&w=3840&q=100)
Govt likely to introduce bill to restore J&K statehood in LS on Aug 20
Himanshu Thakur New Delhi
The government is likely to introduce a bill to restore the statehood of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) in the Lok Sabha on August 20, 2025, according to a report by The Tribune.
On August 5, 2019, the Centre abrogated Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution, which had granted special status to the former state.
The announcement at the time was made in Parliament by Union Home Minister Amit Shah. With the abrogation, Jammu and Kashmir lost its separate Constitution.
The state was simultaneously reorganised into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir, which was given a legislative assembly, and Ladakh, which was created without one.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
a few seconds ago
- Hans India
Justice Sudarshan Reddy symbolises humanitarian values in judiciary
INDIA Bloc's decision to nominate former Supreme Court judge as its candidate for the post of Vice-President of India is indeed a commendable decision. From every perspective, Justice B Sudarshan Reddy is eminently qualified for this constitutional position. A judge deeply committed to the rule of law; he has dedicated his life to upholding constitutional values in the Indian democratic framework. Among the pillars of the Indian Constitution, the judiciary holds a critical role. Some judges have etched their names in history through their unwavering integrity, distinctive vision, and faith in democratic principles—Justice Sudarshan Reddy is one among them. Journey in legal education: Born in 1948, Justice Sudarshan Reddy pursued his legal education in Hyderabad and obtained his law degree from the Law College. Even during his student days, he displayed a strong commitment to the legal system, a deep understanding of constitutional values, and a dedication to social justice. He began his legal career in 1971, advocating on constitutional matters in both the High Courts and the Supreme Court. He gained recognition for his fearless arguments in public interest litigations and constitutional issues. In 1995, he was appointed a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and later in 2007, he took charge as a judge of the Supreme Court. His judgments consistently reflected a reverence for the Constitution, a protection of people's rights, and a firm commitment to transparent governance. He also served as the Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), launching several initiatives to ensure access to justice for ordinary citizens. Judicial integrity and distance from politics: One of the most notable aspects of Justice Reddy's career is his strong belief in keeping the judiciary free from political influence. His landmark judgments continue to serve as guiding lights for legal professionals. His rulings in cases of national importance have had a profound impact on society. Vice-presidential nomination: In today's politically turbulent environment, nominating a figure like Justice Reddy symbolizes a stand for ethics and democratic values. The INDIA alliance's decision reflects their respect for judicial integrity and the dignity of constitutional offices. Justice Reddy is also to be commended for his commitment to democracy. His presence in the office of the Vice-President would enhance the stature of the Constitution and uphold moral values. This role would be a fitting tribute to a life devoted to justice. Landmark Salwa Judum judgment: Particularly worth discussing is his historic verdict in the Salwa Judum case, which stands as a milestone in Indian judicial history. This decision played a vital role in defending citizens' fundamental rights and upholding constitutional values. The Salwa Judum case: In the case Nandini Sundar & others vs State of Chhattisgarh, on July 5, 2011, Justice B. Sudarshan Reddy, along with Justice S.S. Nijjar, delivered a historic and significant judgment. This verdict deserves an entire book of its own (which the author had the privilege of translating and was published by Malupu Publications). The case dealt with the Chhattisgarh government arming tribal youth under the banner of Salwa Judum to combat Maoists. Key points of the verdict: 1. Salwa Judum declared unconstitutional: The Court held that the government's act of arming tribal civilians to fight Maoists was against the Constitution. 2. Arming civilians is unethical and dangerous: Appointing untrained villagers as Special Police Officers (SPOs) and giving them weapons was described as highly unethical and risky. 3. Violation of fundamental rights: The policy was deemed in violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution. 4. Immediate disbanding ordered: The Court ordered an immediate halt to Salwa Judum activities and withdrawal of arms given to civilians. 5. Citizens' safety must be ensured: The ruling stressed that the government must address the Maoist problem through legal and secure means, not by turning civilians into combatants. Through this landmark judgment, Justice Reddy sent a clear and powerful message to the government about the protection of citizens' rights. It was a significant step in defending human rights and constitutional values. This verdict stands as a shining example of 'Judicial humanism' in Indian legal history. Speech on the Constitution's preamble: Recently, in a public address related to a book titled 'Preamble of the Constitution' (authored by the writer), Justice Reddy criticized certain senior figures who argue that the Indian Constitution does not truly belong to India. He cited how, even on the day the Constituent Assembly drafted the Constitution, an editorial in the Organizer newspaper openly refused to recognize the tricolour flag and the Constitution. They declared that they would neither accept it nor follow it. Justice Reddy, referring to such intellectuals, highlighted Dr. Ambedkar's response, who proudly stated that if India's Constitution has been borrowed from multiple global sources, there was no shame in it. 