Latest news with #RahulGandhi
New Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Rahul Gandhi spreading hatred through pre-planned actions, UP govt tells Supreme Court in Savarkar defamation case
NEW DELHI: The Uttar Pradesh government has told the Supreme Court that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is deliberately spreading hatred through pre-planned actions, referring to his alleged remarks against freedom fighter Veer Savarkar during the Bharat Jodo Yatra in 2022. The government made this claim in an affidavit filed in response to Gandhi's Special Leave Petition (SLP), which seeks to quash a summons issued by a Lucknow lower court based on a criminal complaint by lawyer Nripendra Pandey. A two-judge bench of the top court, comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan, is scheduled to hear the matter. In its previous hearing on 25 April, the Supreme Court had stayed the Allahabad High Court's order refusing to quash the summons and had directed the UP government to file a response. The Yogi Adityanath-led government, in its affidavit, defended the summons and urged the court to dismiss Gandhi's appeal, stating, "All the allegations are supported by the investigation, which indicates deliberate spreading of hatred through pre-planned actions." The affidavit claimed that the magistrate had thoroughly reviewed the case file, statements, and investigation report before issuing the summoning order under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups) and 505 (statements conducive to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Remarks against Savarkar: SC extends stay on trial in case against Rahul Gandhi in UP
The Supreme Court on Friday extended the stay on the criminal proceedings against senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a criminal case lodged in Uttar Pradesh for his comments against Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 2022. A bench comprising Justices Dipankra Datta and Augustine George Masih took note of the fact that a letter for adjournment was circulated in the case filed by Gandhi and decided to hear it after four weeks. Senior advocate Garima Prasad, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, apprised the court that a reply to the plea has been filed by the state. The state government has opposed the plea of Gandhi and sought its dismissal saying it agreed with 'the contention of complainant advocate Nripendra Pandey that Rahul Gandhi's actions were done with intention of spreading hate and enmity within the society.' It said the order passed by the Allahabad High Court, rejecting Gandhi's plea, was 'justified and legal' and interference from the top court was 'warranted'. The bench also permitted complainant Pandey, who had fled the case against the Congress leader, to file his reply during the day. It said Gandhi can file his rejoinder to the replies filed by the state government and others in two weeks. Earlier, the top court on April 25 had pulled up Gandhi for his 'irresponsible' remarks on Savarkar, saying 'let's not mock our freedom fighters'. The bench, however, stayed the criminal proceedings against Gandhi in the case lodged in Uttar Pradesh for his remarks. Gandhi moved the apex court challenging an order of the Allahabad High Court, which refused to quash summons issued against him in the case. A case under various penal provisions for alleged offences like 'promoting enmity between classes' and 'public mischief' was lodged against Gandhi by Pandey, a lawyer by profession. The case stems from the Congress leader's comments on Savarkar made on November 17, 2022, during his Bharat Jodo Yatra at a rally in Maharashtra's Akola district.
News18
an hour ago
- Politics
- News18
Kiren Rijiju Meets Rahul Gandhi, Kharge After Bihar SIR Uproar In Parliament
Last Updated: Kiren Rijiju today met Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge during an all-party meet. Rahul raised concerns over the SIR exercise in Bihar and sought discussion on it in Parliament. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Friday met Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, and Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge during an all-party meet at the Speaker's room. According to sources, the leaders discussed the voter roll revision in Bihar and the charges against Allahabad High Court Judge Yashwant Varma and his impeachment. Sources also said that Rahul Gandhi, during the meeting, also questioned as to when a discussion on the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter rolls in poll-bound Bihar will be taken up. Earlier today, Kharge joined the protest by the INDIA Bloc MPs against the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls in Bihar. The protest, which entered its fifth consecutive day, was held at Parliament's Makar Dwar. Several senior Congress leaders, including Rahul Gandhi and party leader Priyanka Gandhi, also participated in the protest. The MPs marched from the Gandhi statue on the Parliament premises ahead of the start of the day's session, and were seen carrying multiple posters and a big banner which read 'SIR- Attack on Democracy." Wayanad MP Priyanka Gandhi, who also attended the protest, criticised the Election Commission (EC) for not providing the updated voter rolls to the political parties. 'They should respond to the allegations. They should provide us with the voters' list, which we have been asking for. There should be transparency. It is a democracy. All political parties should have access to that information. Why is it not being provided?" she told reporters at the Parliament premises. The opposition parties, including Congress and Samajwadi Party, have been protesting against the SIR exercise in poll-bound Bihar, alleging that it's an attempt to disenfranchise voters, particularly from marginalised communities. They claim that the process is being used to remove names from the voters' list, which could impact the outcome of upcoming assembly elections. view comments 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.
