The Indian Supreme Court on Tuesday in a paramount ruling said that no additional restrictions can be imposed on the country's fundamental right to Freedom of Speech and Expression, even in cases involving officials holding high offices.

A five-member bench comprising of Justices V Ramasubramanian, S. Abdul Nazeer, B R Gavai, A S Bopanna, and B V Nagarathna agreed on the larger question with regard to the imposition of additional curbs on the fundamental right and said that it could not be done.&nbsp;

The issue had originally gained heat in 2016 when Azam Khan a minister in the then Uttar Pradesh government had alleged that a ghastly gang rape incident involving a mother-daughter duo on a highway near Bulandshahr district of the northern Indian state was a "political conspiracy".

Watch |&nbsp;India on path to position itself as global power

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/india-on-path-to-position-itself-as-global-power-548248/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Emphasising the importance of "sweet speech" the bench quoted Tamil poet and philosopher Tiruvalluvar of the Tamil Sangam age.&nbsp;

Tiruvalluvar &nbsp;in his classic "Tirukkural" had written that the "scar left behind by a burn injury may heal, but not the one left behind by an offensive speech."

The bench said, "Though religious texts of all faiths and ancient literature of all languages and geographical locations are full of such moral injunctions emphasising the importance of sweet speech (more than free speech), history shows that humanity has consistently defied those diktats."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/new-years-week-saw-indian-capital-delhi-guzzle-liquor-worth-263-million-548991">New Year's week saw Indian capital Delhi guzzle liquor worth $26.3 million</a>

Addressing a suggestion by the petitioner they said that it is not always possible for a prime Minister or a Chief minister to maintain disciplinary control over their council of ministers.

"In a country like ours where there is a multi-party system and where coalition governments are often formed, it is not possible at all times for a Prime Minister/Chief Minister to take the whip, whenever a statement is made by someone in the Council of Ministers," said the judgement by four justices; V Ramasubramanian, Nazeer, B R Gavai and A S Bopanna. They said that when governments at time exist on "wafer thin" majority it is not always possible for the PM or the CM to drop any minister out of the Cabinet.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/stunning-zero-rhinos-poached-in-the-indian-state-of-assam-in-nearly-45-years-549207">STUNNING! Zero rhinos poached in the Indian state of Assam in nearly 45 years</a>

However, as per PTI, Justice B V Nagarathna who wrote a separate judgement differed on the question of whether the government can be held liable for disparaging utterances of its ministers. She said that the government can in fact be held liable if the statement can be traced back to the views of the government.

She added that public functionaries and people of influence due to the influence they wield owe a duty to the society at large to be more responsible and restrained in regard to their speech.

"A mere statement made by a Minister, inconsistent with the rights of a citizen under Part III of the Constitution, may not constitute a violation of the constitutional rights and become actionable as Constitutional tort. But if as a consequence of such a statement, any act of omission or commission is done by the officers resulting in harm or loss to a person/citizen, then the same may be actionable as a constitutional tort," said the apex court.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

The Indian Supreme Court on Tuesday in a paramount ruling said that no additional restrictions can be imposed on the country's fundamental right to Freedom of Speech and Expression, even in cases involving officials holding high offices.

