Court should take cognisance of vote fraud charges: Mehbooba
Noting that the Supreme Court has demonstrated a commendable degree of empathy by constituting a three-member bench to deliberate on the rights of stray dogs, she said this move reflects the nation's core values, a commitment to protect not only its citizens but also the voiceless and uncared animals that share our spaces.
She said in light of this, there is a 'growing public expectation" that the court will also take suo motu cognizance of the recent revelations made by the Congress leader concerning the fundamental right to vote of 140 crore Indians.
'Allegations with documentary proof of widespread irregularities in the electoral process strike at the very heart of our democracy and demand urgent judicial scrutiny.
Safeguarding the integrity of elections must take precedence over all other concerns if we are to preserve our identity as a democratic nation," she said.
Gandhi last week cited data to allege that more than one lakh votes were 'stolen' in the Mahadevpura assembly constituency of Bengaluru Central Lok Sabha in the 2024 elections, resulting in the defeat of a Congress candidate.
The Election Commission had directed Gandhi to give a written declaration on his claims. PTI SSB DV DV
view comments
First Published:
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.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Worked for animal welfare': Man who attacked Delhi CM Rekha Gupta visited Ayodhya, loves monkeys
The man accused of assaulting Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta during a Jan Sunwai at her camp office Wednesday recently visited Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh due to his love for monkeys, according to sources. The sources said Rajeshbhai Khimjibhai Sakriya told the Delhi Police during interrogation that after the inauguration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya last year, the administration launched a campaign to remove monkeys from the temple premises. They said Sakriya told the police that he travelled from his hometown, Rajkot in Gujarat, to Ayodhya earlier this year, offered prayers at the temple, and fed the monkeys. The sources added that he told the police that he spent some time with the monkeys before leaving the city. The Delhi Police will contact their counterparts in Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat to verify his travel history to these places, the sources added. The police said Sakriya also told them he had staged a protest earlier this year in Khodaldham, Rajkot, for the welfare of stray cattle. 'During interrogation, he revealed that he is an animal lover and has worked in several places across Gujarat and other parts of the country for animal welfare,' an officer, privy to the probe, said. Sakriya's mother, Bhanu Khimjibhai Sakriya, told reporters in Rajkot that her son was a dog lover and was upset over the Supreme Court order directing authorities in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR) to pick up all stray dogs and put them in shelters. The police have said Sakriya attacked Rekha Gupta, allegedly over a video clip in which she can be heard speaking about stray dogs. Before attacking Rekha Gupta, while she was holding a public meeting at her camp office, he also talked about the issue, the officer said. The police said the actual cause of the attack is yet to be ascertained, as they are still interrogating him. According to police records, Sakriya has been booked in five cases of assault, and creating a ruckus under the influence of alcohol in Gujarat.
India Today
12 minutes ago
- India Today
As Modi govt tables bills to prevent ‘rule from jail', why Opposition smells a ploy
With barely two days left before adjournment of the monsoon session of Parliament, Union home minister Amit Shah walked into Lok Sabha on August 20 carrying three slender bills whose implications have ignited a massive political the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025, propose a seismic shift: any Union minister, chief minister or even the prime minister could be forced to vacate office if held in custody for 30 consecutive days on charges punishable with at least five years in On paper, these bills seek to codify a mechanism that ensures that top leaders in India—a country long haunted by criminalisation of politics—cannot govern from prison cells. In spirit, the legislation borrows from service rules for civil servants, who are suspended upon arrest. Extending that logic to elected representatives, the government insists, is a matter of constitutional Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, along with companion legislation for Union territories and Jammu and Kashmir, establishes an automatic removal mechanism. Any minister arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days on charges carrying a minimum five-year sentence would be removed from office on the 31st day, regardless of whether they have been convicted or even faced regular ministers, the removal requires either advice from the prime minister or chief minister by the 31st day, or automatic cessation if no such advice is given. For prime ministers and chief ministers themselves, the bills mandate resignation by the 31st day or automatic removal thereafter. While the removed officials can theoretically be reappointed upon release, the political damage would likely prove RATIONALEThe bills are not arriving in a vacuum. Over the past two years, India has witnessed two high-profile sagas that underscored the absence of such a mechanism. Arvind Kejriwal, while he was the chief minister of Delhi, spent