Ex-NIA judge moves Delhi High Court seeking arms licence for personal security
Delhi High Court
seeking directions to central govt and
Delhi Police
to issue him an arms licence. In his plea, the judge cited personal security concerns.
Hearing the plea, Justice Sachin Dutta recorded an assurance by the govt counsel that a decision on the judge's pending application would be taken within four weeks. "The above redresses the immediate grievance of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the above terms. The pending application also stands disposed of," the court stated.
Justice Dutta, however, noted that if the petitioner judge was not satisfied with the decision taken by the authorities, he could seek legal remedies.
In the petition filed through advocate Sadiya Rohma Khan, the judge submitted that he served as a special NIA judge in Tripura and was currently on deputation in Delhi.
You Can Also Check:
Delhi AQI
|
Weather in Delhi
|
Bank Holidays in Delhi
|
Public Holidays in Delhi
He said he applied for an arms licence in Nov 2023, but no action was taken on his request, reflecting a "casual" attitude by Delhi Police's licensing authority.
According to the petition, the judge was called by the police licensing authorities for a personal assessment last year, and he appeared for the same.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Use an AI Writing Tool That Actually Understands Your Voice
Grammarly
Install Now
Undo
However, there was no development after the assessment.
"It is shocking that the petitioner and his family are living with no security in New Delhi, and this potentialises both direct and indirect threats to their personal safety and security," the plea argued. Since his family is permanently stationed in Delhi, he applied for an arms licence to ensure protection and safety so that he is free from any "external criminal threats and potential risks and non-interference in free movement and is able to defend himself if a threat arises", the counsel submitted.
Invoking Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioner argued that forcing his family to live without any security amounted to a violation of their right to life and personal liberty.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Centre blocks debate on Bihar electoral roll revision, cites EC autonomy; Opposition cries foul
NEW DELHI: The Union government has signaled its unwillingness to allow a debate on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, with Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman Harivansh invoking a 1988 ruling by former Lok Sabha Speaker Balram Jakhar to reject the Opposition's demand. On Tuesday, Harivansh cited Jakhar's December 1988 decision, which barred parliamentary discussion on the functioning or decisions of the Election Commission (EC), stating that the autonomous body's actions cannot be scrutinized in the House. 'You know that I cannot comment upon the actions and decisions of the EC, which is an autonomous body. Never before have I done it, nor will I do it now. Unless you amend the Constitution and bring the EC under parliamentary purview, we cannot discuss its decisions,' Harivansh said, quoting Jakhar's ruling. The Deputy Chairman's remarks came as he dismissed 34 notices submitted by Opposition MPs, most seeking the suspension of business under Rule 267 to urgently debate the SIR in Bihar and other states. Harivansh cited procedural flaws, including incorrect formatting, the sub judice nature of some matters, and the absence of precedent for such discussions. He expressed concern over the frequent misuse of Rule 267, meant for 'rarest of rare' cases, noting that most notices lacked proper citations or pertained to issues outside Parliament's jurisdiction. 'Despite clear rules, some members are using Rule 267 casually, disrupting proceedings when their notices are disallowed,' he said. Highlighting historical data, Harivansh pointed out that very few such notices had been accepted—none between 2000–2004, only four from 2004–2009, one out of 491 during 2009–2014, and just six out of 3,152 between 2014 and the 2025 Budget Session.
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Canada: Spike in refusals for express entry applications where spouse is shown as ‘non-accompanying'
Representative Image Canada's immigration agency is increasingly rejecting 'Express Entry' applications for permanent residency, or is issuing procedural fairness letters (PFLs) in cases where applicants have declared their spouse as 'non-accompanying' often with the intent of improving their Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) score. In many instances, the spouse was already residing in Canada – working or studying. It is not just those outside Canada who can apply to become permanent residents under the Express Entry route – it is also open to those already in Canada such as on temporary work visas. Express Entry is Canada's point-based mechanism used to manage immigration applications for skilled workers who want to become permanent residents. Based on various parameters such as age, education, French language proficiency etc, candidates are given a Comprehensive Ranking Score (CRS). Post which, they are placed in the Express Entry pool and ranked relative to each other. Periodical draws are held and those attaining the cut-off CRS score get an invite to apply for permanent residency. When an individual applies without including his/her spouse ( shown as 'non-accompanying spouse'), the individual is assessed as a single applicant, which the point distribution system tends to favour. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Take a Look - How Watching Videos Can Boost Your Income TheDaddest Undo A single applicant can get up to 40 more points under the 'Core Human Capital' section because spouse-related sub-factors are not considered. Being a single applicant helps boost scores if the spouse's credentials (education, language, etc) are weak and would drag down the scores. Kubeir Kamal, a regulated Canadian immigration consultant (RCIC) told TOI, 'This tactic of declaring a spouse as 'non-accompanying' has unfortunately become widespread, particularly among applicants who are already residing in Canada with their spouse on temporary status (eg: one is on a closed work permit and the other is on an open spousal work permit). In such cases, Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is rightly scrutinizing whether the spouse was ever genuinely intended to be excluded. ' Added Manish Kapoor, a regulated Canadian immigration consultant, 'IRCC has increasingly taken the position that if an applicant's spouse is physically present in Canada, it implies an intention to permanently reside. As such, declaring the spouse as non-accompanying may be interpreted as a misrepresentation under sections 16(1) and 40(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), which require applicants to answer truthfully and prohibit the withholding of material facts. ' Kamal cautioned that if both partners are living and working in Canada, declaring a spouse as 'non-accompanying' without a valid and well-documented reason such as custody arrangements, or family obligations, can be seen as a deliberate misrepresentation, which in addition to refusal of the application can lead to a five-year ban from re-applying. 