Tag: Indian Supreme Court

  • Indian Supreme Court validates the revocation of Article-370

    Indian Supreme Court validates the revocation of Article-370

    A five-judge constitution bench, presided by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, has given its verdict on the Union government’s 2019 move to amend Article 370 of the constitution, the abrogation of which ended the special status of Jammu and Kashmir.

    The decision was reserved earlier on September 5 this year, after 16 days of hearings.

    The unanimous verdict by the panel of five judges came in response to more than a dozen petitions challenging the revocation and a subsequent decision to split the region into two federally administered territories, the central government, on the other hand, had defended its action, asserting there was no “constitutional fraud” in nullifying the provision.

    Chief Justice said that Jammu and Kashmir held no internal sovereignty after accession to India. The court maintains that the president has the right to abrogate any of the articles in the Constitution. The same was carried out on August 5 2019.

    The order also declared that the reorganisation of the erstwhile state into Union Territories in 2019 was a temporary move, it directed the Centre for the restoration of statehood and for Legislative Assembly elections to be held.

    However, Justice Kaul recommended in his opinion that a Truth and Reconciliation Commission should be set up in Jammu and Kashmir, for the acknowledgement of acts of rights violations in the region.

    The revocation was one of Mr Modi’s poll promises in 2019 and the court’s decision comes months before he seeks a third term. Local politicians in the region have expressed disappointment over the order.

    Former Chief Minister Omar Abdullah posted on X (formerly Twitter) that he was “disappointed but not disheartened”. An hour later, he also posted Faiz Ahmed Faiz poem, “Dil na umeed to nahi, na kaam he to hai”.

    Meanwhile, Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India wrote this decision is “a resounding declaration of hope, progress and unity”.

    Amit Shah, a major proponent of Hindutva supremacy and Indian Home Minister, criticised India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, on the Kashmir issue, saying in Parliament, “I say this with full responsibility that Kashmir suffered due to two blunders by Nehru. First, the ceasefire (with Pakistan) was announced when our forces were winning…before winning the whole of Kashmir. The second blunder was to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations.”

    Today he posted on Twitter that because of this decision “separatism and stone pelting are now things of the past.”

    Asaduddin Owaisi says, ” We are disappointed by this verdict.”

    “Pakistan categorically rejects the judgement announced by the Supreme Court of India on the status of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK),” states the statement released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Pakistan.

    Caretaker Foreign Minister of Pakistan Jalil Abbas Jilani posted on Twitter that “The judicial endorsement by the Indian Supreme Court has no legal value.”

  • Gauhar Khan responds to Indian SC’s refusal to grant ‘Tandav’ makers protection from arrest

    Gauhar Khan responds to Indian SC’s refusal to grant ‘Tandav’ makers protection from arrest

    Gauhar Khan has responded to the Indian Supreme Court’s refusal to grant the makers and actors of the controversial Amazon Prime Video series Tandav protection from arrest. According to reports, the top court has denied relief to director Ali Abbas Zafar and others seeking quashing of FIRs against them for allegedly hurting religious sentiments of Hindus. The top court has also issued notices to Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and other states on their pleas.

    As per details, the bench hearing the case said that the “right to freedom of speech is not absolute”.

    “Your right to freedom of speech is not absolute. You cannot play the role of character that hurts the sentiments of a community,” said the bench.

    When Mohammad Zeeshan Ayyub’s lawyer argued that he was just an actor under contract and that the views expressed by his character could not be attributed to him, Justice MR Shah said, “You accepted the contract after reading the script. You cannot hurt religious sentiments.”

    Responding to the bench’s comment, a Twitter user said: “Excellent. Next people playing murderers on screen might be tried for the same. After all, they read the script.”

    Gauahar retweeted the tweet along with three ‘face with monocle’ emojis.

    Tandav has been accused of disrespecting Hindu deities, with several political leaders including Uttar Pradesh deputy chief minister Keshav Prasad Maurya demanding legal action against the team.

