Activists flag upper castes identifying as Scheduled Castes in Karnataka
This revelation has prompted SC leaders and rights activists to raise red flags. 'Even in recent surveys, numbers show an increase of about 2 lakh entries, which appears suspicious,' said Renuka Prasanna, secretary, Veerashaiva Mahasabha. 'We are urging people to report their actual caste and not make false claims. Just because an enumerator records, it doesn't mean someone automatically becomes SC, there are official processes involved.'
The implications of this alleged loophole are far from minor. A delegation of Scheduled Caste leaders, including former MP Dr L Hanumanthaiah and former minister H Anjaneya, met Justice Nagamohan Das to caution him about the misuse.
Dr L Hanumanthaiah told TNIE, 'While we demanded there should be no false entries, the commission said there is a problem because some members have approached the High Court, asking why they were asked to show proof of Beda Jangam and Budaga Jangam identity, while others were not asked for certificates as proof. Considering this serious problem, it is good that enumerators demand proof of identity, because the number of Beda Jangams and Budaga Jangams have shot up from less than 60,000 to over 3 lakh, an increase of 400-500 per cent between 2011 and the present.''
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
SC overturns sarpanch election results in Haryana: When can courts order a recount of votes?
The Supreme Court overturned the result of the sarpanch election of Buana Lakhu village in Haryana's Panipat district on August 11. The move came after the apex court conducted a recounting of votes by summoning all Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) used during the election to its premises in New Delhi. Mohit Kumar, who had been declared as defeated in the previous result and later approached the SC, was announced the winner as he beat the originally elected sarpanch, Kuldeep Singh, by 51 votes. Mohit challenged the initial result of the election, which took place in November 2022, alleging that a presiding officer had swapped votes between him and Kuldeep at a polling booth. Experts believe that the case marked the first instance of the SC conducting a recount of EVM votes. Here is a look legal pathways available for challenging election outcomes and the remedies courts can provide. Legal framework for challenging an election The validity of the results of Parliamentary, Assembly, or state council elections can be challenged by filing an election petition before the High Court of the particular state in which the election was conducted. Election petitions against local government elections are to be filed at the district-level civil courts. The petition can only be filed by a candidate or an elector related to the election in question. Also, it has to be filed within 30 to 45 days from the date of declaration of results. The petition must contain a concise statement of all 'material facts' on which the challenge is based. If a petition has allegations of 'corrupt practices', it must provide details such as the names of individuals involved, and the date and place of the alleged act. The SC has repeatedly held that allegations of corrupt practices are quasi-criminal and require a high standard of proof. Vague or ambiguous claims are not entertained, and a petition that fails to state material facts can be dismissed at the outset. Grounds for invalidating an election Courts can declare an election void on several grounds. This includes: When courts can order a recount of votes A recount of votes is one of the remedies a court can order, but it is not granted lightly. As it involves re-examining ballots, it is seen as potentially compromising the secrecy of the vote, a cornerstone of free and fair elections. Therefore, a court will only order a recount if the petitioner presents specific, material facts and provides sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case that a mistake in counting is probable and that a recount is necessary. Courts usually order vote recounts to take place at the location where the election was held — unlike in the case of the Panipat sarpanch election dispute, in which the SC recounted the votes at its premises. When courts can declare a new winner It is rare – but not unprecedented – for a court to void an election and declare another candidate as the winner. The court must be satisfied that the petitioner or another candidate received a majority of the valid votes. Alternatively, the petitioner must prove that they would have secured a majority of votes if not for the votes obtained by the winning candidate through corrupt practices. This requires concrete evidence to quantify the votes tainted by corruption. In February 2024, the SC declared a new electoral winner in the Chandigarh mayoral election after it found that the polling station presiding officer had wrongfully marked eight paper ballots as invalid. All the votes had been cast for the losing candidate. The court ordered that these votes be treated as validly cast in the losing candidate's favour, which helped him win the election.
