Body shaming, digital abuse punishable under Kerala's new anti-ragging law
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Kerala govt is set to introduce the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging (Amendment) Bill, 2025, overhauling its two-decade-old anti-ragging legislation. This move comes in the wake of the death of J S Siddharthan — a student of Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Pookode, Wayanad, at his hostel last February — which highlighted critical loopholes in the existing 1998 Act.
For the first time, the revised bill explicitly defines ragging to include body shaming, psychological harassment, and digital abuse, making them punishable under law. Harassment through internet or any other electronic mode will now be a cognisable offence. The amendment broadens scope of ragging to encompass a wide array of criminal acts, such as abetment, criminal conspiracy, unlawful assembly, and rioting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
40 years on, implementation of Assam Accord remains incomplete, claim student leaders, oppn parties
Guwahati, Four decades after the historic Assam Accord was signed to end a six-year-long violent anti-foreigner agitation, its central objective of making the state free of illegal immigrants remains unfulfilled, student leaders and political parties claimed. The issue of illegal immigration is one of the most contentious topics in Assam's political and social spheres. Several elections have been fought over this single issue of Bangladeshi infiltrators, who were initially marked as D-voters if their names were found in the electoral rolls. The Assam Accord was signed on August 15, 1985 after a violent anti-foreigner movement, which claimed the lives of thousands. Among other clauses, the pact stated that names of all foreigners coming to Assam on or after March 25, 1971, would be detected and deleted from electoral rolls with steps taken to deport them. The All Assam Students' Union (AASU), All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP) and the central government were the three signatories of the accord. "Successive governments at the Centre and state have failed to implement the pact for 40 years. Illegal foreigners were not detected, deported and their names not deleted from the voter lists," AASU president Utpal Sarma and general secretary Samiran Phukan said in a joint statement. Even the paths through which infiltration took place have not been sealed, and it is an "unpardonable sin" committed by the governments, they added. Unchecked infiltration from Bangladesh threatens the very identity, language, culture and identity of Assamese people, the duo said. They also reiterated demands for the implementation of the Justice (Retd.) Biplab Kumar Sharma Committee's report on Clause 6 of the Accord, which promises constitutional, legislative, and administrative safeguards to protect the Assamese people's identity. The AASU also demanded implementation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) after due corrections and exclusion of Assam from the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) seeks to provide Indian citizenship to Hindus, Jains, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsis entering India on or before December 31, 2014 from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan after five years of residence here. On the implementation of the accord, Minister Atul Bora in a post on X said the state government was doing everything possible to implement it. "We have taken some historic steps to implement the 52 recommendations of Justice (Retd) Biplab Kumar Sharma Committee. In this way, the process is on to execute all clauses of the Accord," he claimed. Leader of the opposition in Assam assembly Debabrata Saikia said the Congress, which was in power in both the Centre and the state during signing of the accord, wholeheartedly wants implementation of all clauses. "The BJP government does not want implementation of the accord, especially as they are strongly against Clause 6. That is why they have introduced CAA, which in a way nullifies the pact," he added. The Assam Jatiya Parishad (AJP), which was formed as an aftereffect of the anti-CAA movement of 2019-20 comprising mostly ex-AASU members, too slammed the BJP for not doing enough to implement the pact. "The BJP had promised to fully implement the accord before the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. However, nothing has been done. Instead, they enacted the CAA and welcomed illegal Bangladeshis coming after 1971," AJP president Lurinjyoti Gogoi claimed. The Supreme Court on October 17 last year had upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act which grants Indian citizenship to immigrants who came to Assam between January 1, 1966 and March 25, 1971. Section 6A was inserted into the Citizenship Act in 1985 as a special provision to deal with the citizenship of people covered under the Assam Accord. A five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by then Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, had said the Assam Accord was a political solution to the problem of illegal migration. It had held that the cut-off date of March 25, 1971, for entry into Assam and granting citizenship is correct. As an outcome of the Assam Accord, the concept of 'D' voters was introduced in the state in 1997 by the EC and prepared a list by including those people who allegedly could not provide evidence in favour of their Indian nationality. It does not exist anywhere in India. Deletion or regularisation of a D-voter is done as per orders of the Foreigners Tribunals (FTs) and the subsequent judgements by higher courts. If the legal system declares one as a foreigner, then his or her name is deleted from the electoral rolls. If a D-voter is termed an Indian citizen by the judiciary, then the prefix 'D' is removed from his or her name. In July last year, the Assam government had asked its Border Police wing not to forward the cases of non-Muslim illegal immigrants entering the state before 2015 to FTs and instead advise them to apply for citizenship through CAA. Last month, the Assam government instructed all districts to drop ongoing cases of suspected non-Muslim illegal foreigners entering the state before 2015 from the FTs following implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act .