    Read more – India’s Karni Sena announces INR 1 crore award to whoever cuts tongue of ‘Tandav’ makers

    Following the backlash and outrage, Tandav creator Ali Abbas Zafar issued an “unconditional apology” on behalf of the team. Calling any resemblance to real-life persons and incidents coincidental, he wrote in a statement, “The cast and crew did not have any intention to offend the sentiments of any individual, caste, community, race, religion or religious beliefs or insult or outrage any institution, political party or person, living or dead. The cast and crew of Tandav take cognizance of the concerns expressed by the people and unconditionally apologize if it has unintentionally hurt anybody’s sentiments.”

    Later, Ali issued another statement, in which he said that the makers decided to ‘implement changes’ to the web series after concerns were raised. At least two scenes were removed from the show.

    Tandav is a nine-episode series that takes viewers inside the corridors of power and politics. It was released on Amazon Prime Video on January 15.

  • Babri Masjid case: Indian SC decides in favour of Hindus

    Babri Masjid case: Indian SC decides in favour of Hindus

    Putting to rest the decades-old Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, the Indian Supreme Court (SC) on Saturday decided in favour of Hindus as it allotted Ayodhya land to Ram Janambhoomi Nyas (Ram Birthplace Trust).

    Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas is an organisation to promote and oversee the construction of a temple in Ayodhya at the Ram Janmabhoomi, the reputed site of the birth of Rama, the seventh and one of the most popular avatars of Hindu God Vishnu.

    With a five-judge bench pronouncing its unanimous judgment that was reserved last month on the Ayodhya case involving the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid, it ordered allotment of five-acre alternative land to Muslims for setting up of a mosque while deciding in favour of Hindus.

    The ruling said the Indian government will formulate a scheme in three months to set up a board of trustees for the construction of the temple at the disputed structure.

    “This court must accept faith and accept the belief of worshippers. The court should preserve balance,” Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi said while reading out the judgement.

    The court said Hindus believe that Lord Ram was born under the dome, adding that faith is a matter of individual belief.

    It said there is evidence that Ram Chabutra, Sita Rasoi was worshipped by the Hindus before the British came. The court said evidence in the records shows that Hindus were in the possession of outer court of the disputed land.

    “Arguments were made on archaeology report. Archaeological Survey of India’s credentials are beyond doubt and its findings can’t be neglected,” the court said.

    The court said that titles can’t be decided on faith and belief but on claims. The judgement stated that historical accounts indicate the belief of Hindus that Ayodhya was the birthplace of Lord Ram.

    The Indian SC dismissed the plea of Shia Waqf Board on a claim to the Babri Masjid, saying there was no evidence that Muslims abandoned the mosque. Hindus always believed the birthplace of Lord Ram was in the inner courtyard of the mosque, the verdict added. 

    According to the court, it is clearly established that Muslims offered prayer inside the inner courtyard and Hindus offered prayers in the outer courtyard.

    Ahead of the verdict, appeals for peace were made by the Hindu and Muslim organisations and various political leaders, including Indian Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi.

    Meanwhile, Delhi Police said it will initiate strict legal action against mischief-mongers or those found indulging in any activity that may adversely affect peace and public order.

    “Activities on social media platforms will be under observation,” said the police.

    Earlier, authorities banned the assembly of more than four people at one place in and around Ayodhya, a town in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh while the government ordered all schools and colleges to remain closed until Monday.

    BABRI MASJID DESTRUCTION:

    Babri Masjid was a mosque in Ayodhya, India. Located in Ayodhya district, at a spot believed by Hindus to be the birthplace of Hindu deity Rama, it has been a bone of contention between the Hindu and Muslim communities since the 18th century.

    The destruction of the mosque in 1992 sparked massive Hindu-Muslim violence that left around 2,000 people dead.

    Hindu hardliners say the mosque was built after a temple dedicated to the Hindu god was destroyed by Muslim invaders. After the demolition of the mosque, Hindus and Muslims took the issue to a lower court, which, in 2010 ruled that the disputed land should be divided into three parts — two for Hindus and one for Muslims.