United News of India
2 hours ago
- United News of India
SC upholds Bombay HC order quashing FIR in MP Mohan Delkar suicide case
New Delhi, Aug 18 (UNI) The Supreme Court today upheld the Bombay High Court's decision to quash the FIR alleging abetment to suicide and extortion in connection with the death of Dadra and Nagar Haveli MP Mohanbhai Sanjibhai Delkar in 2021. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and comprising Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria pronounced the order, stating: 'High Court order confirmed and dismissed the SLP.' The verdict had been reserved on August 4. The Court was hearing the plea filed by Abhinav Mohan Delkar, son of the deceased MP, challenging the Bombay High Court order that quashed the FIR against Dadra and Nagar Haveli Administrator Praful Khoda Patel, Collector Sandeep Kumar Singh, Police Superintendent Sharad Darade, and other officials accused of abetting Delkar's suicide. On September 8, 2022, a Bombay High Court bench of Justices Prasanna B. Varale and Shrikant D. Kulkarni had allowed a batch of writ petitions filed by the accused, holding that the allegations were unsustainable. Delkar, a seven-time MP, was found dead on February 22, 2021, at a hotel in Mumbai. His son lodged an FIR accusing the officials of harassment, humiliation, and conspiracy to force his father to commit suicide, invoking Sections 306 (abetment to suicide), 506 (criminal intimidation), 389 (putting person in fear of accusation of offence), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of IPC, along with provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The FIR alleged that Delkar faced systematic harassment to seize control of the college he managed and to prevent him from contesting future elections, besides being publicly humiliated as he belonged to a Scheduled Tribe. However, the High Court found no substantive evidence to support these claims. It held that the allegations were based largely on Delkar's perception of being ill-treated. The Court observed that no material showed attempts by the accused to take over Delkar's educational institution, and in fact, Delkar had successfully contested elections as an independent candidate. Quoting from its order, the High Court had said: 'If both these alleged objects are not substantially established and it is only in the form of certain allegations and an impression of the deceased, then asking the Petitioners to undergo the rigors of criminal prosecution is nothing but an abuse of process of law.' The Court also ruled that the FIR lacked concrete evidence of conspiracy under Section 120-B IPC, noting that there were only bare allegations without incidents showing the accused acted in concert. Relying on precedents including Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court emphasized that a positive act is necessary to constitute 'abetment' under Section 306 IPC, which was absent in this case. Accordingly, the Bombay High Court quashed the FIR against nine accused persons, a decision now affirmed by the Supreme Court. UNI SNG AAB
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Here are this past week's main stories in charts
(1) Plea for SC/ST 'creamy layer' in Supreme Court The Supreme Court sent a notice to the Centre after it received a plea calling for the establishment of a creamy layer system in SC/ST reservations, similar to that seen within the OBC. Currently, a creamy layer is recognised for SCs and STs only in promotions within government jobs. This comes from a 2006 verdict that said the creamy layer will be taken into account for such promotions. Here is a brief timeline of key judgments regarding the issue, noting the considerations before the Court. These key judgments have shown that a majority of judges in Supreme Court Benches have supported the creation of a 'creamy layer' of SCs and STs based on individual conditions, while recognising the inherent backwardness of these communities as a whole. When it comes to reservation at other levels, what is to be decided by States is the criteria to decide what constitutes the creamy layer - whether it is economic conditions, vocations or something else. (2) Trump-Putin Alaska summit yields no deal on war U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday (August 16. 2025) that Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because 'Russia is a very big power, and they're not', after a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land. After the two leaders met in Alaska on Friday, Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that Putin had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow's main targets, a source familiar with the matter said. Zelenskiy rejected the demand, the source said. Russia already controls a fifth of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk province, which it first entered in 2014. The meeting between US and Russian presidents, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, was billed as a vital step towards peace in Ukraine. But with no ceasefire and an invitation to Moscow, the meeting has yielded more questions than answers. Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and has been gradually advancing for months. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. (3) Retail inflation eases to 8-year low of 1.55% in July Retail inflation in India slipped to 1.55% in July 2025, the lowest since June 2017, and below the Reserve Bank of India's comfort band of 2-6%, primarily led by a contraction in food prices. The Consumer Price Index (CPI), released by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation on Tuesday (August 12, 2025), showed inflation in India has been easing for nine consecutive months. The rate of inflation in the food and beverages category came in at -0.8% in July 2025, lower than -0.2% in June and 5.1% in July 2024. Vegetable and pulses prices contracted 21% and 14% respectively, driven by a high base and falling prices. Core inflation, which excludes the impact of food and fuel prices, also eased to 4.1% in July 2025 from 4.4% in the previous month, nearly at the RBI's target of 4%. The other broad categories in the CPI saw inflation remaining nearly the same in July as in June. The pan, tobacco and intoxicants category saw inflation remain flat at 2.4% in July. Similarly, the clothing and footwear category saw inflation ease marginally to 2.5% in July from 2.5% in June. Inflation in the housing segment remained at 3.2% in July, while that in the fuel and light category quickened to 2.7% in July from 2.5% in June. (4) Three-member panel to probe Justice Yashwant Varma case Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Tuesday (August 12, 2025) set in motion the process of removing Justice Yashwant Varma of Allahabad High Court by admitting a motion, signed by 146 members, and constituting a three member inquiry committee to probe the charges against Justice Varma. The inquiry committee comprises Supreme Court judge Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and senior Karnataka High Court advocate B.V. Acharya. Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court after burnt wads of currency notes were found at his official residence on March 14. Subsequently, an in-house inquiry of the Supreme Court had indicted Justice Varma. Earlier, then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna had initiated an in-house probe into the allegations and set up the three-member committee in March to conduct the inquiry. After receiving the report, the CJI asked Justice Varma to resign or face impeachment proceedings. However, since Justice Varma declined to quit, CJI Khanna then forwarded the report and the Judge's response on it to the President of India and the Prime Minister for removal of the judge. Though Justice Varma had moved the Supreme Court against CJI Khanna's recommendation for his removal, the top court rejected his plea. (5) Afghanistan begins its fifth year of Taliban rule On August 15, 2021, the Taliban marched into Kabul, returning to power after two decades, as internationally backed President Ashraf Ghani fled the country. Since then, the former insurgents have consolidated their grip on power, excluded women and girls from public life, stamped out internal dissent and external challengers, and gained debut recognition as the country's official government from Russia, a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. The Taliban govern through decrees, but Afghans have aspirations and needs that cannot be fulfilled through edicts and ideology. Here is a look at key dates since the Taliban returned to power four years ago:
