SC to hear plea seeking President's Rule in Bengal amid communal unrest
The matter was earlier mentioned for urgent listing before a Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih on April 21, which scheduled the hearing for today.
Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing petitioner Ranjana Agnihotri, sought the Court's permission to submit additional documents detailing the continuing violence in the state. He also urged for immediate invocation of Article 355 of the Constitution to ensure security and constitutional compliance.
'There is a need for immediate deployment of paramilitary forces. This matter is listed for tomorrow. I have filed an additional application seeking the invocation of Article 355,' Jain submitted during the mentioning.
The fresh intervention application was filed by Ranjana Agnihotri through Advocate-on-Record (AoR) Vishnu Shankar Jain, along with AoRs Arvind Kumar Sharma, Kunal Mimani, Prateek Kumar, Parth Yadav, and Omprakash Ajitsingh Parihar.
The plea has been clubbed with a previously filed writ petition by petitioner Shashank Shekhar Jha, which seeks a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the violence in the state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
25 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Suhas Palshikar writes: Left Wing Extremism is a smokescreen. Maharashtra's new law could criminalise dissent
What you require is a dictionary, the Supreme Court is reported to have told the SIT in the Ali Khan Mahmudabad case recently. Very soon, the courts may have to say, what you need is a set of Political Science books. The need to read Political Science literature may be necessitated by the mention of Left Wing Extremism (LWE) in a bill passed by the Maharashtra legislature in the name of protecting public security. Indeed, there is a separate section under the Ministry of Home Affairs that deals with LWE but one is not sure that there is a clear legal definition of LWE. The MHA portal says that LWE refers to organisations that are banned and listed as an appendix to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. But that hardly satisfies the test of what conceptually constitutes LWE. Broad innuendos making the rounds in the public domain refer to Maoism. In operational terms, the provisions refer to the use of violence for the overthrow of the state. But since the Maharashtra government now intends to incriminate Left Wing ideology, the onus is on the government to specify what it means by it. In the absence of clarity, anyone can be accused of subscribing to Left Wing ideology, and then the police will be running from one library to another for material on what constitutes Left Wing ideas. The current dispensation in Maharashtra and nationally is allergic to the idea of the 'Left'. Therefore, it will do well to come forward and define for legal purposes which ideas are construed as Left and are hence liable to be proscribed. Maoist violence in many parts of the country has invited a reaction of repulsion even among those who may have a leftward leaning. That repulsion is tactically utilised intellectually and cinematically by some who employ the term 'urban Naxal'. Even the Maharashtra Chief Minister has repeatedly referred to urban Maoism. What is overlooked is the distinction between those who actively mobilise Maoist violence against the state, those who sympathise with such organisations and those who do not endorse such violence but subscribe to the idea that the stranglehold of capital over state authority needs to be removed. The other problem with the Maharashtra law is that it incriminates a number of activities that are already proscribed by various laws and thus there is a vicious duplication of legal instruments giving the executive and the police unseemly discretionary powers on whether to book someone under this law, under UAPA or a more routine law penalising crime and violence. We regularly witness instances of how executive discretion results in overenthusiasm and even partisan vendetta. The new law will be an additional instrument to harass civil society. Given that it precludes the bail provision and recourse to lower courts, one can only imagine its likely draconian effects. Perhaps the most worrisome provisions in this law pertain to freedom of speech and expression. True, we routinely get a dose of pontification from the judiciary that freedom — and freedom of expression, in particular — is not absolute. It is nobody's case that in the Indian context, this freedom is absolute or without constraints. But the central question that law-makers and the judiciary must answer is not whether freedom of expression is or should be absolute. The question is whether restraints on freedom of expression can be random and arbitrary. Scholars of the Indian Constitution have argued that writing down the restrictions on the freedom of expression produces a concrete limiting effect on the executive and legislature. The written restrictions guarantee that governments or state authorities will not have unlimited powers to curb the freedom of expression. Also, the constitutional scheme of things requires the test of reasonableness. Restrictions have to be reasonable. Courts are therefore not to tell a citizen what she should reasonably express but to examine if the enforced limitations are reasonable. In the backdrop of the judiciary's abdication of this sacrosanct duty, the provisions in Maharashtra's bill could be dangerous and ill-intended. Under this new law, 'unlawful' activities are defined as activities 'by act or words… or by sign or by visible representation'. In other words, freedom of expression, besides actual acts, is intended to be criminalised. As a member of the legislature publicly stated after the passage of the bill, holding seminars (purportedly on objectionable matters, in that lawmaker's view) will be punished by the new law. Therein exists a dual danger. One, any dog-whistling can easily activate the police machinery, and there is no mechanism to first examine such random complaints emanating from ideological or political rivals before action is taken; the Advisory Board comes into the picture only after action is taken by the police. Two, any intellectual activity can easily be brought under the purview of unlawful activity. What constitutes incitement to violence will always be a ticklish issue legally, morally and politically. For the sake of argument, let us admit that 'incitement' may be legitimately criminalised. In that case, incitement against minorities — indulged in even by some members of the state government — should also be criminalised. But since such perpetrators are not Left Wing, this law would turn a blind eye towards that incitement. As the new law says, any acts through words that 'constitute danger to peace and tranquility', 'acts of generating fear and apprehension in the public', 'preaching disobedience of law and its institutions' are construed as unlawful. A plain reading of these phrases should alert any citizen. Because, while the law mentions LWE, these political acts are the common language of democratic mobilisation and as such practically any social worker can be booked for extending a verbal criticism of authorities and appealing to citizens to protest. Any stringent criticism can be construed as endangering tranquility. Thus, the language of 'urban Naxal' is a smokescreen. The tameness and intellectual laziness of the Opposition in Maharashtra is such that it is content with limiting the powers under this law to LWE. In its abject muteness, the Opposition in Maharashtra has shown that it is following in the footsteps of the loyal Opposition in Gujarat. Following legislation in Chhattisgarh, Odisha etc, this law raises wider issues beyond being Left or non-Left. It is about the idea of the state and protests: Whether the state can be critiqued in a democracy and whether a self-proclaimed democratic state should be criminalising protest, dissent and difference of opinion. The writer, based in Pune, taught Political Science
Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
BC Commission yet to get report on caste survey!
