Connect with us
Wednesday,22-January-2025
Breaking News

Crime

Hijab ruling will have effect on constitutional morality, individual dignity, AG to HC

Published

on

Karnataka Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi on Tuesday told the High Court that the judicial decision on hijab will have binding on “constitutional morality” and “individual dignity”.

“When we impose, the element of choice of dress goes away. The woman will be obligated to wear that dress. It becomes compulsory,” he said in his concluding remarks before a three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, hearing the hijab row.

“Women cannot be subjugated to any form of dress code and she can’t be made to feel less equal and children of a lesser god. Judicial declaration of every woman of a particular religion to wear hijab, would it not violate the dignity? If it is a compulsion of an attire, it is impermissible on this day.

“We propose no ban on hijab, it should be left to the choice of the woman. Right to privacy cannot be enshrined in public. Institutional discipline is paramount. Dignity of women must also be kept in mind in a plural society,” Navadagi said.

He also quoted a Bollywood song: “Na muh chupake jiyo, na sar jhuka ke jiyo, gamon ka daur bi aaye toh muskura ke jiyo”.

He argued that it is entirely on the petitioner to prove that the practice of hijab is obligatory in nature and compulsorily followed in Islam. However, they have placed 144 Surahs of Quran to the court’s query and there is no record on table to show that the custom is obligatory and it is an element of compulsion which compels a member to be expelled from the community, he added.

“Wearing of dress is freedom of speech, as argued by the petitioners as their fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (a). However, Article 19 (1) (a) is subject to public order, decency under Article 19 (2). In the present case, the uniform rule is subjected to institutional restriction and it is subjected to institutional discipline not only in schools but also in hospitals, military establishments and others,” the AG submitted.

“The rule imposes reasonable restrictions on wearing a headscarf,” he said, adding that a uniform is being prescribed till Pre-University as they have “an impregnable mindset”.

“There is no restriction on campus to wear a hijab. Only during class hours, in the classrooms, it has been not allowed and anything beyond uniforms, irrespective of any religion, is not allowed,” he said.

As Navadgi mentioned the total ban on hijab by France and Turkey in public spaces, Justice Krishna S. Dixit, who is also on the bench, intervened and stated that it depends on the constitutional policy of every country. He then said that he only wanted to bring out that there is no prohibition as such in our country.

Reiterating that hijab is not an essential practice of Islam and can’t come under the Constitution’s Article 25. (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) he sought to bring to the notice of the court that how this has been upheld by various High Courts and Supreme Court judgments.

Giving clear indications of an early verdict on hijab row, the bench had directed counsel to complete their arguments by this week.

Chief Justice Awasthi asked the Advocate General to complete his submissions at the earliest, and he said that he would complete his arguments on Tuesday.

CJ Awasthi informed all counsel that the bench wants to complete the hearing on the case by this weekend and directed them to keep the arguments brief. “Make positive endeavors to complete within this week only,” he said.

Senior advocate R. Venkataramani, appearing for teachers who have been made respondents in the case, maintained that there are no hierarchies of religions between teachers and students. “School environment is more important than a public place. There should be a free mind among students and all minds of children should be in unity for education,” he said.

“Whatever may be the assertion, if the state is in collision with public order, morality and health, it will stop. The state comes in through Article 25 (2) in the matters of religion and finance, when it comes to regulation. There is public space and qualified public space. School is a qualified public space,” he added.

Referring to the verdict of the South African court allowing the wearing of ‘nose ring’ to school there, he stated that the court did not make an emphatic statement of religion in the judgment. “Borrowing from foreign judgments could be problematic here, though we cannot close our eyes on them,” he held.

Senior advocate S.S. Nagananda, who also appeared for teachers, maintained that there is a fine line of distinction as far as culture and religion are concerned. “It is not possible for Muslims to give five time prayers, similarly, it is not possible for a Brahmin to perform Sandhyavandana three times. This practice of wearing hijab is not an essential religious practice. There are some practices, which are required to perform otherwise, they will have consequences,” he said.

Hearing will continue om Wednesday.

Crime

CJI-led SC bench fixes Jan 29 to hear suo moto RG Kar case

Published

on

New Delhi, Jan 22: The Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed January 29 for hearing the matter where it has taken suo moto cognisance of the rape and murder of a junior doctor at the state-run R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata in August 2024.