The Indian Supreme Court on Tuesday in a paramount ruling said that no additional restrictions can be imposed on the country's fundamental right to Freedom of Speech and Expression, even in cases involving officials holding high offices. A five-member bench comprising of Justices V Ramasubramanian, S. Abdul Nazeer, B R Gavai, A S Bopanna, and B V Nagarathna agreed on the larger question with regard to the imposition of additional curbs on the fundamental right and said that it could not be done. The issue had originally gained heat in 2016 when Azam Khan a minister in the then Uttar Pradesh government had alleged that a ghastly gang rape incident involving a mother-daughter duo on a highway near Bulandshahr district of the northern Indian state was a "political conspiracy". Watch | India on path to position itself as global power Emphasising the importance of "sweet speech" the bench quoted Tamil poet and philosopher Tiruvalluvar of the Tamil Sangam age. Tiruvalluvar in his classic "Tirukkural" had written that the "scar left behind by a burn injury may heal, but not the one left behind by an offensive speech." The bench said, "Though religious texts of all faiths and ancient literature of all languages and geographical locations are full of such moral injunctions emphasising the importance of sweet speech (more than free speech), history shows that humanity has consistently defied those diktats." Also read | New Year's week saw Indian capital Delhi guzzle liquor worth $26.3 million Addressing a suggestion by the petitioner they said that it is not always possible for a prime Minister or a Chief minister to maintain disciplinary control over their council of ministers. "In a country like ours where there is a multi-party system and where coalition governments are often formed, it is not possible at all times for a Prime Minister/Chief Minister to take the whip, whenever a statement is made by someone in the Council of Ministers," said the judgement by four justices; V Ramasubramanian, Nazeer, B R Gavai and A S Bopanna. They said that when governments at time exist on "wafer thin" majority it is not always possible for the PM or the CM to drop any minister out of the Cabinet. Also read | STUNNING! Zero rhinos poached in the Indian state of Assam in nearly 45 years However, as per PTI, Justice B V Nagarathna who wrote a separate judgement differed on the question of whether the government can be held liable for disparaging utterances of its ministers. She said that the government can in fact be held liable if the statement can be traced back to the views of the government. She added that public functionaries and people of influence due to the influence they wield owe a duty to the society at large to be more responsible and restrained in regard to their speech. "A mere statement made by a Minister, inconsistent with the rights of a citizen under Part III of the Constitution, may not constitute a violation of the constitutional rights and become actionable as Constitutional tort. But if as a consequence of such a statement, any act of omission or commission is done by the officers resulting in harm or loss to a person/citizen, then the same may be actionable as a constitutional tort," said the apex court. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

No additional curbs on freedom of speech and expression: Indian Supreme Court

The proceedings of disqualification of the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs in Maharashtra have been put on hold before the Deputy Speaker of the state Assembly till July 11 by the Supreme Court on Monday. This seems to be a relief for the 39 rebel MLAs. The apex court has also asked for responses from the state government and others on the pleas, which have questioned the legality of the notices seeking disqualification of these lawmakers. The vacation bench, which comprised of Justices Surya Kant and J B Pardiwala, also declined to pass any interim order on a plea by senior advocate Devdutt Kamat, who was appearing for Uddhav Thackeray-led Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government, that in the meantime, there should not be any floor test in the Assembly. The state government can always approach it if there is any illegality, the court said. &nbsp;

The top court has also directed the MVA government to protect the 'life, liberty, and property' of the 39 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and their family members. The MLAs are headed by minister Eknath Shinde. The rebels may also file their replies to the disqualification notices till 5:30 pm on July 12, it said. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/maharashtra-crisis-legal-battle-begins-between-eknath-shinde-rebels-and-shiv-sena-492138" hreflang="en">Maharashtra political crisis: Legal battle begins between Eknath Shinde rebels and Shiv Sena</a>

"Meanwhile as an interim measure, the time granted by the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly to the petitioners or other similarly placed Members of the Legislative Assembly to submit their written submissions up to today by 5.30 pm is extended till July 12, 2022." &nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

The top court has also posted the matter for the next hearing on July 11. It also wants the status quo to continue till it balances the competing claims made by rival Sena camps. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The proceedings of disqualification of the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs in Maharashtra have been put on hold before the Deputy Speaker of the state Assembly till July 11 by the Supreme Court on Monday.

The proceedings of disqualification of the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs in Maharashtra have been put on hold before the Deputy Speaker of the state Assembly till July 11 by the Supreme Court on Monday. This seems to be a relief for the 39 rebel MLAs. The apex court has also asked for responses from the state government and others on the pleas, which have questioned the legality of the notices seeking disqualification of these lawmakers. The vacation bench, which comprised of Justices Surya Kant and J B Pardiwala, also declined to pass any interim order on a plea by senior advocate Devdutt Kamat, who was appearing for Uddhav Thackeray-led Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government, that in the meantime, there should not be any floor test in the Assembly. The state government can always approach it if there is any illegality, the court said. The top court has also directed the MVA government to protect the 'life, liberty, and property' of the 39 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and their family members. The MLAs are headed by minister Eknath Shinde. The rebels may also file their replies to the disqualification notices till 5:30 pm on July 12, it said. Also Read: Maharashtra political crisis: Legal battle begins between Eknath Shinde rebels and Shiv Sena "Meanwhile as an interim measure, the time granted by the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly to the petitioners or other similarly placed Members of the Legislative Assembly to submit their written submissions up to today by 5.30 pm is extended till July 12, 2022." WATCH WION LIVE HERE The top court has also posted the matter for the next hearing on July 11. It also wants the status quo to continue till it balances the competing claims made by rival Sena camps. (With inputs from agencies) You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. ×

