Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Extension Of Ban On Terror Group SIMI
A former SIMI member had approached the top court against a tribunal order which upheld the Home Ministry order declaring SIMI as an "unlawful association" under Section 3(1) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to hear the plea against the July 24, 2024 order of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) tribunal.
The tribunal was constituted under the UAPA after the Centre on January 29, 2024 decided to extend the ban on SIMI for five years.
It was set up for adjudicating whether or not there was sufficient cause for declaring SIMI an outlawed organisation.
SIMI was first banned in September 2001. The ban continues till today.
The ban was last extended in 2024 via a press release by the Ministry of Home Affairs. While extending the ban on SIMI, the government said the group was involved in fomenting terrorism and disturbing peace and communal harmony in the country.
Today, the court said that it will deal with the case along with other cases that are already pending before the court.
The petitioner's counsel today informed the top court that there are 10 other similar cases pending before the Court, raising important questions of law.
The counsel requested the bench to issue notice on the plea and tag it with the pending matters.
When he said the petitioner was a former member of SIMI, the bench orally observed, "Then why are you here? Let the organisation come." After the counsel said the organisation did not exist, the bench asked, "How does it affect you then?" The counsel said there were legal issues that remained in the matter.
SIMI was established on April 25, 1977 in Aligarh Muslim University as a front organisation of youth and students, having faith in Jamait-e-Islami-Hind (JEIH). However, the organisation declared itself independent in 1993 through a resolution.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
26 minutes ago
- Economic Times
SC reserves verdict on Telangana's domicile rule for medical admissions
Synopsis The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on the Telangana domicile rule for medical college admissions, which prioritizes students who studied in the state for the four years leading up to Class 12. The Telangana High Court previously struck down the rule, arguing it unfairly denies opportunities to permanent residents who studied elsewhere. Agencies Supreme Court The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its verdict on pleas including one of the Telangana government against an order that struck down its domicile rule for admissions in medical colleges in the state. The state government through the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, amended in 2024, entitled only those students, who have studied for last four years up to Class 12 in the state, to admissions in the medical and dental colleges under the state quota. The Telangana High Court held that the state's permanent residents cannot be denied benefits of admissions in the medical colleges only because they lived outside the state for sometime. On Tuesday, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran heard detailed arguments from both sides, including the Telangana government's counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi. Defending the state's four-year domicile criterion, Singhvi said once a domicile rule is established, "a threshold becomes inevitable". He said Telangana relied on a government order backed by a presidential order and, moreover, only the state government, not courts, could define "permanent residence". The CJI referred to the practical consequences of the rule, illustrating if "a Telangana judge is transferred to Bihar and his son studies in classes 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Bihar then the boy is disentitled from getting admissions in his home state". "Take a student born and raised in Telangana but moves away for just classes 10 and 11 and say, to Kota for coaching. Or an IAS officer from Telangana posted in Delhi, whose child studies outside the state for two years. Should such children be disqualified?" the CJI asked. Justice Chandran weighed in, "If a person remains idle in Telangana for four years, they qualify. But someone who leaves to study doesn't. Isn't that an anomaly?" Singhvi said the high court created the term "permanent resident," which only the state has the authority to define. The top court on September 20 last year stayed the high court order directing permanent residents or those domiciled in the state couldn't be denied the benefit of admission in the medical colleges only because they remained outside Telangana for sometime for their studies or residence. The state government, however, agreed to grant a one-time exception to 135 students, who had moved the high court, in admissions in the medical and dental colleges in 2024. The state's appeal argued that the high court erroneously held Rule 3(a) of the amended Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, to be interpreted to mean the respondents (candidates) were eligible to admission in the medical colleges in Telangana. The rule mandated four consecutive years of study in the state for students seeking admission in Telangana medical colleges before qualifying the exam. The state's plea argued such an order by the high court overlooked the fact that Telangana possesses the legislative competence to determine various requirements, including domicile, permanent resident status, etc. The high court's judgement, it said, mandates the state to prepare new rules for admission, which was a time-intensive process. "After framing the rules students have to apply and collect the requisite certificates from authorities concerned. Each certificate submitted by the student needs to be verified by the Health University. Whereas the present rule prescribes that the students can produce their educational certificate without approaching any office or authority. If the judgement of the high court is implemented, it will result in a huge delay in the allotment of seats to MBBS and BDS students," the plea added.
