English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Bhima Koregaon: After CJI, then entire bench, fifth judge recuses from hearing Navlakha’s bail plea

After Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and a three-judge bench recused themselves from hearing Gautam Navlakha’s petition, fifth judge backed out from the case.

Published

on

Gautam Navlakha

Within days of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, followed by a three-judge bench, recused themselves from hearing a petition filed by activist Gautam Navlakha in Bhima Koregaon case, another judge, Justice S Ravindra Bhat, backed out from hearing the case today, Thursday, Oct 3.

The plea will now come up for hearing on Friday, October 4, before another bench.

Civil rights activist Gautam Navlakha has challenged the Bombay High Court order refusing to quash an FIR lodged against him in the Koregaon-Bhima violence case.

On September 30, Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had recused himself from hearing Gautam Navlakha’s plea saying, “List the matter before a bench in which I am not the party.”

A day later, on October 1, the three judges of a bench – Justices NV Ramana, R Subhash Reddy and BR Gavai – also recused themselves from hearing the matter.

When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday before a bench comprising justices Arun Mishra, Vineet Saran and S Ravindra Bhat, Justice Bhat recused himself from hearing the case.

When the bench was informed by Gautam Navlakha’s counsel that the three-week protection given to him by the Bombay High Court was expiring on Friday, the bench said his petition would be heard by another bench tomorrow.

The Maharashtra government had earlier filed a caveat in the matter seeking to be heard before any orders are passed.

On September 13, the Bombay High Court had refused to quash the FIR lodged against Gautam Navlakha in the 2017 Bhima-Koregaon case and for having alleged Maoist links, noting that there was prima facie substance in the case.

The high court had said, “Considering the magnitude of the case, we feel a thorough investigation is required.”

Also Read: Chidambaram, in jail since Sep 5, moves Supreme Court for bail in INX media case filed by CBI

The high court had, however, extended the protection from arrest to Gautam Navlakha for a period of three weeks to enable him to approach the Supreme Court to file an appeal against its order.

The FIR was lodged against Gautam Navlakha and others by the Pune Police in January 2018 after the Elgar Parishad meeting on December 31, 2017 that had allegedly triggered violence at Koregaon-Bhima in Pune district the next day.

The police has also alleged that Gautam Navlakha and other accused in the case had Maoist links and were working towards overthrowing the government. Gautam Navlakha and the other accused were then charged under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code.

Besides Gauram Navlakha, four others – Varavara Rao, Arun Ferreira, Vernon Gonsalves and Sudha Bharadwaj, were also arrested in the case.

Five other activists – Shoma Sen, Surendra Gadling, Mahesh Raut, Rona Wilson and Sudhir Dhawale – were arrested in June 2018 as part of the same investigation.

Entertainment

Bharti Singh, Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcome second child after she’s rushed to hospital mid-shoot

Comedian Bharti Singh and her husband Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcomed their second child after she was rushed to hospital during a television shoot.

Published

on

Bharti

Popular comedian and television personality Bharti Singh and her husband, writer-host Haarsh Limbachiyaa, have welcomed their second child. The baby was born on Friday after Bharti was taken to the hospital following a sudden medical emergency earlier in the day, according to media reports.

Emergency during television shoot led to hospitalisation

As per available information, Bharti Singh was scheduled to shoot for the television show Laughter Chefs on Friday morning when her water broke unexpectedly. She was immediately rushed to a nearby hospital, where she later delivered her second child. No further details about the baby have been shared publicly so far.

The news of the delivery comes weeks after the couple announced Bharti’s second pregnancy on social media.

Pregnancy announcement and maternity shoot

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa had revealed the pregnancy during a family vacation in Switzerland. A few weeks ago, Bharti also shared pictures from her maternity photoshoot, where she was seen wearing a blue silk gown with white floral patterns.

Sharing the photos online, Bharti wrote, “2nd Baby Limbachiya coming soon,” along with a baby emoji.

Family background

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa became parents for the first time in 2022, when they welcomed their son, Lakshya.

The couple is among the most well-known faces on Indian television. Bharti is widely recognised for her comic timing and distinctive on-screen persona, while Haarsh has made his mark as a writer and host. Apart from their television work, the two also co-host a podcast together.

Continue Reading

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com