Ex-Foreign Secy Harsh Vardhan Shringla, Kasab Case prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam nominated as Rajya Sabha members
Harsh Vardhan Shringla
and former Special Public Prosecutor in Kasab case, Ujjwal Deorao Nikam, to the
Rajya Sabha
, marking two high-profile entries into the Upper House of Parliament.
The official announcement came on Sunday through a government notification. Shringla, a 1984-batch Indian Foreign Service officer, previously served as India's Ambassador to the High Commissioner to Bangladesh. He was Foreign Secretary from January 2020 to April 2022, navigating India's diplomatic landscape during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Nikam, a prominent criminal lawyer, is best known for his role as the Special Public Prosecutor in several high-profile cases, including the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks trial of Ajmal Kasab and the 1993 Bombay blasts case. Over his decades-long legal career, Nikam has represented the Maharashtra government in many criminal cases.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
New Container Houses Indonesia (Prices May Surprise You)
Container House | Search ads
Search Now
Undo
The nominations were made by the President of India under Article 80 of the Constitution, which allows for the appointment of individuals with special knowledge or practical experience in fields such as literature, science, art, and social service.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Offers great hope': Clerics make last ditch effort to save Nimisha Priya; Kerala nurse faces execution in Yemen on July 16
NEW DELHI: Desperate, last-minute attempts are being made to halt the execution of Indian nurse Nimisha Priya, scheduled for July 16 in Yemen, with the intervention of senior religious leaders both in India and Yemen. The efforts are being led by Sufi scholar Sheikh Habib Umar bin Hafiz, at the behest of influential Indian Sunni cleric Kanthapuram A P Aboobacker Musliyar. A key meeting is expected to take place in Dhamar on Tuesday between representatives of Sheikh Habib Umar and the family of Talal Abdo Mahdi, the Yemeni national allegedly murdered by Priya in 2017. Talal's relative—who is also the Chief Justice of the Hodeidah State Court and a member of Yemen's Shura Council—has travelled to Dhamar to attend the talks, following the advice of Sheikh Habib. "The fact that he is a follower of Sheikh Habib Umar's Sufi order and the son of another prominent Sufi leader offers great hope," said Kanthapuram's office. "Along with persuading the family, he is also expected to meet the Attorney General to initiate urgent efforts to postpone the execution scheduled for tomorrow." Sources close to the process said the talks represent the first breakthrough in engaging with Talal's family, who had so far refused all contact. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Windows Users & Owners Don't Forget To Do This Before Tuesday Read More Undo "It was only through Kanthapuram's intervention that communication with the family became possible for the first time," a source said. Tuesday's meeting will attempt to secure a final decision from the family on whether they will accept diya (blood money), as allowed under Shariah law. If agreed, this would offer a legally sanctioned route to halt Priya's execution. 'We see the agreement of the family to hold talks with representatives of the Sufi spiritual leader as a positive signal,' the source added. The government, meanwhile, told the Supreme Court on Monday that there is 'nothing much' it can do diplomatically, given the status of Yemen and the absence of formal recognition of its authorities. "The Government of India is trying its best," Attorney General R Venkataramani told the bench. "We have also engaged with some sheikhs who are very influential people there." He added: 'Yemen is not like any other part of the world where, through diplomatic processes or inter-governmental negotiation, something can be sought. It is very complex.' Priya, a nurse from Kerala's Palakkad district, was convicted in 2020 for murdering Mahdi—her former business partner—and dismembering his body. Her final appeal was rejected in 2023, and she remains in prison in Sana'a.
Scroll.in
21 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Not exercising restraint on social media may lead to state intervention: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday said that citizens must know the value of freedom of speech and exercise self-restraint on social media, failing which the state would intervene, The Indian Express reported. The bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan also considered framing guidelines to control 'divisive tendencies' on social media platforms, PTI reported. The bench was hearing a plea by Kolkata resident Wajahat Khan who had sought consolidation of first information reports filed against him in several states in connection with his allegedly objectionable posts about Hindu deities on social media. The court cited the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The provision outlines the restrictions that can be placed on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. The bench said that the restrictions had been placed correctly and that the state can step in when there was a violation. 'We are not speaking about censorship,' Live Law quoted Nagarathna as saying. 'But in the interest of fraternity, secularism and dignity of will have to go into this beyond this petition.' Nagarathna said that one of the fundamental duties of citizens was to uphold the unity and integrity of the country. '…See all these divisive tendencies, at least on social media, must be curbed,' she said. 'But to what extent can the state curb?' She went on to ask: 'Instead, why can't the citizens themselves regulate themselves? Citizens must know the value of freedom of speech and expression. If they don't then the state will step in and who wants the state to step in? Nobody wants the state to step in.' The bench asked the petitioner's counsel and the state 'to assist vis-à-vis the guidelines to be issued to the citizens to comply'. In March, the Supreme Court asked the Union government to frame regulations to stop the broadcast of programmes that do not meet the 'acceptable moral standards of our society', particularly on social media platforms while ensuring that the measures do not impinge the fundamental right to free speech.
The Hindu
25 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court stays order directing Sri Lankan Deputy High Commission to reinstate former employee
A Division Bench of the Madras High Court has stayed the operation of an order passed by a single judge directing the Sri Lankan Deputy High Commission in Chennai, to reinstate a former employee with back wages. The Bench has also decided to examine in detail as to whether diplomatic missions would fall under the definition of the term 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947. The Bench comprising Justices R. Subramanian and K. Surender granted the interim stay after the Deputy High Commission preferred a writ appeal, through its counsel G. Kalyan Jhabak, and contended that the single judge had overlooked the proposition that an Embassy or High Commission could not be termed as an 'industry' as it had been defined under Section 2(j) of the I.D. Act. The orders had been passed on a writ petition filed by T. Senthilkumari, who had served as Consular Assistant at the Deputy High Commission of Sri Lanka in Chennai between 2008 and 2018. The Deputy High Court Commission also argued that there was no master-servant relationship between it and the writ petitioner who had sought reinstatement in service and hence the question of reinstatement would not arise at all. Claiming that the petitioner was not terminated at all, the appellant stated that she had worked only in a temporary post and her contractual service had come to an end on December 31, 2018. On the other hand, the single judge, in his February 12 order, had held that foreign diplomatic missions in India could not claim any exemption from following the labour and social security laws of the country, at least with respect to Indians employed in their High Commissions and Consulates here. He stated that the Parliament had enacted the Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972, to give a force of law to a convention adopted by India at the United Nations Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities held in Vienna on April 14, 1961. Article 33 of the Convention clearly states that only foreign nationals serving in a diplomatic mission would be exempt from the social security laws of the receiving State. 'Therefore, the exemption provided for in the Article is not applicable to the nationals of the receiving State... In respect of such employees to whom the exemption provided in the Article does not apply, the diplomatic agents shall observe obligations which the social security provisions of the receiving State impose upon employers. In such view of the matter, no immunity can be claimed by the management,' the judge had said. He had further held that Indians serving in foreign diplomatic missions here need not obtain the Centre's permission, under Section 86 of the Code of Civil Procedure, before approaching an industrial tribunal against their employers. Relying upon a 1963 Supreme Court verdict, he had said, industrial tribunals could not be deemed to be a court for the purpose of obtaining the Centre's express permission before suing a diplomatic mission.