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC reserves verdict on Telangana's domicile rule for medical admissions
The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its verdict on pleas including one of the Telangana government against an order that struck down its domicile rule for admissions in medical colleges in the state. The state government through the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, amended in 2024, entitled only those students, who have studied for last four years up to Class 12 in the state, to admissions in the medical and dental colleges under the state quota. Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program The Telangana High Court held that the state's permanent residents cannot be denied benefits of admissions in the medical colleges only because they lived outside the state for sometime. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Crossout: New Apocalyptic MMO Crossout Play Now Undo On Tuesday, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran heard detailed arguments from both sides, including the Telangana government's counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi. Defending the state's four-year domicile criterion, Singhvi said once a domicile rule is established, "a threshold becomes inevitable". Live Events He said Telangana relied on a government order backed by a presidential order and, moreover, only the state government, not courts, could define "permanent residence". The CJI referred to the practical consequences of the rule, illustrating if "a Telangana judge is transferred to Bihar and his son studies in classes 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Bihar then the boy is disentitled from getting admissions in his home state". "Take a student born and raised in Telangana but moves away for just classes 10 and 11 and say, to Kota for coaching. Or an IAS officer from Telangana posted in Delhi, whose child studies outside the state for two years. Should such children be disqualified?" the CJI asked. Justice Chandran weighed in, "If a person remains idle in Telangana for four years, they qualify. But someone who leaves to study doesn't. Isn't that an anomaly?" Singhvi said the high court created the term "permanent resident," which only the state has the authority to define. The top court on September 20 last year stayed the high court order directing permanent residents or those domiciled in the state couldn't be denied the benefit of admission in the medical colleges only because they remained outside Telangana for sometime for their studies or residence. The state government, however, agreed to grant a one-time exception to 135 students, who had moved the high court, in admissions in the medical and dental colleges in 2024. The state's appeal argued that the high court erroneously held Rule 3(a) of the amended Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, to be interpreted to mean the respondents (candidates) were eligible to admission in the medical colleges in Telangana. The rule mandated four consecutive years of study in the state for students seeking admission in Telangana medical colleges before qualifying the exam. The state's plea argued such an order by the high court overlooked the fact that Telangana possesses the legislative competence to determine various requirements, including domicile, permanent resident status, etc. The high court's judgement, it said, mandates the state to prepare new rules for admission, which was a time-intensive process. "After framing the rules students have to apply and collect the requisite certificates from authorities concerned. Each certificate submitted by the student needs to be verified by the Health University. Whereas the present rule prescribes that the students can produce their educational certificate without approaching any office or authority. If the judgement of the high court is implemented, it will result in a huge delay in the allotment of seats to MBBS and BDS students," the plea added.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
SC reserves verdict on Telangana's domicile rule for medical admissions
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its verdict on pleas including one of the Telangana government against an order that struck down its domicile rule for admissions in medical colleges in the state. SC reserves verdict on Telangana's domicile rule for medical admissions The state government through the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, amended in 2024, entitled only those students, who have studied for last four years up to Class 12 in the state, to admissions in the medical and dental colleges under the state quota. The Telangana High Court held that the state's permanent residents cannot be denied benefits of admissions in the medical colleges only because they lived outside the state for sometime. On Tuesday, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran heard detailed arguments from both sides, including the Telangana government's counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi. Defending the state's four-year domicile criterion, Singhvi said once a domicile rule is established, 'a threshold becomes inevitable". He said Telangana relied on a government order backed by a presidential order and, moreover, only the state government, not courts, could define "permanent residence". The CJI referred to the practical consequences of the rule, illustrating if "a Telangana judge is transferred to Bihar and his son studies in classes 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Bihar then the boy is disentitled from getting admissions in his home state". 'Take a student born and raised in Telangana but moves away for just classes 10 and 11 and say, to Kota for coaching. Or an IAS officer from Telangana posted in Delhi, whose child studies outside the state for two years. Should such children be disqualified?' the CJI asked. Justice Chandran weighed in, 'If a person remains idle in Telangana for four years, they qualify. But someone who leaves to study doesn't. Isn't that an anomaly?" Singhvi said the high court created the term "permanent resident," which only the state has the authority to define. The top court on September 20 last year stayed the high court order directing permanent residents or those domiciled in the state couldn't be denied the benefit of admission in the medical colleges only because they remained outside Telangana for sometime for their studies or residence. The state government, however, agreed to grant a one-time exception to 135 students, who had moved the high court, in admissions in the medical and dental colleges in 2024. The state's appeal argued that the high court erroneously held Rule 3 of the amended Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, to be interpreted to mean the respondents were eligible to admission in the medical colleges in Telangana. The rule mandated four consecutive years of study in the state for students seeking admission in Telangana medical colleges before qualifying the exam. The state's plea argued such an order by the high court overlooked the fact that Telangana possesses the legislative competence to determine various requirements, including domicile, permanent resident status, etc. The high court's judgement, it said, mandates the state to prepare new rules for admission, which was a time-intensive process. "After framing the rules students have to apply and collect the requisite certificates from authorities concerned. Each certificate submitted by the student needs to be verified by the Health University. Whereas the present rule prescribes that the students can produce their educational certificate without approaching any office or authority. If the judgement of the high court is implemented, it will result in a huge delay in the allotment of seats to MBBS and BDS students," the plea added. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
