Accra, Ghana
<meta content="uuidQIzxXG5snk9D" name="uuid"/>Ghana's Supreme Court on Wednesday paved the way for a contested bill severely curtailing LGBTQ rights to become law after rejecting two bids to overturn it.
Lawmakers approved the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in February, drawing international condemnation despite gaining wide public support in the conservative West African country.
The proposed anti-LGBTQ legislation is considered among the most stringent in Africa, stipulating jail terms of up to three years for engaging in same-sex relations and up to five years for promoting or sponsoring LGBTQ activities.
The bill will only become law after being ratified by the outgoing president Nana Akufo-Addo or his successor, John Mahama.
Akufo-Addo, who officially stepped down on January 7 after two terms in office, has not yet announced his decision.
Watch | Oman Stops New Import Permits For Indian Chicken Eggs
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://cdn.thepublive.com/wion/static/kaltura_player/wion_video_player_iframe.html?thumbnail=wion/media/post_attachments/files/2024/12/18/1812_Manav_OMAN_6PM-1734531915-00000003.jpg&videourl=https://vodakm.zeenews.com/vod/WION/1812_Manav_OMAN_6PM.mp4/index.m3u8&duration=207&tags=Oman,Chicken Eggs,World News,WION" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
He had said he would first await the Supreme Court's ruling on the bill's constitutionality. 
Opposition leader Mahama, who won the December 7 elections, voiced support for the anti-LGBTQ bill during the electoral campaign.
Gay sex is already illegal in the religious, mostly Christian nation, but while discrimination against LGBTQ people is common, no one has ever been prosecuted under the colonial-era law.
<h2>Fears for finances </h2>
"It will be premature for this court to exercise its interpretive and enforcement jurisdiction to intervene. Consequently, the action fails," Judge Avril Lovelace-Johnson, head of the court's seven-member panel said, reading its judgement.
"Until there is presidential assent to the bill, there is no act of which the Supreme Court will use its supervisory jurisdiction to overturn," she added.
The court's ruling followed cases filed by Ghanaian broadcaster Richard Dela-Sky, who challenged the constitutionality of the bill, and university researcher Amanda Odoi.
Odoi had sought to block the sending of the bill to the president for ratification.
The bill was initially introduced into parliament in 2021, but the vote faced delays.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-us-subsidies-to-canada-make-no-sense-suggests-canada-become-51st-us-state-785043">Trump says US subsidies to Canada make no sense, suggests Canada become 51st US state</a>
It sparked criticism from the United Nations and several countries, including the United States, as well as concern from Ghana's finance ministry, which warned of a risk of losing billions of dollars in World Bank funding.
Ghana fears it could face the same fate as Uganda, which last year passed one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the world.
The World Bank froze lending to Uganda in the wake of the law, which imposes penalties of up to life in prison for consensual same-sex relations and contains provisions that make "aggravated homosexuality" an offence punishable by death.
Ghana is emerging from its worst economic crisis in decades and is also under a $3 billion loan programme from the International Monetary Fund.
United Nations rights chief Volker Turk condemned the passing of the bill in February, saying that consensual same-sex conduct should never be criminalised.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/virginia-man-dies-after-bear-shot-by-his-partner-falls-from-tree-on-him-785032">Virginia man dies after bear in tree shot by his partner falls on him</a>
Around 60 countries in the world ban same-sex relations, about half of them are in Africa, according to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association (ILGA).
Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Lawmakers approved the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in February, drawing international condemnation despite gaining wide public support in the conservative West African country.



Accra, Ghana Ghana's Supreme Court on Wednesday paved the way for a contested bill severely curtailing LGBTQ rights to become law after rejecting two bids to overturn it. Lawmakers approved the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in February, drawing international condemnation despite gaining wide public support in the conservative West African country. The proposed anti-LGBTQ legislation is considered among the most stringent in Africa, stipulating jail terms of up to three years for engaging in same-sex relations and up to five years for promoting or sponsoring LGBTQ activities. The bill will only become law after being ratified by the outgoing president Nana Akufo-Addo or his successor, John Mahama. Akufo-Addo, who officially stepped down on January 7 after two terms in office, has not yet announced his decision. Watch | Oman Stops New Import Permits For Indian Chicken Eggs He had said he would first await the Supreme Court's ruling on the bill's constitutionality. Opposition leader Mahama, who won the December 7 elections, voiced support for the anti-LGBTQ bill during the electoral campaign. Gay sex is already illegal in the religious, mostly Christian nation, but while discrimination against LGBTQ people is common, no one has ever been prosecuted under the colonial-era law. Fears for finances "It will be premature for this court to exercise its interpretive and enforcement jurisdiction to intervene. Consequently, the action fails," Judge Avril Lovelace-Johnson, head of the court's seven-member panel said, reading its judgement. "Until there is presidential assent to the bill, there is no act of which the Supreme Court will use its supervisory jurisdiction to overturn," she added. The court's ruling followed cases filed by Ghanaian broadcaster Richard Dela-Sky, who challenged the constitutionality of the bill, and university researcher Amanda Odoi. Odoi had sought to block the sending of the bill to the president for ratification. The bill was initially introduced into parliament in 2021, but the vote faced delays. Also read | Trump says US subsidies to Canada make no sense, suggests Canada become 51st US state It sparked criticism from the United Nations and several countries, including the United States, as well as concern from Ghana's finance ministry, which warned of a risk of losing billions of dollars in World Bank funding. Ghana fears it could face the same fate as Uganda, which last year passed one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the world. The World Bank froze lending to Uganda in the wake of the law, which imposes penalties of up to life in prison for consensual same-sex relations and contains provisions that make "aggravated homosexuality" an offence punishable by death. Ghana is emerging from its worst economic crisis in decades and is also under a $3 billion loan programme from the International Monetary Fund. United Nations rights chief Volker Turk condemned the passing of the bill in February, saying that consensual same-sex conduct should never be criminalised. Also read | Virginia man dies after bear in tree shot by his partner falls on him Around 60 countries in the world ban same-sex relations, about half of them are in Africa, according to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association (ILGA). Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Ghana's Supreme Court paves way for anti-LGBTQ law

As Punjab farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal continued his fast-unto-death, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (Dec 18) directed the Punjab government to extend him immediate medical aid, saying that if something happens, the "entire state machinery will be blamed".&nbsp;

The 70-year-old farmer leader has been on a fast-unto-death at the Khanauri border point between Punjab and Haryana since November 26.

The court further said that there would be serious repercussions if something untoward happened to him.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-farmers-protest-rail-roko-agitation-in-punjab-travellers-may-face-inconvenience-784880">Also read:&nbsp;India farmers' protest: 'Rail roko' agitation in Punjab, travellers face inconvenience</a>

“He needs to be healthy to agitate… As an elected government and a constitutional organ, you would not like to invite the blame that something happened to him… Even farmers should be concerned about saving their life. He’s their leader! You tell us something tomorrow. Do something swiftly,” a Bench led by Justice Surya Kant told the central and state governments.&nbsp;

This comes as the Punjab government pointed out that Dallewal has refused medical treatment despite his health deteriorating and has vowed to sacrifice his life for farmers' rights.&nbsp;

The court stressed that Dallewal is a leader of the farmers, and no leniency can be shown in such a situation.&nbsp;

"He's (Mr Dallewal) their leader. The farmers should also be concerned about his health... You tell us something tomorrow. Do something swiftly," he added.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;Delhi Farmers Protest Explained: Why Are Farmers Protesting and What Are Their Demands?

<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/delhi-farmers-protest-explained-why-are-farmers-protesting-and-what-are-their-demands-780833/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The apex court emphasised that the court's doors are always open for farmers' demands, and they can visit and express their grievances.&nbsp;

"We clarify that the court's doors are always open to any suggestion or demand by farmers directly or through their authorised representative," it said.&nbsp;

Dallewal had been on a hunger strike for Minimum Support Price (MSP) and to seek justice for the injured farmers.

The doctors are warning that he may suffer a heart attack as his health is worsening. Despite the fact he knows about these risks, Dallewal is keen to continue his protest till his demands are met.

(With inputs from agencies)

As Punjab farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal continued his fast-unto-death, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (Dec 18) directed the Punjab government to extend him immediate medical aid, saying that if something happens, the "entire state machinery will be blamed".

As Punjab farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal continued his fast-unto-death, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (Dec 18) directed the Punjab government to extend him immediate medical aid, saying that if something happens, the "entire state machinery will be blamed". The 70-year-old farmer leader has been on a fast-unto-death at the Khanauri border point between Punjab and Haryana since November 26. The court further said that there would be serious repercussions if something untoward happened to him. Also read: India farmers' protest: 'Rail roko' agitation in Punjab, travellers face inconvenience “He needs to be healthy to agitate… As an elected government and a constitutional organ, you would not like to invite the blame that something happened to him… Even farmers should be concerned about saving their life. He’s their leader! You tell us something tomorrow. Do something swiftly,” a Bench led by Justice Surya Kant told the central and state governments. This comes as the Punjab government pointed out that Dallewal has refused medical treatment despite his health deteriorating and has vowed to sacrifice his life for farmers' rights. The court stressed that Dallewal is a leader of the farmers, and no leniency can be shown in such a situation. "He's (Mr Dallewal) their leader. The farmers should also be concerned about his health... You tell us something tomorrow. Do something swiftly," he added. Watch | Delhi Farmers Protest Explained: Why Are Farmers Protesting and What Are Their Demands? × The apex court emphasised that the court's doors are always open for farmers' demands, and they can visit and express their grievances. "We clarify that the court's doors are always open to any suggestion or demand by farmers directly or through their authorised representative," it said. Dallewal had been on a hunger strike for Minimum Support Price (MSP) and to seek justice for the injured farmers. The doctors are warning that he may suffer a heart attack as his health is worsening. Despite the fact he knows about these risks, Dallewal is keen to continue his protest till his demands are met. (With inputs from agencies)

Farmers' protest: SC warns Punjab govt if something happens to farmers 'entire state machinery to be blamed'

Ghana's Supreme Court on Wednesday paved the way for a contested bill severely curtailing LGBTQ rights to become law after rejecting two bids to overturn it. Lawmakers approved the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in February, drawing international condemnation despite gaining wide public support in the conservative West African country.

Ghana's Supreme Court on Wednesday paved the way for a contested bill severely curtailing LGBTQ rights to become law after rejecting two bids to overturn it. Lawmakers approved the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in February, drawing international condemnation despite gaining wide public support in the conservative West African country. The proposed anti-LGBTQ legislation is considered among the most stringent in Africa, stipulating jail terms of up to three years for engaging in same-sex relations and up to five years for promoting or sponsoring LGBTQ activities. The bill will only become law after being ratified by the outgoing president Nana Akufo-Addo or his successor, John Mahama. Akufo-Addo, who officially stepped down on January 7 after two terms in office, has not yet announced his decision. Watch | Oman Stops New Import Permits For Indian Chicken Eggs He had said he would first await the Supreme Court's ruling on the bill's constitutionality. Opposition leader Mahama, who won the December 7 elections, voiced support for the anti-LGBTQ bill during the electoral campaign. Gay sex is already illegal in the religious, mostly Christian nation, but while discrimination against LGBTQ people is common, no one has ever been prosecuted under the colonial-era law. Fears for finances "It will be premature for this court to exercise its interpretive and enforcement jurisdiction to intervene. Consequently, the action fails," Judge Avril Lovelace-Johnson, head of the court's seven-member panel said, reading its judgement. "Until there is presidential assent to the bill, there is no act of which the Supreme Court will use its supervisory jurisdiction to overturn," she added. The court's ruling followed cases filed by Ghanaian broadcaster Richard Dela-Sky, who challenged the constitutionality of the bill, and university researcher Amanda Odoi. Odoi had sought to block the sending of the bill to the president for ratification. The bill was initially introduced into parliament in 2021, but the vote faced delays. Also read | Trump says US subsidies to Canada make no sense, suggests Canada become 51st US state It sparked criticism from the United Nations and several countries, including the United States, as well as concern from Ghana's finance ministry, which warned of a risk of losing billions of dollars in World Bank funding. Ghana fears it could face the same fate as Uganda, which last year passed one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the world. The World Bank froze lending to Uganda in the wake of the law, which imposes penalties of up to life in prison for consensual same-sex relations and contains provisions that make "aggravated homosexuality" an offence punishable by death. Ghana is emerging from its worst economic crisis in decades and is also under a $3 billion loan programme from the International Monetary Fund. United Nations rights chief Volker Turk condemned the passing of the bill in February, saying that consensual same-sex conduct should never be criminalised. Also read | Virginia man dies after bear in tree shot by his partner falls on him Around 60 countries in the world ban same-sex relations, about half of them are in Africa, according to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association (ILGA). Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The Supreme Court of India listed eight points that are required to be considered while deciding the permanent alimony amount during the hearing of a divorce settlement case.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna V Varale laid down the formula amid heated debate in the country around alimony, harassment and extortion by wife and in-laws. The debate was triggered by recent death of a techie from Uttar Pradesh state, who died by suicide after accusing his wife and her family of extortion.