more than five months in jail in 2024 on charges related to the capital's liquor policy. Despite his incarceration, he refused to resign, forcing the Delhi government into an unprecedented arrangement: governance by proxy from a prison ward. He quit only after being granted interim bail, and even then, under Supreme Court conditions that barred him from entering the Secretariat.V. Senthil Balaji, a Tamil Nadu minister, was arrested in 2023 in a money-laundering case. Chief minister M.K. Stalin kept him in the cabinet without portfolio, igniting a bitter standoff with governor R.N. Ravi. Balaji was reinstated when the Supreme Court granted him bail, only to resign months later after the court insisted that his presence undermined constitutional the BJP, these cases are proof that without a clear constitutional remedy, governance risks paralysis and public trust corrodes. From the BJP's vantage point, the legislation is an extension of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's oft-repeated mantra of 'zero tolerance' for corruption. The Statement of Objects and Reasons attached to each bill echoes that tone. Ministers, it says, embody 'the hopes and aspirations of the people' and their conduct should be 'beyond any ray of suspicion'. A minister in custody, it warns, risks thwarting 'the canons of constitutional morality' and diminishing the trust reposed in elected OBJECTIONSIn India's fractious democracy, the timing and manner of the bills' introduction have only deepened mistrust. Critics argue they mark an extraordinary expansion of executive authority, one that risks turning investigative agencies into weapons against political rivals. The choice of timing, they say, is no the BJP and the Election Commission (EC) already under fire over contentious revisions of electoral rolls, the government is accused of trying to divert political attention. Many in the Opposition believe the BJP itself knows that the bills stand little chance of clearing the formidable hurdles of constitutional change—passage by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament, with at least half the states ratifying them. That, they insist, explains why the bills were rushed in at the fag end of the session, leaving no room for meaningful debate or the three bills were introduced, Opposition benches erupted in protest. When Amit Shah moved to have the legislation referred to a joint committee for scrutiny, several Opposition leaders tore up copies of the bills and flung them towards the Treasury benches, some landing directly before the home MP and senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi called the move 'the best way to destabilise Opposition governments'. 'No ruling party chief minister is ever touched. But unleash biased agencies, arrest an Opposition CM, and by the 31st day, he is gone, without a vote, without a trial,' he India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi, in a formal notice to the Lok Sabha secretary general, argued that the legislation violates principles of federalism, separation of powers and due process. 'This amendment would allow the executive agencies a free run to become the judge, jury and executioner,' Owaisi stated, noting that in a parliamentary democracy, ministers can only be removed through loss of legislative confidence or recommendation by the head of deepest unease stems not from the text of the bills but from India's investigative reality. Over the past decade, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and other agencies, which report to the central government, have been accused by courts and Opposition parties of selective zeal. In July, chief justice of India B.R. Gavai rebuked the ED for being used in 'political battles'. Earlier this month, another court bench told the agency it was 'crossing all limits' and warned it not to act 'like a crook'.advertisementEven inclusion of provisions for removing prime ministers, which government defenders cite as evidence of even-handedness, rings hollow to critics, who note the impossibility of central agencies arresting a sitting prime minister who controls manner of the bills' introduction has further fuelled Opposition anger. Shah's letter to the Lok Sabha secretary general requesting inclusion of these bills came on the evening of August 19, with the session scheduled to conclude on August 21. The home minister explicitly sought relaxation of Rule 19(A) and 19(B), which require prior notice and circulation of bills to members before Sabha speaker Om Birla accommodated Shah's request, with the understanding that the bills would be referred to a joint parliamentary committee for scrutiny. For critics, the last-minute manoeuvre smacks of opportunism, a way to table a politically potent law without adequate debate, and to force the Opposition into defensive posturing just as the monsoon session wraps PATH TO PASSAGEThe path to passage is complex. Unlike ordinary bills, the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill alters the federal balance by touching Articles 75 and 164. It therefore requires:1. Approval by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament, with at least 50 per cent of members present and voting.2. Ratification by at least half the contrast, the Union territories and J&K bills are ordinary amendments requiring only a simple majority. But politically, the three are being bundled as a single reform package, amplifying both their symbolic weight and the resistance they are likely to National Democratic Alliance (NDA) currently lacks a two-thirds majority in either House. For the bills to pass, a significant number of