Indian SC stays rebel Shiv Sena MLAs’ disqualification proceedings in Maharashtra till July 11

In a petition seeking directions to classify pregnant women and lactating mothers as “high-risk” category for Covid, Indian Supreme Court issued a notice to the Union government on Monday.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

The petition also looks to give them priority in vaccination against the illness, reported news agency PTI.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Watch:&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/india-registers-protest-against-new-uk-travel-rules-414619/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The bench comprising Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice BV Nagarathna has directed the Centre to file its response within two weeks over the plea filed by the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR).&nbsp;&nbsp;

In the hearing, advocate Vrinda Grover, who appeared on behalf of the child rights body, argued that though the Central government issued guidelines for inoculating pregnant women against Covid, it is now being claimed that vaccinating them could lead to “adverse effects.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/do-your-own-research-four-words-hurting-us-response-to-covid-says-report-414459" hreflang="en">'Do your own research': Four words hurting US response to Covid, says report</a> &nbsp;&nbsp;

In the top court, Grover submitted, “We need to declare women facing such conditions as high-risk categories, and since people are dealing with a virus that they don’t know much about, there is a need to conduct continuous research to observe the effects of vaccination on them.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-unhappy-over-changes-in-uk-travel-rules-report-414394" hreflang="en">India unhappy over changes in UK travel rules: Report</a> &nbsp;&nbsp;

Grover added that a platform should also be set up to register women, who are expecting, for the purpose of properly monitoring the effects of a Covid shot on them.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The DCPCR’s appeal was filed in May this year. The bench sought assistance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Centre’s top law officer, to apprise it on the policy to administer vaccine shots to pregnant women, and what additional steps can be taken.&nbsp;&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

In a petition seeking directions to classify pregnant women and lactating mothers as “high-risk” category for Covid, Indian Supreme Court issued a notice to the Union government on Monday.

In a petition seeking directions to classify pregnant women and lactating mothers as “high-risk” category for Covid, Indian Supreme Court issued a notice to the Union government on Monday. The petition also looks to give them priority in vaccination against the illness, reported news agency PTI. Watch: × The bench comprising Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice BV Nagarathna has directed the Centre to file its response within two weeks over the plea filed by the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR). In the hearing, advocate Vrinda Grover, who appeared on behalf of the child rights body, argued that though the Central government issued guidelines for inoculating pregnant women against Covid, it is now being claimed that vaccinating them could lead to “adverse effects.” Also Read | 'Do your own research': Four words hurting US response to Covid, says report In the top court, Grover submitted, “We need to declare women facing such conditions as high-risk categories, and since people are dealing with a virus that they don’t know much about, there is a need to conduct continuous research to observe the effects of vaccination on them.” Also Read | India unhappy over changes in UK travel rules: Report Grover added that a platform should also be set up to register women, who are expecting, for the purpose of properly monitoring the effects of a Covid shot on them. The DCPCR’s appeal was filed in May this year. The bench sought assistance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Centre’s top law officer, to apprise it on the policy to administer vaccine shots to pregnant women, and what additional steps can be taken. (With inputs from agencies)

Indian SC asks for govt take on plea seeking priority jab for pregnant women

indian-sc

Indian Sc, News on Indian Sc, stories on Indian Sc, articles on Indian Sc, Indian Sc stories at Wion, Indian Sc news, Indian Sc latest news

indian sc

No additional curbs on freedom of speech and expression: Indian Supreme Court

Indian SC stays rebel Shiv Sena MLAs’ disqualification proceedings in Maharashtra till July 11

Indian SC asks for govt take on plea seeking priority jab for pregnant women