banned her citing security reasons.

During a discussion on ABC’s This Week about Coulter’s battle with University of California, Berkeley, host Jonathan Karl wondered whether President Donald Trump’s war on media outlets also set a dangerous precedent for free speech.

Coulter, however, preferred not to talk about the president.

“Universities ought to be places where I am not the only conservative most students will hear in four years of college,” she opined. “This whole incident shows the radical insulated left on the college campuses. And the entire left wing, including President [Barack Obama] and Bill Maher, are on the other side.”

“And what useless institutions our universities are,” she continued. “The lefties are on the side of the thugs. They’ve taken over the universities. I don’t think anyone learns anything at college anymore. It’s a four year vacation. And I think that’s what people ought to be looking at because the taxpayers are supporting these universities.”

Reich, however, redirected the conversation back to the subject of President Trump’s attack on the free press.

“The libel laws should not be widened [as Trump has suggested],” Reich explained. “We really do need a free press. One thing that concerns me about the present administration is the willingness of the administration to not only talk about widening the libel laws and also criminal laws — flag burning — but even the president of the United States, last night, using a [rally] in Harrisburg to summon his supporters and criticize the press once again.”

“This is dangerous,” Reich added. “I mean, if we believe in the First Amendment, we believe in a free and independent press.”

Watch the video below from ABC’s This Week, broadcast April 30, 2017.

Winsome, Lose Some: Jatin Mehta (Relative of Gautam Adani) and the Great Rs 7,000 Crore Diamond Heist

The three year-long CBI investigation into Jatin Mehta’s Winsome Diamonds has finally come to an end. While there are a number of questions still remaining, will the guilty be punished?

Hyderabad: In early 2014, Winsome Diamonds and Jewellery – formerly known as Su Raj Diamonds, but now better known as India’s second largest corporate defaulter after Vijay Mallya’s Kingfisher Airlines – acknowledged on record that the Central Bureau of Investigation had visited their offices.

In its financial statement for the period ending March 31, 2014, the company also stated that it had received a notice from the Mumbai police’s economic offence wing and that its “management and directors” had “fully cooperated with the agencies during their investigations.”

Fast forward three long years. On April 5, 2017, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) finally booked six cases against the Winsome Diamonds and other group companies.

Initial reports often suggest that investigative authorities plunge into action within days after they received formal complaints from banks. But the long gestation of this case suggests that it may have been sidelined after the change of power in New Delhi in 2014. For the past three years, the CBI has investigated without producing any FIRs or arrests – which is curious because it was suspected as early as August, 2014 that there may have been more than a hint of fraud. 

While the mainstream media spotlight often falls on Vijay Mallya, there has been conspicuously less attention devoted to Winsome Group promoter Jatin Mehta, who, going by some estimates, may be the biggest defaulter in Indian corporate history. 

Back to the beginning

Winsome Diamonds had raised Rs 3,420 crore from 14 different banks by 2011. And these loan limits were raised again to Rs 4,617 crore by the first quarter of 2012.

The credit was given to three group companies: Rs 4,366 crore to Winsome Diamond & Jewellers, Rs 1,932 crore to Forever Precious Diamond and Jewellery and Rs 283 crore to Suraj Diamonds.

According to the Economic Times, Indian banks had issued standby letters of credit (SBLC in banking parlance) similar to guarantees in favour of international bullion banks like Standard of South Africa, Standard Chartered London and Scotiabank, which were supplying gold to Winsome Group. As the Economic Times points out, “the arrangement was simple: if Winsome failed to pay the bullion banks, Indian banks would step in to pay for the gold consignment”.  

As all the loans were grounded, within months Jatin Mehta resigned from the company as director.  Mehta first resigned from Forever Precious Diamond and Jewellery on August 13, 2012 and from Winsome Diamonds and Jewellery, the flagship company, on November 9, 2012.   

Mehta claims that the company had failed to pay because Winsome’s customers – UAE jewellers – were hit by derivatives losses and were unable to pay Winsome. In turn, Winsome Diamonds failed to repay the loans to various Indian banks.

From mid-2013, the group started defaulting on loans, and in October that year, banks declared the group a willful defaulter.

In early 2014, the banks knocked on the door of CBI. Both the CBI and the Economic Offence Wing (EOW) of Mumbai police raided Winsome’s offices. According to multiple sources within Indian banking circles, after this point the investigation slowed down. This coincided, multiple senior banking officials say, with the change in government in 2014. 

Rajan dragged PMO

Raghuram Rajan, then RBI chief, sensing the mounting pressure of NPAs on banks and the role of the powerful people from the real estate and diamond sectors decided to take the matter to the prime minister’s office (PMO). In the first half of 2015, he wrote to the PMO seeking “concerted” action in this regard.

