Sikkim MP urges CBSE to include 4 local languages in Classes 11, 12
Subba has backed joint representation from four major community groups: Sikkim Akhil Kirat Rai Sangh, Denjong Sherpa Association, Sikkim Tamang Buddhist Association, and the All Sikkim Gurung (Tamu) Buddhist Association.He raised concerns about the Ministry's earlier rejection, communicated through a letter dated December 20, 2024, arguing that discontinuing the subjects after Class 10 breaks academic continuity and hinders linguistic and cultural preservation.NEP 2020 SUPPORTS MULTILINGUALISM AND REGIONAL INCLUSIONHighlighting the logistical feasibility of the proposal, Subba said that no additional infrastructure or exam days are needed. Students simply choose one language from the existing second language options -- making the proposal both practical and efficient."These languages are already part of the CBSE curriculum in classes 9 and 10. Discontinuing them in senior secondary classes breaks the academic continuity and undermines efforts at cultural and linguistic preservation," Subba said.He further noted that the inclusion would align with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which encourages multilingualism, and would be a step toward inclusive and equitable education.A CALL TO UPHOLD ARTICLE 29 OF THE CONSTITUTIONSubba concluded that the move would reflect the Union government's commitment to protecting minority rights, as enshrined in Article 29 of the Indian Constitution.He requested that the Ministry direct CBSE to implement the inclusion from the 2025-26 academic session in all eligible schools.(With inputs from PTI)- Ends
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Omar Abdullah reacts to statehood buzz, high-profile ‘meetings' – ‘still optimistic about something positive for J-K'
Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has said he is optimistic about 'something positive' for the Union Territory during the ongoing parliament session, but not on Tuesday, amid buzz over the centre planning something on the Jammu and Kashmir 'statehood'. The National Conference leader's remarks came on the eve of the sixth anniversary of the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5. Abdullah clarified that he had no meeting or conversation with the people in Delhi, and his statement is based on his "gut feeling". 'I've heard every possible permutation & combination about what to expect in J&K tomorrow (August 5) so let me stick my neck out and say nothing will happen tomorrow - fortunately nothing bad will happen but unfortunately nothing positive will happen either,' Abdullah said in a post on X on Monday evening. The speculation about 'something' happening on August 5 was fuelled by the government's reported meetings on Monday. Though there was no official word on any meetings, some reports suggested Union Home Minister Amit Shah met with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, Intelligence Bureau chief Tapan Kumar Deka, and Home Secretary Govind Mohan on Monday. Another meeting of the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) MPs is called for today. What sparked the buzz were back-to-back separate meetings on Sunday between President Droupadi Murmu, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Union Home Minister Amit Shah. No official reasons for the meetings were known. The meetings come in the backdrop of the upcoming elections to elect a new Vice President after Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation from the post on July 21. "I'm still optimistic about something positive for J&K in this monsoon session of Parliament but not tomorrow. And no, I haven't had any meetings or conversations with people in Delhi. This is just a gut feeling. Let's see this time tomorrow," Abdullah wrote in the post on X. The post is seen as an attempt by the chief minister to put at rest speculation on social media about a fresh reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir. The erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir was reorganised into the Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh following the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019. Tuesday will be the sixth anniversary of the decision. Incidentally, the Parliament session is also on. "There is a lot of speculation about what may be announced tomorrow (5th Aug). The peace in Kashmir has come about at a great cost of human lives of security forces personnel and innocent civilians," Army veteran KJS Dhillon said in one of the posts on X. I'm still optimistic about something positive for J&K in this monsoon session of Parliament but not tomorrow. "Let the whole thing settle down. Let's not jump the gun," he said. Omar has long demanded statehood for Jammu and Kashmir, reminding the Union government of its promise before assembly elections held last year. On 6 June, Omar Abdullah raised the issue of restoring statehood to Jammu and Kashmir at an event in which Prime Minister Narendra Modi flagged off the maiden train to Kashmir. On 13 January 2024, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, speaking in Jammu and Kashmir, responded to Omar Abdullah's reminder to fulfil his promise to restore statehood to the union territory. 'The right things are going to happen at the right time,' Modi said. Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge on 16 July wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, urging the government to bring forward legislation to grant full statehood to Jammu and Kashmir in the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament. 'We urge upon the Government to bring forward legislation in the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament to grant full statehood to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir,' read the letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi by the two Congress leaders. Key Takeaways Omar Abdullah remains cautiously optimistic about future developments for Jammu and Kashmir. Speculation around statehood discussions is heightened due to recent high-profile meetings in Delhi. The sixth anniversary of Article 370's abrogation is a significant date for potential announcements.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Juveniles, age of consent and justice: Explaining the wide conviction gap
