Need better coordination on new threats: Amit Shah
security challenges
that need to be tackled through "better coordination", Union home minister
Amit Shah
on Sunday directed the "formation of
homogenous teams
of central and state agencies to develop strategies, implement and monitor them."
This came after two days of the
National Security Strategies Conference
(NSSC) that concluded late Sunday where Shah further instructed the involvement of young police officers in each state to brainstorm on national challenges and devise solutions to address them. He urged that the use of
national databases
like NATGRID, NIDAAN, iMoT and CBI's fugitive database be inculcated amongst young officers by including them in all training programmes, according to an official statement.
Addressing the 8th NSSC, the home minister said the government has resolved numerous issues scattered across states as he emphasised that the next 5-10 years would be very important for the development and security of the country. "The minister exhorted the police and central security agencies to adopt the motto of 'Suraksha, Sajagta and Samanvay' (Security,
Alertness
and co-ordination)," the statement noted.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Senior Living Homes in Dharashiv May Surprise You
Senior Living | Search Ads
Undo
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Vijay Shah remark row: Supreme Court raps M.P. Minister over public apology
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 28, 2025) pulled up Madhya Pradesh Minister Vijay Shah for not issuing public apology over his remarks against Indian Army officer Col. Sofiya Qureshi., an Army officer who briefed the media during the Operation Sindhoor., saying he is testing the court's patience. 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)
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Remarks against Col Sofiya Qureshi: SC raps MP minister over public apology
The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up Madhya Pradesh minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for not issuing a public apology over his remarks against Indian Army officer Col Sofiya Qureshi, saying he is testing the court's patience. A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said the conduct of the minister was making the court doubt his intentions and bonafide. Senior advocate K Parmeshwar, appearing for Shah, said he had issued a public apology, which was online, and would be placed on court's record. The bench asked the special investigation team (SIT) constituted to probe the statements made by the minister to submit its report by August 13. The top court noted 87 people were examined by the probe team, which was currently examining the statements. The bench also refused to examine a plea filed by Congress leader Jaya Thakur seeking Shah's resignation but said some of the allegations made in the writ petition about the past instances would be looked into by the three-member SIT. The top court posted the hearing for August 18. The SIT constituted by the Madhya Pradesh government was in compliance with the top court's order. On May 19, the top court chided Shah and constituted the SIT to probe the FIR lodged against him. Shah came under fire after a video, which was circulated widely, showed him allegedly making objectionable remarks against Col Qureshi, who gained nationwide prominence along with another woman officer, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, during the media briefings on Operation Sindoor. The Madhya Pradesh High Court rebuked Shah for passing 'scurrilous' remarks and using 'language of the gutters' against Col Qureshi, and ordered police to file an FIR against him on the charge of promoting enmity and hatred. After drawing severe condemnation, Shah expressed regret and said that he respects Col Qureshi more than his sister
Scroll.in
5 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Kerala urges Supreme Court to dismiss president's reference about timelines for bills assent
The Kerala government on Monday urged the Supreme Court to return unanswered the presidential reference that seeks clarity on whether courts can impose timelines on the president and the governors to act on bills passed by legislatures, Live Law reported. In its application, the state argued that the reference was an attempt to reopen and overturn the Supreme Court's April ruling in Tamil Nadu government's case against the governor. On July 22, the court issued notice to the Union government and all states on the reference made by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143 of the Constitution. According to Article 143 of the Constitution, the president may refer any question of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court for its opinion. The president makes such a reference based on the advice of the Union council of ministers. In May, referencing 14 questions, Murmu asked whether the actions of governors and the president could be tried in court and whether such timelines could be imposed on them in the absence of any such provision in the law. The president also said that Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution do not prescribe deadlines or specific procedural requirements. In light of the reference, the Supreme Court set up a Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai, and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar. In its application on Monday, Kerala argued that the reference was based on an 'erroneous statement' that Article 200 does not stipulate a time frame for governors to act on bills, Live Law reported. The state said that 11 out of the 14 questions raised by the president had already been addressed in the Supreme Court's ruling in the Tamil Nadu case. It alleged that the reference was a 'serious misuse' of Article 143, the legal news outlet reported. Kerala also said that the Union government had not filed a review or curative petition against the April judgement and had therefore accepted it. SC's ruling on Tamil Nadu versus governor The ruling on April 8 had come on a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government after Governor RN Ravi did not act on several bills for more than three years before rejecting them and sending some to the president. In its judgement, the court held that governors must decide on bills within a reasonable time and cannot delay indefinitely under Article 200. Similarly, it said that the president must act within three months under Article 201, and any delay beyond that must be explained and communicated to the state government. Both sections outline the process of assent to bills by governors and the president. The judgement had also introduced the concept of ' deemed assent ' in cases of prolonged inaction by the governor or president, allowing pending bills to be considered approved.