Now, the new formula will work as a go-to guide for all courts in the country while deciding alimony amount in divorce cases.

&nbsp;Here are the eight factors that the Supreme Court of India has listed:

<ol>
	<li>Status of the parties, social and financial</li>
	<li>Reasonable needs of the wife and the dependent children</li>
	<li>Parties individual qualifications and employment statuses</li>
	<li>Independent income or assets owned by the applicant</li>
	<li>Standard of life enjoyed by the wife in the matrimonial home</li>
	<li>Any employment sacrifices made for the family responsibilities</li>
	<li>Reasonable litigation costs for a non-working wife</li>
	<li>Financial capacity of the husband, his income, maintenance obligations, and liabilities</li>
</ol>

The apex court however clarified that these factors must not be taken as a straight jacket formula' but a "guideline".

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwij_ererKGKAxUXyDgGHVwfKysQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/growing-tendency-to-misuse-section-498a-indian-supreme-court-amid-bengaluru-techies-suicide-783274" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/growing-tendency-to-misuse-section-498a-indian-supreme-court-amid-bengaluru-techies-suicide-783274&amp;ved=2ahUKEwij_ererKGKAxUXyDgGHVwfKysQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">`Growing tendency to misuse Section 498A`: Indian Supreme Court amid Bengaluru techie`s suicide</a>

Citing a previous judgment in the alimony matter (Kiran Jyot Maini v Anish Pramod Patel), the Supreme Court noted that it was “necessary to ensure that the amount of permanent alimony should not penalise the husband but should be made with the aim of ensuring a decent standard of living for the wife."

Meanwhile, in a separate case, the Supreme Court noted Wednesday (Dec 11) that the laws against marital cruelty were increasingly being misused by women, saying the provisions can’t be used as a "personal tool to unleash vendetta".

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwij_ererKGKAxUXyDgGHVwfKysQxfQBKAB6BAgREAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bengaluru-techie-suicide-case-fir-filed-against-atul-subhashs-wife-and-3-others-783182" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bengaluru-techie-suicide-case-fir-filed-against-atul-subhashs-wife-and-3-others-783182&amp;ved=2ahUKEwij_ererKGKAxUXyDgGHVwfKysQxfQBKAB6BAgREAE">Bengaluru Techie Suicide Case: FIR filed against Atul Subhash`s wife and 3 others</a>

The death of the UP techie has sparked a national outrage over the misuse of laws by women in dowry and alimony cases.

(With inputs from agencies)

<a href="https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/11181469">Get help &amp; support for suicide</a>

If you or someone you know wants help for mental well-being, don’t hesitate to talk to a professional. You can contact local authorities and also encourage the person to contact a suicide prevention hotline using the information in the above link. WION is not associated with any of these organisations and does not make any recommendations.

The Supreme Court of India listed eight points that are required to be considered while deciding the permanent alimony amount during the hearing of a divorce settlement case.

The Supreme Court of India listed eight points that are required to be considered while deciding the permanent alimony amount during the hearing of a divorce settlement case. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna V Varale laid down the formula amid heated debate in the country around alimony, harassment and extortion by wife and in-laws. The debate was triggered by recent death of a techie from Uttar Pradesh state, who died by suicide after accusing his wife and her family of extortion. Now, the new formula will work as a go-to guide for all courts in the country while deciding alimony amount in divorce cases. Here are the eight factors that the Supreme Court of India has listed: Status of the parties, social and financial Reasonable needs of the wife and the dependent children Parties individual qualifications and employment statuses Independent income or assets owned by the applicant Standard of life enjoyed by the wife in the matrimonial home Any employment sacrifices made for the family responsibilities Reasonable litigation costs for a non-working wife Financial capacity of the husband, his income, maintenance obligations, and liabilities The apex court however clarified that these factors must not be taken as a straight jacket formula' but a "guideline". Also read: `Growing tendency to misuse Section 498A`: Indian Supreme Court amid Bengaluru techie`s suicide Citing a previous judgment in the alimony matter (Kiran Jyot Maini v Anish Pramod Patel), the Supreme Court noted that it was “necessary to ensure that the amount of permanent alimony should not penalise the husband but should be made with the aim of ensuring a decent standard of living for the wife." Meanwhile, in a separate case, the Supreme Court noted Wednesday (Dec 11) that the laws against marital cruelty were increasingly being misused by women, saying the provisions can’t be used as a "personal tool to unleash vendetta". Also read: Bengaluru Techie Suicide Case: FIR filed against Atul Subhash`s wife and 3 others The death of the UP techie has sparked a national outrage over the misuse of laws by women in dowry and alimony cases. (With inputs from agencies) Get help & support for suicide If you or someone you know wants help for mental well-being, don’t hesitate to talk to a professional. You can contact local authorities and also encourage the person to contact a suicide prevention hotline using the information in the above link. WION is not associated with any of these organisations and does not make any recommendations.

India: SC devises eight-point formula for deciding alimony amid outrage over techie’s death

As more and more developments are beginning to emerge in the suicide case of a techie in the Indian city of Bengaluru, the Supreme Court expressed concerns over the growing tendency to misuse Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

As more and more developments are beginning to emerge in the suicide case of a techie in the Indian city of Bengaluru, the Supreme Court expressed concerns over the growing tendency to misuse Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This section penalises cruelty by husbands and their relatives against married women. A report by the news agency ANI on Tuesday (Dec 11) said that as the Supreme Court quashed a Section 498A case against a husband and his parents, a bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh said that the Section became a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife. 'A growing tendency to misuse provisions like Sec 498A' On Tuesday, the Supreme Court bench said that the inclusion of Section 498A by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a woman by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by the State. Also read | Bengaluru Techie Suicide Case: FIR filed against Atul Subhash's wife and 3 others "However, in recent years, as there has been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within the institution of marriage, consequently, there has been a growing tendency to misuse provisions like Section 498A of the IPC as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife," the bench said. "Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinised, will lead to the misuse of legal processes and encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family," the bench added. It also pointed out that sometimes, recourse was being taken to invoke Section 498A against the husband and his family to seek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife. "Consequently, this Court has, time and again, cautioned against prosecuting the husband and his family in the absence of a clear prima facie case against them," the bench added. The apex court's remarks came as part of a verdict on a criminal appeal filed by the husband and his family against the Telangana High Court's decision refusing to quash the domestic cruelty case registered by the wife against them. The wife had registered a domestic cruelty case against her husband and in-laws after he filed a petition seeking the dissolution of the marriage. The apex court said that the cases filed by the wife were to settle personal scores and grudges and the wife was misusing the provisions meant originally to protect her. A look at the Bengaluru techie suicide case The techie based in Bengaluru died by suicide in the early hours of Monday (Dec 9). Speaking to ANI, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Whitefield, Shivakumar said that the man took the extreme step following harassment from his wife and her family. The incident has opened up a debate on the misuse of the dowry law. (With inputs from agencies)

'Growing tendency to misuse Section 498A': Indian Supreme Court amid Bengaluru techie's suicide

The Supreme Court of India has taken note of the controversial remarks by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event on December 8.

The Supreme Court of India has taken note of the controversial remarks by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event on December 8. It put under review the whole speech, which has been widely criticised. It also sought details the full speech. The Supreme Court has sought a detailed report from the Allahabad High Court. The Supreme Court said in an official statement that it has noted the reports about the speech. "The Supreme Court has taken note of the newspaper reports of a speech given by Mr. Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, a sitting judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The details and particulars have been called from the High Court and the matter is under consideration," the statement read. Justice Yadav's remarks: A call for Uniform Civil Code Justice Yadav advocated strong support for the proposed Uniform Civil Code as a potential means to promote social harmony and gender equality by unifying personal laws across different religious communities. He claimed that the UCC would replace various personal laws that are currently based on religion with a uniform code from within and between communities. However, the remarks were interpreted by some as an endorsement of a Hindu-majoritarian agenda, especially since they were made during a programme organised by VHP, a Hindu nationalist organisation. Political and public reactions The speech evoked sharp political reactions from political leaders like MP Asaduddin Owaisi, who has called for proceedings to remove Justice Yadav for going against the constitutional norms and hitting at judicial independence. CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat too condemned the remarks, stating they undermine the credibility of the judiciary and could very well cast a pall over public faith in the fairness of the judicial process. Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms, a watchdog, has demanded an inquiry and called for Justice Yadav to be relieved of his duties pending investigation. Also Read: Sambhal violence: SC bars local court from taking further steps on mosque survey till Jan 8 VHP's defence of Justice Yadav The VHP defended Justice Yadav's remarks, arguing that the legal community should support the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code and other reforms. The organisation emphasised that its legal cell has been working to engage the legal fraternity on issues such as the UCC and freeing temples from government control. The statements of Justice Yadav were defended by VHP, which argued that the legal community should strengthen the laws for executing the Uniform Civil Code and other reforms. It emphasised that its legal cell has been working to engage the legal fraternity on issues such as the UCC and freeing temples from government control. Watch: India: Supreme Court Slams ‘Bulldozer Justice’, Lays Down Guidelines Against Action | WION Originals Broader implications for judicial independence The controversy sparks an important question: does political and religious views affect a judge’s impartiality? Legal experts stress the need for judicial independence and warn judges to avoid public comments that might harm the judiciary's reputation. The Supreme Court's decision will be important for judicial accountability and how judges balance their roles with political and religious views in India. The Supreme Court is considering further actions on the issue.

Indian Supreme Court reviews controversial remarks on Uniform Civil Code by Justice Yadav at VHP event

In a major relief for New Delhi, the Supreme Court has eased GRAP-IV (Stage IV) restrictions due to improved air quality. The Court directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to reduce these measures to GRAP-II (Stage II) but restrained any further relaxation.

In a major relief for New Delhi, the Supreme Court has eased GRAP-IV (Stage IV) restrictions due to improved air quality. The Court directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to reduce these measures to GRAP-II (Stage II) but restrained any further relaxation. This development is part of ongoing efforts to control severe pollution levels in Delhi, aggravated by stubble burning, vehicular emissions, and construction activities. The Court directed the CAQM to consider the adoption of certain precautionary measures as in GRAP-III to be initiated when the Air Quality Index reached 350. When it was 400, the Court made it clear that all severe measures as in GRAP-IV would need to be reimposed. Delhi has improved significantly from 'very poor' to 'moderate' on its AQI. The AQI was recorded Thursday morning at 161. According to the AQI scale, air quality is qualified as: 'moderate' (101-200), 'poor' (201-300), and 'very poor' (301-400). "Considering the data before us, we do not think it will be appropriate at this stage to allow the Commission to go below Stage 2. So we permit the Commission to go to Stage 2 for the present," said Justice Abhay S. Oka, who was part of the bench that heard the case. Although certain areas recorded poor AQI like RK Puram, Mundka, and Shadipur while central areas like ITO and Anand Vihar had better readings. The Supreme Court had previously highlighted that the right to live in a pollution-free environment is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court has assigned the CAQM with the task of monitoring the vanishing air and taking necessary action. The CAQM commission continues to closely watch the situation.

Supreme Court lifts GRAP-IV restrictions as Delhi’s AQI drops to 'Moderate'

The Supreme Court of India on Friday (Nov 29) directed the government of the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal and temporarily restrained a local court from proceeding with a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid until January 8.

The Supreme Court of India on Friday (Nov 29) directed the government of the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal and temporarily restrained a local court from proceeding with a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid until January 8. The apex court also advised the mosque committee to challenge the survey order in the high court, adding that the petition would be heard within three days. The bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, added that the advocate commissioner’s survey report must remain confidential. The chief justice said, “We hope and trust the trial court would not take any further steps in the matter until the high court takes up the proceedings in relation to the matter and passes suitable orders.” The Supreme Court’s intervention comes after the mosque committee filed a plea against the survey of the mosque site in Sambhal. Chief Justice Khanna added, “In case any revision appeal is preferred before an appropriate forum, same would be listed within three working days. We hope and trust the trial court will not further proceed till High Court passes appropriate orders,” as reported by Live Law. Also read: 'Not distancing...' ISKCON clarifies stance on Chinmoy Krishna Das' arrest The Supreme Court hearing took place just days after violent clashes broke out during the second survey at the Shahi Jama Masjid site on November 24, which resulted in the death of four people. Late Thursday (Nov 28) night, the Uttar Pradesh government appointed a three-member committee, led by former Allahabad High Court judge Devendra Kumar Arora, to investigate the incident. Sambhal mosque row: All you need to know The controversy began on November 19 when eight individuals, including Supreme Court lawyer Hari Shankar Jain, filed a case in Sambhal’s civil court. They alleged that the Shahi Jama Masjid was built on the site of an ancient “Harihar Temple” and sought access to the location, claiming it as a temple. Watch: Indian, Sri Lankan Navies Target Narcotics Smuggling; 500 Kg Crystal Meth Seized The situation escalated on November 24 when a survey team, acting on the local court’s orders, visited the mosque for a second time. Protests turned violent, with stone-pelting from the crowd and police using tear gas to control the situation. The managing committee of the Shahi Jama Masjid then approached the Supreme Court, requesting an immediate halt to the survey. In their petition, they argued that such surveys of historical religious sites could inflame communal tensions and harm the secular principles of the country. (With inputs from agencies)

Sambhal violence: SC bars local court from taking further steps on mosque survey till Jan 8

The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea by Uttar Pradesh’s embattled Shahi Jama Masjid against a lower court order paving the way for the survey of the mosque on Friday (Nov. 29). A lower court had earlier ordered the survey following a petition claiming the Sambhal mosque was built by the Mughals after destroying a temple at the same site. The bench hearing the case would be headed by the new Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna.

The plea in India’s top court seeks to put a stay on the order passed on November 19 by the local court, reported news agency PTI. The plea noted that the survey has triggered massive communal tensions in the region and it should be halted as soon as possible.

"The haste in which the survey was allowed and conducted all within a day and suddenly another survey was conducted with a notice of barely six hours has given rise to widespread communal tensions and threatens the secular and democratic fabric of the nation," it said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwixptH-z_-JAxUHsVYBHYJYCmAQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sambhal-violence-police-firing-ruled-out-as-cause-of-deaths-in-autopsy-779570" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sambhal-violence-police-firing-ruled-out-as-cause-of-deaths-in-autopsy-779570&amp;ved=2ahUKEwixptH-z_-JAxUHsVYBHYJYCmAQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">Sambhal violence: Police firing ruled out as cause of deaths in autopsy</a>

A major clash between a mob and local police erupted on November 24&nbsp;as officials went to conduct the survey of the mosque. The mob of hundreds of people pelted stones at officials and torched several vehicles. The clashes led to the death of four people and injuries to dozens of police officers.

On Thursday, local police held a flag march in areas near the mosque, a day before Friday prayers, when authorities expect mass gatherings at the site. Tight security has been put in place to prevent&nbsp;any untoward incident. The flag march Thursday was headed by additional superintendent of police (ASP) Srish Chandra.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwixptH-z_-JAxUHsVYBHYJYCmAQxfQBKAB6BAgNEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sambhal-violence-internet-suspended-20-detained-after-clashes-over-mosque-survey-778933" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sambhal-violence-internet-suspended-20-detained-after-clashes-over-mosque-survey-778933&amp;ved=2ahUKEwixptH-z_-JAxUHsVYBHYJYCmAQxfQBKAB6BAgNEAE">Sambhal violence: Internet suspended, 20 detained after clashes over mosque survey</a>

"Namaz will be offered everywhere as usual. An appeal has been made. DM and SP have also spoken to the mosque committee that it is better if people come in lesser number...the mosque committee agrees to this. We have no issues with people peacefully coming for prayers," Aunjaneya Kumar Singh, the divisional commissioner of Moradabad division, was quoted as saying in media reports.

"We have also held meetings with people, meetings with peace committees and Muslim clerics from various mosques were also held. There is a consensus that tomorrow's namaz is offered peacefully. Everyone will offer namaz at their respective mosques," he added.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea by Uttar Pradesh’s embattled Shahi Jama Masjid against a lower court order paving the way for the survey of the mosque on Friday (Nov.

The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea by Uttar Pradesh’s embattled Shahi Jama Masjid against a lower court order paving the way for the survey of the mosque on Friday (Nov. 29). A lower court had earlier ordered the survey following a petition claiming the Sambhal mosque was built by the Mughals after destroying a temple at the same site. The bench hearing the case would be headed by the new Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna. The plea in India’s top court seeks to put a stay on the order passed on November 19 by the local court, reported news agency PTI. The plea noted that the survey has triggered massive communal tensions in the region and it should be halted as soon as possible. "The haste in which the survey was allowed and conducted all within a day and suddenly another survey was conducted with a notice of barely six hours has given rise to widespread communal tensions and threatens the secular and democratic fabric of the nation," it said. Also read: Sambhal violence: Police firing ruled out as cause of deaths in autopsy A major clash between a mob and local police erupted on November 24 as officials went to conduct the survey of the mosque. The mob of hundreds of people pelted stones at officials and torched several vehicles. The clashes led to the death of four people and injuries to dozens of police officers. On Thursday, local police held a flag march in areas near the mosque, a day before Friday prayers, when authorities expect mass gatherings at the site. Tight security has been put in place to prevent any untoward incident. The flag march Thursday was headed by additional superintendent of police (ASP) Srish Chandra. Also read: Sambhal violence: Internet suspended, 20 detained after clashes over mosque survey "Namaz will be offered everywhere as usual. An appeal has been made. DM and SP have also spoken to the mosque committee that it is better if people come in lesser number...the mosque committee agrees to this. We have no issues with people peacefully coming for prayers," Aunjaneya Kumar Singh, the divisional commissioner of Moradabad division, was quoted as saying in media reports. "We have also held meetings with people, meetings with peace committees and Muslim clerics from various mosques were also held. There is a consensus that tomorrow's namaz is offered peacefully. Everyone will offer namaz at their respective mosques," he added. (With inputs from agencies)

Sambhal violence: SC to hear plea challenging mosque survey amid communal tensions

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (Nov 27) expressed concerns over rape cases being filed against men following a break-up between couples, calling it a "worrying trend." The top court noted that a prolonged physical relationship without protest can also be seen as a consensual relationship and not always necessarily as a relationship based on a false pretext of marriage. Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh issued their observation while hearing a petition to quash an FIR filed against a man alleging rape.

"It is evident from the large number of cases decided by this Court dealing with similar matters as discussed above that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged periods, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence," the bench noted.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwi_hqT14PyJAxVik68BHR2nBBYQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/evms-not-tempered-when-you-win-supreme-court-rejects-plea-seeking-use-of-ballot-papers-779386" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/evms-not-tempered-when-you-win-supreme-court-rejects-plea-seeking-use-of-ballot-papers-779386&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi_hqT14PyJAxVik68BHR2nBBYQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">`EVMs not tampered when you win?` Supreme Court rejects plea seeking use of ballot papers</a>

The court said there was an urgent need to make a distinction between consensual relationships and relationships based on the false pretext of marriage. The court noted that any physical relationship between two persons can also be based on their affection, with or without commitment to marriage.

"In our opinion, the longer the duration of the physical relationship between the partners without protest and insistence by the female partner for marriage would be indicative of a consensual relationship rather than a relationship based on false promise of marriage by the male partner and thus, based on misconception of fact," the bench noted.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwi_hqT14PyJAxVik68BHR2nBBYQxfQBKAB6BAgQEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/social-media-erupts-after-supreme-court-changes-the-look-of-lady-justice-statue-768741" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/social-media-erupts-after-supreme-court-changes-the-look-of-lady-justice-statue-768741&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi_hqT14PyJAxVik68BHR2nBBYQxfQBKAB6BAgQEAE">Social media erupts after India`s Supreme Court changes the look of Lady Justice statue</a>

Last week, the apex court noted that a mere breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot result in the initiation of criminal proceedings.

"A mere breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot result in initiation of criminal proceedings. What was a consensual relationship between the parties at the initial stages cannot be given a colour of criminality when the said relationship does not fructify into a marital relationship," the bench of the two justices said.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (Nov 27) expressed concerns over rape cases being filed against men following a break-up between couples, calling it a "worrying trend.

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (Nov 27) expressed concerns over rape cases being filed against men following a break-up between couples, calling it a "worrying trend." The top court noted that a prolonged physical relationship without protest can also be seen as a consensual relationship and not always necessarily as a relationship based on a false pretext of marriage. Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh issued their observation while hearing a petition to quash an FIR filed against a man alleging rape. "It is evident from the large number of cases decided by this Court dealing with similar matters as discussed above that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged periods, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence," the bench noted. Also read: `EVMs not tampered when you win?` Supreme Court rejects plea seeking use of ballot papers The court said there was an urgent need to make a distinction between consensual relationships and relationships based on the false pretext of marriage. The court noted that any physical relationship between two persons can also be based on their affection, with or without commitment to marriage. "In our opinion, the longer the duration of the physical relationship between the partners without protest and insistence by the female partner for marriage would be indicative of a consensual relationship rather than a relationship based on false promise of marriage by the male partner and thus, based on misconception of fact," the bench noted. Also read: Social media erupts after India`s Supreme Court changes the look of Lady Justice statue Last week, the apex court noted that a mere breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot result in the initiation of criminal proceedings. "A mere breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot result in initiation of criminal proceedings. What was a consensual relationship between the parties at the initial stages cannot be given a colour of criminality when the said relationship does not fructify into a marital relationship," the bench of the two justices said. (With inputs from agencies)

‘Not always rape,’ Indian Supreme Court ‘worried’ over FIRs post breakup

The Supreme Court of India Tuesday (Nov. 26) rejected a petition seeking to prefer the use of ballot papers over Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in elections. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale noted that the allegations of tampering were selective and were only made by people when they lose polls.

"What happens is, when you win the election, EVMs are not tampered. When you lose the election, EVMs are tampered (with)," the bench noted.

The top court was hearing the petition filed by KA Paul, who argued that the use of ballot papers was necessary "to save democracy." The petition also cited claims made by US billionaire Elon Musk that no EVM in the world was tamper-proof.&nbsp;

He also quoted Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu and former Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy to make a strong case for his argument.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiT8dT-h_qJAxVJf_UHHVYCLmcQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/severe-pollution-chokes-delhi-as-supreme-court-criticizes-government-for-slow-response-777176" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/videos/severe-pollution-chokes-delhi-as-supreme-court-criticizes-government-for-slow-response-777176&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiT8dT-h_qJAxVJf_UHHVYCLmcQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">Severe Pollution Chokes Delhi as Supreme Court Criticizes Government for Slow Response</a>

However, the apex court refused to consider those, saying the Supreme Court was not the place to make such arguments.

"When Chandrababu Naidu or Mr Reddy lost, they say that EVMs are tampered with. When they win, they don't say anything. How can we see this? We are dismissing this," Justice Nath said, stressing, "This is not the place where you argue all of this."

