SC seeks UP, Uttarakhand reply on plea against QR code mandate for food sellers during Kanwar Yatra
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
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
18 minutes ago
- United News of India
Bandi Sanjay urges Gadkari to release CRIF funds for Telangana road projects
New Delhi/Hyderabad, July 28 (UNI) Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay Kumar met Union Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari in New Delhi today and urged him to release pending Central Road Infrastructure Fund (CRIF) allocations for various road development projects in Telangana, particularly in his Karimnagar parliamentary constituency. During the meeting, Bandi Sanjay submitted proposals amounting to Rs 113 crore under the CRIF, which include key infrastructure works aimed at improving rural connectivity and addressing long-standing transportation issues. Among the proposals submitted are the construction of a high-level bridge over the Maneru River on the Bavupeta-Khazipur road in Kothapalli mandal, and the widening of the Gundlapalli-Pothur road in Ganneruvaram mandal. Additional proposals include the construction of bridges between Chandurthi and Motkuraopet, a bridge up to Kistampalli, and a high-level bridge over the flood canal between Arkandla and Kannapur villages in Shankarapatnam mandal. The Minister also handed over other pending road proposals related to his constituency for immediate consideration. Responding positively, Gadkari assured Bandi Sanjay that an appropriate decision would be taken soon on the release of CRIF funds for Telangana. He appreciated the urgency and said the proposals would be reviewed at the earliest. Bandi Sanjay also raised the issue of the much-delayed Karimnagar–Jagityala road expansion project. He reminded the Union Minister that a detailed proposal for converting the road into a four-lane stretch had already been prepared with an estimated cost of Rs 2,151.35 crore ahead of the last elections. However, the tender process for the project has not begun despite repeated assurances from officials. Taking serious note of the delay, Gadkari immediately called senior officials of the concerned department and sought an explanation. Officials informed him that the project had faced hurdles due to public objections and legal issues, but clarified that all such obstacles have now been cleared and a final report has been submitted to the committee concerned. Gadkari assured that once the committee gives its approval, the tender process will be initiated without delay and the long-pending Karimnagar–Jagityala road expansion work will be launched soon, an official statement said. UNI VV RKM
India Today
38 minutes ago
- India Today
Supreme Court quashes FIR against Lakshya Sen in birth certificate forgery case
The Supreme Court on Monday quashed an FIR against badminton player Lakshya Sen, his family members and coach in the birth certificate forgery case. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar said the continuation of criminal proceedings against Sen was an abuse of the process of court. The top court observed the very allegations that were examined and debunked by competent authorities were now being sought to be revived as it ruled out any fresh evidence meriting reopening of the appellants, particularly appellant 1 and 3, are sportspersons of national standing, having represented India in international badminton tournaments and having earned multiple accolades, including medals at the Commonwealth Games and BWF international events," the court said. The top court went on, "To compel such individuals who have maintained an unblemished record and brought distinction to the country through sustained excellence,to undergo the ordeal of a criminal trial in the absence of prima facie material would not subserve the ends of justice."The invocation of criminal law in such circumstances, the bench held, would amount to an abuse of process, which this court cannot countenance. The top court observed the Sports Authority of India (SAI), upon receiving complaints, initiated a verification process in 2016, which included medical testing and factual players were stated to have undergone bone ossification and dental tests at government-run hospitals including AIIMS, Delhi."The findings of these tests supported the birth years as recorded in official documents. On that basis, the SAI closed the matter. The CVC, an independent oversight body, was also seized of the issue and recommended no disciplinary proceedings against D K Sen. These findings were accepted by the relevant authorities and have not been set aside or reopened," the bench M G Nagaraj alleged birth certificates of Sen and his brother Chirag Sen were top court was hearing a plea against a February 19 Karnataka High Court order rejecting the petitions filed by Sen, his family members, and his coach U Vimal high court found prima facie evidence, warranting an investigation into the alleged Sen's parents Dhirendra and Nirmala Sen, along with his brother, coach, and an employee of the