The Wire
an hour ago
- Politics
- The Wire
Parliament Unfiltered: I Came, I Saw But Did I Question it?
If our parliament can specially meet to celebrate anniversaries, why not for issues like terrorist attacks, inflation, unemployment, women's safety or climate change? Opposition MPs protest in Lok Sabha demanding rollback of Bihar SIR during the monsoon session of parliament. Photo: PTI June 30 marks the International Day of Parliamentarism every year and its commemoration seems more valid as the downhill status of democracies all over the world comes to mind. An incisive couplet by John Dryden states, 'Democracy is essentially anti-authoritarian – that is, it not only demands the right but imposes the responsibility of thinking for ourselves.' V-dem or the Varieties of Democracy index, published in March of this year, points out that India is experiencing 'Autocratization'. Honouring this day in its right spirit calls for a systematic analysis of the developments in the parliament in recent years, acknowledging citizen discontent registering the damage and calling on to policymakers for a reformation that is as much internal as is political. Special session: A hot potato? The demand by opposition parties for a special session post Pahalgam terror attack and the government's reluctance to take it up poses a lot of questions about the direction our democracy is heading towards. The terror attack's implications have been on everyone's lips since April 22 when it blurred the boundaries between black and white. Arguing that 'it is crucial for the people and their representatives to discuss', Congress MP and leader of opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi had written to Modi demanding a special session (followed by subsequent similar demands), but received no response from the government and an uncanny silence reluctance. A few incidents highlighted the need of a special session: the defence ministers' meeting at SCO concluded without a joint statement due to a lack of consensus on whether there should be strict dialogue against terrorism; the United States' President, Donald Trump, announcing a ceasefire between India and pakistan speaks volumes of New Delhi's geopolitical standing and decisions MEA has taken, putting a question mark on the future of our foreign policy; deputy chief of army staff Lieutenant General Rahul R. Singh emphasised China's involvement during Operation Sindoor. It is to be noted that he is the first such official to talk about it, while others have been constantly downplaying China's role, giving a clear indication about the unaligned opinions of our defence officials. Chief of defence staff General Anil Chauhan acknowledged loss of aircraft and downing of jets during the four day clashes with Pakistan recently, evading deeper questions about why, how and how many losses we actually suffered, raising questions about the government's credibility. Here's what makes me question the government's indifference to the demand: in 2017, a joint midnight session was held to launch goods and services tax (GST); in 2023, a special session was held to commemorate the 75th anniversary of India's independence in the new parliament building; and the law on women's reservation in parliament and state assemblies was also passed during this special session. All of these are issues that coincidentally align with the ruling BJP-led government's ideologies and an apparent sense of effort is felt when the same special sessions are demanded in the aftermath of terrorist attacks that sent the whole nation into shock. A backdrop of dissent: Reluctance as refusal to reimagine The list of reluctances is longer than just the demand for a special session, the unfulfillment of which is saddening. The lesser number of sittings, shorter sessions, budget being guillotined and passing of bills within minutes – they all point towards a sorry state of affairs. Lok Sabha's sittings have come down from an average of 135 in a year in the first term of Lok Sabha to just 55 in the 17th. A research by PRS suggests that in 2020, the Indian parliament sat in session for 33 days only, a historic low. When Covid struck and suspended the daily lives of millions of people, the Indian parliament sat shut while many others switched to functioning online or in hybrid mode and met on set dates like in the UK, Australia, Canada and South Africa. The Supreme Court of UK, in 2019, struck down the prorogation of parliament by the Queen as it prevented 'Parliament from being able to do its job.' Canada organised a virtual parliament, allowing MPs to ask questions over a video call, while Chile amended its constitution, permitting the senate to hold sessions in a mixed face-to-face and virtual mode, with remote voting, preventing the compromise on sittings. Sessions have been cancelled and called off on various occasions due to unnecessary reasons, like for the Vidhan Sabha elections in five states in 2011, when political parties agreed to cut short the budget session. In 2017, 2018, 2022 and 2023, winter session was delayed and curtailed because of assembly elections, stifling the parliament's power as an effective institution. The government's unilateral power to decide where, when and on what agenda the session takes place robs citizens of their right to question through elected representatives, equating the opposition's power of check and balance to zero. In the 17th Lok Sabha, 11 out of the 15 sessions were adjourned early. As a result, 40 scheduled sittings did not take place. Parliament: Rejuvenation of rights or erosion of efficacy? In 2004, 2013, 2018 and 2023, 100% of the budget was guillotined, meaning it was not debated at all before being passed. In the monsoon session of 2020, the controversy around farm bills was used by the government as an excuse to push through 15 bills in just eight hours in the absence of opposition