We all can agree that Rape is “sort” of well known. Now our Supreme Court defines it more clearly. Any sex between a man over the age of 18 and a woman (really a girl) below 18 is Rape. Why? Because “a girl under the age of 18 years is a child and hence, does not have the capacities — physical, emotional or mental — to take an informed decision about engaging in sexual intercourse.”
Till now there was an exception to this if an underage girl is married to a man over the age of 18. This did not make sense as lot of times girls are allegedly forced into marriage due to various pressures.
With this new SC ruling, it makes it 100% clear that ANY SEX BETWEEN A MALE OVER THE AGE OF 18 WHETHER MARRIED TO OR NOT, EVEN IF CONSENSUAL, TO A GIRL BELOW 18 IS RAPE. REALLY SIMPLE AND MAKES GOOD SENSE.
According to one study, India has a few million girls under the age of 18 who are married. Did they all marry by their own choice or due to pressure or other force? More likely it is pressures & force. This judgment may help future victims. Sadly, it could some communities more than others.
- 13 Oct 2017
For pollution control reasons, sale on firecrackers for Diwali was banned. Then in September this ban was relaxed, but now the ban went into effect again. Doing so deeply hurts religious sentiments of the Hindu, Sikh and Jain community who look forward to it and celebrate in a big way. Burning firecrackers has religious significance. Being a deeply sensitive topic, it would be hard to even enforce it.
The Supreme Court’s job (as it is world over) is to NOT to make laws but interpret. Here they want to be like the government (even if unelected) to make the laws? The same is the issue with the Rohingya refugee issue where they want to act like the government? There seems to be no self-check or control on what areas they jump into?
INSTEAD OF THIS FIRECRACKER BAN, COULD THEY HAVE ASKED ALL DELHI MOTORISTS TO STOP DRIVING FOR ONE DAY AND INSTEAD TAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORT?
Would they ever to infringe on sensitive matters of other religions?
- 11 Oct 2017
Due to the public interest litigation (or PIL), the Supreme Court hears and gets involved with so many issues even though it has an overflowing case load. In this case, these Rohingya Muslim, who claim to be stateless are originally from the Bangladesh-Burma border. So with Burma and Bangladesh as neighbors, why are we in India (a 3rd country) have to host them and let them stay. It is alleged that several among them engaged in violence. With 30%+ population in poverty, and with so many issues we are faced with, do we need to absorb and give shelter to another 40,000 Muslim refugees today and possibly lakhs in the future who could be sympathizers of terrorism. The answer ought to be Absolutely Not!
Source: Times of India
- 2 Oct 2017
Many brave women and men among the Muslim community and the public at large have fought to ban Triple Talaq. After decades of fighting, and with strong and unequivocal support of the current NDA government, the Supreme Court has banned the Triple Talaq practice and termed it as unconstitutional – and brought great relief to Muslim women. With so many former secular parties and governments even unwilling to discuss this issue, getting social justice within the Muslim community was hard especially due to the stiff resistance by the AIMPLB – the orthodox All India Muslim Personal Law Board. Most current politicians of the Congress Party, Samajwadi, CPM, CPI, JD(U), JD(S), Trinamool Congress, and on and on only wished to support the orthodoxy, even though the practice is banned in 20+ countries. Polygamy in the Muslim community is already being challenged, and some say a favorable judgement could be next with no prediction on timing. With these landmark development, India should move to a Uniform Civil Code that most countries have.
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 23 Aug 2017
In a major development, the Supreme Court has appointed a retired Supreme Court judge and asked the NIA – National Investigation Agency to probe a handful of Love-Jihad cases. Love-jihad is where Muslim men pursue Hindu, Sikh or Christian women and then convert them into Muslims and then marry them. This is allegedly a soft way to islamize more people. In light of alleged forcible conversion of a Hindu woman, and also after hearing of several other cases in Kerala, the Supreme Court took a big step in probing these alleged cases. Some say that Love-Jihad is a major social issue in several other states, cities and countries. While all are entitled to pursue personal freedoms, forced and induced religions conversions or ‘Love Jihad” to increase the Muslim population are not legally or morally acceptable.
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 17 Aug 2017
The UP Shia board, who own the Shia waqf or property in a major development said that they were willing to relocate the masjid to a shia-muslim dominated area. The exact words that were spoken to the Supreme Court were, “WE WOULD SETTLE FOR A MASJID LOCATED IN A MUSLIM-DOMINATED AREA AT A REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM THE MOST REVERED PLACE OF BIRTH OF MARYADA PURUSHOTTAM SRI RAM“. This could be the key step to reach a happy settlement and prevent/limit the avoidance of future conflict.
Source: The Hindu
- 15 Aug 2017
Right to privacy is real sensitive issue with so much stuff and interaction on the internet, and most organizations asking for individuals personal information. The key question is, “If give personal information like names, parents’ name, passport number, Aadhar card, drivers license, etc. are given for a particular purpose, then is there a reasonable expectation that such personal information will be used only for that purpose or not. Will organizations use that to do marketing, will they sell it, are they legally required to protect the information so the individual faces no harm?” As the common man, each of us should ask yourself – this is the minimum expectation. As has happened in other countries, our Supreme Court is dealing with this sensitive question.
