English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Supreme Court pulls up Modi govt for objecting to its criticism

Published

8 years ago

on

Supreme Court

After a series of cases it came in for scathing criticism at the Supreme Court, the Narendra Modi government on Wednesday, August 8, told the top judicial body to restrain itself from making adverse remarks against governance while dealing with individual cases.

The top court said it was at least solving problems, and was in no way “criticising the government”. It said that the judiciary would not need to intervene in PILs if the authorities discharged their duties in accordance with the law. It said it was enforcing the rights of citizens and warned the government against creating the impression that the courts were preventing it from working.

Attorney-general K.K. Venugopal said the country had a wide range of problems and that the “Hon’ble court must desist from making adverse remarks against the governance in entirety”. He made the submission before a bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta and Abdul Nazeer while appearing in a PIL on poor prison conditions.

Venugopal also made references to newspaper headlines based on the observations made by the bench.

Venugopal referred to Justice Lokur’s observation on Tuesday, while dealing with another PIL, that “women are being raped left, right and centre” and the government was not doing anything to check the rising crime.

Venugopal said often, when the court passes an order on a PIL, there are adverse effects. Giving examples, Venugopal said that while the cancellation of the 2G licenses by the court virtually wiped out huge foreign investments, another order for removal of liquor vends on highways caused a financial loss and people lost their livelihood.

“There is a question of budgetary allocations…Government’s 80-90 welfare programs are going on simultaneously…Court dealing with one issue and passes order but from where the funds would come,” Venugopal pleaded.

“It is not that we have done nothing or we are doing nothing. Not everything is negative,” Venugopal said.

“Judges may not know all aspects of every problem when they choose to make adverse comments against the government,” he added.

Justice Lokur shot back saying it was because of the court’s order that the government has collected over Rs. 1,50,000 crore as environment funds for illegal mining. The court wanted to know why that amount has not been spent.

Venugopal said these funds were collected for environment purposes.

The bench retorted that in one of the matters related to construction workers, over Rs 30,000 crore meant for welfare of these workers were used to buy laptops and washing machines.

“There is enough money. They (construction workers) do not have clothes to wear but washing machines were purchased. They are illiterates, but laptops were purchased,” it said.

The AG told the bench that India has a population of around 1.3 billion which was increasing exponentially and there were several problems in the country.

“Day in, day out, I read newspapers and your observations,” the AG told the bench.

To this, Justice Lokur said, “Rest assured that Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) will remain here and we will uphold it”.

The court: “Let us make it clear that we have not and we are not criticising the government for everything.  We are also citizens of this country. Do not give the impression that we are criticising the government and preventing it from working. We are only enforcing rights of people. We cannot wish away Article 21.”

Many developments have happened only because of the orders of the court, the bench said, adding: “You should only ask your officers to follow the laws made by Parliament.”

The bench of Justice Lokur has been hearing pleas relating to social media monitoring, mob lynching, pollution, environment, garbage, overcrowding of prisons, conditions of women and children there, shelter homes for children, rehabilitation of widows, illegal mining and other matters. In many of these cases, it has passed strictures on the government.

In the present instance, the court was hearing a PIL relating to inhuman condition prevailing in 1,382 prisons across the country which are overcrowded.

Venugopal said that with 1.3 billion population which is increasing exponentially there were several problems faced by the country, and every order on PILs should have a separate note as to the effects of such orders on other sectors, effect on budgeting, rights of others who could be affected and every order has to be balanced and well thought of as India has “enormous problems”.

The bench said, “Tell your law officers to argue on this line also. Tell your government to obey the law of the land”.

The Attorney General said that he has conveyed his views to the court about dealing with the PILs and the court should consider his submissions without any offence.

The court wanted setting up of a one member committee of a retired judge of the apex court to recommend measures on prison reform, including overcrowding, and women prisoners languishing in jails. It said the Committee would be assisted by two-three government officials that would file periodical reports to the apex court.

Posting the matter for 17 August, the bench asked the Centre to file details of the proposed committee.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

Gandhi Parivar vs Sangh Parivar, Revanth Reddy’s remark sparks BJP attack

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks contrasting the Gandhi Parivar with the Sangh Parivar triggered a BJP response accusing Congress of prioritising the Gandhi family.

Published

3 hours ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks comparing the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar have triggered a political exchange, with the BJP hitting back at the Congress leader.

Speaking in Kerala on Friday, Mr Reddy described the contest over India’s future as a fight between the two “parivars”. He said the Gandhi family had made sacrifices for the country while accusing the Sangh Parivar of attempting to divide India on the basis of religion, caste, region and language.

What Revanth Reddy said

Mr Reddy cited Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi while speaking about what he described as sacrifices made by the Gandhi family.

He also referred to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi, saying they had given up positions, power and high office.

The Telangana Chief Minister said he had no remaining personal political ambitions and described his objective as working towards a Congress-led government at the Centre with Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister.

Mr Reddy also appealed to people to stand with the Gandhi Parivar and oppose the Sangh Parivar. He described the latter as a threat to India’s democracy.

BJP hits back

The BJP responded to Mr Reddy’s remarks on Saturday.

BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said the Telangana Chief Minister’s comments amounted to an admission that Congress’s objective was to bring the Gandhi family back to power.

He also linked Mr Reddy’s remarks to the ongoing political debate around “vote chori”, the Election Commission, the Constitution and democracy, arguing that the Congress’s focus was instead on the Gandhi family.

The exchange adds to the political confrontation between the BJP and Congress, with Mr Reddy presenting the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar as opposing forces in India’s political future, while the BJP has interpreted his remarks as evidence of Congress’s focus on the Gandhi family.

Continue Reading

India News

India hits back at Shehbaz Sharif at UN, says terror will have consequences

India hit back at Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s UN speech, with New Delhi warning that terrorism will have consequences.

Published

10 hours ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

India has responded to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s remarks at the United Nations, delivering a strong message on terrorism and warning that such actions will have consequences.

The response came after Mr Sharif addressed the UN and raised issues concerning India and Pakistan. New Delhi rejected the narrative presented by the Pakistani prime minister and highlighted the issue of terrorism.

India’s message was delivered by Petal Gehlot, who represented New Delhi in the response to Pakistan.

India warns Pakistan over terrorism

India’s response focused on Pakistan’s record and its approach towards terrorism. New Delhi made clear that terrorism cannot be separated from its consequences and that those responsible cannot expect such actions to go unanswered.

The Indian side also pushed back against the claims and allegations made by Mr Sharif during his UN speech.

The exchange comes amid continuing tensions between India and Pakistan, with terrorism remaining a major point of disagreement between the two countries.

Shehbaz Sharif’s UN remarks

In his address, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke about India-Pakistan relations and raised several issues concerning New Delhi.

India subsequently exercised its right of reply to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the United Nations.

New Delhi’s response underlined its position that terrorism remains a serious issue in the relationship and that there would be consequences for terrorist actions.

The latest exchange at the UN adds to the continuing diplomatic confrontation between the two neighbouring countries.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

23 hours ago

on

September 25, 2026

By

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com