Former Supreme Court judge Jagti Chelameswar said on Friday that despite the case pending in the Supreme Court, the government could make laws for the construction of Ram Temple. He said that there have been instances of creating a barrier in court decisions by the legislative process.Justice Chelameswar has made this comment at a time when demand for a law to make a path for the construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya is increasing in the Sangh Parivar. Justice Chelameswar remarked in a discussion session organized by All India Professionals Congress (AIPC), a Congress party affiliated organization.
“Legally if it can happen (or not) is one aspect. Whether it will happen (or not) is another. I’m aware of instances that happened in the past where decisions of the Supreme Court were scuttled by the legislative process,” he said.
Vallabhbhai Patel, who is popularly known by the name of Sardar Patel, is known for his leadership and his strength and tactics in uniting more than 550 princely state without which it would have been impossible to realize India as a country. He was respected for the decision he made and honoured for this firm view on the matter concerned with citizen of India. It was under his leadership a chapter in Constitution named Fundamental Right was drafted and his clear view on freedom of speech and expression gave a way for freedom of press. He was certainly not known for his personality of physical existence. He was never a show-off person. My problem is not with that of money spent in building such a grand statute. The main problem with the statue of Sardar Patel is that it looks like an enlargement of a passport size picture and thus fails to create an impact for what he was known for. I hope it was not made just to mimic a photograph to which we are anyway familiar with.
If we look at the statue of liberty with the torch held up in the air, it conveys the thrill of freedom. A Gandhi statue with his long stride and the walking stick conveys motion — depicting the movement that brought us Independence.
A statue of Mother Teresa shows the love and care in her face for the orphan child in her arms.
An Ambedkar statue with a finger pointing the direction we are headed with India’s progressive constitution in his other hand pays homage to the person who headed its writing. A meditating Buddha statue fills us with peace and tranquility.
The 50 inch statue of the Fearless Girl in front of the Charging Bull on Wall Street may be tiny but shows the power of women.
The problem with me is not just with thousands of crores of public money wasted in making a grand statute. But it was a formality.
What difference it would have made if the statute symbolizes unity?
After and before independence, Sardar Patel was face behind unity of nation. He was an advocate who is well known for fighting for the rights for adivassis and farmers. However, on the contrary, Sardar Sarovar, is one of the world largest dam, well known for displacing adivasis and farmers. Not to blame electrol party, but the Government itself who didn’t gave a damn about the rights of farmers and adivasis. Even after huge protest, most of the uprooted adivasis and farmers have no place to live, hundreds and thousands of them died in struggle for their right.
The grand tallest statute of the world, the Statute of Unity, the Statue of Sardar Patel, would have been really the tallest and would have been respected the most if it would have paid a true homage to the people displaced and never rehabilitated, those who died in process, and to those who is still looking for justice.
The statue for record is surely the tallest, but unrespected, signifying a token of formality.
by Amaresh Patel
Today’s society is largely referred to as the Digital Society. Serious efforts are been made in adopting and integrating information and communication technologies at home, work, education and recreation. One can certainly not deny the numerous benefits given by being a Tech savvy, but at the same time it has also brought new compilations and worries. One of the major one being- Trolls.
Trolls or trolling someone can be defined as when someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
Trolls is said a way of removing their vengeance and aggression towards a particular person. It’s an online aggression and the people behind these trolls stay in anonymity. Thus relatively little is known about the type of people who troll. Abusive and derogatory words are used by the people who troll. The purpose behind trolling is derive pleasure from annoying others, it is a source of entertainment for the troller, to get attention, recognition and feel powerful. It has been compared to flaming in cyberbullying and many people who troll think what they do is an “art”. There are different types of trolls such as Paid by Neta Trolls, Religious Crusader Trolls, Misogynist Trolls, Body Shaming trolls etc.
One should not confuse trolls being similar to bullying. There is a difference between the two. Bullying is definitely a subset of trolling, as bullying is done with the primary intent of provoking people into an emotional response. But there are many other actions that can be categorized as “trolling” even though they aren’t necessarily bullying. In fact, provoking readers into an emotional response is often a huge component of getting them to laugh.
Trolling’s is not done by one single person’s act or comment. It is done by a group of people at large, the numbers of which vary from hundreds to thousands. Question arises why do people indulge in such act? According to a study published by the University of Manitoba, in Canada, it was found that trolls exhibit the personality traits of narcissists, psychopaths and sadists – taking pleasure in the suffering of others and lacking remorse or empathy for their victims.