'If spouse is outside Canada, you may still list them as non-accompanying if it's truthful and justifiable—for instance, owing to custody of children or job obligations of the spouse in the home country. In this case, a strong letter of explanation and supporting evidence is required. Further, intentions must be aligned with the declaration: If you say they're non-accompanying, don't sponsor them immediately after landing!,' said Kamal. 'Historically, similar applications were approved without issue, raising concerns about consistency in decision-making in the application of policy. Many applicants argue that they have valid reasons for listing their spouses as non-accompanying and have provided clear explanations, yet refusals continue to rise. It will be important to watch how the Federal Court interprets the concept of an 'accompanying spouse,' particularly as an increasing number of applicants seek judicial review. The outcome of these cases may set a significant precedent for future immigration decisions,' added Kapoor.. Traditionally, India has been a top-source country for those getting invitations to apply for permanent residency under the Express Entry system. In 2023, nearly 52,100 Indians were invited to be permanent residents (bagging 47% of the total invites). Country-specific data for 2024 is not available. Of late, the modalities of the Express Entry mechanism have changed. All-program or general draws have become a rarity. Of late, IRCC has issued invitations to become permanent residents extensively based on category based Express Entry draws such as French‑language proficiency, Canadian Experience Class (CEC), Provincial Nominee Program (PNP), or occupational specific draws such as health‑care, education, and trades. Further, from March 25, candidates no longer earn additional Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) points for holding a valid job offer – this change was done to prevent fraud through illicit sales of 'Labour Market Impact Assessments'. Immigration experts point out that there are bonafide ways to improve the CRS score such as improving language results, obtaining proficiency in French or even by exploring PNP options.
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Donald Trump says he will raise tariff of India 'substantially' in next 24 hours
Donald Trump TOI correspondent from Washington: Ties between US and India are headed downhill on the slippery slope of Russian oil. Accusing New Delhi of fueling the Moscow war machine, US President Donald Trump said he would, in the next 24 hours, raise tariffs on Indian exports "substantially" on top of the 25 per cent he has already announced. In a phone-in interview on CNBC, Trump claimed that New Delhi had agreed to zero tariffs for US exports into India, but asserted that's not good enough because of the Russia issue. "They're fueling the (Russian) war machine. And if they're going to do that, then I'm not going to be happy," a peeved Trump said, hours after New Delhi defiantly said it will continue to buy Russian oil, arguing that Washington had actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability. The fact that former US ambassador to India Eric Garcetti has confirmed this appears to have have irked the Trump White House, which suggests that the Biden administration gave India a free pass. The rules have now changed, forcing New Delhi -- and many countries across the world -- to consider switching policy depending on which party comes to power in America. In a separate interview on Fox News, Trump aide Stephen Mller said Trump "has been very clear that it is unacceptable for India to continue funding this war by buying oil from Russia.' Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Pierce Brosnan's Wife Lost 120 Pounds - This Is Her Now Undo by Taboola by Taboola 'People are shocked when they learn that India is actually on par with China in terms of the volume of Russian oil purchases. That is a striking fact,' Miller said. Yet, the Trump White House has adopted different rules for different countries, cutting China plenty of slack because of the leverage it wields in terms of critical exports to the US like rare earths, compared to India. Similarly, countries that resist US hectoring and push back, like Canada, have attracted immediate punitive tariffs, compared to countries that have rolled over (Japan and South Korea) or bought have time (Mexico). In the CNBC interview, Trump continued his tirade against India for its high tariffs despite claiming New Delhi had agreed to lower it to zero. "Now I will say went from the highest tariffs ever, they will give us zero tariffs, and they're going to let us go in. But that's not good enough, because because of what they're doing with (buying Russian) oil," Trump said. The US President also knocked down current trade with India, which stands at around $135 billion, saying "we do very, very little business with India because their tariffs are so high." India ranks 9th on the list of US trading partners, but Trump is irked by the $45 billion trade deficit caused by India's $87 billion exports to the US, compared to its imports from the US of $42 billion. "So India has not been a good trading partner, because they do a lot of business with us, but we don't do business with them," he complained even though India has pledged to reduce the deficit by buying more US arms and armaments, oil and gas, among other exports. He wants India to open its markets for US auto industry like Japan, South Korea, and EU have done despite American car manufacturers being run out of a competitive global market. Trump's trade and tariff rampage has affected countries far and wide, rich and poor, with former allies and adversaries being re-arranged depending on who bows and scrapes before the US President with flattery and pledged of big investments in America. The US President threw out numbers like a $600 billion investment from EU and $500 billion from Japan among other pledges -- even though details of the purported agreements remain sketchy -- to boast that money is flowing into the US and the country is rich again. Trump's trade-centric, America First approach at the expense geo-political considerations has sent many world leaders scrambling to Washington. Switzerland's President Karin Keller-Sutter is rushing to the White House this week to negotiate lower taxes after Trump slapped a 39 percent tariff on the country, ostensibly because she was not obsequious enough during an argumentative phone call. The US is a big market for US for Swiss products such as luxury watches, jewellery, chocolate, and pharmaceuticals. While these items and products will become more expensive for American customers (as will items ranging from apparel to seafood that India exports to US because of the 25% plus tariffs), it will allow countries with lower tariffs to take advantage of the differential.