Opposition MPs would have to abstain on voting day. Without the support of Opposition parties, the chances of passage remain slim. Even NDA allies, such as the Telugu Desam Party, Janata Dal (United) and smaller partners, may hesitate to back the proposals. As expected, the bills have now been referred to a joint parliamentary if passed, constitutional challenges are almost inevitable. Lawyers argue the bills may clash with the 'basic structure doctrine' established by the Supreme Court, which safeguards federalism and separation of powers from parliamentary India watches this constitutional drama unfold, the central question remains whether these bills represent necessary reform to combat corruption or, as the Congress's Singhvi posted on social media, 'the best way to destabilise the Opposition' through 'arbitrary arrests' when unable to defeat them electorally. The answer may well determine the trajectory of Indian democracy for years to to India Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch
India Today
17 minutes ago
- India Today
Bengal Files, 1940–47: From Killings to Gandhi's Miracle of Peace
At the dawn of the 1940s, Calcutta was a cauldron of communal tension and political rivalry, marked by fragile alliances in a society increasingly shaped by the Muslim LAHORE RESOLUTIONOn March 23, 1940, Fazlul Huq, the 'Lion of Bengal,' arrived at the Muslim League's annual meeting in Lahore to a thunderous welcome. Muhammad Ali Jinnah greeted him respectfully: 'When the tiger appears, the lamb must give way.'advertisementFormer League president and founder of the Krishak Samaj Party, Huq gave his defining performance that day by presenting the Lahore Resolution. It called for autonomous and sovereign states in Muslim-majority regions of British India, laying the foundation for what would later be interpreted as the demand for Pakistan. In December 1941, Huq formed the Progressive Coalition government in Bengal with the Hindu Mahasabha's support, Syama Prasad Mookerjee becoming finance QUIT INDIA MOVEMENTWhen Congress launched the Quit India Movement in 1942, the Bengal ministry opposed it. On July 26, 1942, Mookerjee wrote to the Governor:'The question is how to combat this movement (Quit India) in Bengal?...It should be possible for us, especially responsible Ministers, to be able to tell the public that the freedom for which the Congress has started the movement, already belongs to the representatives of the peopleIndians have to trust the British, not for the sake for Britain, not for any advantage that the British might gain, but for the maintenance of the defence and freedom of the province itself.'The 'Huq-Syama' government, as it was popularly known, maintained 'adherence to office' by enforcing the Defence of India Rules and opposing Congress calls for mass protest or resignation, prioritising maintenance of order and cooperation with British wartime the government soon collapsed under the burden of Bengal's political contradictions, making way for the dominance of the Muslim DIRECT ACTION DAYOn August 16, 1946, the Muslim League, led by Jinnah, called for "Direct Action" to demand the creation of Pakistan after talks with the Indian National Congress and the British government broke down over the issue of separate Muslim representation and movement was intended as a show of solidarity and strength by Muslims, but in Calcutta (now Kolkata), it led to a massive shutdown, citywide rallies, and quickly descended into unprecedented communal GREAT CALCUTTA KILLINGSMuslims were a majority in the Bengal province overall, but Calcutta itself was a Hindu-majority city (73% Hindu, 23% Muslim in the 1941 census). These demographics and historic tensions contributed to the scale and speed of Hodson, a member of the Viceroy's staff and (later) editor of The Sunday Times, has written a detailed account of the partition in his book The Great Divide. The book provides detailed commentary on the Calcutta Killings of August Calcutta the League Ministry under Mr Suhrawardy, who had adopted a much more bellicose attitude than Mr. Jinnah, declared 16th August a public holiday, an extremely dangerous thing to do when communal passions were inflamed, Satan would find work for idle hands to do, and any gathering or group in a crowded city might invite reactions from hostile bystanders.'Hodson records that huge crowds gathered by midday, mainly Muslims from all over Calcutta, many armed with iron bars and bamboo sticks. Speeches delivered by leaders like Khawaja Nazimuddin and Chief Minister Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy added to the tension. While there were calls for peace, some remarks highlighted community grievances and calls for self-defense, intensifying communal antagonism.'What happened was more than anyone could have foreseen. In the next three days some 20,000 people were killed or seriously injured in Calcutta. Whole streets were strewn with corpses-men, women and children of all communities,' writes Muslims instigated the violence, but they were also its worst victims because they were in the minority in Calcutta. '...the Sikhs in particular, a comparatively small community in Calcutta but tough and armed and largely motorised, being the mechanics and drivers of Bengal as of so many places, swept furiously through the Muslim quarters slaying mercilessly as they went,' according to to the Statesman, the city was completely paralysed. The trains did not move. Newspapers were not published. Civic amenities were disrupted.'The estimated number of people killed ranged from 4000 to 10000.'A detailed military report from the Eastern Command, archived in