Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging tribunal's order confirming ban extension on SIMI
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta dismissed the plea challenging the tribunal's July 24, 2024 order.
The tribunal was constituted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 after the Centre had on January 29, 2024 decided to extend the ban on SIMI for five years.
The SIMI was first declared outlawed in 2001 during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government and since then the ban has been extended periodically.
The SIMI was established on April 25, 1977 in Aligarh Muslim University as a front organisation of youth and students, having faith in Jamait-e-Islami-Hind (JEIH). However, the organisation declared itself independent in 1993 through a resolution.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
38 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court decides to wait a day for Kerala government's take on KEAM 2025 revised rank list
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 15, 2025) gave the Kerala government 24 hours to inform if it intends to appeal a High Court direction to publish the revised rank list of the Kerala Engineering Architecture and Medical Examination (KEAM) 2025. A Bench headed by Justice P.S. Narasimha made it clear that the court's interference would be minimal and based on legal principles and not on facts. 'We are very clear... We are not going to interfere in any existing selection, appointment processes. The country is plagued with this problem of uncertainty as every exam, every appointment comes under challenge and gets delayed. We will consider this case on principles, but so far as facts are concerned, we will not interfere,' Justice Narasimha addressed the parties in the court room. Scheduling the case for hearing for July 16, the court instructed Kerala State counsel C.K. Sasi to take instructions from the government and apprise the Bench. Original prospectus The original prospectus for KEAM 2025, which was held between April 22-30, had prescribed that the marks obtained in 10+2 in respect of Maths, Physics and Chemistry would be in the ratio of 1:1:1. However, the Kerala government had constituted a Standardisation Review Committee on April 9 to study the method and formula used to calculate standardised/normalised marks of KEAM-2025 and to suggest any changes. The committee had submitted its report on June 2. Following which, the State, taking into consideration the committee report and the suggestions given by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations, decided to amend the ratio for subject marks in KEAM 2025. On July 1, the State ordered that the marks obtained in 10+2 for Maths, Physics and Chemistry would be taken in the ratio of 5:3:2 instead of the earlier 1:1:1. The existing 50:50 ratio for marks obtained in the entrance examination and 10+2 Board examination would continue. The State published the KEAM rank list the same day. On July 10, the High Court directed the reversion to 1:1:1 as provided in the original prospectus. The High Court had reasoned that the modification to the standardisation formula was made belatedly, after the conclusion of the entrance examination and merely an hour prior to the publication of the rank list. The High Court had found the timing both arbitrary and unsustainable in law. The revised rank list was published on July 11. Appearing for the State syllabus students on Tuesday, advocates Prashant Bhushan and Zulfiker Ali P.S., argued that the State was empowered to make the amendments to original prospectus to create a 'level playing field for candidates of the State Board and the CBSE'. 'The old standardisation formula [prior to the amendment to the original prospectus] was disproportionate and disadvantageous to the majority of students studying under the State syllabus in government schools. It is important to note that in Kerala government school students predominately come from middle and lower-income backgrounds,' Mr. Bhushan contended. Justice Narasimha remarked the 'new rule balances much better than the earlier one' but questioned the timing of the modification to the standardisation formula in July, months after the KEAM exam and just before the declaration of the results. 'The issue is we do not doubt the new rule, but when you introduce a new policy... can you do it all of a sudden? Do you not have to declare it first and say it will be implemented from next year…' Justice Narasimha asked advocate Bhushan. Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran and advocate Aljo Joseph, on a caveat for CBSE students, highlighted that the formula was revised an hour before the publication of the rank list on July 1. Mr. Bhushan said the problem of disparity between the State syllabus students and their CBSE counterparts had been flagged by the Controller of Examinations in 2024 itself. He said the High Court order had affected a large number of students in Kerala while seeking urgent relief.
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
SC seeks UP, Uttarakhand reply on plea against QR code mandate for food sellers during Kanwar Yatra
New Delhi, July 15 (UNI) The Supreme Court today granted one week's time to the states of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to file their responses on a plea challenging the government directive mandating food sellers along the Kanwar Yatra route to display QR code stickers revealing owners' details. A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh posted the matter for next Tuesday after noting that the yatra will conclude within 10 to 12 days. During the hearing, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand sought two weeks to file their replies. Deputy advocate general Jatinder Kumar Sethi appeared for the states. Senior advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the applicants, however, pressed for urgent hearing citing the time-sensitive nature of the issue. Senior advocates Chander Uday Singh and Huzefa Ahmadi appeared for other petitioners in the matter. The application seeks a stay on all directives requiring or facilitating public disclosure of ownership or employee identity of food vendors along the Kanwar Yatra routes in both states. It argues that the directions violate an interim order passed by the Supreme Court last year, which held that sellers cannot be forced to disclose their identities. Applicants Professor Apoorvanand and activist Aakar Patel have alleged that this year's QR code mandate circumvents the earlier court order and results in the disclosure of owners' names and identities, leading to religious profiling. They contended that such directions have no backing of law and are aimed at creating religious polarisation and discrimination. The bench has posted the matter for hearing next week. UNI SNG PRS
News18
an hour ago
- News18
'Disturbing': SC Slams Samay Raina, Others Over Jokes On People With Disabilities
Last Updated: Taking strong objection to the remarks, the apex court recorded the personal appearance of the comics and directed them to file formal replies within two weeks. The Supreme Court on Tuesday termed jokes made by stand-up comedian Samay Raina and others about persons with disabilities and rare diseases as 'disturbing", stating it would 'scrutinise individual conduct minutely." The remarks came while the SC heard a petition filed by the CURE SMA Foundation of India, which raised concerns over allegedly insensitive and offensive content shared by Raina and other comedians. The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, ordered the comedians to respond to the plea and appear again in court at the next hearing, which is scheduled in three weeks. Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh, representing the foundation, argued that the comedians' comments over people with disabilities amounted to 'hate speech", which does not deserve any protection under the right to free speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Taking strong objection to the remarks, the apex court recorded the personal appearance of the comics and directed them to file formal replies within two weeks. The bench also reminded the Centre that existing guidelines on regulating online content, especially on social media and OTT platforms, must align with constitutional values. The bench stressed that the right to freedom and duties of citizens must be balanced. Earlier, while hearing a separate case involving YouTuber Ranveer Allahabadia over his crass remarks on 'India's Got Latent' show, the top court had asked the government to consider formulating clearer guidelines to control vulgar and derogatory content online. Justice Kant reiterated the need for public debate on where free expression ends and civic responsibility begins. '…you have to have guidelines which are in conformity with constitutional principles, comprising both parts – freedom, where the limit of that freedom ends, and where duties start…we would like to invite open debate on that," Justice Kant said. On May 5, the top court had summoned five influencers and comedians, including Raina, over offensive content targeting persons with disabilities. It reiterated that any speech that demeans a community or group would be subject to legal restriction. view comments 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.
