We are in shame: SC on Odisha teen set afire
New Delhi, Jul 21 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday used 'shame" and 'unfortunate" to describe the attack on a 15-year-old girl in Odisha, underscoring the need to empower and provide a safe haven for women especially in rural areas.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said, 'We need suggestions from everyone on what concrete steps can be taken to empower the school girls, home makers, children in rural areas, who are the most vulnerable and the voiceless people. Our directions should have some impact and visible imprint." Some short-term and long-term directions need to be issued for immediate and for future and so that women living in taluka level could be made aware and empowered, it added.
The bench said para legal volunteers, particularly women could be trained and appointed at the taluka level and even help of Anganwadi workers could be taken to make the women aware of their rights.
Senior advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani, appearing for the petitioner Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association, said a couple of days ago, the minor was burnt and similar incidents took place in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu.
'How long will this go on? This court needs to pass some directions for the safety of women," Pawani said.
The bench said, 'We are in shame and it is unfortunate that these incidents are still taking place. This is not adversarial litigation. We need suggestions from the centre and all the parties." Justice Kant said the registry has not put the affidavit of the Centre on record and posted the matter next week.
She said one-stop centres were now functioning in every district which would be helpful for the women in distress.
The bench, however, said while one-stop centre was good, it needed to go to the taluka level.
On December 16, last year, the top court agreed to examine a plea seeking directions to frame pan-India guidelines for a safe environment for women, children and transpersons.
The PIL said sexual crimes against women, girls and infants, reported across the country continued in different states.
'The recent Kolkata gangrape of young lady trainee doctor is only one amongst the many which has highlighted the deep-rooted ineptness, red-tapism, bureaucratic cowardice by the law enforcement agencies, political hooliganism, and the brutal, nefarious and grisly state of affairs concerning the safety of women in India," it said.
The petitioner sought the court to invoke the doctrine of parens patriae to safeguard the fundamental rights of women, children and the third gender encompassing their right to safety, a secured workplace, adequate sanitation, personal dignity, bodily integrity, and safe environment. PTI MNL MNL AMK AMK
view comments
First Published:
July 21, 2025, 20:45 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
16 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court agrees to hear pleas on the status of Rohingyas as ‘refugees', their deportation
The Supreme Court decided on Thursday (July 31, 2025) to hear in detail the question of whether the Rohingyas can be treated as 'refugees', or if they are illegal immigrants. A three-judge Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant said it would devote three days to hear the case extensively, saying once this question was answered authoritatively, the consequences would flow automatically. The primary questions recorded by the Court, as raised by petitioners who are Rohingya people living in camps in the national capital, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan and senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, include protections available to the Rohingyas in India if they were entitled to be declared as refugees. Or, on the other hand, if they were not refugees but illegal immigrants, whether the action of the government in deporting them was justified. Mr. Bhushan said the petitions, some of which dated back to 2013, had also highlighted the prolonged detention suffered by persons, including Rohingyas, after being declared as foreigners in States such as Assam. The Bench agreed to hear arguments on whether persons, including illegal entrants to India, could be detained indefinitely. The Court said it would also hear submissions on the living conditions and availability of basic amenities in Rohingya camps. 'The first issue is whether they are refugees or illegal immigrants. Rest is consequential,' Justice Kant remarked. In an earlier hearing in May, the apex court had observed that if the Rohingyas were found to be 'foreigners' under the Foreigners Act, they would be dealt with by the Centre in accordance with law. The petitioners have challenged the Centre's power to deport Rohingyas. They argued that the Rohingyas had been identified as 'refugees' by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). They had constitutional protection against deportation to Myanmar. The petitioners claimed non-refoulement, saying the Rohingyas would be tortured and killed if they were deported to Myanmar, which had anyway declared them 'stateless'. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, had submitted that India was not a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees. He had referred to an interim order passed by the Supreme Court that the government's power under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act to issue orders to 'prohibit, regulate, restrict entry or departure of foreigners' was absolute and unlimited, especially when national security concerns were in play. Mr. Mehta said Article 51(c), which emphasises respect for international law, could be pressed by the petitioners as long as they were in consonance with the domestic law.
The Hindu
16 minutes ago
- The Hindu
It was Congress' conspiracy to malign Hindu community: Indore man discharged in Malegaon blast case
An Indore-based businessman who was discharged in the 2008 Malegaon blast case eight years ago, on Thursday (July 31, 2025) welcomed the acquittal of seven accused, and alleged that he was implicated in the case as a result of the Congress's "conspiracy" to malign the Hindu community. Demanding an apology from the Opposition party, he accused it of coining terms like "Hindu terrorism" and "saffron terrorism" to appease a particular section of society. A special court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused, including former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Colonel Prasad Purohit, observing that there was "no reliable and cogent evidence" against them. The blast had killed six persons and injured 101 others nearly 17 years ago on September 29, 2008. Businessman Shyam Sahu from Indore, who was arrested in this case in October 2008, said he was in judicial custody for three years. The special court, however, discharged him in 2017 citing lack of evidence. Talking to PTI, Mr. Sahu alleged that he, Pragya Singh Thakur and others were implicated as part of a "Congress conspiracy" to malign the Hindu community by coining terms such as "Hindu terrorism" and "saffron terrorism" to appease a particular section. "We have got justice," he said about the court verdict. "The Congress' conspiracy has been exposed. The party should apologise for its conspiracy, though I don't think it will," he said. He said he had to face several "ordeals" following his arrest in the case. "While I was in jail after my arrest, my elder brother Mohan Sahu came to support me during a court appearance. Before my eyes, he suffered a heart attack and died about half-an-hour later. I could not do anything to save him," he added. "No one can compensate for the loss my family suffered due to the death of my elder brother," Mr. Sahu said.
News18
25 minutes ago
- News18
'Are Rohingyas Refugees Or Illegal Entrants?' Supreme Court Flags Core Question
The court made this observation while hearing a batch of petitions related to the status and treatment of Rohingyas living in the country The Supreme Court on Thursday said the key issue in the ongoing cases concerning Rohingyas in India is to determine whether they are refugees or illegal entrants. The court made this observation while hearing a batch of petitions related to the status and treatment of Rohingyas living in the country. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh said that once this primary issue is resolved, other related matters can be considered. 'The first major issue is simple, are they refugees or illegal entrants?" Justice Kant noted during the hearing. The bench outlined several questions arising from the petitions. If the Rohingyas are declared refugees, the court will have to consider what protections, privileges or rights they are entitled to under Indian and international law. However, if they are found to be illegal entrants, the court must then examine whether actions taken by the Centre and state governments to detain or deport them are legally justified. The court also questioned whether those deemed illegal entrants can be held in detention indefinitely or if they should be granted bail under conditions set by the court. Another concern raised was the condition of Rohingyas living in camps, who are not currently detained. The court asked whether these individuals are being provided with basic facilities such as clean drinking water, sanitation, and education. The bench said the petitions would be grouped into three categories: those directly relating to Rohingyas, those that do not, and one separate matter. These groups will be heard on consecutive Wednesdays. The court stressed that it could only lay down guiding legal principles, especially on the issue of deportation for those considered illegal entrants. During the proceedings, some lawyers argued that Rohingyas cannot be detained without limit. Others referred to past claims that 43 Rohingyas, including women and children, were left in the Andaman Sea for deportation, a claim the court previously dismissed as unsubstantiated. The Supreme Court has earlier stated that if Rohingyas are found to be foreigners under Indian law, they would have to be deported, regardless of UNHCR identity cards. The matter will continue to be heard in the coming weeks. (With inputs from PTI) view comments First Published: July 31, 2025, 17:16 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
