Lucknow Bench of Allahabad HC seeks locus standi of petitioners on plea against ban on Bahraich Urs
The division bench, comprising Justice AR Masoodi and Justice AK Srivastava (I) granted time to the petitioners by posting the matter on May 19 as the next date of hearing.
A bench of passed the order on the writ petition filed by Waqf No. 19, Dargah Sharif, Bahraich.
Taking up the petition, the Bench asked the petitioners to prove their right to sue in the present case and said it would hear the plea only on merit.
Appearing on behalf of petitioners, advocate LP Mishra said that if Kumbh could be organised, why 'urs' was not being allowed by the authorities concerned.
Mishra called it a discrimination based on religion by the state authorities in violation of the right to profess religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
4 hours ago
- Scroll.in
‘Undignified' Modi caricature: SC grants interim protection from arrest to Indore cartoonist
An Indore-based cartoonist who was booked for depicting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in an allegedly undignified manner was granted interim protection from arrest by the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Live Law reported. However, the bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar cautioned that if the cartoonist, Hemant Malviya, continued to share offensive posts on social media, the Madhya Pradesh government was free to take action against him, PTI reported. The order came after Malviya submitted an apology for his social media post. The court has directed the cartoonist to file the apology in Hindi as an affidavit, Live Law reported. On Monday, the cartoonist agreed to delete the allegedly objectionable post after being criticised by the Supreme Court. Malviya had moved the top court challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that denied him anticipatory bail in the case. The High Court in its July 3 order observed that Malviya had 'clearly overstepped' the limits of free speech and misused his right to expression. The court held that the cartoonist had failed to exercise discretion while publishing the caricature and held that his custodial interrogation was necessary. The case Malviya had published the original cartoon on January 6, 2021, which depicted Modi as a doctor administering an injection to a man dressed in what may have appeared to some as the uniform of the RSS. The RSS is the parent organisation of the Bharatiya Janata Party. It was accompanied with the Hindi caption: 'Why are you worried? Serum's Poonawala has said that the vaccine only has water, you won't die from the side effect of water!' This was a reference to Serum Institute of India's chief executive Adar Poonawalla alleging that many Covid-19 vaccines in the market were only as effective as water. According to the Madhya Pradesh High Court order, a Facebook user had republished the cartoon, but replaced the caption with one in which the man in the purported RSS uniform addresses Modi as an incarnation of the Hindu deity Shiva and asks to be injected with such a strong dose of the caste census in his buttocks so that he forgets the Pahalgam terror attack, the controversial Waqf Act, among other matters. Malviya had shared the amended version of his cartoon on Facebook on May 1, writing that anyone could use any of his cartoons by writing their own names and captions. All his cartoons were for the public, by the public and dedicated to the public, he said. He added that the amended cartoon was shared with him by a friend and that whoever had created the caption had written well. Based on this, a RSS member had filed a complaint, alleging that Malviya had posted objectionable content on Facebook that defamed the Hindutva organisation and hurt religious sentiments. Malviya was booked in May under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act pertaining to promoting enmity between different groups, acts intended to outrage religious feelings, intentional insult and electronically publishing or transmitting material containing sexually explicit acts. Malviya has argued that he was falsely implicated in the case and that his work was merely satire. He also said that the comments about the caricature on Facebook were not his own, and therefore, he could not be held responsible for them.
The Hindu
4 hours ago
- The Hindu
SCR awaits A.P's share to resume Kovvur–Bhadrachalam rail project
Authorities of the South Central Railway (SCR) are awaiting the release of the Andhra Pradesh State government's cost share to expedite the Kovvur-Bhadrachalam railway line project in the State. Originally estimated at ₹1,445 crore, the project cost has increased to over ₹2,100 crore owing to the delays in execution. The project was proposed on a 50:50 cost share basis between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The State of Telangana has already released its full share and completed and commissioned the 56-kilometer-long railway line from Bhadrachalam to Sathupalli. Work in Andhra Pradesh is stalled. At a meeting in Hyderabad on July 15, SCR general manager Sanjay Kumar Srivastava told Rajamahendravaram MP D. Purandeswari, 'We are waiting for the release of the cost share by the Andhra Pradesh State government to proceed with the Kovvur-Bhadrachalam railway line project. The Telangana State had already released its due share'. The project is targeted to be completed and commissioned by April 2030. Tenders for modernisation Responding to an appeal by Ms. Purandeswari to speed up the ₹271 crore modernisation of the Rajahmundry railway station ahead of the Godavari Pushkarams-2027, Mr. Sanjay Kumar assured that tenders would be invited within a week. Ms. Purandeswari alleged that the tenders had not been invited, despite funds being released six months ago. Kovvur station She also raised the issue of reduced train halts at the Kovvur railway station. She said: 'As many as 18 trains, including those destined to Chennai and Tirupati via Kovvur, used to halt at Kovvur railway station. However, post-covid, only eight trains halt there. The major trains which no longer make stops at Kovvur include the Tirumala, Seshadri and Sarkar Express trains.' She urged the SCR to reconsider train halts at Kovvur. Mr. Sanjay Kumar was further urged to resume local train operations from Rajahmundry to Bhimavaram, Tanuku and Narsapuram which were suspended during COVID-19. In regards to the electrification of the Nidadavole railway line, Ms. Purandeswari said that ₹6 crore is still required to connect the line to the main power supply to complete the ₹150 crore line electrification project.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
5 hours ago
- Business Standard
Authorities can decide parole, furlough when appeal pending in SC: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday ruled prison authorities can decide a plea of parole and furlough even when the matter was pending in the Supreme Court. A bench of Justices Pratibha M Singh and Amit Sharma observed the Delhi Prison Rules did not bar consideration of parole and furlough if a convict's appeal against the conviction was pending in the Supreme Court. The bench, however, noted whether the relief could be granted or not was a different issue altogether and depended on the facts of each case. Furlough and parole envisage a short-term temporary release of convict from jail. "It is an altogether different question as to whether in the facts of a specific case, the prison authorities ought to grant parole or furlough, if the Supreme Court is seized of the matter either in a Special Leave Petition or in an Appeal. The grant or non grant of the parole and furlough on merit would depend on the facts of each case," the bench said. While parole is granted to the prisoner to meet a specific exigency, furlough may be granted after a stipulated number of years have been served without any reason. There could be a situation in which the Supreme Court might have specifically refused to grant suspension of sentence or refused bail to a particular convict, the bench said. "In such cases," the high court said, "a deeper scrutiny would be required by the prison authorities as to whether parole or furlough could be granted to the convict." The bench clarified that the mere fact that the authorities could exercise power did not mean parole or furlough ought to be granted as a matter of right. "The authorities would have to bear in mind the non-grant of suspension or bail by the Supreme Court or other relevant circumstances and the same may have an impact on the consideration of parole/furlough." According to the bench, the Delhi Prison Rules couldn't be interpreted to hold that the right of prisoners to apply for parole or furlough was barred when their criminal appeal or special leave petition were pending before the Supreme Court. "Mere pendency of criminal appeal/Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court cannot be taken as a bar for release on furlough, each case would be determined on its own eligibility criteria as per rules by the competent authority and the same would be subject to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the High Court," it said. The power to suspend sentence and grant bail was observed to be distinct from the power to grant parole or furlough. "Thus, while appeals are pending before a higher forum, grant of parole and furlough can be considered as per the applicable prison rules by the jail authorities," it added. The court was hearing a batch of petitoins on the legal issue.