The Hindustan Times, quoting sources, noted that Rajan pegged the value of the scams at about Rs 17,500 crore. In the letter, he also outlined the reasons cited by banks for delays in their investigation and the status of the cases as obtained from the CBI.

 Rajan also later confirmed that PMO was pursuing  big default cases. While speaking at a seminar on the topic of ‘Resolving Stress in the Banking System’, in June 2015, the former RBI chief said:

For fraudsters, quick and effective investigation by the investigative agencies is extremely important. We should send the message that no one can get away, and I am glad that the Prime Minister’s Office is pushing prosecution of large frauds.

Rajan also added, in an warning:

And for those who have diverted money out of their companies, especially into highly visible assets abroad, a stern message sent by bankers sitting together with investigative agencies should help send the message that the alternatives to repayment can be harsh.

Who alerted Jatin?

The Supreme Court also believed that the NPA issue was a matter of serious concern. While hearing a petition on NPAs in 2016, the-then chief justice T.S. Thakur and justice R. Banumathi said that the court will examine if the total amount of defaulting loans running into crores of rupees can be disclosed. On April 12, 2016, they came down in favour of public disclosure of defaulting loans that ran into thousands of crores. 

A few months after the court’s decision, news broke that Jatin Mehta had become a citizen of St. Kitts and Nevis. Located in the Carribean, St Kitts and Nevis is widely known to be a tax haven. More crucially, India does not have an extradition with the country and analysts point that out that it will be nearly impossible, if it is required, for the Indian authorities to bring Mehta to book.

Doing business in the UK

As per the records of Companies House, the registrar information companies for UK, Jatin Rajinikanth Mehta is a citizen of Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean. He now owns a company called Diamond Distribution Company (UK) Limited that was incorporated August 1, 2016. Mehta has listed his residential address as 1 Bell Street, 2nd Floor, London, England, NW1 5BY.

In sharp contrast to Vijay Mallya, Indian banks are left with almost nothing with which they can recover their loans Mehta. The Times of India reported in August 2014, that the banks were left with nothing. Journalist Josy Joseph noted that “the collateral security provided by Winsome is worth just about Rs 250 crore”. 

 “…Jatin Mehta may not have many assets in India. He used to take commercial spaces on rent, and operated through his trusted staff and managers. Investigators have so far been able to track down just one property owned by his family members, a flat in his mother Gunvantiben Mehta’s name in Malabar Hill in Mumbai,” the newspaper report said.

Where is the money?

On April  5, 2017, the CBI  registered six separate cases against Winsome Diamonds and Jewellery Limited, and Forever Precious Jewellery and Diamonds Limited, and their chief promoter Jatin Mehta for allegedly cheating three government banks to the tune of Rs. 1,530 crore.

CBI spokesperson R.K. Gaur said that it was alleged that Central Bank of India suffered losses of Rs 699.54 crore from Winsome and Rs 255.24 crore from Forever. IDBI and Vijaya Bank suffered loss of Rs 133.12 crore and Rs 55.68 crore on the account of Winsome and Forever respectively.

It is suspected that all of the company’s 13 UAE-based  buyers were in connivance with Mehta and that they have siphoned off the funds.

Times of India raised doubts about this deal in 2014. The report also narrated how the money was allegedly siphoned off: 

Winsome has 13 distributors in the Middle East, of which 12 are controlled by one  Haitham Sulaiman Abu Obaida. He owns Italian Gold FZE, and has the power of attorney on behalf of the other distributors.’ According to documents with TOI, it is now clear that Obaida also controlled some of the suppliers of Winsome, and fully owns at least one of them, Al Noora FZE, a key supplier of Winsome. Raising questions about the so-called distribution network of Winsome, documents show that 10 of its distributors were incorporated only in 2012, five on the same day, June 25, 2012.

The 11th distributor, Al Mufied Jewellery FZE, was registered in 2010. The 12th distributor is a company named Al Alam Jewellery FZE, incorporated in 2010 in the Ras Al Kaimah Free Zone and had Suneil Mehta as its director.

It isn’t clear who Mehta is, but Al Alam Jewellery is fully owned by Herald International, which is based in the Bahamas, a tax haven.

Even-Zohar’s stand vindicated?

Diamond trade expert Chaim Even-Zohar, who runs Diamond Intelligence Briefs, alleged in 2016 that the money had been laundered to US-based company Pure Grown Diamonds and IIa Technologies of Singapore and Malaysia.  

