English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Khaps cannot interfere in marriages, cannot even hold meeting for it: Supreme Court

Published

on

Supreme Court

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra on Tuesday, March 27, ruled that self-appointed quasi-judicial bodies like khap panchayats trying to scuttle marriage between two consenting adults were “absolutely illegal”.

The court, in an “unlimited direction” to parents, society and khap panchayats, said that interference, harm or insult caused to consenting adults who fall in love and choose to marry is absolutely illegal.

The bench, also consisting of justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, laid down guidelines to prevent such interferences and said the norms laid down by it would remain in force till a suitable legislation is enacted by the Parliament.

The bench which, in an earlier hearing, had told khap panchayats not to act as conscience keeper of the people, further said that any assembly which is intended to scuttle a marriage of two consenting adults is also illegal.

The court was hearing a PIL by NGO Shakti Vahini which had moved the court in 2010 seeking directions to the central and state governments to prevent honour crimes. The apex court also asked the Centre and state government to issue directions to crackdown on such illegal assemblies.

The court said the fundamental right of two people who wish to get married to each other and live peacefully is absolute.

In previous hearings on a petition filed by NGO Shakti Vahini, the court had repeatedly emphasised that no one has any individual, group or collective right to harass a couple.

In the hearing last month, the SC said that no third person should interfere in the choice of marriage between two adults. The bench, also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, said “whether the law prohibits or allows a particular marriage, the law will take its own course” but “when two people get into a wedlock, no panchayat, no one should interfere”.

During the proceedings in the matter, the Centre too had told the top court that state governments must provide protection to couples fearing for their lives due to inter-caste or inter-faith marriages and that such couples should inform the marriage officers about any such threat.

In an indication that it would not recognise khap panchayats, the top court had also said that it would refer to them only as an assembly of people or as a community group.

A counsel appearing for the khaps said the panchayats promote inter-caste and inter-religious marriages. He also referred to provisions in Hindu marriage law which prohibit union between ‘sapinda’ relations (those between close relatives), saying that even science had proved that such marriages can lead to genetic problems in children. He submitted that khaps do not approve honour killings, adding that “custom is not above a human life”. The court said it was not concerned about khaps but only about the freedom of choice of adults in marriages.

The Centre had earlier pleaded with the apex court to put in place a mechanism to monitor crimes against women by khap panchayats, saying that the police was not able to protect such women.

The government had acknowledged that “honour killing was neither separately defined or classified as an offence under the prevailing laws. It [honour killing] is treated as murder.”

The proposed law against honour killing — The Prohibition of Interference with Freedom of Matrimonial Alliance Bill — is still under circulation among the States. The Centre recommended that the State governments should take responsibility for the lives of couples who fear retaliation. They should be housed in special protection homes, away from danger.

The government said special cells should be formed in every district to receive complaints from couples who feared for their lives.

The Centre said the apex court, due to the pendency of the proposed Bill, should categorically issue directions that “no person or assembly of persons shall harass, torture, subject to violence, threaten, intimidate or cause harm to any couple wishing to get married by their own choice or couple who have got married.”

The top court had also said that as a pilot project, it would examine the situation in three districts of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh where khap panchayats were active.

India News

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

Published

on

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The Canadian government clarified that there is no evidence to connect Prime Minister Narendra Modi or his top officials to any criminal activity in Canada, including the killing of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah. The media report further alleged that PM Modi, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval were informed about the plan.

Nonetheless, the same report acknowledged that the Canadian government had no direct evidence to support these claims against PM Modi. Issuing a statement, the Canadian government distanced itself from these allegations, mentioning that there was no substantiating evidence.

The statement underlined that on October 14th, because of a significant and ongoing threat to public safety, the RCMP and officials took the extraordinary step of making public accusations of serious criminal activity in Canada perpetrated by agents of the government of India.

It added that the government of Canada has not stated, nor is it aware of evidence, linking Prime Minister Modi, Minister Jaishankar, or NSA Doval to the serious criminal activity within Canada. It remarked that any suggestion to the contrary is both speculative and inaccurate.

Earlier, India furiously rejected the Canadian daily’s report as ludicrous, terming it detrimental to diplomatic ties that have been frosty since Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first accused India of involvement in Nijjar’s killing last year.

Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said that they do not normally comment on media reports, but such ludicrous statements made to a newspaper purportedly by a Canadian government source should be dismissed with the contempt they deserve. He added that smear campaigns like this only further damage our already strained ties.

Diplomatic ties between India and Canada weakened when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) accused Indian government agents of involvement in criminal activities on Canadian soil, including murder, extortion, and intimidation. As the diplomatic rift intensified, both the countries expelled top envoys in response.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar was gunned down outside a gurdwara in Surrey, British Columbia, in June 2023. Earlier in 2024, Canadian authorities arrested and charged four Indian nationals for the murder.

Continue Reading

India News

Parliament winter session: Government lists 15 bills, including Waqf bill

The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

Published

on

The government has listed five new ones and one to amend the contentious Waqf law out of 15 bills for the winter session of Parliament. The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

The government has introduced five new bills, including the Coastal Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to promote coasting trade and increase the participation of Indian-flagged vessels owned and operated by Indian citizens for both national security and commercial purposes.

Another significant legislation that will be introduced by the government is the Indian Ports Bill, 2024. This bill is designed to implement measures for the conservation of ports, enhance security, and manage pollution, ensuring compliance with India’s international obligations and statutory requirements.

Additionally, the government plans to introduce the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to meet India’s obligations under maritime treaties and support the development of Indian shipping while ensuring the efficient operation of the Indian mercantile marine in a way that serves national interests.

Pending legislation includes the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which is awaiting consideration and passage after the joint committee of both Houses submits its report to the Lok Sabha. The committee is expected to report by the end of the first week of the winter session.

Currently, there are eight bills, including the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, pending in the Lok Sabha, while two additional bills are in the Rajya Sabha.

Furthermore, the government has also listed the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Bill for introduction, consideration, and passage, which seeks to increase the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of Delhi district courts from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 20 lakh.

The Merchant Shipping Bill, along with the Coastal Shipping Bill and the Indian Ports Bill, is slated for introduction and eventual passage.

Continue Reading

India News

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.

Published

on

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare. The leaders allegedly restricted essential supplies such as food, water, and medical aid to civilians in Gaza, resulting in severe humanitarian crises and deaths, including among children.

Last year in October, Israel had launched attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack by Hamas. The Israel-Hamas war has led to the death of thousands of civilians, while lakhs have been displaced. The major infrastructures in Gaza, including hospitals and schools, were also destroyed as Israel vowed to wipe out Hamas.

The International Criminal Court stated that it found reasonable grounds to believe the accused intentionally targeted civilians and limited medical supplies, forcing unsafe medical procedures, which caused immense suffering. This ruling was based on the findings from at least October 8, 2023 until at least May 20, 2024.

The court remarked that it has assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that PM Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza.

Furthermore, it also noted that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and medical supplies created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, leading to death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration.

Additionally, the International Criminal Court dismissed two challenges by Israel against its jurisdiction in the situation in the State of Palestine.

Notably, Israel had contested the ICC’s jurisdiction, claiming it could not be exercised without Israel’s consent. Nonetheless, the Chamber ruled that the Court has jurisdiction based on Palestine’s territorial scope, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. It further noted that Israel’s objections were premature, as jurisdictional challenges under the Rome Statute can only be made after an arrest warrant is issued.

Reportedly, Israel had also requested a fresh notification regarding the investigation, started in 2021. Denying the request, the court stated that Israel had earlier declined to request a deferral, making additional notifications unnecessary.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com