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwi57Zf9h_qJAxWIh68BHTLuMDI4ChDF9AEoAHoECA4QAQ" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-directs-caqm-to-consider-reopening-schools-amid-delhi-ncr-pollution-crisis-779113" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-directs-caqm-to-consider-reopening-schools-amid-delhi-ncr-pollution-crisis-779113&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi57Zf9h_qJAxWIh68BHTLuMDI4ChDF9AEoAHoECA4QAQ">Supreme Court directs CAQM to consider reopening schools amid Delhi-NCR pollution crisis</a>

The petitioner had also sought a directive to the Election Commission of India to disqualify candidates found guilty of distributing money, liquor, or other material inducement to the voters during polls for a minimum period&nbsp;of five years.

"You have interesting PILs. How do you get these brilliant ideas?," the top court asked the petitioner, who is president of an organisation that has rescued over three lakh orphans and 40 lakh widows.

"Why are you getting into this political arena? Your area of work is very different," the bench said.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India Tuesday (Nov. 26) rejected a petition seeking to prefer the use of ballot papers over Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in elections. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale noted that the allegations of tampering were selective and were only made by people when they lose polls.

The Supreme Court of India Tuesday (Nov. 26) rejected a petition seeking to prefer the use of ballot papers over Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in elections. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale noted that the allegations of tampering were selective and were only made by people when they lose polls. "What happens is, when you win the election, EVMs are not tampered. When you lose the election, EVMs are tampered (with)," the bench noted. The top court was hearing the petition filed by KA Paul, who argued that the use of ballot papers was necessary "to save democracy." The petition also cited claims made by US billionaire Elon Musk that no EVM in the world was tamper-proof. He also quoted Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu and former Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy to make a strong case for his argument. Also read: Severe Pollution Chokes Delhi as Supreme Court Criticizes Government for Slow Response However, the apex court refused to consider those, saying the Supreme Court was not the place to make such arguments. "When Chandrababu Naidu or Mr Reddy lost, they say that EVMs are tampered with. When they win, they don't say anything. How can we see this? We are dismissing this," Justice Nath said, stressing, "This is not the place where you argue all of this." Also read: Supreme Court directs CAQM to consider reopening schools amid Delhi-NCR pollution crisis The petitioner had also sought a directive to the Election Commission of India to disqualify candidates found guilty of distributing money, liquor, or other material inducement to the voters during polls for a minimum period of five years. "You have interesting PILs. How do you get these brilliant ideas?," the top court asked the petitioner, who is president of an organisation that has rescued over three lakh orphans and 40 lakh widows. "Why are you getting into this political arena? Your area of work is very different," the bench said. (With inputs from agencies)

'EVMs not tampered when you win?' Supreme Court rejects plea seeking use of ballot papers

The Supreme Court of India has directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to consider the reopening of schools, emphasising the importance of mid-day meals for students and the limitations of online education. The Court urged CAQM to immediately evaluate the possibility of allowing physical classes in schools and educational institutions, impacted by the ongoing pollution crisis.

<h2>Current air quality status</h2>

The air quality in Delhi-NCR has improved in&nbsp;the recent days. However, several monitoring stations have recorded AQI levels ranging from 200 to 300, indicating a "very poor" category in certain areas. As of now, Delhi-NCR remains under Stage-4 of the GRAP, with several restrictions still in place, including a ban on truck entry, unless they are carrying essential items or use cleaner fuels like LNG, CNG, BS-VI diesel, or electricity. Under the GRAP-4 stage, construction work on public projects has been halted, and non-essential light commercial vehicles from outside Delhi are also prohibited unless they meet the required environmental standards. The restrictions aim to curb the pollution levels and protect public health in the region.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sc-rejects-pleas-challenging-socialist-and-secular-in-indias-preamble-779095">SC rejects pleas challenging ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in India's Preamble</a>

<h2>Impact on labourers and daily wagers</h2>

While acknowledging the adverse effects of the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) 4 on various sections of society, including daily wage labourers, the Supreme Court made it clear that the restrictions will not be eased until there is a consistent downward trend in the Air Quality Index (AQI). This decision highlights the ongoing struggle for labourers and daily wage workers, who face challenges in earning their livelihood under the current restrictions.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indian-parliament-winter-session-both-houses-adjourned-till-wed-amid-uproar-by-oppn-over-adani-case-779032">Indian Parliament Winter Session: Both Houses adjourned till Wed amid uproar by oppn over Adani case</a>

<h2>Relief measures for workers</h2>

The Court also directed all states to utilise funds collected from the labour cess to provide mitigating measures for labourers and daily wagers. Additionally, the Court ordered the implementation of subsistence allowances for workers during the ongoing construction ban period.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India has directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to consider the reopening of schools, emphasising the importance of mid-day meals for students and the limitations of online education.

The Supreme Court of India has directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to consider the reopening of schools, emphasising the importance of mid-day meals for students and the limitations of online education. The Court urged CAQM to immediately evaluate the possibility of allowing physical classes in schools and educational institutions, impacted by the ongoing pollution crisis. Current air quality status The air quality in Delhi-NCR has improved in the recent days. However, several monitoring stations have recorded AQI levels ranging from 200 to 300, indicating a "very poor" category in certain areas. As of now, Delhi-NCR remains under Stage-4 of the GRAP, with several restrictions still in place, including a ban on truck entry, unless they are carrying essential items or use cleaner fuels like LNG, CNG, BS-VI diesel, or electricity. Under the GRAP-4 stage, construction work on public projects has been halted, and non-essential light commercial vehicles from outside Delhi are also prohibited unless they meet the required environmental standards. The restrictions aim to curb the pollution levels and protect public health in the region. Also Read | SC rejects pleas challenging ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in India's Preamble Impact on labourers and daily wagers While acknowledging the adverse effects of the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) 4 on various sections of society, including daily wage labourers, the Supreme Court made it clear that the restrictions will not be eased until there is a consistent downward trend in the Air Quality Index (AQI). This decision highlights the ongoing struggle for labourers and daily wage workers, who face challenges in earning their livelihood under the current restrictions. Also Read | Indian Parliament Winter Session: Both Houses adjourned till Wed amid uproar by oppn over Adani case Relief measures for workers The Court also directed all states to utilise funds collected from the labour cess to provide mitigating measures for labourers and daily wagers. Additionally, the Court ordered the implementation of subsistence allowances for workers during the ongoing construction ban period. (With inputs from agencies)

Supreme Court directs CAQM to consider reopening schools amid Delhi-NCR pollution crisis

The Indian Supreme Court on Monday (Nov. 24) rejected pleas which challenged the inclusion of words 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Preamble of the Constitution under the 42nd Amendment during the Emergency.

Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, while reading out the order, said that Article 368 of the Constitution grants amending power to the Parliament which also extends to the Preamble.&nbsp;

The bench comprising CJI Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar reaffirmed the “incontrovertible” power of the Parliament to carry out amendments in the Constitution under Article 368 if the amendments do not violate its basic structure.

The bench added that the addition of terms cannot be invalidated on the grounds that the original adoption date of November 26, 1949, has been retained by the Preamble.&nbsp;

“The fact that the Constitution was adopted and actively given to themselves by the people of India on 26th of November 1949, does not make any difference. The date of the adoption would not curtail or restrict the power under Article 368 of the Constitution,” said the CJI, while reading out the judgement.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/indian-pm-modi-joins-world-leaders-to-congratulate-trump-on-his-win-in-us-election-773939">Indian PM Modi joins world leaders to congratulate Trump on his win in US election</a>

On November 22, while reserving its order, the bench said that there has been a judicial review of the 42nd Amendment and the decisions taken by the Parliament during that time cannot be nullified.&nbsp;

“The way we understand socialism in India is very different from the way other academics may understand. In our context, socialism primarily means welfare state. That’s all. It has never prevented the government. There’s this private sector which is thriving, doing well… The word socialism used over here is in a different context that the State must ensure it’s a welfare state and that there should be equality of opportunity. That’s done through so many Articles. Then why worry about that score? Why go into all that?” said the bench.

<h2>Here's what the petitioners said&nbsp;</h2>

It was argued by the petitioners that the matter needed consideration by a large bench, however, the judges disagreed.

The petitioners said that “when this amendment was brought in, we were never heard. It was the Emergency (period)”.

Watch:&nbsp;India-China: Beijing And New Delhi Signal Need For Normalised Ties&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/india-china-beijing-and-new-delhi-signal-need-for-normalised-ties-wion-originals-777628/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The petitions were filed by social worker Balram Singh, advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and former BJP parliamentarian Subramanian Swamy, who claimed that the original vision of the framers of the Constitution was distorted by the 42nd Amendment.&nbsp;

It was argued that the terms “socialist” and “secular” were deliberately excluded by the framers during Constituent Assembly debates.

The legitimacy of the 1976 Parliament, which was operating in the Emergency and had an extended tenure, was also questioned by the petitioners.&nbsp;

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, who was representing Singh, said, “The tenure of the Lok Sabha was extended to address emergency requirements, not to amend the Constitution. Adding these words without public consultation distorted the original intent of the framers.”

India's former prime minister Indira Gandhi had declared an Emergency from June 25, 1975, to March 21, 1977, during which the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution was adopted by the Parliament.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

The Indian Supreme Court on Monday (Nov. 24) rejected pleas which challenged the inclusion of words 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Preamble of the Constitution under the 42nd Amendment during the Emergency.

The Indian Supreme Court on Monday (Nov. 24) rejected pleas which challenged the inclusion of words 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Preamble of the Constitution under the 42nd Amendment during the Emergency. Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, while reading out the order, said that Article 368 of the Constitution grants amending power to the Parliament which also extends to the Preamble. The bench comprising CJI Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar reaffirmed the “incontrovertible” power of the Parliament to carry out amendments in the Constitution under Article 368 if the amendments do not violate its basic structure. The bench added that the addition of terms cannot be invalidated on the grounds that the original adoption date of November 26, 1949, has been retained by the Preamble. “The fact that the Constitution was adopted and actively given to themselves by the people of India on 26th of November 1949, does not make any difference. The date of the adoption would not curtail or restrict the power under Article 368 of the Constitution,” said the CJI, while reading out the judgement. Also Read: Indian PM Modi joins world leaders to congratulate Trump on his win in US election On November 22, while reserving its order, the bench said that there has been a judicial review of the 42nd Amendment and the decisions taken by the Parliament during that time cannot be nullified. “The way we understand socialism in India is very different from the way other academics may understand. In our context, socialism primarily means welfare state. That’s all. It has never prevented the government. There’s this private sector which is thriving, doing well… The word socialism used over here is in a different context that the State must ensure it’s a welfare state and that there should be equality of opportunity. That’s done through so many Articles. Then why worry about that score? Why go into all that?” said the bench. Here's what the petitioners said It was argued by the petitioners that the matter needed consideration by a large bench, however, the judges disagreed. The petitioners said that “when this amendment was brought in, we were never heard. It was the Emergency (period)”. Watch: India-China: Beijing And New Delhi Signal Need For Normalised Ties The petitions were filed by social worker Balram Singh, advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and former BJP parliamentarian Subramanian Swamy, who claimed that the original vision of the framers of the Constitution was distorted by the 42nd Amendment. It was argued that the terms “socialist” and “secular” were deliberately excluded by the framers during Constituent Assembly debates. The legitimacy of the 1976 Parliament, which was operating in the Emergency and had an extended tenure, was also questioned by the petitioners. Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, who was representing Singh, said, “The tenure of the Lok Sabha was extended to address emergency requirements, not to amend the Constitution. Adding these words without public consultation distorted the original intent of the framers.” India's former prime minister Indira Gandhi had declared an Emergency from June 25, 1975, to March 21, 1977, during which the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution was adopted by the Parliament. (With inputs from agencies)

SC rejects pleas challenging ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in Indian Constitution’s Preamble

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain the petition seeking an inquiry into the death of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and said that the court can't decide such a matter and it is not the judiciary's job to run the government.