An analysis of government data in the Supreme Court reveals a stark disparity between the number of juveniles and young adults charged under rape and child sexual abuse laws and the relatively small proportion who are eventually convicted, throwing sharp focus on the ongoing debate over the age of consent and its unintended consequences. According to the Union government's latest submission to the Supreme Court, between 2018 and 2022, only 468 juveniles aged 16-18 were convicted under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, despite more than 4,900 being booked across the country in the same period , a conviction rate of just 9.55%. For charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, just 855 convictions were recorded out of 6,892 cases during the same period , a rate of only 12.4%. The corresponding numbers for young adults aged 18-22 tell a similar story. While 52,471 were arrested under these stringent laws during this period, only 6,093 were convicted under Pocso, a conviction rate of just 11.61%. Of 24,306 arrested between 2018 and 2022 for rape, only 2,585 young adults were convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, amounting to just 10.63% . The statistics form part of the Centre's written submissions opposing any move to lower the age of consent under the Pocso Act or introduce exceptions for adolescent relationships, telling the top court that such dilution, 'even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy,' would dismantle the statutory shield meant to safeguard minors and risk opening the door to child abuse. However, the wide gap between the registration of cases and convictions suggests that while these laws aim to safeguard children from sexual exploitation, they may also be pulling large numbers of adolescents and young people (mostly men) into the criminal justice system, often in cases involving consensual relationships that turn adversarial due to family or societal pressure. Convictions and sentencing For juveniles (16-18 years), Pocso convictions rose modestly from 144 in 2018 to 213 in 2022 even as the number of detentions rose from 844 to 1,757, which implies a conviction rate of just 12.12% in 2022. The majority received prison terms of up to 10 years. Life imprisonment was awarded in only 31 cases across five years, and there was no death penalty. For the same group, rape convictions remained flat, ranging from 83 to 110 per year, with over 85% receiving sentences of up to 10 years. Only eight juveniles, tried as adults under the pertinent legal provisions, received life terms during this period. Among young adults in the 18-22 years age group, convictions under Pocso grew from 1,213 in 2018 to 1,312 in 2022. However, even this increase is modest considering the scale of bookings under the Act. While 8,740 persons were apprehended in 2018, 13,068 were arrested in 2022. That translates to conviction rates of 13.88% in 2018 and 10.04% in 2022 under Pocso. Additionally, rape convictions dropped from 620 in 2018 to 476 in 2022, reflecting a 23.23% decline despite higher arrest figures. Life imprisonment was more common in this age group. 773 individuals received life terms for Pocso offences, while 238 did so for rape. A total of 22 young adults were awarded the death penalty over the five years, compared to just one juvenile. These statistics emerge at a time when the Supreme Court is hearing a public interest litigation examining whether the blanket criminalisation of all sexual activity below the age of 18 under the Pocso Act requires re-examination. The law, enacted in 2012, sets the age of consent at 18 and makes even consensual acts between teenagers prosecutable. Senior advocates Indira Jaising and Sidharth Luthra, appearing as amici curiae in the 2012 public interest litigation (PIL) filed by lawyer Nipun Saxena, have argued that the mandatory reporting requirement and lack of a close-in-age exception is leading to over-criminalisation, infringing on the autonomy, privacy, and health rights of adolescents, particularly girls. But the Union government has pushed back, telling the court that 'any dilution of the age of consent, even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy, would irrevocably dilute the statutory presumption of vulnerability that lies at the heart of child protection law.' In a recently filed affidavit, It has urged the court to uphold the 'bright-line' age of 18 to deter abuse and exploitation. Numbers suggest a need for nuance Data suggests that many of those convicted are themselves just a few years older than the complainants. The tables submitted by the government highlight that young men aged 18–22 are the most prosecuted group under Pocso, raising concerns that the protective intent of the law is being applied to penalise consensual relationships. For example, in 2022, 213 juveniles (16-18) were convicted under Pocso whereas 1,312 young adults (18-22) were convicted under the same Act -- over six times higher. Rape convictions for 18-22-year-olds (476) were also significantly higher than for juveniles (92). The sentencing trends further bolster the case for a more differentiated approach. A vast majority of both juveniles and