The synthetic diamonds that have were produced by IIa Technologies of Singapore and Malaysia, and sold by its US marketing arm, Pure Grown Diamonds, could be declared as the fruits of money laundering,  according to Zohar’s investigative report. 

Even-Zohar reports that at least three of Mehta’s UAE-based suppliers were listed on the block global insurance policy of Su Raj Diamonds (later called Winsome) and then were  taken off the block insurance policy shortly before they defaulted on the amount owed to Winsome/Forever. These revelations point towards the conclusion that the UAE companies were set up with the express purpose of siphoning off the money taken from the banks.

Even-Zohar’s report also revealed that most of these UAE companies were, in fact, one-room fronts that did not have the required staff or facilities to store diamonds and jewelry. It appears no actual diamonds or jewellery were bought by them though amounts in hundreds of millions of dollars were accounted for in transactions with Winsome. Most tellingly, all the UAE companies were owned by one Haytham Ali Salman Abu Obidah, who Even-Zohar’s report says, has worked for Winsome for the past eight or nine years.

Winsome Diamonds denied the Even Zohar report and has had filed a defamation case against him. The company had also issued a defamation notice to The Pioneer for carrying a story that allegedly says the loan money was siphoned off. Once Mehta left Winsome Diamonds, the present company has condemned news reports which talk of the loan default or file defamation cases against weak media institutions. 

Why so late?

Most investors know Jatin Rajinikanth Mehta as a diamond trader, but very few knew that Mehta is a close relative of industrialist Gautam Adani, considered close to Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Mehta’s son Suraj married Krupa, the daughter of Gautam Adani’s brother Vinod Shantilal Adani, in 2012.

Winsome was incorporated in 1985 as Su-Raj Diamond India Limited, apparently named after Mehta’s son, who is now Vinod Adani’s son-in-law. Within months after the marriage, Mehta resigned from Winsome Diamonds.

Indian media flashed the news that Mehta had given up his Indian citizenship on June 2, 2016. Just two days before that, however, on May 31, the Enforcement Directorate had issued orders for provisional attachment of immovable assets, plant and machinery worth Rs 171.97 crore belonging to Winsome Diamonds and Jewellery Limited, its promoter Mehta and other group companies.

The outstanding loan of Winsome Diamonds group has already crossed nearly Rs 7,000 crore, according to sources within banking circles. With the CBI finally filing cases, it appears that the investigations has started to come to an end. But will the guilty be punished?

Lack Of Resources Or Excessive Workload Is No Defense For “Medical Negligence”: British Medical Journal (BMJ) Reports

Leaders of the Indian Medical Association (IMA) have frequently claimed that lack of adequate infrastructure and too much workload in Indian hospitals and nursing homes are responsible for doctors committing more mistakes and medical malpractice. 

Top international medical journal, British Medical Journal (BMJ), has categorically undermined any such notions as BMJ in a report published this week has reported that according to the medico-legal experts, law would not accept any view that a lack of adequate resources or excessive workload in hospitals as a defense in cases involving gross medical negligence (“Workload pressure no defense against clinical negligence, barrister warns” by Abi Rimmer, BMJ 2017: 357, j2103). 

The BMJ report has advised that the argument that UK government’s healthcare system (NHS) has not allocated enough financial resources for running government hospitals cannot provide any shield for doctors who are facing charges of criminal negligence causing death of a patient. 

While a number of doctors in UK have been jailed after conviction for criminal negligence (“manslaughter”) causing death of a patient through reckless treatment, in history of Indian medicine, not a single bona fide allopathic physician has ever been convicted for criminal negligence under Section 304A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) that carries a maximum jail sentence of 2 years, fine or both. Even in the most well-known medical negligence case for death of Anuradha Saha, although three senior doctors (Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee, Dr. Baidyanath Halder and Dr. Abani Roychowdhury) were convicted under IPC 304A and sentenced for 3 months jail by the trial court, their conviction was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court on the ground of “cumulative negligence” (suggesting that some other junior doctors, who were not charged criminally, also contributed, albeit to a minimal level, to Anuradha’s eventual death).

No politician has ever been convicted and served his full term in jail as like a pack of dogs they bark away any intruder who may enter their territory. Some, who had the misfortune to have been convicted are out of jail, securing bail, in a jiffy. Yes, there is Shahabuddin of Bihar who did secure his bail but because of vigilance of Prashant Bhushan, his bail was cancelled and he was shifted to Tihar Jail where the atmosphere is less conducive for his kind.

Doctors too have their own packs who start barking as soon as one of their members is hauled up and hence although they are found guilty, they are seldom punished.

