ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

In a show of strength, India stands up like a colossus!

In a show of strength, India stands up like a colossus!
Highlights

By declaring unconditional, unstinted and spontaneous support to the latest acts of abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A of the Constitution of India, the premier Muslim body

By declaring unconditional, unstinted and spontaneous support to the latest acts of abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A of the Constitution of India, the premier Muslim body-- Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind -- has not only served a solid punch on the Muslim fanatics but also has sent a loud and clear message to the war-mongering Pakistan as well as its supporters within India who have been playing the sinister game of inciting the Muslim community in the name of religion that India is one and shall remain united in all circumstances.

The most influential Muslim organisation following the Deoband school of Islamic thought is a widely respected religious congregation having over 10 million members in the country.

Its general secretary, former Rajya Sabha member, Moulana Mehmood Madani, has condemned the Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in very strong words and exhorted the people, including the Muslims, not to fall prey to the vicious propaganda by the enemy country, Pakistan, and its 'paid' henchmen within the country.

The unity in diversity is the beauty of this great country, called Bharat or India. Whenever nation faces the external threat, be it from Pakistan or China, all people irrespective of their different religions, creeds, castes or languages unite and stand up like a rock.

Such a show of strength, indeed, is equal to winning the battle half as the enemy certainly feels threatened and demoralised. Hope, the dissenting whispers made by the splinter groups too, would fall in symphony with the coral of unity.

SC on Common Civil Code

The candid observation made by the apex court in the recently delivered judgement that despite the hope and expectation expressed in Article 44 of the Constitution of India, no concrete steps have been taken by the successive governments to introduce the Common Civil Code in the country.

Citing the example of Goa where no person, including the Muslim can practice polygamy or give oral divorce (triple talaq), the court exhorted the government that necessary steps towards introduction of common civil code throughout the country should be taken in the right earnest.

With this judicial diktat, the picture has become quite clear now. Hope, the country would soon get rid of the discriminatory civil laws which have emerged out of political hypocrisy of leaders of the yesteryears.

Up in arms against SC?

Once again the top judiciary has been in the news, And this time it has been targeted for exercising its power of transferring some High Court judges.

While the Telangana High Court's lawyers supported by the subordinate courts advocates associations and the State bar Council have not yet totally given up the threat of abstaining from the court work on the issue of transfer of a senior judge, Justice Sanjay Kumar, to another high court in lower seniority, Madras High Court too, is facing the similar conundrum .

Its chief justice Vijaya K Tahilramani has defied her transfer orders to the Meghalaya High Court and tendered resignation which is yet to be accepted. Meanwhile the lawyers of Madras High Court boycotted the courts and now there are reports that the lawyers in Maharashtra too, would do so.

In Madhya Pradesh, the Bar Association of High Court is on a different wicket. It has demanded transfer of Justice Sanjay Kumar Yadav alleging that the said judge has been 'misbehaving' with advocates and there have been several complaints against him.

Added to this, former judge of the apex court, Justice Markandey Katju has also taken a plunge into the disturbed waters in favour of the Collegium of the Supreme Court. In a web article, the former Chief Justice of Madras High Court has come down heavily on the present incumbent and said that she hardly devoted time for the judicial work which also demoralised other judges of the High Court.

Indeed, this is a very unpleasant situation. It does not behove well that a wheel of the judicial machine, called the Bar association in its anxiety to streamline or overhaul the justice delivery system, comes out openly in public and forgetting its limitations indulges in abstaining the judicial work thereby causing hardship to the litigant public.

The self-assumed advisory role by these Associations and public utterances by the leaders of these Associations send out a negative message for the affairs of the highest judiciary. It is not that this simple fact is not known to the agitating bar associations or the 'aggrieved' honourable judges.

That is why one smells a rat in the whole turn of events. Notably, earlier too, similar attempts to tarnish the image of judiciary had been made, of course, without any success.

Having sex knowing uncertainty about marriage, no rape: SC

If a woman continues to maintain physical relationship with a man for a long time despite knowing it won't fructify in marriage, she cannot accuse him of rape on the ground that he made a false promise of marriage.

The verdict of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee came as it quashed the rape case lodged by an assistant against a deputy commandant of CRPF. They were in a relationship for six years and lived in each other's houses on multiple occasions, which showed they were in a consensual relationship, the court said.

The complainant who knew the CRPF man since 1998 alleged he had forcibly established a sexual relationship with her in 2008 on the promise of marriage. The relationship continued till 2016 during which they used to visit each other's house and stayed together for days.

In 2014, he raised concerns about marriage on the ground of her caste but they continued to remain in a relationship. She filed FIR against him in 2016 when he told her about his engagement with another woman.

The bench said any false promise of marriage must be of immediate relevance or bear a direct nexus to the woman's decision to engage in the sexual act. It said there is a distinction between a false promise given on the understanding by the maker that it will be broken, and the breach of a promise which is made in good faith but subsequently not fulfilled.

"Where the promise to marry is false and the intention of the maker at the time of making the promise itself was not to abide by it but to deceive the woman to convince her to engage in sexual relations, there is a misconception of consent.

On the other hand, a breach of a promise cannot be said to be false promise. To establish a false promise, the maker of the promise should have had no intention of upholding his word at the time of giving it," the court said.

The court said, "To summarise the legal position that emerges from the above cases, the consent of a woman with respect to Section 375 must involve an active reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act.

To establish whether the consent was vitiated by a misconception of fact arising of a promise to marry, two propositions must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct nexus to engage in the sexual act".

The bench said the allegations do not indicate that the promise by appellant was false, or that the complainant engaged in sexual relations on the basis of this promise.

NGT to CPCB on plastic waste management

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has directed the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to implement a mechanism for plastic waste management.

Acting on a petition, the NGT suggested potential remedial measures such as, restriction on import of plastic waste. The NGT asked the CPCB to oversee the compliance of its directions and, to take up the matter of illegal import with the concerned authorities.

Show Full Article
Download The Hans India Android App or iOS App for the Latest update on your phone.
Subscribed Failed...
Subscribed Successfully...
More Stories


Top