young adults received sentences below 10 years, suggesting courts may be exercising discretion when faced with such cases, but only after the accused have undergone lengthy trials and detention. A legal and social dilemma The Centre's firm position against creating a 'close-in-age' exception, such as exempting consensual acts between teens aged 16-18, comes amid growing calls for a calibrated rethink. Several high courts, and even Supreme Court benches in bail and quashing proceedings, have flagged the problem of criminalising teenage love. Yet, the government has maintained that 'loosening age-based protections could open avenues for abuse under the guise of consensual activity,' and that the law must 'act as a strong deterrent… in a society where children, especially girls, are vulnerable to manipulation, coercion and abuse.' At the heart of the debate lies the challenge of balancing protection with autonomy, ensuring minors are not exploited, while also preventing a legal system from punishing consensual and developmental relationships among peers. In her written submissions countering the Centre's stance, Jaising said the age of consent was static at 16 years for 80 years and that increasing it to 18 years through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. 'No rational reason has been indicated for the increase, nor is there any data to suggest that the age of consent required any increase,' stated her submissions, adding the increase in the age of consent violated the right to autonomy of children between the ages of 16 and 18 who have the ability to give mature consent to sexual activity, having regard to the fact that they have attained puberty giving rise to sexual awareness. 'Scientific research indicates that adolescents are attaining puberty sooner than they did several years ago and puberty as we know, is the age of awakening of sexual awareness. It is the age during which there is a natural attraction between the sexes and the development of sexual relationships of choice. Hence, to criminalise such an activity rather than addressing the issue of sex education, is arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the best interests of children as defined in law,' the submissions contended. Increasing the age of consent has led to branding hundreds of children in the 16-18 age group as criminals. 'Data also indicates that most complaints to police are filed by parents of the girl, often against her own wishes and for extraneous reasons such as inter-religious or inter-caste relationships,' she said. 'The only solution lies in declaring that sex between consenting adolescents between the age of 16, an almost universal age of sexual maturity, and 18 is not a form of 'abuse',' Jaising's submissions added. The senior counsel urged the Supreme Court to read into the impugned legal provisions a 'close-in-age exception', applicable when both parties to the sexual act are adolescents between the ages of 16 and 18 and the sexual act is consensual. 'Such an exception would preserve the protective intent of the statute while preventing its misuse against adolescent relationships that are not exploitative in nature,' she said. As the Supreme Court resumes hearing the matter next month, the numbers paint a sobering picture : thousands of adolescents and young adults are caught in the legal net each year, but only a fraction are ultimately held guilty, often after years of litigation. Whether this calls for legislative reform or judicial steps may now be for the court to decide but the data offers compelling reason to confront the unintended consequences of the current regime.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Of controversies and incomplete tenures
1 2 Ranchi: The political life of eminent tribal leader and key architect of the formation of Jharkhand state, Shibu Soren, has been plagued by controversies. The 'Dishom Guru' struggled to complete his tenure in the Union govt as well as in the state. Soren served as the chief minister three times, but he held office cumulatively for only 308 days. His shortest tenure lasted just 10 days, from March 2 to March 12, 2005. In 2009, while he was still serving as the chief minister, Shibu was defeated in the Tamar by-election by Raja Peter. He was appointed as the Union coal minister in former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's cabinet, following the alliance between JMM and UPA for the Lok Sabha polls in 2004. However, a three-decade-old Chirudih massacre case returned to haunt him. Facing potential arrest, Shibu went underground for several days before resigning from the Union govt on July 24, 2004. In November of that year, after securing bail, Shibu was reappointed as coal minister in Manmohan's cabinet. However, he was removed again in March 2005 due to a murder case in 1994, involving his secretary, Sashinath Jha, who was allegedly attempting to blackmail him in a "cash for vote scam" that was aimed at saving former PM Narasimha Rao's govt in 1993. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This Bond Accounts offers a 6%+ yield on your investment 6% Yield Bond Account Learn More Undo In January 2006, Shibu returned as a Union minister but was forced to resign in November after Delhi's Tis Hazari court found him guilty of Jha's murder. Shibu was allegedly accused of abducting Jha from Delhi on May 22, 1994, and having him killed in Ranchi. The CBI's charge-sheet claimed that Jha was aware of a monetary arrangement between Congress and JMM to avert a no-confidence motion against the Narasimha Rao govt in 1993 and was "blackmailing" Shibu for money, allegedly resulting in the murder. In the end, Shibu was acquitted in all the cases -- Kudko, Chirudih, Shashinath Jha murder and vote-for-cash scam.