A bench of Justices&nbsp;Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan&nbsp;refused to entertain the plea and asked the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.

The top court said that the issue of whether one commission was right or another is about policy. The petitioner argued that Bose's death has remained a mystery and there is no final outcome available relating to his disappearance.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-pollution-crisis-nasa-scientist-alleges-farmers-of-hiding-stubble-burning-from-satellite-777108">Delhi pollution crisis: NASA scientist alleges farmers of hiding stubble burning from satellite</a>

"We are not experts of everything," the top court said as it noted that the petitioner, who claimed to be a political worker, can raise the issue on the political platform instead of insisting the court pass any direction.

"Supreme Court har cheez ki dawa nahi hai. Sarkar ko chalana court ka kaam nahi hai (The Supreme Court is not a remedy for everything. It is not the Court's job to run the government)," Justice Kant said. Justice Kant further added that the job of the court is to decide the legal issues and asked the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum with his grievances.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/pm-modi-welcomed-with-celebration-of-indian-culture-as-he-arrives-in-brazil-for-g20-summit-777049">PM Modi&nbsp;welcomed with 'celebration of Indian culture' as he arrives in Brazil&nbsp;for G20 summit</a>

Earlier, the top court pulled up the petitioner Pinak Pani Mohanty for levelling reckless and irresponsible allegations against some national leaders who are no longer alive and said that the bona fides of the petitioner require a deeper scrutiny. The top court has asked the petitioner to file an affidavit of the activities so far undertaken by him for the welfare of society at large, particularly for enforcement of human rights.&nbsp;

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION&nbsp;audience.

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain the petition seeking an inquiry into the death of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and said that the court can't decide such a matter and it is not the judiciary's job to run the government.

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain the petition seeking an inquiry into the death of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and said that the court can't decide such a matter and it is not the judiciary's job to run the government. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan refused to entertain the plea and asked the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. The top court said that the issue of whether one commission was right or another is about policy. The petitioner argued that Bose's death has remained a mystery and there is no final outcome available relating to his disappearance. Also read | Delhi pollution crisis: NASA scientist alleges farmers of hiding stubble burning from satellite "We are not experts of everything," the top court said as it noted that the petitioner, who claimed to be a political worker, can raise the issue on the political platform instead of insisting the court pass any direction. "Supreme Court har cheez ki dawa nahi hai. Sarkar ko chalana court ka kaam nahi hai (The Supreme Court is not a remedy for everything. It is not the Court's job to run the government)," Justice Kant said. Justice Kant further added that the job of the court is to decide the legal issues and asked the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum with his grievances. Also read | PM Modi welcomed with 'celebration of Indian culture' as he arrives in Brazil for G20 summit Earlier, the top court pulled up the petitioner Pinak Pani Mohanty for levelling reckless and irresponsible allegations against some national leaders who are no longer alive and said that the bona fides of the petitioner require a deeper scrutiny. The top court has asked the petitioner to file an affidavit of the activities so far undertaken by him for the welfare of society at large, particularly for enforcement of human rights. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Supreme Court denies plea for inquiry into Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's death

The Supreme Court on Tuesday condemned the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA) for unlawfully occupying the Gumti of Shaikh Ali, a tomb dating back to the Lodhi era, in Delhi’s Defence Colony. The court also criticized the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for its failure to prevent the encroachment.

RWA Illegally Occupies Lodhi Era Tomb 'Gumti Of Shaikh Ali', SC Expresses Displeasure

A failed bomb attack on Brazil's Supreme Court is being probed as a terrorist act with possible links to last year's uprising against President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Federal Police Chief André Rodríguez has said that the explosions are being investigated as an act of terrorism and a violent attack on the democratic rule of law. Watch in for more details!

Brazil SC Bomb Attack: Police Say, Explosion Being Investigated As An Act Of Terrorism

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of India ruled against what is known as 'Bulldozer Justice'. It refers to demolition of buildings as an action taken against someone accused of a crime. The SC said that demolitions should be carried out with proper legal procedures in place. Property owners now have to be given a 15-day notice and even an opportunity to defend themselves. In recent years, 'bulldozer justice' has emerged as a political tool that rendered many homeless and affected their businesses. Watch this video to find out more.

India's Top Court Bans 'bulldozer Justice' | GRAVITAS

India’s Supreme Court slams ‘bulldozer justice’, lays down guidelines against action. SC stresses that executives can't become judges, demolish properties unlawfully. Court warns that officials acting beyond authority will pay for bulldozer injustice. Top Court was hearing petitions seeking to halt ‘bulldozer’ action as a corrective measure. Watch to know more!

India: Supreme Court Slams ‘Bulldozer Justice’, Lays Down Guidelines Against Action | WION Originals

India’s top court on Wednesday (Nov 13) rebuked the Ajit Pawar-led faction of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), a party in the Indian state of Maharashtra,&nbsp;for using photos and videos of party founder Sharad Pawar. The Ajit faction had orchestrated a split from Sharad’s party in July last year and joined the ruling alliance led by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Meanwhile, the faction led by Sharad Pawar remains a part of the opposition INDIA bloc.

Before the top court, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was representing the Sharad Pawar faction, claimed that junior Pawar was violating earlier SC ruling by blatantly using videos of Sharad Pawar in election campaigning. Singhvi added that the Ajit faction wanted to “piggyback” on the reputation of the senior Pawar.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwjpg7HP0dmJAxXFsVYBHdKrHIoQxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/congress-mva-release-manifesto-ahead-of-maharashtra-assembly-elections-promises-these-five-guarantees-774993" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/congress-mva-release-manifesto-ahead-of-maharashtra-assembly-elections-promises-these-five-guarantees-774993&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjpg7HP0dmJAxXFsVYBHdKrHIoQxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE">MVA releases manifesto ahead of Maharashtra assembly elections: Promises these ‘five guarantees’</a>

Responding to the charges, advocate Balbir Singh, who was representing the Ajit faction, claimed the videos were doctored and the party never used Sharad Pawar’s images in poll campaigning. In response, Singhvi said the video in question was shared by the official handle of Amol Mitkari, a politician affiliated with the Ajit Pawar faction.

Justice Suryakant then scolded Balbir Singh and asked the Ajit faction to “Stand on your own legs.”

“Whether or not it is an old video, with Sharad Pawar, you have an ideological difference and are competing against him. Stand on your own legs,” the supreme court justice noted.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwjpg7HP0dmJAxXFsVYBHdKrHIoQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/focus-on-women-welfare-food-security-health-bjp-releases-manifesto-for-maharashtra-elections-774981" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/focus-on-women-welfare-food-security-health-bjp-releases-manifesto-for-maharashtra-elections-774981&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjpg7HP0dmJAxXFsVYBHdKrHIoQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE">Focus on women welfare, food security, health: BJP releases manifesto for Maharashtra elections</a>

Justice Suryakant further advised, “Concentrate on the battlefield. The people are wise; they know who is Sharad Pawar and who is Ajit Pawar. Video clips may or may not influence them, but the Court’s order must be respected.”

Earlier, the opposition INDIA bloc had raised concerns that the Ajit faction was still using images of Sharad Pawar to create confusion among voters. The court also directed the Ajit faction to issue a message to all candidates not to use images and campaigning material carrying visuals of Sharad Pawar.

The case will now be heard on November 19.

According to arguments made before the court, the Ajit faction and Sharad Pawar faction are going head-to-head in 36 assembly seats in Maharashtra state. The polls in the state will be held on November 20.

(With inputs from agencies)

India’s top court on Wednesday (Nov 13) rebuked the Ajit Pawar-led faction of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), a party in the Indian state of Maharashtra, for using photos and videos of party founder Sharad Pawar.

India’s top court on Wednesday (Nov 13) rebuked the Ajit Pawar-led faction of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), a party in the Indian state of Maharashtra, for using photos and videos of party founder Sharad Pawar. The Ajit faction had orchestrated a split from Sharad’s party in July last year and joined the ruling alliance led by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Meanwhile, the faction led by Sharad Pawar remains a part of the opposition INDIA bloc. Before the top court, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was representing the Sharad Pawar faction, claimed that junior Pawar was violating earlier SC ruling by blatantly using videos of Sharad Pawar in election campaigning. Singhvi added that the Ajit faction wanted to “piggyback” on the reputation of the senior Pawar. Also read: MVA releases manifesto ahead of Maharashtra assembly elections: Promises these ‘five guarantees’ Responding to the charges, advocate Balbir Singh, who was representing the Ajit faction, claimed the videos were doctored and the party never used Sharad Pawar’s images in poll campaigning. In response, Singhvi said the video in question was shared by the official handle of Amol Mitkari, a politician affiliated with the Ajit Pawar faction. Justice Suryakant then scolded Balbir Singh and asked the Ajit faction to “Stand on your own legs.” “Whether or not it is an old video, with Sharad Pawar, you have an ideological difference and are competing against him. Stand on your own legs,” the supreme court justice noted. Also read: Focus on women welfare, food security, health: BJP releases manifesto for Maharashtra elections Justice Suryakant further advised, “Concentrate on the battlefield. The people are wise; they know who is Sharad Pawar and who is Ajit Pawar. Video clips may or may not influence them, but the Court’s order must be respected.” Earlier, the opposition INDIA bloc had raised concerns that the Ajit faction was still using images of Sharad Pawar to create confusion among voters. The court also directed the Ajit faction to issue a message to all candidates not to use images and campaigning material carrying visuals of Sharad Pawar. The case will now be heard on November 19. According to arguments made before the court, the Ajit faction and Sharad Pawar faction are going head-to-head in 36 assembly seats in Maharashtra state. The polls in the state will be held on November 20. (With inputs from agencies)

‘Stand on your own legs,’ SC scolds Ajit-led NCP over using Sharad Pawar’s images in campaigning

The Supreme Court of India issued a judgement aimed at limiting the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’ on Wednesday (Nov 13). A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan issued pan-India guidelines on a nationwide scale, setting a standardised process for demolishing properties.

This ruling was issued in response to petitions contesting the use of bulldozers on properties linked to individuals accused of crimes, a practice that has become known as ‘bulldozer justice’ in some Indian states. Officials have previously claimed that only illegal structures were being targeted in these cases. However, many petitioners argued that such actions bypassed legal procedures.

“It is a dream of every person, every family to have a shelter above their heads. A house is an embodiment of the collective hopes of a family or individuals' stability and security,” the court’s ruling stated.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jharkhand-assembly-election-kick-start-with-phase-1-polling-along-with-karnataka-bypolls-on-3-seats-775742">Jharkhand assembly election phase 1 polling starts with Karnataka bypolls</a>

<h2>'Construction of a house is the culmination of years of hard work, dreams and aspirations'</h2>

“For an average citizen, construction of a house is the culmination of years of hard work, dreams and aspirations. House embodies collective hope of security and future. If this is taken away, authorities must satisfy it is the only way,” the bench emphasised.

The court raised questions on whether authorities could demolish a home if only one resident faced accusations, effectively leaving others homeless. “Punishing such persons who have no connection with the crime by demolishing the house where they live in or properties owned by them is nothing but an anarchy and would amount to a violation of the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution,” the bench said.

“Such an action also cannot be done in respect of a person who is convicted of an offence. Even in the case of such a person the property/properties cannot be demolished without following the due process as prescribed by law. Such an action by the executive would be wholly arbitrary and would amount to an abuse of process of law. The executive in such a case would be guilty of taking the law in his hand and giving a go-bye to the principle of the rule of law,” the court observed.

"The executive cannot declare a person guilty, as this process is the fundamental aspect of the judicial review. Only on the basis of the accusations, if the executive demolishes the property/properties of such an accused person without following the due process of law, it would strike at the basic principle of rule of law and is not permissible," the court added.

"The chilling sight of a bulldozer demolishing a building, when authorities have failed to follow the basic principles of natural justice and have acted without adhering to the principle of due process, reminds one of a lawless state of affairs, where ‘might was right’," the court observed.

<h2>Demolition guidelines</h2>

Using its authority under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court laid out specific demolition guidelines. It mandated that demolitions cannot proceed without a show cause notice, allowing the recipient 15 days (or the time specified in local laws) to respond.