- 2 Aug 2017
The great Lord Pamanaswamy Temple, is one of India greatest treasures for both the temple, the sacredness and how its property and assets has been preserved and protected for centuries by members of the former royal family of Travancore. The members and the temple priests consider themselves only as servants of the Diety and Temple. Due to a PIL (public interest litigation), the Supreme Court got involved. As some would say, with little regard for centuries old customs, the Supreme Court seeks to get each of the six or more treasure vaults opened, the contents counted and displayed in a museum. Well, understand the idea BUT THIS IS A TEMPLE NOT A MUSEUM. Lakhs and Crores of devotees over time have never asked for it. So what authority does our Supreme Court now have to want to get this done? What about our sentiments and sacredness? The Priests and former Royal Family and many many devotees are dead again this.
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 13 Jul 2017
Shri Ram Nath Kovil’s nomination to be the next president has been well received from many quarters. While a Dalit, he is highly educated, a Supreme Court lawyer who has a lifetime of social service. Our Indian Opposition parties were hoping to put up a fight with a common candidate but Shri Kovil selection by the ruling NDA has shattered any chance of opposition unity. In a positive way, most opposition parties have praised or endorsed Shri Kovil, and this leaves a few political parties which are become smaller and less insignificant such as the Indian National Congress, CPI and few others.
- 22 Jun 2017
The nation await the Supreme Court judgement on oral talaq, which is opposed by millions of women. The Government of India joined the petition by Muslim women to see the ban of this practice and even offered stated that they would bring a law to ban this. However, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, an unelected body which claims to represent all Muslims kept resisting and resisting on the grounds this is a religious practice and cannot be interfered with. Suddenly, the AIMPLB has a change of heart. They have now filed an affidavit with the Supreme Court which states that “ANY MUSLIM MAIN WHO RESORTS TO TRIPLE TALAQ WILL FACE SOCIAL BOYCOTT“. This is along with other actions. Obviously the Muslim Board is not just late to the petition being heard by the Supreme Court, but they at least 70 years too late since independence?
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 25 May 2017
Supreme Court passed an order, based on a PIL that all liquor shops, hotel and restaurants which are within 500 meters (lowered to 220 meters in thinly populated areas) of national and state highways are henceforth banned from serving any liquor – legally of course. The hotel and restaurant industry and even the general public is shocked as this seems to be the first of its kind anywhere in the world. As liquor is a source of profits and cash flow to the hotel industry as well as the states that collect huge excise taxes, this will be a big hit. In addition, in a young country like ours, early estimates are that over 10 lakh jobs would be lost, with adverse multiplier effect. So is the purpose of this SC order to stop drinking or to reduce drunk driving – it is not clear. Given the huge impact, governments and industry are using the usual Indian creativeness – called “jugaad” to reduce this impact.
Source: Economic Times
- 12 Apr 2017
Ram Mandir – Masjid settlement is with the Supreme Court. The Allahabad high court had already awarded its judgment. In an unusual move, the sitting Chief Justice of India has offered to broker a voluntary resolution. As correctly noted by the justice, this is a sensitive case and a negotiated settlement as against the high court making judgement could be a better way forward. Several parties have welcome this move, however the Babri Masjid convener does not favor this path. One solution could be that of Subramanian Swamy, MP and litigant in the case has said that Ram Janmabhoomi – which after all is the birth place of Lord Ram be handed over for temple and the masjid can be built on the other side of Sarayu river.
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 27 Mar 2017
Most people of Tamil Nadu feel the ban on traditional sport of Jallikattu by the Supreme Court from 2012 spearheaded by the former UPA – Congress government, foreign NGOs such as PETA and others with vested interests is unfair and totally against the sentiments of most people of the state. They are upset as the is bull is worshiped and the sport is an essential part of pongal celebrations for centuries. Despite the ban, Jallikattu was organized in 6 districts with great fanfare. In preparation, cows and bulls were washed, special pujas were performed to temple bulls. Then some of their horns were painted and decorated with colorful beads and tinkling bells, and then flowers and garlands were tied around their necks. One farmer was even quoted to have said, “ban or no ban, we will hold the event here. The authorities are free to take action against us”.
Source: Daily Pioneer
- 17 Jan 2017
Effective April 1st, 2017 the Supreme Court has banned liquor and beer shop from operating on national and state highways. Per its order, no new licenses will be issued and existing licenses will not be renewed. Further, it has asked that all signage be removed. The SC passed this order after noting and expressing anguish over 1.5 lakh annual fatalities on roads each year. Liquor and beer licenses and the associated excise duties are huge money makers for the state governments. Officially these shops may disappear, but this order might create an underground economy or black market which now will not be controlled or regulated. The idea and the concern is noteworthy. Should we attempt a behavior change, better education, more controls or implement this order with unintended but expected consequences, one has to think about?
- 16 Dec 2016
While this case is to be heard by the Supreme Court, the Allahabad high court, one of the premier high court for legal opinion came down heavily on the practice of triple talaq – calling it that this form of instant divorce is cruel and most demeaning which impedes and drags India from becoming a nation. The court noted that divorce is permissible in Islam only in case of extreme emergency. So why are the “Secular parties” who get a major portion of their support from the minority communities against banning triple talaq. These parties include the Congress (led by Sonia Gandhi), Samajwadi party, Mayawati and her BSP, Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress, the left front parties all for continuing for practices that treat women badly and in favour of triple talaq which gives all the power to divorce to men only in the Muslim community.
Source: Pune Mirror
- 10 Dec 2016