Death penalty too harsh: Governor sends back Bengal's Aparajita bill
The Bill proposes enhancement of punishment for rape from the existing minimum of 10 years under the BNS to life imprisonment for the remainder of one's life or death."The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has flagged multiple provisions in the Bill as problematic. After taking note of the MHA observation, the Governor has referred those for appropriate consideration to the state government," the source told PTI."The Centre has described the proposal of amendment to Section 64 of the BNS to increase the punishment for rape from a minimum of 10 years to life imprisonment for the remainder of the convict's life or the death penalty as excessively harsh and disproportionate," he said, referring to the MHA's observation.The other controversial change is the proposed deletion of Section 65, which currently provides stricter penalties for rape of girls aged under 16 and 12."The removal of this classification undermines the principle of proportionality in sentencing and could reduce legal protections for the most vulnerable victims," he said.However, the clause drawing the sharpest criticism is the one under Section 66, which seeks to make the death penalty mandatory in rape cases where the victim either dies or is left in a persistent vegetative state."The ministry has raised constitutional concerns, arguing that removing judicial discretion in sentencing violates established legal norms and Supreme Court rulings," the source said.The Bill was recently reserved by Governor Bose for the consideration of the President of India.'As of now, there is no communication from anyone with regard to the Aparajita Bill. We will consider taking suitable measures, as per requirements in the matter, if and when we receive such intimation," a senior bureaucrat of the state said.The West Bengal assembly had unanimously passed the Bill nearly a month after the alleged rape and murder of a postgraduate trainee doctor at Kolkata's RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024.- EndsMust Watch
IN THIS STORY#West Bengal#Bharatiya Janta Party
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
43 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Redressal on pending ORR project unlikely by July 31
Meanwhile, NHAI sources said that the finalisation of the K Raveendran Nair, one of the landowners, alleged that the DPR, a prerequisite to initiating compensation disbursal, remains incomplete. He alleged that the government has committed a huge violation by acquiring land for a project that didn't get the necessary approvals. 'For PPP projects, it is mandatory to obtain consent from 70 per cent of the landowners and this hasn't happened in the case of the ORR project. The 3a notification issued is illegal,' he alleged. 'I have an RTI document that can prove that the project hasn't made any progress in the last two years and the government has no rights to acquire land,' he added. Last December, the Centre had asked the state to revise the DPR by adding SGST exemptions and amendments to mining laws. The state submitted the revised DPR in January 2025. The I4,767 crore-worth ORR project is aimed at decongesting city traffic and improving connectivity to the Vizhinjam International Seaport. 'We met all authorities concerned and they have assured us to sort out the issues and start disbursal of compensation by next month. The PWD secretary informed us that the project will get the approval after the NHAI visit,' said Chandramohanan Nair, chairman, Outer Ring Road Vizhinjam-Navayikulam Janakeeya Samiti.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘Bharat ki baat sunata hoon': Manish Tewari on being ‘benched' by Cong during Op Sindoor debate
Congress MP Manish Tewari on Tuesday evoked Manoj Kumar's iconic song from 'Purab aur Pashchim' — 'Bharat ka rehne waala hoon, Bharat ki baat sunata hoon' — as he shared on X a media report on being 'benched' by his party during the Operation Sindoor debate. There had been intense speculation whether Tewari and Shashi Tharoor, both part of the diplomatic delegations that had been sent abroad to convey India's stand, would speak in the Lower House or not during the ongoing debate on the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor. Taking to X, Tewari shared the screenshot of a media report which was headlined — ''Spoke in favour of govt': Why Congress benched Shashi Tharoor, Manish Tewari during Operation Sindoor debate.' The report stated that none of the leaders picked by the Centre to represent India globally as part of delegations post Operation Sindoor found a place in the list of speakers from the Congress party. Along with the screenshot of the report and a picture of him with the tricolour in the backdrop, Tewari posted, 'Hai preet jahaan ki reet sada, main geet wahaan ke gaata hoon, Bharat ka rehne waala hoon, Bharat ki baat sunata hoon – Jai Hind.' These are the lyrics from a song in the 1970 Manoj Kumar starrer 'Purab Aur Paschim'. Tewari did not elaborate any further on his views about the whole issue. Congress party sources on Monday said the party had asked Tharoor if he was interested in speaking during the Operation Sindoor debate in Parliament but he declined and instead expressed a desire to speak on 'The Indian Ports Bill, 2025'. There has been intense speculation on whether Tharoor, who led the delegation to the US among other countries, will be picked as a speaker by the Congress given that his enthusiastic endorsement of the government's action following the terror attack has soured his ties with the party. The BJP-led ruling National Democratic Alliance and opposition parties are fielding their top guns during the discussion in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Opposition parties have framed their public criticism of the government around alleged intelligence lapses behind the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, which left 26 civilians killed, and US President Donald Trump's claims of mediating a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. Rahul Gandhi has repeatedly attacked the government's foreign policy, claiming that India did not receive international support on Operation Sindoor and has cited Trump's frequent mediation claims to target the ruling alliance. The government has rejected Trump's claims.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC fixes schedule for hearing Presidential Reference on timeline for assent to state bills
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Supreme Court on Tuesday fixed a time schedule for hearing the Presidential Reference raising constitutional issues on whether timelines could be imposed for dealing with bills passed by assembly, and proposed to start the hearing from August 19.A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai asked the Centre and states to file their written submissions by August the parties to adhere strictly to the timeline, the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar said that it will be first hearing preliminary objections filed by states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu questioning the maintainability of the Presidential Reference on August 19 for one top court said the Centre and the States supporting the Presidential Reference will be heard on August 19, 20, 21 and 26, while those opposing it will be heard on August 28 and September 2, 3 and bench said rejoinder submissions, if any, will be heard on September July 22, the top court observed that the issues raised in the Presidential reference will affect the "entire country".In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised powers under Article 143(1) to know from the top court whether timelines could be imposed by judicial orders for exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with the bills passed by state President's decision comes in light of the April 8 verdict of the apex court passed in a matter over the powers of governor in dealing with bills questioned by the Tamil Nadu verdict for the first time prescribed that the President should decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by the governor within three months from the date on which such reference is a five-page reference, President Murmu posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court and sought to know its opinion on powers of governor, President under Articles 200 and 201 in dealing with bills passed by the state verdict has set a timeline for all governors to act on the bills passed by the state assemblies and ruled that the governor does not possess any discretion in exercise of functions under Article 200 of the Constitution in respect to any bill presented to them and must mandatorily abide by the advice tendered by the council of had said state governments can directly approach the Supreme Court if the President withholds assent on a bill sent by a governor for consideration.
