English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Aadhaar not required for NEET, other all India exams, rules Supreme Court

Published

on

Aadhaar not required for NEET, other all India exams, rules Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, March 7 ruled that Aadhaar cards would not be mandatory students appearing in NEET 2018 and other all India exams.

Delivering the order, a five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief justice Dipak Misra and comprising Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, directed the CBSE to upload the information on their website.

The CJI, addressing the respondents, said that they need to follow the court’s interim order which said Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory.

Earlier, in the morning, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) had told the apex court that it has not authorised CBSE to mandatorily take Aadhaar number of students to get themselves enrolled for appearing in NEET 2018 examination.

Attorney-General KK Venugopal had said he has instructions from UIDAI that like in Jammu and Kashmir, Meghalaya and Assam other identity proofs like passport, voter card and ration card can be used by the CBSE for enrolling the students in the examination.

The UIDAI’s remarks came on a plea challenging the decision of CBSE seeking Aadhaar number or Aadhaar enrolment number from students who are aspiring to take up the NEET 2018 examination.

The Gujarat High Court had dismissed the plea on February 27 and its order was challenged in the Supreme Court.

Senior counsel Arvind Datar, arguing for petitioners, said that the forced use of Aadhaar for availing of several services is amounting to almost coercion. He gave the example of a driving licence (Motor vehicles Act), where you will not be deprived of benefits accruing because you do not have a licence.

He made a clear point in this. He said: “If it wasn’t a money bill and had gone to the Rajya Sabha, Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act wouldn’t have been passed.”

[Section  57 says that the Act is “not to prevent use of Aadhaar number for other purposes under law. Nothing contained in this Act shall prevent the use of Aadhaar number for establishing the identity of an individual for any purpose, whether by the State or any body corporate or person, pursuant to any law, for the time being in force, or any contract to this effect…”]

Datar said: “Consent is said to be free without any coercion, but in the present scenario there’s a coercion; so much so that if your Aadhaar is not linked your account will be closed.”

He said: “To enroll or not to enroll is my wish. When I exercise this right, I do not exercise in reference to Sec.3 of the Aadhaar Act, but because of my right to privacy. Under rule of law, is it permissible to coerce at every stage? This is what your lordships must decide. Sec.8(2)(a) is rendered irrelevant now, because the consent part has been removed by authorities under this section and will be closed on this March 31,” he said.

[Sec.8(2)(a) of Aadhaar Act says: “unless otherwise provided in this Act, obtain the consent of an individual before collecting his identity information for the purposes of authentication in such manner as may be specified by regulations.”]

He said Aadhaar is a choice. “But if I don’t take Aadhaar, I cannot link it with PAN card which has been mandated. This will mean as if I never had a PAN card because it will cancel my PAN card. After Puttuswamy case, this is my decision with my privacy, on whether to take Aadhaar or not. Article 14,19  and 21 entitles me not to take Aadhaar.”

Datar pointed out various orders of the court. “Twenty nine applications were made for relaxing the orders of the court which prayed that Aadhaar must not be mandatory for filling of forms. It is voluntary,” he said.

He also said: “A total of 2,000 applicants could not fill forms for their exams in state of Gujarat, because they did not have Aadhaar.”

At this point that the CJI said that this writ was useless. Justice Misra said that the high court’s interim stay, saying Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory will have to be abided by.

Justice Chandrachud also made it clear that the interim order passed in October 2015 will stay till the time matter is disposed off.

Extension of deadline

One senior advocate also mentioned that the deadline for linking of documents to Aadhaar must also be extended beyond March 31.

Chidambaram submits

Senior advocate P Chidambaram, starting his submission, said that the Aadhaar bill has been passed as a money bill so as to bypass the Rajya Sabha. He pointed to Article 110 and he pointed out the difference between 117 (financial bill) and 110 (money bill). He said that a financial bill can be a bill which is related to provisions from a-f and others also but a money bill can only be related to provisions between a-f.

A money bill is a subset of financial bill which is a subset of a bill. He submits that nothing escapes in a guise of a money bill.

The matter continues.

India News

Journalist files police complaint against Rahul Gandhi over push allegation

Journalist Richa Parashar has filed a criminal complaint against Rahul Gandhi and others, alleging that she was pushed while covering the Opposition’s march to the Supreme Court. The Congress has denied the allegation.

Published

on

Journalist Richa Parashar has filed a police complaint against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over an alleged incident during the INDIA bloc’s march to the Supreme Court in New Delhi on October 12. She has sought the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Gandhi and others, alleging that she was pushed while covering the protest.

Parashar submitted her complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), New Delhi district, on Friday, seeking immediate action. She has said she was three months pregnant at the time of the alleged incident and accused those involved of mistreatment, threats and the use of force.

What Richa Parashar alleged in her complaint

Parashar alleged that she was reporting on the Opposition’s march when the incident occurred. According to her earlier account, she was waiting near a gate on the Supreme Court premises to seek a response from Gandhi when he allegedly grabbed her hand and pulled her forward. She further alleged that his security personnel pushed her away, causing her to fall on the Supreme Court steps.

In her complaint, Parashar said she asked Gandhi questions before he allegedly pushed her towards a gate. She claimed that the force caused her to lose her balance and fall, and that her repeated requests not to be pushed were ignored.