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Now, women in state can work in night shifts as Prez gives assent to bill
1 2 Ranchi: President Droupadi Murmu gave her assent to the Factories (Jharkhand Amendment) Bill, 2023. The President's office sent the file to the Raj Bhavan, which, in turn, forwarded it to the state govt, officials said on Thursday. The Factories (Jharkhand Amendment) Bill, 2023, was tabled in the state assembly on Aug 2, 2023. Once it becomes an Act, it would pave the way for women to work night shifts in the state. The Factories Act, 1948, which is in force in Jharkhand, does not allow women to work between 7 pm and 6 am. "The bill was passed by the state assembly and forwarded to the Raj Bhavan, which, in turn, referred it for the President's assent. We received the assent on Wednesday and forwarded it to the state govt," a Raj Bhavan official said. Speaking to TOI, Jharkhand chief factories inspector Manish Kumar Sinha said, "The state govt will send the file to the state labour, employment, training and skill development department, which will forward it to my office. We will notify it in the state gazette. The new rule will come into force the day it is notified in the gazette. It will take about a week or 10 days." He added, "The amendment would ensure participation of the women workforce in industries. Many industries, which function round the clock, had expressed their interest in employing women, but could not as only a general shift was available for them. The new rules, which are industry-friendly, will increase women's participation in the workplace, which is very meagre at present." Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. "Get the latest news updates on Times of India, including reviews of the movie Coolie and War 2 ."
The Wire
2 hours ago
- The Wire
‘Disenfranchising People While Passing Bills in Parliament': TMC MP Sushmita Dev
New Delhi: Amid the ongoing protests by the opposition during the monsoon session of parliament demanding a discussion on the special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, the government has pushed ahead with legislative business and passed crucial Bills, including the new income tax Bills, and two Bills relating to sports governance: the National Sports Governance Bill and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill. Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Sushmita Dev in an interview to The Wire said that voters from whom legislators derive their mandate are being asked to prove the genuineness of their right to vote even as Bills are being passed in parliament. 'As Abhishek Banerjee [TMC general secretary and Lok Sabha MP] has said, according to the Election Commission (EC)'s own inquiry, 65 lakh voters have been removed [from the draft rolls in Bihar]. So this brings into question the 2024 elections also. How can this Lok Sabha continue?' she said. 'You cannot say that people will spend their time, money and energy proving the genuineness of their right to vote on the one hand, and the rest of us are sitting in parliament elected by these very people [on the other]. We get our mandate from people. You are disenfranchising people and you are passing Bills in parliament?' The government's move to push ahead with the bills comes as the opposition march to the Election Commission on Monday was stopped and MPs were detained. Meanwhile the stalemate between the opposition and treasury benches has continued over a discussion on the SIR. Read edited excerpts of the interview below: 1. The TMC was one of the first parties to allege irregularities in the voter rolls. The EC has cited some of these concerns that the TMC itself raised to conduct the SIR. If voter rolls are to be purified, why the opposition to SIR? There is a dual mischief – on the one hand, they have made the SIR into an exclusionary process. The EC's job is to make democracy stronger so that more and more people participate in this democratic process, but the SIR is turning into an exclusionary process. On the other hand, as Mamata Banerjee pointed out in February, while you are taking out voters because of lack of documents, we are seeing duplicate EPICs [elector photo identity cards]. Who issues the EPIC? It is the EC. You are excluding massive numbers like 65 lakh on the one hand, and on the other hand you are encouraging false voters and the duplication of voters. This is a multipronged process that is making a mockery of the democratic process. 