Bihar van driver attacked for honking at a cow, may lose sight in one eye

SAHARSA: Amid rising incidents of cow vigilantism, a driver of a pick-van is suspected to have been blinded in his left eye after he was attacked for allegedly scaring a cow by honking the horn in north Bihar’s Saharsa district.

The incident took place at Maina village in Sonbarsa Raj police station area, 250 km north of state capital Patna, on Thursday evening.

Police said driver Ganesh Mandal, 30, was returning home at Bochahi village in neighbouring Bhagalpur district from Saharsa when he came across a cow roaming on national highway-107. “Mandal honked the horn so that the cow could get out of his way. Instead, the bovine panicked and ran away. This made the owner of the cow, who was nearby, furious and he rained baton blows on Mandal,” the police said. The cow owner has been identified as Ram Dular Yadav, they added.

Mandal fell unconscious after being hit on his left eye and was rushed to the nearby primary health centre (PHC), police said. On regaining consciousness Mandal complained that he was unable to see with his left eye, the doctor at the PHC referred him to the government hospital at Saharsa. “The patient was bleeding profusely from his left eye and the possibility of his losing vision could not be ruled out,” the PHC doctor said.

While Saharsa civil surgeon Ashok Kumar Singh was not in the town, deputy superintendent of the district hospital said the patient has been taken to Bhagalpur for treatment at the medical college hospital there.

Ram Dular Yadav, meanwhile, denied the charge that his cow was roaming on the highway. “I was, in fact, milking the cow when the driver scared it by honking the horn,” he told reporters.

Sonbarsa Raj police station SHO Mohammad Izhar Alam said an FIR had been registered on the basis of the complaint by Mandal.

'No space for goons' (won't apply to stage)

Lucknow, April 29: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath today said there was "no space for criminals" in his state, the assertion coming from a stage he shared with a murder accused who sat a few seats away.

Amanmani Tripathi, accused of murdering his wife Sara Singh but out on bail since March 9, was seen walking up to the BJP leader and touching his feet.

Amanmani's father Amarmani Tripathi and mother Madhu Mani are both murder convicts, serving life terms for the 2003 killing of Madhumita Shukla, a Lucknow-based poetess.

Adityanath's assertion came during a government event at Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University, where the chief minister, who is also the mahant of Gorakhnath temple, announced several development projects for east Uttar Pradesh.

"There is no space for criminals in Uttar Pradesh," Adityanath, who was at the programme for about 45 minutes, said.

"Either they should leave the state or the law would soon start taking its course," Adityanath, who is on a two-day tour of Gorakhpur, 300km east of Lucknow, added.

Amanmani, who won the recent Assembly elections as an Independent candidate from Nautanwa in Maharajganj district, was on the dais throughout.

This is not the first time Adityanath has warned criminal elements in the state since taking over as chief minister last month. He had earlier been quoted as saying they would either have to run away from Uttar Pradesh or get prepared to be put behind bars.

"Criminals must not think about continuing their activities in the state. There are only two places for them - one is jail and the other... they know what is the other place for them," he had said an hour after taking oath on March 19.

Amanmani is accused of strangulating his wife Sara and then cooking up a car accident scene on a national highway in Firozabad. The CBI is probing the July 2015 case.

Sara's mother Seema Singh said the BJP must stay away from her daughter's alleged killer. "I have heard that he was trying to get entry into the BJP, where he has many sympathisers," she said. "But it is disappointing for those who expect clean governance under Yogi."

Sources in the BJP said Amanmani had offered prayers at Gorakhnath temple on March 12 and taken Adityanath's blessings.

A BJP leader, who asked not to be named, said Amarmani, the senior Tripathi, was in Gorakhpur jail in 2007 when Adityanath had been lodged there for over a week for inciting communal violence. "Amarmani had helped him a lot at that time. We are not surprised if Yogi is obliged and wants to help his son," the leader added.

Dwijendra Tripathi, spokesperson for the Uttar Pradesh Congress, said: "When Yogi says criminals should get out of UP, he only means the criminals of the Samajwadi Party.... Those criminals of the SP who have joined the BJP would also be free from any fear of law. Yogi is out and out into lip-service politics."

Amarmani is considered close to many BJP leaders. But his friendship with Samajwadi patriarch Mulayam Singh Yadav is no secret either.

IMA gets into semantics to beat code on generic drugs

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's resolve to ensure that doctors prescribe only generic medicines is being undone by some creative interpretation of the Medical Council of India's (MCI's) "code" for doctors, which ostensibly makes it mandatory to prescribe using generic names. Reacting to the MCI injunction that doctors should prescribe generic drugs, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) said "should means may and may means optional or preferable".

