A tragic incident unfolded in Ghaziabad’s Raj Nagar Extension, where 46-year-old realtor Kuldip Tyagi shot his wife Anshu Tyagi dead before dying by suicide. The incident occurred at their residence in Radha Kunj society around 11 am on Wednesday, while their two sons were present in the house.

According to police, Tyagi used his licensed revolver to shoot his wife, whose body was found on the bed. He then turned the weapon on himself; his body was discovered on the floor of their bedroom. The couple was rushed to a nearby hospital but was declared dead on arrival.

A suicide note discovered at the scene sheds light on the motive behind the extreme act. Tyagi wrote that he had been diagnosed with cancer and had concealed the illness from his family. Expressing hopelessness about recovery, he stated he did not want money to be spent on treatment, fearing it would be in vain. His note also revealed a disturbing resolve to take his wife’s life along with his, citing a mutual vow to stay together forever.

“This is my decision. No one, especially my children, is to blame,” the note emphasized, clearing their two sons and other family members of any involvement or blame.

Senior police officer Poonam Mishra confirmed the sequence of events and said an investigation is underway. The revolver used in the incident has been seized, and the bodies were sent for post-mortem examination.

The couple is survived by their two sons and Kuldip’s father, a retired police officer. The incident has sent shockwaves through the community, underlining the mental and emotional toll that undiagnosed illnesses and financial fears can take on individuals.

In a major development impacting West Bengal’s education sector, the Supreme Court has permitted teachers whose appointments were cancelled earlier this month due to recruitment irregularities to continue in their roles until the state concludes a new selection process. However, this interim relief applies strictly to those educators who were not implicated in the 2016 recruitment scam.

Delivering the verdict, the apex court underscored the importance of uninterrupted education for students, noting that learners should not be made to suffer due to administrative lapses. The bench clarified that only “untainted” teachers—those not found to be involved in the irregularities exposed during investigations—would benefit from this decision.

Earlier, a large number of teaching appointments in the state were cancelled following revelations of procedural violations and corruption in the 2016 recruitment drive. This led to widespread uncertainty among both educators and students. The court’s ruling seeks to strike a balance between upholding justice and ensuring educational continuity.

The state government is now tasked with conducting a fresh recruitment drive to replace the posts affected by the earlier scandal, ensuring a transparent and merit-based selection this time.

The Supreme Court of India, during a hearing on petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, raised pointed questions to the Central government, specifically regarding the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council. The bench asked whether a reciprocal arrangement—such as allowing Muslims to be part of Hindu religious boards—would be acceptable.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Vishwanathan, was hearing 73 petitions questioning the constitutional validity of the amended Waqf Act. The new legislation has been the subject of protests in various regions, mainly due to its redefined provisions, including the controversial concept of ‘Waqf by user’.

At the beginning of the session, the Chief Justice sought clarity from the petitioners on two fronts: whether the case should be sent to a High Court and what specific legal arguments they aimed to raise in the Supreme Court.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing one of the petitioners, argued that several provisions of the amended law infringe upon Article 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to manage one’s own religious affairs. He particularly criticized the extensive powers granted to the Collector under the new framework. According to Sibal, the Collector, being a government functionary, cannot also serve a quasi-judicial role, as it undermines the principle of separation of powers.

He also raised objections to the ‘Waqf by user’ provision—where a property may be declared as Waqf based solely on prolonged religious or charitable use, without formal documentation. While the amended Act now exempts disputed or government lands from being automatically classified as Waqf, the clause remains contentious.

The court’s query about the possible inclusion of Muslims on Hindu religious boards drew attention to what it called a lack of parity in religious governance. The top court hinted at the need for a balanced and non-discriminatory approach if religious representation is to be redefined through legislative changes.

The matter continues to evolve, with the Supreme Court yet to decide whether it will take up the entire batch of petitions or refer them to a High Court.