New Delhi, Jan 24: The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) meeting on the Waqf Amendment Bill on Friday turned chaotic as opposition MPs were suspended for the entire day following a heated argument. It happened during a discussion on the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024.

At the same time, the Opposition MPs alleged that they were not given sufficient time to study the draft which was brought up for discussion.

Chaired by BJP MP Jagadambika Pal, the panel meeting was in fact set to hear a delegation led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq from Kashmir. But before the process, the meeting was disrupted by opposition MPs who raised concerns about “the speed with which the government wanted to pass the bill”, “especially considering the upcoming Delhi Assembly elections”.

As the disruption escalated, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey proposed the suspension of 10 opposition MPs for the day. The panel subsequently accepted Dubey’s proposal.

MPs namely Kalyan Banerjee, Mohammad Javed, A. Raja, Asaduddin Owaisi, Nasir Hussain, Mohibullah, M. Abdullah, Arvind Sawant, Nadimul Haque, and Imran Masood were among the suspended members. Dubey accused the opposition of using unparliamentary language. He alleged that they were trying to suppress the majority’s voice.

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who appeared before the committee after the suspension, expressed his strong opposition to the Waqf Amendment Bill, stressing that the government should not intervene in religious matters. Farooq further pointed out they hoped their suggestions would be heard and implemented. The aim should be to ensure that Muslims do not feel marginalised by any proposed changes, he remarked.

Before being suspended, opposition MPs, including Kalyan Banerjee of TMC and Congress member Syed Nasir Hussain, walked out of the meeting. They accused the proceedings of becoming a “farce.” They demanded that the meeting be postponed until January 30 or 31 to allow for a detailed, clause-by-clause discussion.

Banerjee even described the atmosphere as resembling an “undeclared emergency” where the chairman was not listening to anyone.

Dubey meanwhile claimed that the opposition’s behaviour was against parliamentary traditions, and their attempts to disrupt the meeting were an affront to democratic norms.

Arvind Sawant, a Shiv Sena (UBT) MP, flayed the “hasty handling” of such an important Bill, which, according to him, could potentially cause unrest in the country. He asked as to why the Bill was being rushed through the committee process when there should be a proper discussion.

Mumbai: One of the biggest rappers in India, Bilal Shaikh, popularly known as Emiway Bantai, took the internet by storm as he announced his wedding with model-actress Swaalina on Thursday. Congratulatory wishes poured in for the couple as the two shared their photos.

In the late hours of Thursday, Emiway took to his Instagram handle to share a slew of photos in which both Swaalina and he can be seen dressed in ornate wedding outfits. The two twinned in violet outfits and flashed their brightest smiles at the camera. A photo even shows Emiway putting a garland around Swaalina.

“Alhamdulillah,” Emiway wrote as he shared photos of his wedding with Swaalini on Instagram.

Who is Swaalini?

Swaalini was first seen with Emiway Bantai in his music video, Kudi. Born in Finland in 1995, her real name is reportedly Halina Kuchey. She is a professional model and actress who has been a part of several Hindi and Punjabi music videos.

In 2017, she appeared in the Hindi song, Ik Kahani, and in 2018, she featured in the Punjabi song, Prada.

In January this year, she starred in the song, Nasha, which was produced by Emiway’s label.

About Emiway Bantai

Emiway Bantai is considered as one of the pioneers of the hiphop culture in India. Known for his raps based on the themes of freedom, friendship and social issues, Emiway shot to fame with his 2014 track, Aur Bantai.

It was followed by tracks like Machayenge and Khatam, which went on to become a rage not just in Indua, but even overseas.

According to several reports, Emiway’s net worth is currently poised at Rs 60 crore, making him one of the richest rappers in the country.

New Delhi, Jan 24: The Supreme Court made a scathing remark on Friday while hearing the petition of Yogeshwar Sao, a resident of Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, convicted in a dowry harassment case.

A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh criticised the appellant for neglecting his daughters and mistreating his wife.

The Bench remarked, “What kind of man are you who does not even care for his daughters? How can we allow such a heartless person to come to our court? All day at home, sometimes Saraswati Puja, sometimes Lakshmi Puja… and then all this.”

The court emphasised that any relief for the petitioner would only be considered if he agreed to transfer agricultural land to his daughters.

Yogeshwar Sao, also known as W. Sao, a resident of Katkamdag village, was convicted in 2015 under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court of Hazaribagh which found him guilty of harassing his wife, Poonam Devi, for a dowry of Rs 50,000 and sentenced him to two-and-a-half years of imprisonment.

Sao and Devi were married in 2003 and had two daughters. In 2009, Poonam Devi filed an FIR alleging dowry harassment, forced surgical removal of her uterus, and her husband’s subsequent remarriage.

She also filed a petition in the family court for maintenance for herself and her daughters. The family court ordered Sao to pay Rs 2,000 per month to his wife and Rs 1,000 per month to each daughter until they reached adulthood.

Sao appealed against his conviction in the Jharkhand High Court, which upheld the trial court’s verdict in September 2024.

However, the High Court reduced his sentence to one-and-a-half years, citing lack of evidence regarding the allegations of forced surgery and remarriage. Additionally, the High Court imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on Sao.

Following this, Sao approached the Supreme Court in December 2024 seeking relief.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court reiterated the importance of ensuring the welfare of Sao’s daughters and condemned his behaviour. The court made it clear that no relief would be granted unless he demonstrated accountability, including transferring his agricultural land to his daughters.