Karnataka Badminton Association were involved in falsifying the birth to the complaint, the accused allegedly manipulated the birth certificates of the Sen brothers, reducing their age by approximately two-and-a-half alleged forgery was intended to allow them to participate in age-restricted badminton tournaments and avail government supported his claims with documents obtained under RTI Act and requested the court to summon original records from SAI and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports in New on the evidence, the court directed the High Grounds police station to conduct an police subsequently lodged an FIR under Sections 420 (cheating), 468 (forgery), and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of petitioners moved the Karnataka High Court in 2022, securing an interim order, which stalled the argued the complaint and subsequent FIR were baseless, motivated, and intended to harass was alleged to have acted out of personal vendetta, after his daughter applied to join the Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy in 2020 but was not selected after the evaluation a coach at the academy, was named in the high court, while dismissing the petitions, observed the petitioners' counsel did not present arguments despite being given sufficient opportunities.- EndsTune InMust Watch
The Hindu
38 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Why did Justice Varma submit to in-house inquiry if it was contrary to Constitution, Supreme Court asks
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 28, 2025) questioned High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma's choice to submit to an in-house inquiry procedure into an allegation of 'burnt cash' found at his official residential premises in Delhi, despite finding the procedure to be 'completely contrary to the Constitutional scheme'. A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih asked whether he was at the time looking for a favourable outcome. Supreme Court hearing on Justice Varma's petition updates: SC asks Sibal to place on record the fact-finding committee report, adjourns case to July 30 The query came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal complained that the action taken by the Supreme Court at the time, including release of sensitive visual and audio materials showing 'burnt currency', 'convicted' Justice Varma in the public eye. 'There was a public furore, media interactions named the judge, accusations were levelled against the judge and the findings of the inquiry committee found its way into the public domain. He was convicted in the public eye from day one,' Mr. Sibal argued. Mr. Sibal said the process of removal of a judge was covered under Article 124(4) of the Constitution. The inquiry had to be done under the Judges Inquiry Act. The in-house procedure was meant to 'enhance' the moral vigour of the judiciary and depicted zero tolerance to judicial misconduct. 'Violation of Article 121' The senior counsel said the outing of sensitive material regarding a sitting High Court judge and very public discussions on his conduct violated the bar under Article 121 of the Constitution. 'Article 121 restricts discussions even in the Parliament on a sitting judge unless there is evidence of proven misconduct against him… Here, he was already 'convicted' in the public eye. The in-house inquiry procedure was devised to enhance the moral authority of the judiciary. The conduct of the in-house inquiry and its report, now in the public domain, hardly meet that objective,' Mr. Sibal argued. Mr. Sibal challenged the inquiry committee's finding of misbehaviour against Justice Varma. 'If cash is found in an outhouse, what is the behaviour of the judge to do with it… There is no 'behaviour' or 'misbehaviour' involved. They have to prove the cash belonged to him. They never found that… There could never have been a recommendation for my [read Justice Varma's] removal,' Mr. Sibal argued. 'Political overtones' The counsel said the issue of 'removal' of the judge has taken on political overtones. 'But removal is also a political procedure,' Justice Datta observed. 'Yes, inside the Parliament, not outside,' Mr. Sibal responded. 'You could have raised these points immediately, without submitting to the committee's jurisdiction… why did you not?' Justice Datta asked. Mr. Sibal contended that the decision of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna (now retired) in May to forward the committee report and recommendation for the removal of Justice Varma was 'illegal'. 'Why do you think sending it to the President, who is the appointing authority of the judge, illegal? And what is wrong in sending it to the Prime Minister? He is the leader of the Council of Ministers. His advice is taken at the time of appointment of judges. Sending it to the President or the Prime Minister does not mean the Chief Justice is trying to impress or persuade the House to accept his point of view,' Justice Datta responded. The court listed the case on July 30, directing Mr. Sibal to place the inquiry committee's report on record.
