The Allahabad High Court has put a stay on the arrest of a retired IAS officer against whom FIRs were filed for a tweet demanding respectful cremation of bodies of Covid victims. The bench of Justices Ramesh Sinha and Jaspreet Singh granted interim relief as they were assured that the petitioner would not misuse social media and will be careful in the future.

The petitioner, Surya Pratap Singh filed a plea to quash the FIR filed against him under sections 153, 465 and 505 of the IPC as well as sections of Uttar Pradesh Public Health and Epidemic Diseases Control Act, Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the Information Technology Act. The FIR was filed suo moto by the police for a tweet dated May 13, stating that the photographs posted by him were posted deliberately to spread hatred and to cause social tension.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that he is a retired IAS officer and raised issues of public and social concerns through various social media. It was further contended that he has no intention to malign the image of the Government but only, by posting the contents and news items, wants to draw the attention of the Government towards the problems faced by the citizens. He further argued that he is a responsible citizen, and in his tweet had never intended to spread any rumour or panic among people, but the objective of the tweet was that bodies of dead persons be treated with respect and be cremated as per religious rituals.

He submitted that the FIR was an attempt to throttle the voice of dissent and is violative of freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution. He argued that no FIR could be lodged for reporting and venting grievances on social media.

When the court was given an assurance that the petitioner would be careful in future and shall not misuse social media, the court decided that a case for interim relief was made and granted stay on the arrest of the petitioner subject to the restraint that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Urgent action needed against spread of Covid in tribal areas!
Bhima Koregaon case: 3 accused test Covid positive at Taloja jail
NHRC issues new advisories for bonded and migrant labourers amid Covid-19

The post Allahabad HC stays arrest of former IAS officer booked for tweeting pictures of Covid casualties appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the May 28 order of Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) which empowered 13 districts across three states to grant citizenship to non-Muslim minorities from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, reported Bar and Bench.

When the IUML had sought a stay on the operation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), being the first body to challenge it, the Centre had submitted that it was not necessary to stay it since the rules under the Act had not been framed. It has filed an IA stating that the Centre “in a roundabout way, and in an attempt to circumvent the assurance given to this Hon’ble Court, have sought to implement their mala fide designs envisaged under the Amendment Act through the recently issued order dated 28.5.2021,” reported LiveLaw.

In its application, the IUML has averred that during the pendency of the petition challenging the validity of CAA has gone ahead and issued the impugned order which is manifestly illegal and runs counter to the provisions of the Act. 

The plea states that Section 5 (1)(a)-(g) and section 6 of the Citizenship Act read together do not permit the classification of applicants on the ground of religion and therefore the order goes beyond what is permitted by the provision itself. While Section 5 (1)(a)-(g) lays down terms for persons eligible to apply for citizenship by registration, section 6 permits any person (not being an illegal migrant) to apply for citizenship by naturalisation.

The plea further states that if this order is implemented and citizenship is given to persons based on their religion, and further ahead if the court strikes down CAA and the order, then it will be a “herculean task” to take back the citizenship thus granted.

In its May 28 order the Ministry of Home Affairs extended its powers under section 5 of Citizenship Act of registering as a citizen and under section 6 of granting certificate of naturalisation to the District Collector of :

1. Morbi, Rajkot, Patan and Vadodara in the State of Gujarat ;
2. Durg and Balodabazar in the State of Chhattisgarh ;
3. Jalore, Udaipur, Pali, Barmer and Sirohi in the State of Rajasthan ;
4. Faridabad in the State of Haryana ; and
5. Jalandhar in the State of Punjab

The order also sets out procedures for application and eventual verification. The applicant belonging to a minority community as deemed by the Citizenship Act and hailing from Afghanistan, Pakistan or Bangladesh has to apply for citizenship online and the verification of this application shall be done by the Collector at district level or the Secretary at the state level.

Related:

US Government lambasts India on Freedom of Religion
Give online applications for Indian citizenship under CAA: MHA
Seven Years of Narendra Modi in power

The post IUML moves SC against MHA order inviting applications for citizenship as per CAA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Kerala high Court has refused to stay the operation of Draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation 2021 (LDAR). The LDAR was challenged in a petition filed by Congress politician Noushad Ali, which also challenged the Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act (PASA). The bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and MR Anitha has granted 2 weeks’ time to the Lakshadweep administration to respond to the petition, reported LiveLaw.

When the counsel for the petitioner prayed that the implementation be stayed in the interim, the court refused to grant the same and set the next hearing after 2 weeks.

The plea challenges the illegal interference with social, political and cultural realities of Lakshadweep by the Administrator. The plea contends that the LDAR has been objected to widely as it gives the authority the power to remove or usurp the small holdings of property owned by the islanders belonging to the Scheduled Tribes. It further contends that the powers vested in the authority violates Article 21 of the Constitution and also that the right to livelihood of the tribes will get affected.

The petitioner states that the current administration is lacking consideration towards the island’s inhabitant and their choices of food, culture and livelihood thus violating Articles 15 (Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth), 16 (equal opportunity to all citizens in matters related to employment in the public sector), 19 (right to speech etc) and 21 (right to life).

Background

The actions of Lakshadweep’s relatively new administrator Praful Patel have drawn criticism across opposition parties. Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) president Sharad Pawar has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi asking him to intervene and stop what is being perceived as destructive policy changes being proposed by the Union Territory Administrator Praful Koda Patel in Lakshadweep. The Congress has already demanded that Patel be “immediately removed” as Lakshadweep administrator, and alleged that the proposals he has presented threatened the “peace and culture of the islands” and that his arbitrary restrictions were “harassing” people. 

Patel has also been criticised by the BJP general secretary Mohammad Kasim who called him “authoritarian” adding that the proposals were “not in the interests of people on the islands.” Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal PP told the media that this draft “is aimed at usurping people’s land. The Authority will get huge power to take over land without protecting the interests of land owners. There is a move to develop roads as per National Highway standards. Why does Lakshadweep require huge highways? The Administrator is furthering the business interests of people in the mainland.’’

The Union Territory has Muslims making up over 90 per cent of the population and proposals such as a ban on beef where “No person shall directly or indirectly sell, keep, store, transport, offer or expose for sale or buy beef or beef products in any form anywhere in Lakshadweep” is seen as a directly targeting the community. As is the crackdown on the fishing community that makes up more than 80 per cent of the population. As reported earlier the fisherfolk’s temporary huts, sheds, boats, net-drying facilities and storage spaces have been removed from the shores citing “violation of coastal zone norms” by the Patel-led administration.

Related:

Lakshadweep: Is Praful Khoda Patel fishing in troubled waters now?
AIKS calls for the sacking of Lakshadweep administrator Praful Patel
Lakshadweep: Beef Ban, Goonda Act proposed by Administrator Praful Khoda Patel

The post Kerala HC refuses to stay Draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court has refused to stay the sale of electoral bonds ahead of the state elections in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Assam, reported LiveLaw.

Rejecting the plea filed by NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), the court said, “Since the bonds were allowed to be released in 2018 and 2019 without interruption, and sufficient safeguards are there, there is no justification to stay the electoral bonds at present.”

The top court Bench headed by CJI SA Bobde had agreed to hear the matter on March 24. The petitioner organisation, represented by Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi, had argued that that the electoral bond scheme increases illegal and illicit funding of political parties.

Prashant Bhushan had also submitted that the Election Commission in May 2018 and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) vide letters on January 31, 2017, September 14, 2017 and September 27, 2017 had objected to electoral bonds and had advised against issuing them as a mode for donation to political parties, as per LiveLaw.

Neha Rathi had also argued before the Supreme Court that the data obtained through RTI shows that illegal sale windows have been opened in the past to benefit certain political parties. She had also submitted that there is a serious apprehension that any further sale of electoral bonds before the upcoming State elections in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Assam would further increase illegal and illicit funding of political parties through shell companies.

ADR’s petition including political party Communist Party of India (Marxist), and NGO Common Cause, had challenged the provisions of Finance Act 2017 which paved the way for anonymous electoral bonds. The Finance Act 2017 introduced amendments in Reserve Bank of India Act, Companies Act, Income Tax Act, Representation of Peoples Act and Foreign Contributions Regulations Act to make way for electoral bonds.

For instance, under the 2017 amendment made to Section 29C of the Representation of Peoples Act 1951 (RPA), political parties were permitted to not report the donations received through electoral bonds to the ECI. The amendment to Section 182 of the Companies Act did away with the restriction that contribution can be made only to the extent of 7.5% of net average profit of three preceding financial years. This enabled even newly incorporated companies to donate via electoral bonds, according to a report in The Wire.

According to The Leaflet, Bhushan argued that electoral bonds is like cash to a political party for a quid pro quo, contending that electoral bonds were anonymous to others but not to the government which would know who the donor was as the State Bank of India (SBI) came under the purview of the Centre. Therefore, he submitted that if the government wished to victimise a donor for donating to opponent parties, it could do so as it would know the identity of the donor.

The order may be read here:

Related:

SC to hear plea seeking stay on the sale of electoral bonds on March 24

The post BREAKING: SC refuses to stay the sale of electoral bonds appeared first on SabrangIndia.