Vijay Shah remark row: Supreme Court raps M.P. Minister over public apology
A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said the conduct of the Minister was making the court doubt his intentions and bona fide.
Senior advocate K. Parmeshwar, appearing for Mr. Shah, said he had issued a public apology, which was online, and would be placed on court's record.
The court also asked the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to complete the probe against the M.P. Minister by August 13, and submit a report.
An FIR was filed against Mr. Shah late on May 14 for allegedly calling Colonel Qureshi 'sister of the terrorists' of Pahalgam attack, after the Madhya Pradesh High Court took suo moto cognizance of the matter.
In the May 19 hearing, Justice Kant had remarked that the Minister's comments amounted to 'crass, thoughtless remarks'. The court said there was no point apologising to the court merely to 'wriggle out of a situation'.
'Instead of leading by example, you, a public figure and a politician of experience, do this most unfortunate thing… The sentiments of the people were ruthlessly hurt by your comments. You should have done or said something to convey your sincere regret,' Justice Kant had addressed Mr. Shah's side in court.
(With inputs from PTI)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Shah to visit Assam on Aug 29, join land protection drive & unveil new Raj Bhavan
1 2 Guwahati: Ahead of the assembly election early next year, Union home minister Amit Shah will join the state in its drive to protect its lands from encroachers here on Aug 29. Shah, who is also the cooperation minister, will address the panchayat members from NDA on the state govt's plan to form cooperatives in every panchayat. These cooperatives will use the vacant govt land on lease for cultivation and farming so that no encroachment on any vacant govt land can take place. Large swathes of forest lands in the state, illegally occupied by Bangladesh-origin Muslim people, are being cleared by the state govt. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma, while addressing a press conference here on Friday, said, "The Union home minister will first inaugurate the newly constructed Raj Bhavan on Aug 29, which I think will be the best Raj Bhavan in the country. Thereafter, he will address a convention of the newly elected panchayat members of BJP and its ally Asom Gana Parishad." He further said the state govt is planning to form cooperative societies in every panchayat. "The responsibility of the cooperative societies will be to use the vacant govt land for agriculture, farming, or dairy. We want to inspire the panchayat members to use the vacant govt land for agriculture so that no encroachment can take place," he added. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Indian NRIs Are Getting Eligible For INR 2 Lakh Monthly Pension On Retirement. Invest 18K/M Get Offer Undo He said the vacant govt land will be given to the cooperative societies on lease. "Since Shah is also the cooperation minister, he will also address the panchayat members on this," he added. In the evening, Shah will attend the birth centenary of Assam's first non-Congress CM Golap Borbora. He will then return to Delhi. Borbora was arrested in 1975 during the Emergency for opposing the then Indira Gandhi govt and he spent 18 months in Tihar jail. He became the state unit president of the Janata Party in 1977 after his release from Tihar jail and led the party to victory with 53 seats. He was unanimously elected the first non-Congress chief minister of Assam in 1978, but his govt lasted for only 18 months. He was also a Rajya Sabha member from 1968 to 1974.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
List steps you plan against betting apps, SC asks government
. NEW DELHI: Expressing serious concern over the deleterious impact of addictive betting applications on youth, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to respond in two weeks what steps it is contemplating to save youngsters from getting financially ruined, often forcing them to commit suicide. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked the counsel for Centre to specify in its affidavit "what remedial measures it is contemplating after applying mind to the gravity of the issue". The counsel said another bench is examining whether these apps are akin to gambling, requiring them to be banned, and the decision in that case would have a direct bearing on reliefs sought in a PIL filed by K A Paul. But the bench said, "You (the Centre) do not appear to take the problem seriously". The judges also issued notices to some states, RBI, ED, TRAI, Google India, Apple India, Dream11 and other gaming companies to file responses in two weeks. The petitioner had sought a complete ban on illegal betting apps and strict regulation of online gaming and fantasy sports, alleging these are being popularised by film stars, famous cricketers and other celebrities and end up drawing youth to the apps like moths to a flame. He said the more than 150-year-old Public Gambling Act, 1867, is unable to deal with the menace. Over 24 incidents of suicide have been reported from Telangana alone in the last one and a half years and are directly linked to debt traps created by gambling/betting platforms.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