Parashar has sought legal action against Gandhi and others whom she alleges were involved. The complaint reportedly seeks action under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 74, 115(2), 131, 125 and 3(5). These provisions concern alleged assault or criminal force against a woman, voluntarily causing hurt, assault or criminal force, acts endangering human life or personal safety, and joint liability for acts committed with common intention.

The allegations and the sections cited in the complaint do not, by themselves, establish criminal liability.

Congress disputes the allegation

The Congress has challenged Parashar’s account of the incident. According to report, the party said a video released by the journalist did not show the sequence of events she described.

Congress leader Alka Lamba also questioned the circumstances surrounding the incident and accused those raising the issue of attempting to manufacture propaganda.

The allegations remain disputed. The complaint and the competing accounts should not be treated as an established finding of wrongdoing.

Incident took place during Opposition’s Supreme Court march

The alleged incident occurred on October 12, when Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders marched to the Supreme Court to submit a petition concerning alleged irregularities in the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The Opposition has raised concerns about the voter-list revision process and alleged irregularities.

Parashar’s police complaint adds a legal dimension to the controversy surrounding the march. Any further action will depend on the police process and the relevant legal proceedings.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi court orders release of CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke

A Delhi court on Saturday ordered the conditional release of Cockroach Janta Party founder Abhijeet Dipke, who was detained and subsequently arrested ahead of a planned protest march at Connaught Place.

Published

on

Abhijit Dipke

A Delhi court on Saturday ordered the conditional release of Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke, a day after he was detained and subsequently arrested ahead of a planned protest march in the national capital. The march was scheduled to take place at Connaught Place as part of demonstrations against alleged electoral irregularities.

Dipke was asked to furnish a bond and undertake to maintain peace as a condition of his release, according to reports. The court’s order came after he was produced before a Special Executive Magistrate following his arrest on Friday.

Why Abhijeet Dipke was detained

Dipke had planned to participate in the ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march at Connaught Place, where participants intended to gather and wave the national flag. The proposed demonstration was part of ongoing protests over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

According to the Delhi Police, Dipke was taken into preventive custody before being formally arrested in a case related to the apprehension of a breach of peace. Police cited Sections 126 and 170 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

Neha Bora was also detained

All India Students’ Association (AISA) president Neha Bora was also detained on Friday ahead of the planned march. She was released early Saturday morning after completing the formalities associated with her detention, according to the report.

Bora criticised the police action and called for the release of protesters who remained in custody. She also demanded an end to the SIR exercise and sought the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. These were her demands and allegations, rather than findings established by the court.

Protests over electoral rolls continue

The demonstrations involving CJP, student groups and opposition supporters have centred on allegations of irregularities in the voter-list revision process. Critics have questioned the exercise, while the Election Commission has maintained that its decisions were approved by the Supreme Court. The BJP has criticised the protests, describing them as attempts to spread anarchy, according to the report.

Dipke’s conditional release marks the latest development in the dispute over the planned Delhi protest. The court’s order concerns his release under specified conditions; it should not be interpreted as a judicial finding on the wider allegations surrounding the electoral-roll revision.

Continue Reading

India News

Anirudh Ravichander to marry Kavya Maran in November, reception on November 21

Anirudh Ravichander and Kavya Maran are set to marry in November, with their Chennai wedding reception scheduled for November 21.

Published

on

Music composer Anirudh Ravichander and Sunrisers Hyderabad executive Kavya Maran are set to marry in November. Their wedding reception is scheduled to take place in Chennai on November 21, according to an announcement by Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy’s office.

The development followed a meeting between Revanth Reddy and Kavya’s parents, Sun Group chairman Kalanithi Maran and Kavery Maran, at the chief minister’s residence in Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.

According to the Telangana Chief Minister’s Office, the couple’s reception is scheduled for November 21, with Kavya’s parents extending an invitation to the chief minister.

Telangana CM’s office announces reception date

The Telangana CMO shared photographs and videos of the meeting on its official social media account on October 16. The announcement stated that Kalanithi Maran and his wife had met Revanth Reddy to invite him to their daughter’s wedding reception.

The post specifically confirmed that the reception of Kavya Maran and Anirudh Ravichander would be held in Chennai on November 21.

The announcement provided an official confirmation of the reception date and venue, while details about the wedding ceremony itself have also been reported separately.

Who are Anirudh Ravichander and Kavya Maran?

Anirudh Ravichander is a prominent music composer in the Indian film industry. He gained widespread recognition with the song “Why This Kolaveri Di” and has since composed music for several major films, including Leo, Indian 2, Vettaiyan, Vidaamuyarchi and Coolie.

Kavya Maran is the daughter of Kalanithi Maran, chairman of the Sun Group. She serves as an executive director at Sun TV Network and is widely recognised in cricket circles for her association with Sunrisers Hyderabad, the IPL franchise.

Wedding rumours and reported ceremony details

Speculation about a possible marriage between Anirudh Ravichander and Kavya Maran had circulated before the latest announcement. Earlier reports in August 2026 discussed the possibility of a November wedding in Greece.

A subsequent report said the wedding was reportedly scheduled to take place in Greece on November 11. However, the couple had not directly confirmed their wedding plans in the cited report.

The Telangana Chief Minister’s Office has confirmed that the reception is scheduled for November 21 in Chennai. The reported wedding ceremony details should therefore be attributed to reports rather than presented as officially confirmed information.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com