the UK (WO 216/662), written by an officer assessed the riots. The report describes the escalation from the morning of August 16:'By late in the afternoon, the situation had changed, and the persons involved on both sides were gwallahs, rickshaw pullers, teashop wallahs, pan berri (beedi) wallahs, cart pullers, cart men, goondas of the worst type. Soon after midnight on the 16/17th these gangs fought out the most desperate battles. Murder and butchery of the worst type were carried on in the side lanes and byways of North Calcutta. Round Vivekananda Road/Central Ave., crossing about 50 Hindu Behari rickshaw pullers were caught in a cul-de-sac and butchered. Further up Central Ave., round the temple which stands in the middle, a party of some 30 Mohamedans were killed.'advertisementTHE AFTERMATH OF RIOTSSuhrawardy, Bengal's Chief Minister, faced widespread criticism for his role in the riots. The military report labelled him 'the king of the goondas,' suggesting he incited notes administrative failure: 'I am confident that if all ranks had known that they would be supported to the hilt, nothing like the state of affairs which occurred would have taken place.' (The Great Divide, p. 168).The Calcutta killings triggered retaliatory violence in Noakhali, East Bengal, where Muslim mobs attacked Hindus, killing 5,000 and displacing thousands. Mahatma Gandhi arrived on November 19, 1946, to mediate, staying until January 1947, as detailed in Freedom at Midnight (p. 210).THE MIRACLE OF CALCUTTAIn August 1947, renewed riots broke out in Calcutta. Mahatma Gandhi stepped into this searing divide, setting the stage for what is called the 'Miracle of Calcutta.'Gandhi had spent 1946-1947 touring riot-affected areas like Noakhali (East Bengal) and Bihar, consoling victims and promoting in Calcutta on August 9, 1947, he initially planned to return to Noakhali. However, local leaders, including Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy—the Muslim League's former Chief Minister of Bengal, often blamed for inaction during the 1946 riots—urged him to stay and prevent Mahatma's secretary Pyarelal recounts: 'Gandhiji arrived in Calcutta on August 9th, 1947... A delegation of Muslims, led by Mohammad Usman, urged him to stay in Calcutta to protect Muslims. Gandhiji agreed, but on condition they guarantee Hindu safety in Noakhali. He met Suhrawardy, who expressed fears for Muslims. Gandhiji said: 'I will stay if we live together and work until every Hindu and Muslim can return safely home.' Suhrawardy agreed." (Mahatma Gandhi: The Last Phase, Vol. X).On August 13, Gandhi moved into Hydari Manzil, a dilapidated house in the Muslim-majority Beliaghata slum, surrounded by Hindu neighborhoods—a deliberate choice to symbolize unity in a riot-prone 'no-man's land.'Angry Hindu crowds protested Suhrawardy's presence, throwing bricks and shouting, 'Go back, Gandhi!' Gandhi Bhawan or Hyderi Manzil in Beleghata, Kolkata (Photo: AFP) Pyarelal records Gandhi's response: 'Gandhiji addressed them from the roof: 'I have come to serve Hindus and Muslims alike. I place myself under your protection. If you go mad again, I will not witness it alive.''Gandhi's speech, vowing to fast unto death if violence erupted, calmed the mob. Suhrawardy publicly apologised for the 1946 riots, fostering initial reconciliation. Gandhi held daily interfaith prayer meetings at Hydari Manzil, reading from the Quran, Gita, and Bible, as for unity.'On August 15, 1947, while Delhi celebrated, Calcutta experienced a miracle. Violence halted abruptly. Crowds of Hindus and Muslims visited Hydari Manzil, chanting 'Jai Hind' together. Muslims shared meals with Gandhi; children sang nationalist songs. The press called it the 'Miracle of Calcutta.' Gandhi, however, warned it might not last: 'This is no miracle; it is the result of moral persuasion, but we must remain vigilant.'' (Freedom at Midnight).Gandhi's frail presence in a danger zone, coupled with his symbolic cohabitation with Suhrawardy, shamed potential rioters and inspired goodwill, saving thousands of lives in a city of MAHATMA'S SACRIFICEPeace held for about two weeks, but on August 31, 1947, violence erupted again after a Hindu youth was reportedly stabbed by Muslims, sparking retaliatory attacks. Armed thugs resumed killings, looting, and arson, with reports of bombs and acid September 1, Gandhi announced a fast unto death until peace was quotes him: 'I shall terminate the fast only when peace has returned to Calcutta. If it is restored, I shall live to serve.'Gandhi, already weakened by age and prior fasts, consumed only water with lime at Hydari Manzil. His health deteriorated rapidly over 73 details the response: 'His health declined rapidly. Thousands visited; rioters surrendered arms—swords, guns, bombs. Hindu Mahasabha, Muslim League, Sikhs pledged: 'We will protect minorities at personal cost.' On September 4th, convinced by assurances, he broke the fast with orange juice from Suhrawardy.'Gandhi left for Delhi on September 7, 1947. 'Calcutta remained peaceful thereafter. Mountbatten called Gandhi a 'one-man boundary force.' His fast saved thousands, proving non-violence's power, but he despaired: 'Freedom has come stained with blood.'' (Freedom at Midnight).Gandhi's Calcutta efforts saved thousands, contrasting with Punjab's massacres. However, his despair over partition persisted, leading to another fast in Delhi in January 1948, before his assassination on January 30, Manzil is now Gandhi Bhavan, a museum preserving his spinning wheel and surrendered weapons. The 'Miracle of Calcutta' and subsequent fast remind the world of moral leadership in crisis.- Ends