“It is not a happy sight to see women, children and aged persons dragged to the street overnight. Heavens will not fall on the authorities if they hold their hands for some period,” the court said.

The show cause notice must include details of the alleged unauthorised construction, the specific violation, and the justification for demolition. Authorities are required to allow the accused to present their side before issuing a final order and 15 days will then be granted to allow the property owner to remove the unauthorised construction, with authorities stepping in only if no appeal halts the order.

The bench warned that violations of these guidelines could lead to contempt proceedings. Officers responsible for wrongful demolitions will be held liable for the restoration of the demolished property, with the costs deducted from their salaries.

Furthermore, the court directed all municipal authorities to establish a digital portal within three months, detailing show-cause notices and final orders for illegal structures.

The supreme&nbsp;court added that these directions do not apply to unauthorised structures on public spaces like roads, streets, footpaths, or water bodies, or in cases where a court has issued&nbsp;an&nbsp;order.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India issued a judgement aimed at limiting the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’ on Wednesday (Nov 13). A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan issued pan-India guidelines on a nationwide scale, setting a standardised process for demolishing properties.

The Supreme Court of India issued a judgement aimed at limiting the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’ on Wednesday (Nov 13). A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan issued pan-India guidelines on a nationwide scale, setting a standardised process for demolishing properties. This ruling was issued in response to petitions contesting the use of bulldozers on properties linked to individuals accused of crimes, a practice that has become known as ‘bulldozer justice’ in some Indian states. Officials have previously claimed that only illegal structures were being targeted in these cases. However, many petitioners argued that such actions bypassed legal procedures. “It is a dream of every person, every family to have a shelter above their heads. A house is an embodiment of the collective hopes of a family or individuals' stability and security,” the court’s ruling stated. Also read: Jharkhand assembly election phase 1 polling starts with Karnataka bypolls 'Construction of a house is the culmination of years of hard work, dreams and aspirations' “For an average citizen, construction of a house is the culmination of years of hard work, dreams and aspirations. House embodies collective hope of security and future. If this is taken away, authorities must satisfy it is the only way,” the bench emphasised. The court raised questions on whether authorities could demolish a home if only one resident faced accusations, effectively leaving others homeless. “Punishing such persons who have no connection with the crime by demolishing the house where they live in or properties owned by them is nothing but an anarchy and would amount to a violation of the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution,” the bench said. “Such an action also cannot be done in respect of a person who is convicted of an offence. Even in the case of such a person the property/properties cannot be demolished without following the due process as prescribed by law. Such an action by the executive would be wholly arbitrary and would amount to an abuse of process of law. The executive in such a case would be guilty of taking the law in his hand and giving a go-bye to the principle of the rule of law,” the court observed. "The executive cannot declare a person guilty, as this process is the fundamental aspect of the judicial review. Only on the basis of the accusations, if the executive demolishes the property/properties of such an accused person without following the due process of law, it would strike at the basic principle of rule of law and is not permissible," the court added. "The chilling sight of a bulldozer demolishing a building, when authorities have failed to follow the basic principles of natural justice and have acted without adhering to the principle of due process, reminds one of a lawless state of affairs, where ‘might was right’," the court observed. Demolition guidelines Using its authority under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court laid out specific demolition guidelines. It mandated that demolitions cannot proceed without a show cause notice, allowing the recipient 15 days (or the time specified in local laws) to respond. “It is not a happy sight to see women, children and aged persons dragged to the street overnight. Heavens will not fall on the authorities if they hold their hands for some period,” the court said. The show cause notice must include details of the alleged unauthorised construction, the specific violation, and the justification for demolition. Authorities are required to allow the accused to present their side before issuing a final order and 15 days will then be granted to allow the property owner to remove the unauthorised construction, with authorities stepping in only if no appeal halts the order. The bench warned that violations of these guidelines could lead to contempt proceedings. Officers responsible for wrongful demolitions will be held liable for the restoration of the demolished property, with the costs deducted from their salaries. Furthermore, the court directed all municipal authorities to establish a digital portal within three months, detailing show-cause notices and final orders for illegal structures. The supreme court added that these directions do not apply to unauthorised structures on public spaces like roads, streets, footpaths, or water bodies, or in cases where a court has issued an order. (With inputs from agencies)

'Demolition costs to be deducted from officers' salaries,' SC sets guidelines to curb 'bulldozer justice'

Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College rape-murder prime accused Sanjay Roy, in a dramatic turn of events, has claimed he was falsely implicated. Roy, who was charged in court last week, accused former Kolkata Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal of orchestrating a conspiracy against him, alleging that senior officers were involved and had threatened him.

Roy, a civic volunteer, was arrested in August of this year for the heinous crime. On August 9, a postgraduate trainee doctor was found brutally raped and murdered on the premises of Kolkata's RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, located in the capital of West Bengal.

Also read | <a class="WlydOe" data-sb="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/kolkata-rape-murder-case-ima-suspends-membership-of-sandip-ghosh-ex-principal-of-rg-kar-hospital-754099&amp;ved=2ahUKEwja6t2jiNaJAxV_TWcHHYQOOTMQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE&amp;usg=AOvVaw0fSWbLYQAswC3SJgA5dvYm" data-ved="2ahUKEwja6t2jiNaJAxV_TWcHHYQOOTMQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/kolkata-rape-murder-case-ima-suspends-membership-of-sandip-ghosh-ex-principal-of-rg-kar-hospital-754099" jsname="YKoRaf">Kolkata rape-murder case: IMA suspends membership of Sandip Ghosh, ex-principal of RG Kar Hospital</a> 

<h2>Framed?</h2>

Shouting from a police van after a court hearing on Monday (Nov 11), Roy told reporters that the former Commissioner framed him in the case and that other high-ranking officials were also linked to the matter.

“I am telling you it was Vineet Goyal who conspired the whole thing (rape and murder of RG Kar Medical College resident doctor) and framed me…They had threatened me and there were other big officers in it,” Roy alleged.

This comes as the Sealdah Court recently, on Nov 4, charged Roy under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita.

Meanwhile, junior doctors from across the state, outraged by the brutal incident, have intensified calls for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to step in and demand strict punishment for those responsible.

Also read | <a class="WlydOe" data-sb="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/kolkata-horror-rg-kar-principal-sandip-ghosh-ordered-urgent-renovation-after-incident-756168&amp;ved=2ahUKEwja6t2jiNaJAxV_TWcHHYQOOTMQxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE&amp;usg=AOvVaw36B4gPJryvEGreGewBFMEw" data-ved="2ahUKEwja6t2jiNaJAxV_TWcHHYQOOTMQxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/kolkata-horror-rg-kar-principal-sandip-ghosh-ordered-urgent-renovation-after-incident-756168" jsname="YKoRaf">Kolkata horror: RG Kar principal Sandip Ghosh ‘ordered urgent renovation’ after incident</a> 

This case has spurred months of protests, with medical professionals calling for accountability and justice. Junior doctors have vowed to continue protesting until justice is achieved.

The murder, which occurred on August 9 when the young student’s body was discovered in a seminar hall, has led to the removal of Vineet Goyal following public outcry. On September 17, IPS officer Manoj Kumar Verma was appointed as the new Commissioner of Police (CP) for Kolkata.

(With inputs from agencies)

Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College rape-murder prime accused Sanjay Roy, in a dramatic turn of events, has claimed he was falsely implicated. Roy, who was charged in court last week, accused former Kolkata Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal of orchestrating a conspiracy against him, alleging that senior officers were involved and had threatened him.

Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College rape-murder prime accused Sanjay Roy, in a dramatic turn of events, has claimed he was falsely implicated. Roy, who was charged in court last week, accused former Kolkata Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal of orchestrating a conspiracy against him, alleging that senior officers were involved and had threatened him. Roy, a civic volunteer, was arrested in August of this year for the heinous crime. On August 9, a postgraduate trainee doctor was found brutally raped and murdered on the premises of Kolkata's RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, located in the capital of West Bengal. Also read | Kolkata rape-murder case: IMA suspends membership of Sandip Ghosh, ex-principal of RG Kar Hospital Framed? Shouting from a police van after a court hearing on Monday (Nov 11), Roy told reporters that the former Commissioner framed him in the case and that other high-ranking officials were also linked to the matter. “I am telling you it was Vineet Goyal who conspired the whole thing (rape and murder of RG Kar Medical College resident doctor) and framed me…They had threatened me and there were other big officers in it,” Roy alleged. This comes as the Sealdah Court recently, on Nov 4, charged Roy under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. Meanwhile, junior doctors from across the state, outraged by the brutal incident, have intensified calls for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to step in and demand strict punishment for those responsible. Also read | Kolkata horror: RG Kar principal Sandip Ghosh ‘ordered urgent renovation’ after incident This case has spurred months of protests, with medical professionals calling for accountability and justice. Junior doctors have vowed to continue protesting until justice is achieved. The murder, which occurred on August 9 when the young student’s body was discovered in a seminar hall, has led to the removal of Vineet Goyal following public outcry. On September 17, IPS officer Manoj Kumar Verma was appointed as the new Commissioner of Police (CP) for Kolkata. (With inputs from agencies)

RG Kar rape-murder accused Sanjay Roy claims he was 'framed' by ex-Kolkata police commissioner Vineet Goyal

Justice Sanjiv Khanna takes oath as 51st Chief Justice of India, succeeds DY Chandrachud. Unlike Chandrachud’s two-year term, Khanna is set to hold the post for six months. During his tenure, Khanna will hear key judgments like Google's antitrust issues and marital rape. Justice Sanjiv Khanna was elevated as Supreme Court judge in January 2019. Watch to know more!

India: Justice Sanjiv Khanna Takes Oath As 51st Chief Justice Of India | WION Originals

The Supreme Court of India on Monday (Nov 11) sharply criticised the Delhi Police and asked for "immediate action" on banning the sale and bursting of firecrackers in the city, which has been happening every year defying the existing ban, even after the festival of Diwali, and said that "no religion encourages pollution".

"No religion encourages any activity which creates pollution. If firecrackers are burst in this fashion... it also affects the fundamental right to health of the citizens," stated a bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih, while hearing the case on the yearly air quality crisis of Delhi.

“The right to live in a pollution-free atmosphere is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Prima facie, we are of the view that no religion promotes any activity that promotes pollution or compromises with the health of the people,” added the bench.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/justice-sanjiv-khanna-succeeds-dy-chandrachud-takes-oath-as-51st-chief-justice-of-india-775112">Justice Sanjiv Khanna succeeds DY Chandrachud, takes oath as 51st Chief Justice of India</a>

The court also asked the Delhi government to decide by November 25&nbsp;on permanently banning the firecrackers in the wake of their chemical residue blanketing the city with a cloud of toxic smog that has been adversely affecting the health of the residents.

<h2>Court directs Delhi Police to create special cell, tell SHOs to implement order</h2>

The apex court also directed the Delhi Police to create a special cell which would enforce the ban on crackers and give responsibility to SHOs for implementing the Delhi government order dated October 14 in this regard.

The Commissioner of Delhi Police was ordered by the court to file an affidavit by November 25 regarding whether notices of ban were issued to all cracker manufacturers.

The court further asked the police to provide details of steps adopted for curbing the online sale of crackers.

The&nbsp;Supreme Court&nbsp;also asked the states of the National Capital Region to inform about the steps adopted for controlling air pollution.

After the Delhi government and police were reprimanded last week, an affidavit was filed by the Delhi Police explaining the steps taken by them.

Watch:&nbsp;New Delhi: Indian Capital Chokes Under Blanket Of Smog As AQI Drops To 'Severe' Category

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/new-delhi-indian-capital-chokes-under-blanket-of-smog-as-aqi-drops-to-severe-category-774784/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"There are widespread news reports the ban on firecrackers (in Delhi NCR) was not implemented at all...," said the court last week.&nbsp;

"After October 14 did the police go and stop the sale of firecrackers?" the court asked on Monday (Nov 11), to which the police said "yes". "This is all eyewash..." the court replied.

