Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking direction to Parliament to abolish BNS sections
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Anish Dayal said issuing such a direction would amount to legislating, which was not within its domain. It added that such an abolition could only take place by the enactment of a law amending the BNS. 'Abolition is only permissible by enacting an amendment act. It is an act of Parliament. We cannot direct the Parliament to do so. It will amount to legislating. It is not under our realm,' the bench told the counsel representing the petitioner, Upendra Nath Dalai.
'If we peruse the prayers, what we find is that the petitioner is asking to give direction to the Parliament to legislate an amending act. The prayers made in this PIL [public interest litigation] cannot be granted by the court by exercising its jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.'
Dalai's petition argued that the provisions in question grant the government the right to suppress the voices of citizens and are thus violative of the fundamental rights to equality, life, and personal liberty. He added they act as a 'key tool for opposition-free governance.' Dalai said the same also undermines the basic structure of the Constitution and creates an arbitrary attitude in government officials.
The court in May rapped Dalai for filing another petition alleging that the BNS is a criminal act. 'What kind of language is used? What is the prayer? There has to be some limit of frivolity,' the court said.
The BNS replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and came into effect on July 1 last year. Sections 147 to 158 deal with the offences against the state, such as waging war or attempting and abetting to wage war against the government of India, committing acts endangering the country's sovereignty, unity, and integrity, etc. Sections 189 to 197 deal with the offences against public tranquillity. They include offences of unlawful assembly, rioting, etc.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
9 minutes ago
- The Print
Modi's Bharat vs Indira's India: 11-yr report card of politics, diplomacy, economy, nationalism
Mrs Gandhi and Modi took over in completely different circumstances. There was also the differential in political capital they began with. Mrs Gandhi had not won an election in 1966. She was a convenient compromise after Lal Bahadur Shastri's death. She didn't help her cause by looking overawed in Parliament early on, and socialist Ram Manohar Lohia dismissed her as a 'goongi gudiya' (a doll who didn't speak). She had also inherited a broken economy. The growth rate in 1965 was negative, -2.6 percent in fact. The triple blow of a war, droughts, food shortages and instability, and the deaths of two Prime Ministers in harness within 19 months had weakened India. First of all, we need to look at the larger political realities in which each took over power and the challenges to their authority. Then we will assess their record across four dimensions: politics, strategic and foreign affairs, the economy, and nationalism. On the day Narendra Modi won his third term in June, 2024, it was inevitable that this year, he would become India's second longest serving Prime Minister in consecutive terms, surpassing Indira Gandhi (24 January, 1966 to 24 March, 1977). It also became inevitable, therefore, that around this time in 2025, the season of Modi vs Indira comparisons will begin. Let me be the first, or among the first, off the block. The picture for Modi in 2014 was the exact opposite. He won a majority, the first in India after 30 years, and was his party's chosen candidate; the economy was averaging a robust 6.5 percent growth across the preceding 15 years. His was a peaceful, planned, predictable electoral transition. The degree of difficulty on his first day in power was way lower than Mrs Gandhi's, just as his political capital was enormously higher. It is also important to underline that Mrs Gandhi's 11th year wasn't electorally earned, but self-gifted by mauling the Constitution in a Parliament where she had a brute majority (Congress was 352 out of 518) and the Opposition in jail. In contrast, Modi's third term was earned through general elections, though he fell short of a majority this time. His 11 years have seen no challenge, either within his party or from the Opposition. The global situation has also mostly remained stable and favourable, until the arrival of Trump 2.0. Also Read: RSS chief Bhagwat draws the line at 75. India's politics stares at the Modi Exception Now, the comparisons across the four dimensions we listed. On domestic politics, the first question is: who's been the strongest Prime Minister of India, Modi or Indira? The rest don't count. While Mrs Gandhi redefined her politics in an ideology (deep-pink socialist) first out of compulsion and then preference, Modi was born, dyed and seasoned in his (saffron). Mrs Gandhi's power ebbed and peaked with the times. Modi's has almost been constant, barring the few months of hard dip after the 240 seats of 2024. Even at 240 now, one challenge he need not bother about is from within his party. He's marginalised all, replacing the