The victims of trolling are particularly the vulnerable and minority sections of the society. In India it has been observed that it is the woman who have majorly been the victims of trolls. One can certainly not forget Smt. Sushma Swaraj (MP) and journalist Barkha Dutt being trolled for doing their work. They were abused and various offensive terms were attached to their names and offices. Even their family members weren’t spared.
It is believed that Trolling is a ‘mind game’ and is done to silence the person and therefore the best way of dealing with trolling is to ignore rather than engage with a troll. But is it that easy to ignore them? Writing or commenting is said to be utilizing ones right of expression and opinion. Can it be said and accepted that this is the ‘new’ mode of expressing one’s opinion regarding a particular person and his/ her work? Importantly can it be said that this is the new way Freedom of Speech and Expression will be exercised in India?
In a country like India where freedom/ liberty is given by the law of the land to question and express one’s views and opinions, this liberty certainly cannot be used to tarnish one’s dignity and image. This liberty/ freedom certainly has invisible boundaries which cannot be crossed by any person no matter what the circumstances. Trolls in no way can be used as ‘way of speech and expression’. Trolls cannot be encouraged as a platform for expression of opinions. The victims of Trolling have to face serious consequences such as- being mentally disturbed leading into depression (chronic or acute), being defamed in society, being suicidal. It is important for people to understand the damaging consequences trolling can cause and therefore should refrain oneself from indulging in such acts.
In India the laws and sections dealing with trolling are as follows:-
It is important to note that there is no agency in India to specifically monitor trolls or comments so posted. If one complaints to police, then police can approach a court of to pass an Order directing CERT-In and Google to delete a set of defamatory blogs. The Police is empowered to obtain such an order from the Court as per section 69A of the Information Technology Act. This section refers to the power to issue directions for blocking public access of any information through any computer resource. Law is particularly handicapped in cases where the person is based abroad, and not within Indian jurisdiction.
Trolling is a problem which requires urgent attention of the authorities. Just criticizing trolls and people indulging in trolling isn’t enough. Stringent Laws should be made. An agency needs to be set up either at the National or State level to address this issue. It is important that those who are trolling in the grab of moral policing be punished. India should not be heading towards becoming a society where trolls are used as an excuse to express oneself or for fun at the cost of another person. People should realize that ‘Civilization’ and ‘Being Digital’ have no place for trolling.
by Pinny Pathak
A complaint of defamation has been filed in a Delhi court against Congress Senior leader Shashi Tharoor. Significantly, only a few days ago, Shashi Tharoor told PM Modi the scorpion. The case of defamation against Tharoor has been filed by Delhi BJP leader Rajiv Babbar. In his complaint, Babbar alleged that Tharoor made this statement maliciously, which not only has the disrespect of Hindu deity but it is also humiliating. He said that Tharoor’s statement has hurt his religious sentiments. In the complaint filed through advocate Neeraj, the statement has been described as a totally insult to the unbearable misbehavior and the faith of millions of people.
In his complaint, Babbar alleged that Tharoor made this statement maliciously, which not only has the disrespect of Hindu deity but it is also humiliating. He said that Tharoor’s statement has hurt his religious sentiments. In the complaint filed through advocate Neeraj, the statement has been described as a totally insult to the unbearable misbehaviour and the faith of millions of people.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Samar Vishal marked that this matter will be heard on 16th November. Tharoor had created a fresh controversy on Sunday in the Bangalore Literary Festival claiming that an anonymous RSS leader compared Modi to scorpion sitting on Shivling. This complaint has been filed under Section 499 of Indian Penal Code and section 500 regarding defamation. If Tharoor is found guilty, he can be sentenced to a maximum jail of two years. Significantly, this is not the first time that Shashi Tharoor has made a statement about PM Modi or the central government. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor once again attacked the Narendra Modi government. He said on the arrest of social workers in Bhima Koregaon violence that the Modi government is doing this work under conspiracy.
Nisar ud Din Ahmed was arrested on January 15, 1994, one year after the disputed structure was dropped in Ayodhya. Nissar, living in Gulberg, Karnataka, was caught in connection with the bomb blasts on the first anniversary of demolition of the Babri Masjid. Two people were killed and 8 were injured in the bomb blasts. In this case, the court had summoned Nissar for life imprisonment. He was in jail for 23 years, but 17 days ago the Supreme Court released Nissar and the other two young men arrested with him.
When Nissar from Jaipur jail came out, he saw his elder brother Zaheer ud Din Ahmed waiting for him. In an interview with the Indian Express, Nissar said, “For the moment I forgot that I am free.