2. Your party has alleged that the SIR is being used to usher in a National Register of Citizens (NRC) through the backdoor. Why do you say so? The EC has every right to remove people who have died or migrated. We accept there should not be foreigners, but deciding who is a foreigner is a mandate that lies with the Union home ministry and not the EC. It is not that the TMC or any opposition party is advocating for foreigners in the electoral rolls. Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, the home ministry is the relevant authority and once the home ministry determines after an inquiry through the NRC or the NPR [National Population Register] that somebody is a foreigner, then the EC will remove that person. The EC cannot make that inquiry on its own. 3. If voter roll purification is to be done, how would the TMC propose that it be done? If an exercise like the SIR is to be done, all political parties should have been brought on board. This exercise should have been spread over months so that awareness is created, and political parties are involved in creating that awareness. The rush with which it is being done, given the profile of our electorate which includes the marginalised, poor and those who live in remote areas, where not everybody is highly educated, this is becoming an oppressive measure. This is not only against the constitutional mandate but also against the spirit of the constitution. 4. The opposition's march to the EC's office on August 11 was stopped and MPs were detained. The EC says they were ready to meet 30 MPs. Why couldn't a decision be taken to send a delegation of 30 MPs? The EC is not ready to listen. We decided we will march to the EC with our demands – a peaceful protest with the demand that the SIR has to stop. They give a letter one day before to say only 30 people can come to meet us. The move to not give machine-readable data, questions over a surge in votes after 5:30 pm – these are questions that have to be asked. You have negated all this and now when we have decided to come to you, you say only 30 people will come. Why will 30 people come? Who will decide the number? If the EC had bonafide concern about what we are saying, it should have been handled differently. Since you are planning to do an SIR across the country, should you have not called all political parties? The NRC in Assam was a Supreme Court-monitored exercise that continued for six years. Till today, have they notified the NRC? A process that took six years, monitored by the Supreme Court and conducted by the home ministry under the registrar general, why hasn't it still been notified? What you could not do in six years that you want to do in six months? 5. The monsoon session has been almost a washout barring the discussion on Operation Sindoor, with the government and the opposition at a stalemate over a discussion on the SIR. The government says that the EC is an independent constitutional body and cannot be discussed in parliament. How do you respond to that? We are saying that the SIR is directly impacting the democratic rights of every citizen; the concept of 'one man, one vote' is under challenge. The question is, why can't the people's concerns be debated in parliament? They are talking about the autonomy of the EC. But every procedure that it embarks upon – whether it is delimitation or anything else – you have to involve all political parties. Autonomy does not mean that you embark on this massive enquiry without any consensus with political parties. 6. With the monsoon session due to end in a few days, will this stalemate continue? The government has already said that they have no option but to continue with legislative business. Amid opposition protests, crucial Bills like the Income Tax Bill, the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill, the National Sports Governance Bill and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill have been passed. Important Bills like the Sports Governance Bill should have been sent to the standing committee. But they bulldozed these Bills through parliament, just like they did for the three farm Bills, which they paid a price for. It is a bad precedent they are setting because they fear scrutiny and accountability. As Abhishek Banerjee has said, according to the EC's own inquiry, 65 lakh voters have been removed. So this brings into question the 2024 Lok Sabha elections also. How can this Lok Sabha continue? You cannot say that people will spend their time, money and energy proving the genuineness of their right to vote on the one hand, and the rest of us are sitting in parliament elected by these very people [on the other]. We get our mandate from people. You are disenfranchising people and you are passing Bills in parliament?