state satraps with unknown lightweights. That isn't so different from Mrs Gandhi. On ruthlessness, therefore, they are equally matched. On dealing with the Opposition and free speech, the Emergency will be a hard act to match even if somebody—God forbid—wished to do so. On the respect for institutions, the competition is tough, like a dead heat. For convenience, let's limit ourselves to just one institution: the Rashtrapati. With V.V. Giri, Mrs Gandhi reduced the job to that of a porcelain president: a fragile, ornamental object expected to do nothing except sign on the dotted line. The Modi era presidents have been of a piece with those. Modi rose with the power of a '56-inch chest', Mrs Gandhi was often described in times innocent of political correctness as the only man in her Cabinet. Both lived up to these propositions. With Mrs Gandhi, we saw another manifestation of political skill, out of power and back again in 1977-84. But that period is out of the syllabus in this 11-year comparison. Also Read: One prime minister's 19-month legacy is bigger than another's Emergency An important question is who kept India's cohesion better. Mrs Gandhi ruthlessly fought insurgencies in Mizoram and Nagaland. Her troubles on this score came post-1980. Modi has made a dramatic improvement in the Kashmir Valley, and continued with normalisation in the Northeast. But Manipur is an unending failure. A big positive is the near destruction of the Maoists in east-central tribal India. This dovetails neatly into strategic and foreign affairs. Mrs Gandhi's 11 years were across the peak of the Cold War. She signed a treaty with the Soviet Union with a cleverly drafted mutual security clause, endured the Nixon-Kissinger tilt to China, and deftly navigated the narrow spaces still available to India. Modi started out with a 'friends with all' approach but Pakistan-China realities soon caught up with personalised diplomacy. Mrs Gandhi announced India's nuclear status in 1974 (Pokhran-1) but it took Modi in 2019 (Balakot) and in 2025 (Operation Sindoor) to call Pakistan's nuclear bluff. That's a big plus in his corner. As things soured in the neighbourhood, India warmed up to the US/West and then the complexity of Ukraine arose. This gave rise to multi-alignment. The Trump bull has trampled all over this China shop. Pakistan is playing the US and China as it did in 1971. And like Mrs Gandhi then, Modi has to look for alternatives, but then, the Soviet Union is long gone. His predicament is tougher than Mrs Gandhi's in 1971, but India is enormously stronger. The economy is where we might have expected to see many contrasts, but surprisingly, there are many similarities, too. Modi came to power promising to be the exact opposite of Mrs Gandhi, asserting that it's no business of the government to be in business. But on many basic instincts, he's emulated her. The larger, if enormously more efficient distributive politics, for example. An abiding commitment to the public sector instead of privatisation. Even this year, the budget allocated Rs 5 trillion for fresh investments in PSUs. Compare that with our defence budget, Rs 6.81 trillion. Modi has brought in some significant reform—digital payments, GST and the bankruptcy code. Many others, from mining to manufacturing and electricity economics, are meandering. In his first and second terms, Modi attempted some audacious reform—land acquisition, farm and labour reform laws, lateral entry into civil services. All have been given up now. Until Trump came to power, Modi seemed settled into the 6-6.5 percent figure, which we'd risk calling the Hindutva rate of growth. The logic: a politics driven by Hindu identity and polarisation would win elections with 6-6.5 percent risk-free. The Trump arm-twisting and the resultant free trade agreements have rocked that leisurely cruise. Let's see if this can force fresh reform at gunpoint. And finally, how do we compare the two greatest proponents of employing nationalism in their politics? For Mrs Gandhi the backdrop was multiple wars between 1962 and 1971. India was already a jai jawan, jai kisan country. The liberation of Bangladesh, Green Revolution and non-aligned world's adulation fuelled her nationalism. Modi's nationalism is more muscular, in military livery. We can't prejudge the consequences of a commitment trap in promising to respond militarily to a terror act and leave it to historians to reflect on the consequences of such strategic predictability. Under Modi, a new Hinduised nationalism has emerged. While this has united a critical mass of Hindus to keep him secure, it has also created divisions. India's adversaries would be tempted to run a dagger through these. We've seen the Pakistanis try that not just with our Muslims but also the Sikhs, especially during Operation Sindoor. Also Read: You can put words in Mrs Gandhi's mouth & get away. But too much fiction, and you mess with Bhindranwale
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
'25 likes & 5 comments': Cops book Facebook page, users for post targeting Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah
Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah (File photo) BENGALURU: A routine social media monitoring exercise by cybercrime police has led to a suo motu case against a Facebook page and users for interacting on an allegedly derogatory post targeting CM Siddaramaiah. The post, written in Kannada and uploaded on July 21 on 'True Secular' page, accused Siddaramaiah of targeting religious institutions across his terms in office. It claimed he had acted against the Udupi Sri Krishna Mutt during his first term, attempted to alienate the Lingayat community from Hinduism, and was now targeting Dharmasthala. The post had drawn 25 likes & five comments - some of which included alleged derogatory remarks about the CM's leadership. These engagements are now part of the FIR, with the names of those who commented & some who liked the post also listed. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru Post found during regular monitoring by cops Police said the post was spotted on July 23 during regular monitoring by sub-inspector Kubera from the cybercrime station attached to the commissioner's office. A senior police officer said the case has been booked under the Information Technology Act, 2000, andSection 299 of BNS, which pertains to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings. The development comes days after the state govt announced a special investigation team to probe allegations of serial rapes and murders in Dharmasthala — a move that has triggered political reactions and sharp commentary online.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
India's Pharma Exports Have Shot Up By 92% In Last 6 Years: Minister
New Delhi: Various schemes being implemented by the Centre to realise the vision of Aatmanirbhar Bharat in the pharmaceutical sector have resulted in India's exports of drugs and pharmaceuticals increasing by 92 per cent, from Rs 1,28,028 crore in FY2018-19 to Rs 2,45,962 crore in FY2024-25, the Parliament was informed on Friday. The schemes include the Promotion of Research and Innovation in Pharma MedTech Sector (PRIP) scheme, the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) Scheme for Pharmaceuticals, the PLI Scheme for Bulk Drugs, Scheme for Promotion of Bulk Drug Parks, and Strengthening of Pharmaceutical Industry scheme, Minister of State for Chemicals and Fertilisers Anupriya Patel told the Lok Sabha in a written reply to a question. The PRIP scheme has been launched with an outlay of Rs 5,000 crore to transform India's Pharma MedTech sector from cost- to innovation-based growth by strengthening research and promoting industry-academia linkage for research and development in priority areas in drug discovery and development and medical devices. Under this scheme, seven Centres of Excellence (CoEs) have been set up, she said. The PLI Scheme for Pharmaceuticals aims to enhance India's manufacturing capabilities by increasing investment and production in the sector and contributing to product diversification to high-value goods in the pharmaceutical sector. The minister said that the scheme has enabled enhanced investment and production in eligible products. As of March 2025, the committed investment of Rs 17,275 crore targeted over the six-year period of the scheme stands substantially exceeded with a cumulative investment of Rs 37,306 crore made by the scheme's third year, and cumulative sales of approved products of Rs 2,66,528 crore have been made, including exports of Rs 1,70,807 crore. The PLI Scheme for Bulk Drugs, which has a total budgetary outlay of Rs 6,940 crore, aims to avoid disruption in the supply of critical active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) used to make critical drugs for which there are no alternatives by reducing supply disruption risk due to excessive dependence on a single source. As of March 2025, the committed investment of Rs 3,938.5 crore under projects approved under the scheme for investment over the six-year production period of the scheme stands substantially exceeded with a cumulative investment of Rs 4,570 crore made by the scheme's third year, she further stated. The minister also highlighted that the government launched the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana scheme to make quality generic medicines available at affordable prices to all. Under the scheme, dedicated outlets known as Jan Aushadhi Kendras (JAKs) are opened across the country to provide medicines at prices that are about 50 per cent to 80 per cent lower than those of leading branded medicines in the market. Till June 6, 2025, a total of 16,912 JAKs have been opened, and on average, about 10 to 12 lakh persons visit these Kendras daily and avail of quality medicines at affordable prices. As many as 2,110 medicines and 315 surgicals, medical consumables and devices are under the scheme product basket, covering all major therapeutic groups, such as cardiovascular, anti-cancer, anti-diabetic, anti-infectives, anti-allergic and gastro-intestinal medicines and nutraceuticals. As a result of the scheme, in the last 11 years, estimated savings of about Rs 38,000 crore have accrued to citizens in comparison to the prices of branded medicines. Further, the scheme has provided self-employment to over 16,000 persons, including over 6,800 women entrepreneurs, the minister added.