Hyderabad: The BC Commission, which was part of the caste survey, is yet to receive the report. This is not only hampering critical study regarding implementation of BC reservation in the State, but also affecting timely responses by the Commission to the pending Supreme Court cases. According to sources, the BC Commission on several occasions wrote to the Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy and Deputy CM Mallu Bhatti Vikramarka, the latter who is also handling the Planning Department for a copy of the report. The Commission was actively involved in door-to-door survey and conducted public hearings while camping various districts across Telangana under the deadlines. Ironically, even the Independent Expert Working Group (IEWG) recently submitted a 300-page report to the government and even this report could not be accessed by the BC Commission. 'The situation is that we even asked the members of the expert group for the copy. But they denied saying that it would be placed in the public domain shortly and the government will take a call,' told the sources to The Hans India. The Commission yearns for the report as all major decisions concerning the BCs depend on it. It also needs to respond to Supreme Court's cases. One such case is regarding removal of 26 castes from AP origin following bifurcation. 'Until and unless we study the report we can arrive at a decision. The Supreme Court has sought opinion regarding the case and we are awaiting to submit a reply. How can we respond till we have real figures related to the case?' wondered one of the members.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Centre to seek six-month extension of President's Rule in Manipur; Amit Shah to table resolution in RS today
Union Home Minister Amit Shah is scheduled to move a resolution in the Rajya Sabha on Friday to extend President's Rule in Manipur for an additional six months starting August 13, 2025, according to media reports. The move comes at a time when political pressure is mounting from within the NDA's own ranks to restore democratic governance in the conflict-hit state. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Data Science Data Science Technology CXO Artificial Intelligence Leadership others Public Policy Cybersecurity Others MBA Product Management healthcare Degree Operations Management Healthcare Data Analytics Project Management Finance Management Digital Marketing Design Thinking PGDM MCA Skills you'll gain: Duration: 10 Months IIM Kozhikode CERT-IIMK DABS India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 11 Months IIT Madras CERT-IITM Advanced Cert Prog in AI and ML India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 11 Months E&ICT Academy, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati CERT-IITG Postgraduate Cert in AI and ML India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 10 Months E&ICT Academy, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati CERT-IITG Prof Cert in DS & BA with GenAI India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 30 Weeks IIM Kozhikode SEPO - IIMK-AI for Senior Executives India Starts on undefined Get Details President's Rule was initially imposed on February 13, 2025, shortly after former Chief Minister N Biren Singh resigned from his post. His departure was largely driven by political turmoil within the ruling BJP, as several Meitei legislators revolted against his leadership. In the absence of any contender staking a claim to form the government, the Centre invoked Article 356. Despite the state assembly remaining in suspended animation—its tenure lasting until 2027—no attempt has since been made to reconstitute an elected government. Live Events Pushback from NDA's Own MLAs Since April, Meitei and Naga legislators of the BJP-led NDA, including both supporters and critics of Biren Singh, have been lobbying for the return of a 'popular government.' They argue that President's Rule has failed to restore normalcy or address the deeper political and ethnic grievances in the state. The move to extend Central rule is expected to further strain saffron party ties between the Centre and its alliance MLAs in Manipur. Meanwhile, Manipur continues to grapple with the aftermath of the violent ethnic conflict that erupted on May 3, 2023, between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities . Over 250 people have been killed, and more than 60,000 displaced. Though violence has subsided in recent months—particularly in the foothill areas that once saw some of the fiercest clashes—key issues remain unresolved. Security Operations ongoing On Thursday, security forces arrested eight militants from multiple proscribed outfits in operations across Imphal West, Bishnupur, Tengnoupal, and Chandel districts. Officials said that area domination exercises and coordinated search operations have been ongoing since the violence first broke out in 2023. Observers note that tensions had been brewing long before the conflict erupted. In 2022 and 2023, then-Chief Minister Biren Singh had launched large-scale eviction drives to clear alleged encroachments on reserve forest lands across both hill and valley districts. These actions sparked sharp resistance, particularly among Kuki and Zo groups, and are now widely viewed as one of the catalysts of the wider conflict.