Meanwhile, doctors demanded that the PM ban companies from manufacturing any generic medicine with a trade name and ensure they produced only high-quality generics. Though the PM said he would bring a legal framework to prescribe generics, there is as yet no new law, either for the pharma industry or for doctors and chemists.

All that has happened after his announcement is that MCI has issued a notification reiterating an existing clause in its code of ethics regulations. The clause, which had earlier stated that "every physician should, as far as possible, prescribe drugs with generic names" was amended in October 2016 to "every physician should prescribe drugs with generic names", indicating the intention to make it mandatory. However, the IMA has pounced on the fact that the letter of the clause uses "should" instead of "shall" to argue that it is not mandatory. IMA president K K Aggarwal's statement on the issue further pointed out that the clause did not say doctors can prescribe "only" with generic names. So, IMA has advised doctors that they can write the generic name and add the name of the company that manufactures the drug.

"Nobody can stop you choosing the company for quality assurance," said the IMA statement. IMA advised doctors to choose drugs from the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM) as they are cheaper and of assured quality. "When writing non-NLEM, take consent. When prescribing, write the cheapest available medicine and that will always be the generic version of that company," advised IMA.

The All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), a civil society group working on drug pricing and accessibility, issued a statement pointing out that the proposal to make prescribing generics mandatory for doctors would be a useless, counterproductive step as a standalone measure. "This is because in India no manufacturer markets medicines in the retail market under generic names and hence medicines are not available under generic names in the Indian retail pharmacy shops," it pointed out.

AIDAN said that unless manufacturers (except those who are marketing medicines still under patent protection) are made to market medicines under generic names for the retail market, consumers would not get the benefit of "generic medicines".

Can doctors be forced to prescribe generic medicines? Is it advisable?
I'll mention two very frequently used medicines.
Saridon, which is a combination of three drugs Paracetamol, Caffeine, & Propylphenazone.

It is made by two companies whose respective price per tablet is shown in brackets.
Abbot Healthcare Pvt Ltd (Rs 1.82) & Libra Drugs( Rs 1.50)

Let us take another medicine, Ecospirin which consists of Aspirin & whose generic name is Acetyl Salicylic Acid.
This is made by 24 companies and their price varies from Rs 0.18 (Cosme Farma Laboratories) and Rs 4.50 (Torrent Pharmaceuticals) - 25 times higher.

Do you expect a doctor to write Paracetamol, Caffeine, & Propylphenazone or Acetyl Salicylic Acid.

Further most chemists will not stock the medicines of all 24 companies in the second case for the consumer to make his selection.

I have been using the site http://www.medguideindia.com/ for getting alternate medicines to what the doctor prescribes.

For my cholesterol I was prescribed Rozucor ASP kit made by Torrent Pharma which was priced at Rs 11.80 per capsule. The active ingredients in this are Aspirin 75 mg & Rosuvastatin 10 mg 
On checking up with the site I found that there were two other companies, Unichem (Unistar 10+75 for  Rs 4.90 each ) and Innovative Pharma Rs (Rosutop A for Rs 13.50 each).
Since Unichem is an equally famous company as Torrent, I switched over to Unistar 10+75, without consulting the doctor and have been using it for the last three years.
During one of my recent visits to my doctor, when I informed him that I was taking Unistar 10+75, he advised that I should go back to Rozucor ASP kit, but I have not.
Doctors are given incentives to promote specific brands.

Plain Rozucor 10 (Rosuvastatin) is made by Torrent Pharmaceuticals costs Rs 11.80 each

This is made by 63 companies and the price varies from Rs 0.90 each  (Healthcare Lifesciences) to Rs 30.00 each (Dr Reddy Laboratories)
Now what could be the reason for such a large price difference?

For one, since Dr. Reddy exports their products to the US market and the USFDA have very stringent quality requirements and if the company does not meet those requirement, an adverse note from USFDA may tank the price of the shares by as much as 50 % as we have seen lately. Good companies like Dr. Reddy, Divis Lab, Aurobindo Pharma and Lupin have tanked because of remarks from USFDA.

Companies which do not export to USA and European countries have no such fears and do not have to maintain quality and can keep their prices low.
Hence, making a law to use generic is not going to help unless you make all the companies meet certain minimum standards. 

Do we have the necessary infrastructure in place to inspect the plants of the thousands of drug manufacturers in India and issue then certificates from HONEST inspectors?

Unless you have, you are just fooling the public with another Jhumla.
Instead, it would be more beneficial if they stopped the unwanted tests conducted on patients and the kickback the doctors received from the tests.
Further, keeping of dead patients under the Ventilator just to increase the patient's bills which the relatives have to cough up before taking back the body is another dastardly act which these hospitals are doing regularly.