due to their boycott. In 2021, during monsoon session again, Lok Sabha cleared 18 bills amid protests by the opposition who demanded debate on farmers' protests and the Pegasus spyware scandal. Disappointingly enough, in 2023, the opposition protested in demand for a discussion on the Manipur crisis but the Rajya Sabha passed a bill within just 3 minutes. Even a papdi chaat cannot be prepared in 3 minutes! Many other controversial bills, like forest conservation amendment bill and digital personal data protection bill, were also passed quickly with no opposition MP participating in debate. Every citizen wants laws to be passed with clear deliberation, intense discussion and stakeholder consultation on the merits and demerits through parliamentary committees, but that is not happening anymore. The percentage of bills referred to parliament standing committees has been just 60%, 71%, 25%, 16% and 20% between the 14th and the 18th Lok Sabha (so far), respectively. Can we ever unsee that? All this evidence forces me to challenge the parliament as a democratic institution and dub it as the government's bill passing factory. This might sound dystopian, but the country's highest institution for lawmaking as we are taught in school books has blatantly failed to live up to its name and fame. A meeting was indeed convened on April 24 with the presence of ministers and leaders from all parties. The absence of the prime minister pointed towards the lack of importance allotted to contemporary issues of national relevance. However, a meeting doesn't suffice for a well-organised session and ultimately the special session never took place. This concerning trend effectively calls to question the accountable executive, stable legislature and righteous judiciary we preach other democracies about. Are we fooling ourselves? To conclude All I wonder as a young person struggling to mark my presence in this democracy is that if our parliament can specially meet to celebrate anniversaries, why not for issues like terrorist attacks, inflation, unemployment, women's safety or climate change? Such is the resistance of the government to debate controversial issues like Pahalgam terror attack, electoral rolls revision in Bihar, etc that it would rather let the opposition protest and disrupt proceedings than schedule the debate. The ongoing 21-day-short monsoon session of parliament has already lost more than four days to early adjournments. The need of the hour are longer parliament sessions so that there is time and space for discussion on all these urgent issues. The parliament exists to deliberate on issues that matter to us – the country's citizens – and is not an instrument of celebrating the myriad meaningless milestones of the government. Readers of this article must rise to summon their questioning capacity and become active agents of change. As Dryden said, let's take the responsibility of thinking for ourselves, ourselves! Just as the age-old saying goes, 'Fine words butter no parsnips', we, as citizens, demand an effective resolution to issues coupled with a proactive approach to accountability. It is high time we stopped taking empty promises for real action and impact. Questioning today may guarantee us a better place in next year's democracy index – the one we blankly stare at every year. The true commemoration of International Day of Parliamentarism will only take place the moment we truly become 'citizens' and not 'followers'. It is imperative for us to demand accountability as we are the demos (people) in this democracy. Guncha Shandilya is a student of history at University of Delhi and worked on this article as part of her research internship with Maadhyam, a civic engagement initiative. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Remarks against Savarkar: SC extends stay on trial in case against Rahul Gandhi
The Supreme Court on Friday extended the stay on the criminal proceedings against senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a criminal case lodged in Uttar Pradesh for his comments against Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 2022. A bench comprising Justices Dipankra Datta and Augustine George Masih took note of the fact that a letter for adjournment was circulated in the case filed by Gandhi and decided to hear it after four weeks. Senior advocate Garima Prasad, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, apprised the court that a reply to the plea has been filed by the state. The state government has opposed the plea of Gandhi and sought its dismissal saying it agreed with "the contention of complainant advocate Nripendra Pandey that Rahul Gandhi's actions were done with intention of spreading hate and enmity within the society." It said the order passed by the Allahabad High Court , rejecting Gandhi's plea, was "justified and legal" and interference from the top court was "warranted". Live Events The bench also permitted complainant Pandey, who had fled the case against the Congress leader, to file his reply during the day. It said Gandhi can file his rejoinder to the replies filed by the state government and others in two weeks. Earlier, the top court on April 25 had pulled up Gandhi for his "irresponsible" remarks on Savarkar, saying "let's not mock our freedom fighters". The bench, however, stayed the criminal proceedings against Gandhi in the case lodged in Uttar Pradesh for his remarks. Gandhi moved the apex court challenging an order of the Allahabad High Court, which refused to quash summons issued against him in the case. A case under various penal provisions for alleged offences like 'promoting enmity between classes' and 'public mischief' was lodged against Gandhi by Pandey, a lawyer by profession. The case stems from the Congress leader's comments on Savarkar made on November 17, 2022, during his Bharat Jodo Yatra at a rally in Maharashtra's Akola district.