"We find that implementation of the order was not taken seriously by the police and there is nothing in the affidavit to show the ban order was communicated to manufacturers and stores making and selling firecrackers (in Delhi)," said the court.

"We direct the Commissioner of Police to immediately take action and inform all concerned about the ban... to ensure, during the ban, no manufacturers stores or sells firecrackers," it added.

After Diwali, the capital city's air quality index (AQI) plummeted to the 'severe' category.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India on Monday (Nov 11) sharply criticised the Delhi Police and asked for "immediate action" on banning the sale and bursting of firecrackers in the city, which has been happening every year defying the existing ban, even after the festival of Diwali, and said that "no religion encourages pollution".

The Supreme Court of India on Monday (Nov 11) sharply criticised the Delhi Police and asked for "immediate action" on banning the sale and bursting of firecrackers in the city, which has been happening every year defying the existing ban, even after the festival of Diwali, and said that "no religion encourages pollution". "No religion encourages any activity which creates pollution. If firecrackers are burst in this fashion... it also affects the fundamental right to health of the citizens," stated a bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih, while hearing the case on the yearly air quality crisis of Delhi. “The right to live in a pollution-free atmosphere is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Prima facie, we are of the view that no religion promotes any activity that promotes pollution or compromises with the health of the people,” added the bench. Also Read: Justice Sanjiv Khanna succeeds DY Chandrachud, takes oath as 51st Chief Justice of India The court also asked the Delhi government to decide by November 25 on permanently banning the firecrackers in the wake of their chemical residue blanketing the city with a cloud of toxic smog that has been adversely affecting the health of the residents. Court directs Delhi Police to create special cell, tell SHOs to implement order The apex court also directed the Delhi Police to create a special cell which would enforce the ban on crackers and give responsibility to SHOs for implementing the Delhi government order dated October 14 in this regard. The Commissioner of Delhi Police was ordered by the court to file an affidavit by November 25 regarding whether notices of ban were issued to all cracker manufacturers. The court further asked the police to provide details of steps adopted for curbing the online sale of crackers. The Supreme Court also asked the states of the National Capital Region to inform about the steps adopted for controlling air pollution. After the Delhi government and police were reprimanded last week, an affidavit was filed by the Delhi Police explaining the steps taken by them. Watch: New Delhi: Indian Capital Chokes Under Blanket Of Smog As AQI Drops To 'Severe' Category "There are widespread news reports the ban on firecrackers (in Delhi NCR) was not implemented at all...," said the court last week. "After October 14 did the police go and stop the sale of firecrackers?" the court asked on Monday (Nov 11), to which the police said "yes". "This is all eyewash..." the court replied. "We find that implementation of the order was not taken seriously by the police and there is nothing in the affidavit to show the ban order was communicated to manufacturers and stores making and selling firecrackers (in Delhi)," said the court. "We direct the Commissioner of Police to immediately take action and inform all concerned about the ban... to ensure, during the ban, no manufacturers stores or sells firecrackers," it added. After Diwali, the capital city's air quality index (AQI) plummeted to the 'severe' category. (With inputs from agencies)

India's SC asks Delhi govt to decide on firecracker ban, says 'no religion encourages pollution'

The Supreme Court on Thursday held that recruitment rules for appointment in government jobs cannot be changed midway unless it is prescribed. A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud held that ‘rules of the game’ once set before the start of recruitment process cannot be tinkered with midway.

The Supreme Court on Thursday held that recruitment rules for appointment in government jobs cannot be changed midway unless it is prescribed. A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud held that ‘rules of the game’ once set before the start of recruitment process cannot be tinkered with midway. Also read: Canada censors Australia Today, India blasts Canada's 'hypocrisy' The selection rules should not be arbitrary and be in accordance with Article 14 of the Constitution, the bench also comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha, Pankaj Mithal and Manoj Misra said. The top court unanimously held that transparency and non-discrimination should be the hallmarks of the public recruitment process and candidates should not be taken by surprise by change of rules midway. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

India: Government job recruitment rules can’t change midway unless prescribed: Supreme Court

The Indian Supreme Court on Tuesday, November 5, ruled that the State cannot take over private property solely under the pretext of serving the “common good”. Watch this report for more details!

India: Supreme Court Overturns 1978 Ruling, Limits Govt's Power on Private Property

In a majority 7:2 ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that states are not empowered under the Constitution to take over all privately-owned resources for distribution to serve the "common good".

A nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, however, said states can stake claim over private properties in certain cases.

The majority verdict pronounced by the CJI overruled Justice Krishna Iyer's previous ruling that all privately owned resources can be acquired by the State for distribution under Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

The CJI wrote for himself and six other judges on the bench which decided the vexed legal question on whether private properties can be considered "material resources of the community" under Article 39(b) and taken over by State authorities for distribution to subserve the "common good".

It overturned several verdicts that had adopted the socialist theme and ruled that states can take over all private properties for common good.

Justice BV Nagarathna partially disagreed with the majority judgement penned by the CJI, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia dissented on all aspects.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-suspected-lashkar-e-taiba-terrorist-gunned-down-in-kashmirs-bandipora-773554">India: Suspected Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist gunned down in Kashmir’s Bandipora</a>

The top court had, in the Minerva Mills case of 1980, declared two provisions of the 42nd Amendment, which prevented any constitutional amendment from being "called in question in any court on any ground" and accorded precedence to the Directive Principles of State Policy over the fundamental rights of individuals, as unconstitutional.

Article 31C protects a law made under Articles 39(b) and (c) empowering the State to take over material resources of the community, including private properties, for distribution to subserve the common good.

The top court had heard 16 petitions, including the lead petition filed by the Mumbai-based Property Owners' Association (POA) in 1992.

The POA has opposed Chapter VIII-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) Act. Inserted in 1986, the chapter empowers State authorities to acquire cessed buildings and the land on which those are built if 70 per cent of the occupants make such a request for restoration purposes.

The MHADA Act was enacted in pursuance of Article 39(b), which is part of the Directive Principles of State Policy and makes it obligatory for the State to create a policy towards securing "that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good".

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

In a majority 7:2 ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that states are not empowered under the Constitution to take over all privately-owned resources for distribution to serve the "common good".

In a majority 7:2 ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that states are not empowered under the Constitution to take over all privately-owned resources for distribution to serve the "common good". A nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, however, said states can stake claim over private properties in certain cases. The majority verdict pronounced by the CJI overruled Justice Krishna Iyer's previous ruling that all privately owned resources can be acquired by the State for distribution under Article 39(b) of the Constitution. The CJI wrote for himself and six other judges on the bench which decided the vexed legal question on whether private properties can be considered "material resources of the community" under Article 39(b) and taken over by State authorities for distribution to subserve the "common good". It overturned several verdicts that had adopted the socialist theme and ruled that states can take over all private properties for common good. Justice BV Nagarathna partially disagreed with the majority judgement penned by the CJI, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia dissented on all aspects. Also read: India: Suspected Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist gunned down in Kashmir’s Bandipora The top court had, in the Minerva Mills case of 1980, declared two provisions of the 42nd Amendment, which prevented any constitutional amendment from being "called in question in any court on any ground" and accorded precedence to the Directive Principles of State Policy over the fundamental rights of individuals, as unconstitutional. Article 31C protects a law made under Articles 39(b) and (c) empowering the State to take over material resources of the community, including private properties, for distribution to subserve the common good. The top court had heard 16 petitions, including the lead petition filed by the Mumbai-based Property Owners' Association (POA) in 1992. The POA has opposed Chapter VIII-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) Act. Inserted in 1986, the chapter empowers State authorities to acquire cessed buildings and the land on which those are built if 70 per cent of the occupants make such a request for restoration purposes. The MHADA Act was enacted in pursuance of Article 39(b), which is part of the Directive Principles of State Policy and makes it obligatory for the State to create a policy towards securing "that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good". Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

India: States can’t claim all private properties for public good, says Supreme Court

The supreme court of India has dealt a significant blow to Byju’s by reversing a tribunal order that allowed the firm to settle its debts with a creditor. This ruling pushes Byju’s back into the insolvency process, raising serious concerns about its future.

Byju’s Faces Setback as Tribunal’s Debt Resolution Rejected

The Supreme Court of India has postponed the hearing on petitions challenging the immunity granted to husbands in marital rape cases for four weeks. This decision comes as Chief Justice DY Chandrachud prepares to retire next month, with his last day in the court being November 8.

<h2>Retirement of Chief Justice Chandrachud</h2>

Chief Justice Chandrachud is set to retire on November 10, raising concerns about the completion of discussions on this crucial issue before his retirement.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/will-take-you-to-task-supreme-court-blasts-modi-govt-over-inaction-on-stubble-burning-770045">‘Will take you to task,’ Supreme Court blasts Modi govt over inaction on stubble burning</a>

The three-judge bench, which includes Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, began its examination of the matter on October 17. The focus is on the exception clause of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which allows sexual relations between a husband and wife aged 18 or older to be excluded from the definition of rape.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/chhota-rajan-granted-bail-in-jaya-shetty-murder-case-bombay-hc-sets-bond-at-1189-769961">Bombay HC suspends Chhota Rajan’s life sentence in Jaya Shetty murder case, grants him bail</a>

During a recent hearing, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing one of the petitioners, indicated he would need an additional day to make his arguments. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, also expressed the need for more time to address the complex legal issues involved.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/lg-manoj-sinha-holds-review-meeting-to-tighten-security-around-all-developmental-projects-in-kashmir-division-769989">LG Manoj Sinha holds review meeting to tighten security around all developmental projects in Kashmir division</a>

<h2>Impact of Diwali break</h2>

The bench highlighted that the upcoming Diwali holidays will further complicate the timeline. A final decision before the Chief Justice retires can only happen if the arguments are finished this week. “In view of the time estimate, we are of the view that it would not be possible to complete the hearings in the foreseeable future,” said the bench.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India has postponed the hearing on petitions challenging the immunity granted to husbands in marital rape cases for four weeks. This decision comes as Chief Justice DY Chandrachud prepares to retire next month, with his last day in the court being November 8.

The Supreme Court of India has postponed the hearing on petitions challenging the immunity granted to husbands in marital rape cases for four weeks. This decision comes as Chief Justice DY Chandrachud prepares to retire next month, with his last day in the court being November 8. Retirement of Chief Justice Chandrachud Chief Justice Chandrachud is set to retire on November 10, raising concerns about the completion of discussions on this crucial issue before his retirement. Also read | ‘Will take you to task,’ Supreme Court blasts Modi govt over inaction on stubble burning The three-judge bench, which includes Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, began its examination of the matter on October 17. The focus is on the exception clause of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which allows sexual relations between a husband and wife aged 18 or older to be excluded from the definition of rape. Also read | Bombay HC suspends Chhota Rajan’s life sentence in Jaya Shetty murder case, grants him bail During a recent hearing, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing one of the petitioners, indicated he would need an additional day to make his arguments. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, also expressed the need for more time to address the complex legal issues involved. Also read | LG Manoj Sinha holds review meeting to tighten security around all developmental projects in Kashmir division Impact of Diwali break The bench highlighted that the upcoming Diwali holidays will further complicate the timeline. A final decision before the Chief Justice retires can only happen if the arguments are finished this week. “In view of the time estimate, we are of the view that it would not be possible to complete the hearings in the foreseeable future,” said the bench. (With inputs from agencies)

Supreme Court defers hearing on marital rape pleas for four weeks

India’s Supreme Court on Wednesday (Oct 23) scolded Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government over not doing enough to address the issue of stubble burning in northern parts of the country amid worsening air quality. Saying that the Environment Protection Act had become “toothless,” the court also blasted the state governments of Haryana and Punjab, the two major agrarian states, for not prosecuting the farmers at fault.

The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih warned they would take the union government to task over the matter.

"We will take the Union of India to task... it has not created any machinery. The Environmental Protection Act has become toothless. You have got rid of punishment and replaced it with a penalty by amending Section 15, and the procedure to be followed for imposing a penalty cannot be followed," the Supreme Court said.