“We will take it up at 2 pm next Wednesday (January 29),” said a bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan as it deferred the hearing due to paucity of time.

The CJI Khanna-led Bench asked senior advocate Karuna Nundy, representing the associations of medical professionals, to provide a copy of interlocutory applications filed to the other side.

Meanwhile, the West Bengal government has approached the Calcutta High Court, challenging the verdict of a Kolkata special court awarding life imprisonment to Sanjay Roy, the sole accused and the convict in the rape and murder case of the woman doctor.

As the matter came up for hearing on Wednesday morning before a division bench of Justices Debangshu Basak and Shabbar Rashidi, the CBI challenged the petition filed by the state government and questioned the grounds on which it could make such an appeal.

Deputy Solicitor General, Rajdeep Majumdar, argued that it was only the CBI, which is the investigating agency in the case, and the victim’s parents who could move such a plea at a higher court, and not the state government, which is not a party in the case.

To support his contention, Majumdar referred to a case filed by the CBI against former Bihar Chief Minister and Rashtriya Janata Dal Chief Lalu Prasad Yadav, where the state government’s plea was not considered by the Patna High Court.

Whether the West Bengal government’s petition will be admissible or not will be decided by the Calcutta High Court on January 27.

Earlier, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announced that the Bengal government would move the Calcutta High Court challenging the quantum of the sentence and the state government would be seeking the death penalty for the convict.

“I am convinced that it is indeed a rarest of rare cases which demands capital punishment. We want to insist upon the death penalty in this most sinister and sensitive case,” the Chief Minister said.

While pronouncing the quantum of the sentence, special court judge Anirban Das said that the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) contention that Roy’s offence in the matter was “the rarest and rare crimes” was not tenable.

Hence, the judge observed that instead of the “death penalty”, Roy, an erstwhile civic volunteer attached to Kolkata Police, be sentenced to “life imprisonment”. Apart from that a fine of Rs 50,000 was also imposed on Roy.

The special court, at the same time, directed the West Bengal government to pay a compensation of Rs 17 lakh to the family of the deceased victim.

It observed that since the victim was raped and murdered at her workplace, which is a state-government entity, the West Bengal government is legally bound to pay compensation to the victim’s family.

In an earlier hearing held in November 2024, the Supreme Court had remarked that it would not pass any direction to transfer the trial of the ghastly rape and murder case outside West Bengal.

A bench, headed by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, turned down the oral prayer made by a lawyer seeking transfer of trial outside West Bengal.

“Yes, we have transferred cases (of gender violence) in Manipur. But we are not doing anything like that here,” it had remarked.

The apex court had noted that the trial would commence on November 11 at a special court in Kolkata after charges were framed against the “sole prime accused” in the case, Sanjay Roy.

The process of the framing of charges was completed on November 4, exactly 87 days after the body of the woman junior doctor was discovered at a seminar hall within the state-run R.G. Kar premises on the morning of August 9, 2024.

In October, the CBI filed its first charge sheet against Roy, a civic volunteer with Kolkata Police, in the alleged rape and murder case.

In the charge sheet, the CBI did not rule out the possibilities of a larger conspiracy behind the macabre crime that prompted alleged events of tampering and altering of evidence during the initial phase of the investigation which was carried out by Kolkata Police.

Besides Roy, two others arrested by the CBI officials in the matter are RG Kar Medical College and Hospital’s former Principal, Sandip Ghosh, and the former SHO of Tala Police Station, Abhijit Mondal. RG Kar comes under the jurisdiction of Tala Police Station.

The main charges against Ghosh and Mondal are for misleading the investigation when the Kolkata Police were probing the matter before it was handed over to CBI by the Calcutta High Court.

Both have been accused of tampering with evidence in the case. Taking suo moto cognisance of the rape and murder case of the junior doctor at the state-run R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata, the Supreme Court had termed the incident “horrific,” which raises the “systemic issue of safety of doctors across the country”.

“We are deeply concerned about the fact that there is an absence of safe conditions of work for young doctors across the country, particularly, public hospitals,” it had said.

The apex court had ordered the formation of the NTF (National Task Force) to suggest measures for the security of medical professionals across the country, observing that the safety of doctors is the “highest national concern”.