'It is only wise to adopt good ideas, no matter where they come from.' Nehru's resolution and the idea of Union: Before the Constitution's enactment, Jawaharlal Nehru had drafted the Objectives Resolution, a precursor to the Preamble. He envisioned a Union of States, emphasizing greater powers to the States, with only essential powers retained by the Union government. This resolution was introduced on April 31, 1946, even before the Partition Plan. Justice Reddy questioned critics who belittle Nehru's contribution, asking whether they even understand his depth of knowledge—evident in his seminal work The Discovery of India, which explores the Upanishads, the Himalayas, the Ganges, the Aryans, and Mohenjo-Daro. He challenged those who pretend to be learned while unfairly blaming Nehru. Gandhi's wisdom: Quoting Gandhi, 'I keep all my windows open to let in fresh ideas from wherever they come,' Justice Reddy remarked how some people try to create artificial conflict between Ambedkar and Gandhi and then take satisfaction in such misrepresentations. Justice Reddy stands as a symbol of judicial ethics, human rights, and constitutional morality. His nomination to the Vice President's office reflects a broader commitment to preserving democratic and humanitarian values in India. His judicial career, particularly the Salwa Judum verdict, is a legacy that exemplifies how law can be a tool for justice and compassion in a democratic society. (The writer is a former CIC and Advisor, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
IT ministry says DPDP Act does not dilute RTI
The IT ministry has clarified that it does not believe the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 dilutes the Right to Information (RTI) Act. IT ministry says DPDP Act does not dilute RTI IT secretary S Krishnan told HT the amendment to the RTI Act through the DPDP law only removed 'a redundant provision' and does not affect citizens' right to information. Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amends section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, removing a proviso that allowed public information officers to share PRIVATE information in circumstances where the disclosure was deemed to be in larger public interest. However, Krishnan said this was redundant because section 8(2) of the RTI Act already permits public authorities to share ANY information if it serves public interest, regardless of exceptions in section 8(1). 'So there is no dilution, and in fact there is a strengthening,' the secretary said. The issue came up in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday through a starred question. IT minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said the amendment balances the right to privacy, as upheld by the Supreme Court, with the right to information. He said the change aligns with judicial reasoning and prevents conflict between the two laws. The ministry has sought the Attorney General's confirmation of this interpretation. Once cleared, the law will be enforced, though the government does not expect any amendments to the DPDP Act. The rules that operationalise the law, however, are still awaited – more than 24 months since the act came into existence. The ministry has finalised the rules, Krishnan said, and will be issued after inter-ministerial feedback.
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
Govt outlines use of AI and drones against narcotics
New Delhi Govt outlines use of AI and drones against narcotics The Union Government on Wednesday outlined the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI), drone technology, and satellite imaging in efforts to detect and destroy illicit cultivation of narcotics, including opium poppy and cannabis. In a written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha, the Ministry of Home Affairs confirmed that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) has been collaborating with specialised research institutions such as the Advanced Data Processing Research Institute (ADRIN), the Bhaskaracharya National Institute for Space Applications and Geo-informatics (BISAG-N), and other centres. These agencies provide satellite images which help identify suspected areas of illegal cultivation. The NCB then shares the geo-spatial data with concerned state governments and other stakeholders to undertake ground-level destruction of such crops. The Central Bureau of Narcotics (CBN) has also been using drones for detection and eradication. Over the past three years, surveys have been carried out to eliminate poppy cultivation in Namsai, Lohit, and Anjaw districts of Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarkashi and Tehri districts of Uttarakhand, along with cannabis cultivation in Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh. No drone-based surveys or eradication drives have been undertaken in Andhra Pradesh. The government further clarified that enforcement data generated through these advanced technologies has not been integrated into the NIDAAN portal, which is a platform for tracking narcotics-related data. On the issue of support to states, the Ministry stated that the NCB's role is confined to sharing satellite imagery and geo-spatial data. According to the annexed details, surveillance using satellite imagery has been extended to multiple states in recent years. For opium poppy cultivation, monitoring was conducted in Manipur (Kangpokpi, Senapati, Ukhrul, Churachandpur, Tengnoupal), Jharkhand (Chatra, Latehar, Palamu, Khunti, Ranchi), Bihar (Gaya), Arunachal Pradesh (Lohit, Namsai, Anjaw, Tirap, Longding, Upper Siang), Uttarakhand (Uttarkashi, Tehri Garhwal), Himachal Pradesh (Kullu, Mandi), Jammu & Kashmir (Anantnag, Badgam, Bandipore, Baramula, Kulgam, Pulwama, Shupiyan), and West Bengal (Birbhum, Coochbehar, Malda, Murshidabad) For cannabis cultivation, the satellite-based data covered Andhra Pradesh (Visakhapatnam, Alluri Sitarama Raju), Odisha (Malkangiri, Rayagada, Kandhamal, Gajapati, Ganjam, Boudh), Tripura (West Tripura, Sipahijala, South Tripura, Gomati, Khowai), and Himachal Pradesh (Kullu, Mandi, Chamba, Hamirpur, Kangra).
