Rath Yatra: Sec 163 BNSS imposed
According to the provisions of Section 163 BNSS, no speaker, individual or political party is permitted to criticise any religion, caste or specific person in speeches, nor is it permitted to play objectionable cassettes that could incite communal tension or caste conflict, nor to encourage others to do so.
Gatherings of five or more people in public places or on roads, the organisation of public meetings, street meetings, processions or demonstrations without prior permission are not allowed.
All will adhere to the instructions issued by the High Court, Allahabad, Lucknow regarding the use of loudspeakers. Those intending to use more than two loudspeakers within the Commissionerate Kanpur City must seek prior permission. tnn
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
3 hours ago
- Deccan Herald
‘Why do people go out without any work': Lawyer's comment on Madhya Pradesh highway traffic jam puts NHAI in a rough spot
In reference to news regarding remark made by an advocate representing #NHAI during the hearing of PIL about traffic jam on 30 June 2025 in High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench, it is hereby clarified that the remark by advocate does not represent official version of NHAI.
New Indian Express
13 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Servitors should get full chariot access, CM Mohan Majhi urged
BHUBANESWAR: Members of the Chhatisha Nijog during their meeting with Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi on Tuesday raised objections to the newly-imposed provisions of allowing only duty-bound servitors on chariots during pahandi of the deities on Rath Yatra. President of Chhatisha Nijog Janardan Pattajoshi Mahapatra said while only Singhari Nijog and Puja Panda Nijog servitors are allowed to touch Lord Jagannath on normal days, Rath Yatra is the only time when servitors of all nijogs can touch the Trinity and offer prayers from a close proximity. However, in a move to maintain discipline and ensure smooth conduct of rituals, Law minister Prithiviraj Harichandan had this year announced that the government would allow only servitors in charge of Rath Yatra duties on the chariots. He had added that unauthorised persons or servitors who have no role to play in the rituals would be booked if found on the chariots. The temple administration implemented the decision and ensured that non-servitors are not allowed on the chariots.
Hans India
14 hours ago
- Hans India
HC hears X Corp's plea on content takedown notices, Centre defends officers' authority
Bengaluru: The High Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case filed by X Corp India, the Indian arm of Elon Musk-owned social media platform 'X' (formerly Twitter), challenging the authority of government officials to issue content takedown notices under the Information Technology Act. 'X' Corp informed the court that it had recently received a notice from the Ministry of Railways seeking the removal of a video showing a woman driving a car on railway tracks in Hyderabad. Representing the company, Senior Advocate K G Raghavan argued against what he termed a misuse of official powers. 'What if every Tom, Dick and Harry officer sends me notices? See how this is being misused,' he said. Raghavan questioned whether such content qualified as unlawful, remarking, 'Some woman drove a car on railway tracks. Milords knows dog biting man is not news, but man biting dog is news.' Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union of India, objected strongly to the language used, stating, 'They are officers, not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries with legal authority. International entities should not display such arrogance'. Mehta emphasised that no social media platform should expect to operate without regulation, noting that intermediaries follow laws in other countries and should do the same in India. Justice M Nagaprasanna also expressed disapproval of the remarks, affirming the stature of Union government officers and stating, 'I take objection to this. They are officers of the Union of India.' 'X' Corp has sought a judicial declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not empower government officials to issue blocking orders, arguing that such orders must follow the procedure laid out in Section 69A of the Act, along with the relevant blocking rules. Additionally, the company has requested the court to prevent government ministries from taking coercive or adverse actions against it based on blocking orders not issued in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