Responding to it, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, representing the centre, assured the apex court that the act will be made fully operational within 10 days and further rules will be finalised.

Referring to the Haryana and Punjab state governments, the top court said, “If these governments and you (the Centre) were seriously ready to safeguard the environment, then everything would have been done before amendment to Section 15. This is all political, nothing else."

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiv8tbYs6SJAxW5sFYBHQRBOpIQxfQBKAB6BAgPEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/grap-stage-ii-measures-to-be-imposed-in-delhi-ncr-amid-increasing-pollution-check-out-restrictions-769559" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/grap-stage-ii-measures-to-be-imposed-in-delhi-ncr-amid-increasing-pollution-check-out-restrictions-769559&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiv8tbYs6SJAxW5sFYBHQRBOpIQxfQBKAB6BAgPEAE">GRAP Stage-II measures imposed in Delhi-NCR amid increasing pollution. Check out restrictions</a>

Air quality has severely worsened around the national capital over the past few weeks. It was recorded in the "very poor" category, with several areas of Delhi falling into the "severe" zone on Wednesday. As winters approach, stubble burning is considered as one of the major contributors to the air pollution.

The top court also criticised the chief secretaries of Haryana and Punjab, labelling their efforts to weed out farm fires as "mere eyewash".

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiv8tbYs6SJAxW5sFYBHQRBOpIQxfQBKAB6BAgMEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/grap-stage-ii-implemented-in-delhi-ncr-to-combat-pollution-what-does-it-mean-769718" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/grap-stage-ii-implemented-in-delhi-ncr-to-combat-pollution-what-does-it-mean-769718&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiv8tbYs6SJAxW5sFYBHQRBOpIQxfQBKAB6BAgMEAE">GRAP Stage II implemented in Delhi-NCR to combat pollution. What does it mean?</a>

"You must answer why you gave a false statement to the Advocate General of Punjab that a request has been made to Central Government for funds for tractors and diesel for farmers. We will issue contempt. We are not leaving you," the court said.

To this, advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Punjab, said, "We will be taking stringent action as we proceed forward."

(With inputs from agencies)

India’s Supreme Court on Wednesday (Oct 23) scolded Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government over not doing enough to address the issue of stubble burning in northern parts of the country amid worsening air quality.

India’s Supreme Court on Wednesday (Oct 23) scolded Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government over not doing enough to address the issue of stubble burning in northern parts of the country amid worsening air quality. Saying that the Environment Protection Act had become “toothless,” the court also blasted the state governments of Haryana and Punjab, the two major agrarian states, for not prosecuting the farmers at fault. The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih warned they would take the union government to task over the matter. "We will take the Union of India to task... it has not created any machinery. The Environmental Protection Act has become toothless. You have got rid of punishment and replaced it with a penalty by amending Section 15, and the procedure to be followed for imposing a penalty cannot be followed," the Supreme Court said. Responding to it, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, representing the centre, assured the apex court that the act will be made fully operational within 10 days and further rules will be finalised. Referring to the Haryana and Punjab state governments, the top court said, “If these governments and you (the Centre) were seriously ready to safeguard the environment, then everything would have been done before amendment to Section 15. This is all political, nothing else." Also read: GRAP Stage-II measures imposed in Delhi-NCR amid increasing pollution. Check out restrictions Air quality has severely worsened around the national capital over the past few weeks. It was recorded in the "very poor" category, with several areas of Delhi falling into the "severe" zone on Wednesday. As winters approach, stubble burning is considered as one of the major contributors to the air pollution. The top court also criticised the chief secretaries of Haryana and Punjab, labelling their efforts to weed out farm fires as "mere eyewash". Also read: GRAP Stage II implemented in Delhi-NCR to combat pollution. What does it mean? "You must answer why you gave a false statement to the Advocate General of Punjab that a request has been made to Central Government for funds for tractors and diesel for farmers. We will issue contempt. We are not leaving you," the court said. To this, advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Punjab, said, "We will be taking stringent action as we proceed forward." (With inputs from agencies)

‘Will take you to task,’ Supreme Court blasts Modi govt over inaction on stubble burning

The Supreme Court on Friday lifted the stay imposed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on proceedings against jailed Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in three cases relating to sacrilege of the holy book in 2015.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan also issued notice to the self-styled godman on the appeal filed by Punjab government against stay on trial by High Court in the case.

In March, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed proceedings against Singh in the three sacrilege cases.

The cases were filed after several incidents in Bargari, Faridkot district, where the scripture of the Guru Granth Sahib, the holy scripture of the Sikhs, was allegedly desecrated and had gone missing.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiZ8PP_u5eJAxXt1jgGHf1NGv4QxfQBKAB6BAgSEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/complete-defiance-sc-scolds-punjab-haryana-over-rising-cases-of-stubble-burning-767991" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/complete-defiance-sc-scolds-punjab-haryana-over-rising-cases-of-stubble-burning-767991&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiZ8PP_u5eJAxXt1jgGHf1NGv4QxfQBKAB6BAgSEAE">‘Complete defiance,’ SC scolds Punjab and Haryana over rising cases of stubble burning</a>

In December 2021, Ram Rahim moved the High Court, demanding that the CBI probe the three sacrilege FIRs of 2015. The High Court then stayed the proceedings in the case.

The cases against Ram Rahim are related to the 2015 sacrilege incidents reported in the Faridkot district of Punjab.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ved="2ahUKEwiZ8PP_u5eJAxXt1jgGHf1NGv4QxfQBKAB6BAgLEAE" href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/poll-body-eci-dismisses-congress-claims-of-evm-tampering-in-haryana-elections-says-cant-be-hacked-767748" jsname="YKoRaf" ping="/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/poll-body-eci-dismisses-congress-claims-of-evm-tampering-in-haryana-elections-says-cant-be-hacked-767748&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiZ8PP_u5eJAxXt1jgGHf1NGv4QxfQBKAB6BAgLEAE">Poll body ECI dismisses Congress claims of EVM tampering in Haryana elections, says 'can't be hacked'</a>

Parts of Guru Granth Sahib were found scattered in village Bargari in Faridkot on October 12, 2015, and an FIR was registered under sections 295, 120-B of IPC at Police Station Bajakhana.Ram Rahim is serving a 20-year sentence for rape and also convicted for murder.

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits for grammar and punctuation. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION&nbsp;audience. 
&nbsp;

The Supreme Court on Friday lifted the stay imposed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on proceedings against jailed Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in three cases relating to sacrilege of the holy book in 2015.

The Supreme Court on Friday lifted the stay imposed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on proceedings against jailed Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in three cases relating to sacrilege of the holy book in 2015. A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan also issued notice to the self-styled godman on the appeal filed by Punjab government against stay on trial by High Court in the case. In March, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed proceedings against Singh in the three sacrilege cases. The cases were filed after several incidents in Bargari, Faridkot district, where the scripture of the Guru Granth Sahib, the holy scripture of the Sikhs, was allegedly desecrated and had gone missing. Also read: ‘Complete defiance,’ SC scolds Punjab and Haryana over rising cases of stubble burning In December 2021, Ram Rahim moved the High Court, demanding that the CBI probe the three sacrilege FIRs of 2015. The High Court then stayed the proceedings in the case. The cases against Ram Rahim are related to the 2015 sacrilege incidents reported in the Faridkot district of Punjab. Also read: Poll body ECI dismisses Congress claims of EVM tampering in Haryana elections, says 'can't be hacked' Parts of Guru Granth Sahib were found scattered in village Bargari in Faridkot on October 12, 2015, and an FIR was registered under sections 295, 120-B of IPC at Police Station Bajakhana.Ram Rahim is serving a 20-year sentence for rape and also convicted for murder. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits for grammar and punctuation. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

India: Supreme Court greenlights proceedings against Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in 2015 sacrilege case

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud officially named Justice Sanjiv Khanna as his successor on Thursday (Oct 18). Khanna is the second-most senior judge of the Supreme Court of India. CJI Chandrachud nominated Khanna in a letter written to the Union Law Minister.&nbsp;

As per convention, the outgoing Chief Justice of India nominates the second-most senior judge as his successor, whose recommendation has to be approved by the Union government. CJI Chandrachud took charge of the apex court on 9 Nov 2022 and his tenure will end on November 10.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/law-is-not-blind-supreme-courts-new-justice-statue-sheds-colonial-symbol-of-blindfold-sword-768204">'Law is not blind': Supreme Court's new justice statue sheds colonial symbol of blindfold, sword</a>

At an event in Bhutan on October 9, Chandrachud expressed that his mind is occupied with fears and anxieties about the future and the past over what he achieved during his tenure and how well he served his role.

"As my tenure is coming to an end, my mind has been heavily preoccupied with fears and anxieties about the future and the past. I find myself pondering over questions such as: Did I achieve everything I set out to do? How will history judge my tenure? Could I have done things differently? What legacy will I leave for future generations of judges and legal professionals?" he said.

<h2>Who is Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the next Chief Justice of India?</h2>

Justice Sanjiv Khanna is a learned fellow in his field, who enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983 and practised at the district courts at the Tis Hazari complex. Later, he went on to practice in the High Court of Delhi and tribunals.&nbsp;

He also served as the Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and became the Standing Counsel (Civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi in 2004.

On 18 January 2019, Justice Khanna was elevated to a Judge of the Supreme Court, even before becoming a Chief Justice of any High Court.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-confirms-cc1-key-figure-in-plot-to-kill-khalistani-leader-pannun-no-longer-employee-of-indian-govt-768202">US confirms 'CC1,' key figure in plot to kill Khalistani leader Pannun 'no longer' employee of Indian Govt</a>

He is currently the Executive Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority, and a member of the Governing Counsel of the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal.

Justice Khanna will have a tenure of little over six months before he retires on 13 May 13 2025, as all judges of the Supreme Court retire by the age of 65.

(With inputs from agencies)

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud officially named Justice Sanjiv Khanna as his successor on Thursday (Oct 18). Khanna is the second-most senior judge of the Supreme Court of India.

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud officially named Justice Sanjiv Khanna as his successor on Thursday (Oct 18). Khanna is the second-most senior judge of the Supreme Court of India. CJI Chandrachud nominated Khanna in a letter written to the Union Law Minister. As per convention, the outgoing Chief Justice of India nominates the second-most senior judge as his successor, whose recommendation has to be approved by the Union government. CJI Chandrachud took charge of the apex court on 9 Nov 2022 and his tenure will end on November 10. Also Read | 'Law is not blind': Supreme Court's new justice statue sheds colonial symbol of blindfold, sword At an event in Bhutan on October 9, Chandrachud expressed that his mind is occupied with fears and anxieties about the future and the past over what he achieved during his tenure and how well he served his role. "As my tenure is coming to an end, my mind has been heavily preoccupied with fears and anxieties about the future and the past. I find myself pondering over questions such as: Did I achieve everything I set out to do? How will history judge my tenure? Could I have done things differently? What legacy will I leave for future generations of judges and legal professionals?" he said. Who is Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the next Chief Justice of India? Justice Sanjiv Khanna is a learned fellow in his field, who enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983 and practised at the district courts at the Tis Hazari complex. Later, he went on to practice in the High Court of Delhi and tribunals. He also served as the Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and became the Standing Counsel (Civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi in 2004. On 18 January 2019, Justice Khanna was elevated to a Judge of the Supreme Court, even before becoming a Chief Justice of any High Court. Also Read | US confirms 'CC1,' key figure in plot to kill Khalistani leader Pannun 'no longer' employee of Indian Govt He is currently the Executive Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority, and a member of the Governing Counsel of the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal. Justice Khanna will have a tenure of little over six months before he retires on 13 May 13 2025, as all judges of the Supreme Court retire by the age of 65. (With inputs from agencies)

Who is Justice Sanjiv Khanna? Next Chief Justice of India to succeed CJI Chandrachud

supreme-court

Supreme Court, News on Supreme Court, stories on Supreme Court, articles on Supreme Court, Supreme Court stories at Wion, Supreme Court news, Supreme Court latest news