Nissar said that when he was put in jail, he was 20 years old. Today he is 43 years old. Before going to jail, when he saw his younger sister, he was 12 years old and now his daughter is 12 years old. Nissar said, “I spent 8,150 days in jail for the most important days of my life. Life is over for me. What you see is a living corpse. ‘
Nissar spent the first night in a hotel after leaving the jail He says, “I could not sleep. There was a bed in the room. For so many years, I slept on a blanket on the ground. ‘
Into Legal World has launched a project ‘Save Prisoners from Injustice’ to save such forsaken prisoners from injustice. ILW has signed MoU with 120 advocates for cause such as this.
The Government by the year end as part of the Supreme Court monitored é-courts’ project aimed at improving access to justice through digitisation of judicial system of more than 3993 districts.
The e-courts programme seeks to enable litigants to track their case status, across çause list’daily orders as well as verdicts online. A Çause List’ is schedule of cases to be heard by a court.
He said that – “Sara Internship, Moot Court, Aur iss Desh ka Law Andar Ghusa Denge. Iss Desh ka koi Law, koi kanoon, koi Court mera kuch nahi bigad sakta.” सारा इंटर्नशिप, सारा मूट कोर्ट और इस देश कासारा लॉ अं
He also showed certain hand gestures which were obscene and no prudent man will do so in a class where girls are also sitting. He said that- “I don’t give a damn to the principle of Natural Justice and no one can remove me from my post.” He said that the Law Students of the University need to be taught a lesson and they are overly smart.
He also put certain allegations on the law students that they commit illegal activities. We are on strike for the removal of chief proctor “kaushal Kishore” from his post of proctor. As he used unparlimentary language and he is baised.
How can people limit love by race or sex
And use the silly book as an excuse?
Judging others based on love, what is next?
Mankind watches the “abnormal” be abused.
There should be no difference to love.
Sexuality is not an option.
Love is a gift from God above.
Acceptance is the only solution.
In reality, love is all the same
Love is contentment, it is acceptance.
People should love who they love without blame.
Water and fire has a balance.
Fight to break down all the dividing walls
To eliminate hatred from the law.
The historic judgment today proclaims a day break for individual freedom and is a noteworthy triumph for the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community that has been contending energetically and constantly to make gay sex legal in India.
It is indeed a milestone judgment, where the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court on 6 September collectively in part struck down the British-period law which criminalized consensual gay sex in India.
The bench imparting such a historic judgment consisted of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra.
The journey of arriving at such a decision starts long back in 2001 when the NGO Naz Foundation had moved toward the Delhi High Court against it. In the year 2009, the Delhi High Court decriminalized sex between consenting grown-ups of a similar sexual orientation by holding the penal provision “unlawful”. But the joy for the LGBTQ community was short lived as in 2013, the SC re-established the culpability of the sexual connection between people of a similar sex. The LGBTQ community only saw a ray of hope in 2018, 10th July when the five-judge bench had clarified that it was not going into the curative petitions and would settle on new writ petitions on the issue.
Justice Indu Malhotra observes “History owes an apology to LGBT persons for ostracisation, discrimination…” While reading out the judgment CJI expresses his views stating “No one can escape from their individualism. Society is now better for individualism.” In the same lines we see Justice RF Nariman quoting that homosexuality cannot be regarded as a mental disorder. Justice Nariman also mentioned that both the administration and media must give more extensive exposure to the apex court’s decision to guarantee the community does not confront any kind of further discrimination. We find Justice DY Chandrachud saying “This case is much more than just decriminalising a provision It is about an aspiration to realise Constitutional rights and equal existence of LGBT community as other citizens,”. Justice Khanwilkar’s observed, “Section 377 has been partially struck down. The law will no longer apply to consensual same-sex acts between homosexuals, heterosexuals, lesbians but will still apply to bestiality and sexual acts without consent by one of them.”
The court while conveying the decision said the Constitution nurtures dissent as a safety valve of society. History cannot be changed yet can pass path for a healthier future, it included.
The SC likewise stated that because of the provisions in Section 377, individuals from the concerned community were compelled to live sequestered from everything and as second-class citizens while others delighted in the privileges of sexual orientation.
Four judges will pen separate judgments which means that judges could be differing in their opinion even though a common judgment is reached.
It is pertinent to note that sexual activity between individuals of a similar sex is legitimate yet same-sex couples lawfully can’t marry or acquire a civil partnership. Hope a change in legalising marriage between same sex couples is not a distant dream now.
While coming to the conclusion of this topic I feel it is quite appropriate to quote DaShanne Stokes who said, “Love should never mean having to live in fear.”
By Anwesha Ghosh