Continue Reading

Crime

Saif, family should narrate horrific knife attack: Sanjay Nirupam

Published

on

Mumbai, Jan 22: Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Nirupam defended his remarks about Bollywood actor Saif Ali Khan’s “swift” recovery following a knife attack at his Bandra residence, urging the actor’s family to clarify the events surrounding the incident.

Nirupam’s remarks came after Saif was discharged from Lilavati Hospital just five days after sustaining serious injuries, including spinal and neck injuries, during a burglary attempt at his 12th-floor flat in the upscale ‘Satguru Sharan’ building.

Speaking to Media, Nirupam said, “Whatever happened to Saif Ali Khan on January 16 is deeply concerning. While we respect the family, it is surprising to see Saif looking fit enough to shoot just days after being discharged. The doctors had stated the knife penetrated 2.5 inches into his back, requiring a six-hour operation. How is such a swift recovery medically possible?”

He added that Saif’s rapid recovery raises questions about the initial severity of the injuries described by doctors and witnesses. Nirupam demanded that both the family and the medical team provide clarity on the “horrific” knife attack.

“When Saif was attacked, it became a matter of law and order in Mumbai. Opposition leaders accused the government and Home Minister of failing. In such a situation, the family should explain what transpired,” Nirupam said.

Nirupam also commented on the accused, Mohammad Shariful Islam Shehzad, a Bangladeshi national arrested by the Mumbai Police. He called for strict action against such individuals, citing the involvement of Bangladeshis in criminal activities in the city.

The Mumbai Police arrested the accused, a 30-year-old Bangladeshi national, from Thane city. The intruder allegedly stabbed Saif multiple times during a struggle, escaping the scene and hiding in the building’s garden for two hours before fleeing.

“The police will have to be given some benefit of the doubt because when such an incident takes place, a big incident occurs, then there is a lot of pressure on the police, and when it is felt from all sides that law and order has collapsed,” he said.

“I do not think it is right to doubt the capability of Mumbai police immediately, as it is sufficient to solve any type of criminal incident,” Nirupam said.

The 54-year-old actor, who underwent neurosurgery and plastic surgery, was advised complete bed rest for a week and has been asked to avoid visitors to prevent infection. Despite his injuries, Saif walked out of the hospital without a wheelchair, escorted by heavy police security.

Meanwhile, Saif has returned to his Bandra home under tight security. The actor has been advised to focus on his recovery as the investigation continues.

Continue Reading

Crime

RG Kar Rape & Murder Case: West Bengal Govt Seeks Death Penalty, Calcutta HC To Hear Case On January 27

Published

on

Kolkata: The West Bengal government has appealed to the Calcutta High Court’s Division Bench against the trial court’s life imprisonment verdict convicting Sanjay Roy in the RG Kar case. The next hearing in the case will be held on 27th January.

Advocate General Kishore Dutta has approached the division bench of Justice Debangshu Basak, seeking the death penalty for Sanjay Roy. The matter has been allowed to be filed.

The Sealdah Civil and Criminal Court announced life imprisonment for the accused Sanjay Roy in the RG Kar rape and murder case. Along with this, the court has also fined Rs 50,000 to the accused.

West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee Expresses Dissatisfaction

Earlier, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday expressed dissatisfaction over the court giving life imprisonment to the convict in the RG Kar hospital rape-murder case and said if the case had been with Kolkata Police, they would have ensured a death penalty.

“I learned about the sentencing from the media. We have always demanded capital punishment and we continue to stand by it. However, this is the court’s decision and I can’t say much about this. For three other cases, Kolkata police ensured capital punishment through thorough investigations concluded within 54-60 days. This was a serious case. Had it been under our purview, we would have ensured the death penalty long back,” CM Mamata said while addressing the media at Malda.

Victim’s Father Rejects Compensation

On Monday, RG Kar’s rape and murder case victim’s father rejected the Rs 17 lakh compensation and said that he will move to a higher court seeking the death penalty for the accused.

Speaking to Media, the victim’s father said “What the Court thinks as a good judgement based on the evidence produced by the CBI, the Court has given that verdict. We have a lot of questions on the investigation done by CBI. We did not go to the court for compensation. We want justice, not compensation. Kolkata police did wrong and the CBI will have to do something. The Kolkata police have given us more pain than the passing away of my daughter.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending