Devanahalli agitation to continue till July 15 after Siddaramaiah cites legal complexities
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
RJD, TMC MPs move SC against revision of electoral rolls in Bihar
Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Jha has approached the Supreme Court alleging that the decision of Election Commission of India (ECI) to undertake a special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar is a tool of 'institutionalised disenfranchisement' that will disproportionately target Muslim, Dalit and poor migrant communities in a state where elections are to be held later this year. Jha filed the petition through advocate Fauzia Shakil (HT Photo) The challenge forms the latest in the line of several petitions filed in the top court challenging the ECI's June 24 order. After non government organisation Association for Democratic Association (ADR) and political activist Yogendra Yadav filed petitions on Saturday, pleas have also been filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and NGO Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, besides Jha. RJD, the second largest party in Bihar and the main Opposition party in the state, has opposed the SIR along with other Opposition parties. Jha in his petition filed through advocate Fauzia Shakil said, 'The present SIR process is not only hasty and ill-timed, but has the effect of disenfranchising crores of voters, thereby robbing them of their constitutional right to vote.' He added, 'It (ECI order) is being used to justify aggressive and opaque revisions of electoral rolls that disproportionately target Muslim, Dalit and poor migrant communities, as such, they are not random patterns but it is engineered exclusions.' Moreover, since the exercise has been launched during the monsoon season in the state when many districts are affected by floods and displacement of local population, the petition questioned the meaningful participation of a large section of population. The schedule under the June 24 order requires submission of enumeration form within 30 days, followed by filing of claims and objections and their disposal within 30 days. 'It is a settled law that the burden of proving citizenship of a person lies with the state and not the person concerned. After the initiation of the present SIR process, an overwhelming majority (about 4.74 crore out of 7.9 crore on the current electoral roll) carry a disproportionately high burden of proving their citizenship with the help of proofs of date and place of birth.' As per ECI data, Bihar has 7,89,69,844 registered voters enrolled as on June 24, 2025. The state accounts for 30% of the national per capita income as per 2021-22 and is home to the highest number of migrant workers with over 9.3 million population migrating between 2001 and 2011. 'One of the most affected classes (of the SIR exercise) are the migrant workers, many of whom despite remaining listed in the 2003 voter rolls, are unlikely to be able to return to Bihar within the stipulated time frame of 30 days to submit their enumeration forms leading to automatic deletion of their names from the electoral roll,' said the Rajya Sabha MP from Bihar. Besides terming the ECI's decision to be unconstitutional, Jha claimed that it is violative of Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The SIR order and the subsequent press release empowers the electoral registration officers or such other officers to initiate a suo motu inquiry, issue notice to the proposed elector, and decide upon their inclusion in the final electoral roll, even as Rule 13(2) permits filing of claims and objections only at the instance of the affected person. 'The short deadlines make the whole process unreasonable and unworkable and has the effect of bypassing the procedure of conduct of inquiry into claims and objections as contemplated under the Rules,' the petition stated. The petition filed by Moitra has raised similar grounds to set aside the ECI's SIR exercise. In her petition filed through advocate Neha Rathi, the TMC MP sought a direction from the court 'to restrain ECI from issuing similar orders for SIR of electoral roll in other states of the country, particularly West Bengal. Moitra claimed to have information that after Bihar, the SIT is to be replicated in West Bengal from August 2025. She further claimed the ECI order to be 'illegal' as it presumes ineligibility of a voter unless otherwise proved by way of providing documents (from a limited list of 11 documents) for self as well as documents of mother or father or both, while excluding readily available documents such as Aadhaar card, ration card, election photo identity card, or MNREGA job card. The SIR resembles the structure and consequences of the National Register of Citizens (NRC), Moitra said, as the consequence of non-submission of documents will result in automatic exclusion from the electoral roll, without adequate procedural protection. The petitions filed so far have unanimously critiqued the ECI's decision to undertake SIR despite conducting a Special Summary Revision (SSR) between October 2024 and January 2025 in the state when the necessary weeding out of names based on death, migration, etc was carried out. 'ECIs decision to conduct a second revision in such a draconian manner in a poll-bound state is unjustified and unreasonable,' Moitra said. ADR, in its petition filed on Saturday had said that the SIR violates fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21, besides other provisions of the Constitution. It said, 'The SIR order if not set aside, can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of voters from electing their representatives, thereby disrupting free and fair elections and democracy in the country, which are part of basic structure of the Constitution.'
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Trial set to begin in IIT-Bombay student suicide case after accused withdraws plea
MUMBAI: Nearly two and a half years after the death by suicide of 18-year-old IIT-Bombay student Darshan Solanki, the trial against the main accused, Armaan Iqbal Khatri, is finally set to move forward. Khatri, 20, withdrew his plea seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings against him, clearing the path for the trial to begin in a sessions court. Trial set to begin in IIT-Bombay student suicide case after accused withdraws plea The development came during a hearing before a Bombay High Court bench of justice Ajay Gadkari and justice Rajesh Patil last Friday. Khatri's petition—filed in May 2023—was strongly opposed by both the Maharashtra government and Solanki's family. Following their arguments, Khatri chose to withdraw the plea, which the court permitted. Solanki, a first-year Dalit student of chemical engineering at IIT-Bombay, died by suicide on February 12, 2023, on the campus. His death triggered widespread protests and demands for an investigation into caste-based discrimination within elite educational institutions. Three weeks after the incident, Mumbai police recovered a one-line note from Solanki's room stating, 'Arman has killed me.' Based on this and other evidence, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) led by the joint commissioner of crime arrested Khatri on April 9, 2023. He was booked under charges of abetment to suicide and sections of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and later granted bail. According to the SIT's findings, Solanki and Khatri had a heated exchange two days before the suicide, during which Solanki allegedly made a communal remark. Khatri, in response, reportedly threatened him with a paper cutter. Police claim the incident left Solanki deeply disturbed. That same night, he developed a fever and, in the following hours, sent Khatri apologetic WhatsApp messages, saying he intended to return home. 'The court noted that since the matter had already moved to the trial stage, the FIR could not be quashed at this point. As a result, the petition had become infructuous, and Khatri opted to withdraw it,' said Hitendra Gandi, counsel for Solanki's father.
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
SC opens up staff jobs for OBC and SC/ST blocs, 'omits' EWS
Supreme Court (AI-generated image) NEW DELHI: CJI B R Gavai, second from the Dalit community to head the judiciary, has amended the Supreme Court Officers and Servant (Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 1961, to provide for reservations to SCs, STs, OBCs, physically challenged, ex-servicemen and dependents of freedom fighters in direct recruitments to subordinate staff of the apex court. Rule 4A of the Act, amended and substituted on the CJI's instructions, has been gazetted through a notification issued on July 3. However, it omits reservation for candidates belonging to the economically weaker section (EWS), which was introduced by Parliament through Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019. The substituted Section 4A, as gazetted, reads: "Reservation in direct recruitment to various categories of posts specified in the Schedule, for the candidates belonging to SCs, STs, OBCs, Physically Challenged, Ex-servicemen and dependant of Freedom Fighters shall be in accordance with the Rules, orders, and Notifications issued from time to time by the Government of India in respect of posts carrying the pay scale corresponding to the pay scale prescribed for the post specified in the Schedule, subject to such modification, variation or exception as the Chief Justice may, from time to time, specify. " The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act introduced Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to give effect to 10% reservation for EWS in govt jobs and admissions to govt and govt-aided educational institutions. It received Presidential assent on Jan 12, 2019. The constitutional validity of EWS quota was challenged in Supreme Court by more than 20 petitions, mainly on the ground that it exceeded the 50% ceiling on quota imposed by SC in its Indra Sawhney judgment in 1992. A five-judge bench led by then CJI U U Lalit on Nov 7, 2022, by three to two majority, declared that Parliament's decision to provide quota for EWS category was constitutionally valid. The majority view was shared by Justices Dinesh Maheswari, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala, while Justices Lalit and S R Bhat ruled that EWS quota was illegal. On Dec 6, 2022, NGO 'Society for the Rights of Backward Communities' filed a petition seeking review of the Nov 7 judgment. A five-judge bench led by then CJI D Y Chandrachud on May 9, 2023 dismissed the review petition, thus giving judicial impregnability to the validity of the EWS quota.
