Latest news with #Sec
Time of India
5 days ago
- Time of India
SC: Cop pulling in-laws into cruelty case unfortunate
NEW DELHI: Expressing concern over misuse of Sec 498A of IPC that criminalises cruelty in matrimonial homes and dowry harassment, Supreme Court has quashed a case lodged 23 years ago by a Delhi Police woman sub-inspector against her husband, a colleague, and his entire family. Allowing the husband's appeal and quashing the case, a bench of justices B V Nagarathna and Satish C Sharma exercised SC's exclusive powers under Art 142 of the Con-stitution to quash the FIR lodged in 2002 at Malviya Nagar in Delhi and the charge sheet filed against the policeman, his parents and five sisters. "It is rather unfortunate that the complainant being an officer of the state has initiated criminal machinery in such a manner, where the aged parents-in-law, five sisters and one tailor have been arrayed as accused," it said. 'Growing tendency to misuse legal provisions' Writing the judgment, Justice Sharma said: "Even if the allegations and the case of the prosecution is taken at face value, apart from the bald allegations without any specifics of time, date or place, there is no incriminating material found by the prosecution or rather produced by the complainant to substantiate the ingredients of 'cruelty' under Section 498A IPC." The court said there were genuine cases of dowry harassment and cruelty in matrimonial homes but flagged the "growing tendency to misuse legal provisions" by women to rope in relatives of their husbands. The man and woman, both sub-inspectors in Delhi Police, had got married in Feb 1998 as per Buddhist rites. Alleging persistent torture for more dowry ever since the solemnisation of marriage, the woman lodged a police complaint in July 2002. A chargesheet was filed against the man and his relatives in July 2004. The magistrate had framed charges in June 2008.
The Hindu
23-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Can Indian and foreign students stay at Harvard? Here are the 6 conditions they must fulfill within 3 days
On May 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officially suspended Harvard University's certification under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). This means Harvard is temporarily barred from enrolling international students under F-1 and J-1 visas, a move that has sparked serious concern across academic and diplomatic circles. Also Read: Harvard University ploughs $250m into research after U.S. govt cuts In response, the DHS has given Harvard 72 hours to comply with six stringent conditions that, if fulfilled, could reinstate its SEVP certification. What are the six conditions Harvard must meet? Any and all records, whether official or informal, in the possession of Harvard University, including electronic records and audio or video footage, regarding illegal activity, whether on or off campus, by a non-immigrant student in the last five years. Any and all records in the possession of Harvard University, including electronic records and audio or video footage, regarding dangerous or violent activity, whether on or off campus, by a non-immigrant student in the last five years. Any and all records in the possession of Harvard University, including electronic records and audio or video footage, regarding threats to other students or university personnel, whether on or off campus, by a non-immigrant student in the last five years. Any and all records in the possession of Harvard University, including electronic records and audio or video footage, regarding deprivation of rights of other classmates or university personnel, whether on or off campus, by a non-immigrant student enrolled in the last five years. Any and all disciplinary records of all non-immigrant students enrolled in the last five years. Any and all audio or video footage in the possession of Harvard University of any protest activity involving a non-immigrant student on a Harvard University campus in the last five years. This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus. It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments… — Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) May 22, 2025 How does this impact Indian students at Harvard? Currently, 788 Indian students are enrolled at Harvard across various graduate programmes. With the SEVP status suspended, these students risk losing their legal visa status unless Harvard's certification is reinstated or they transfer to another SEVP-certified institution. What is next? Harvard University has called the decision 'arbitrary, damaging, and without due process.' It assured international students that it is taking all necessary steps to meet DHS's demands and is seeking legal counsel to challenge the decision if required. The following 72 hours are critical. If Harvard submits the required documentation and meets DHS's six-point criteria, its ability to host international students may be restored. Otherwise, thousands of students, including hundreds from India, could face academic and immigration uncertainty. 'We are fully committed to maintaining Harvard's ability to host international students and scholars, who hail from more than 140 countries and enrich the University - and this nation - immeasurably. We are working quickly to provide guidance and support to members of our community. This retaliatory action threatens serious harm to the Harvard community and our country, and undermines Harvard's academic and research mission,' Harvard spokesperson Jason Newton said in a statement.
The Independent
05-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Immigrants paid $1k to self-deport could be allowed back ‘if they're good people,' Trump says
Donald Trump 's administration is promising $1,000 to undocumented immigrants to voluntarily leave the country, but only 'good people' and 'industrious people that could love our country' will be allowed to return, according to the president. The Department of Homeland Security on Monday announced that 'illegal aliens' who use the CBP Home app to 'self-deport' will receive 'financial and travel' assistance — including $1,000 'paid after their return to their home country has been confirmed through the app.' 'If you are here illegally, self-deportation is the best, safest and most cost-effective way to leave the United States to avoid arrest,' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement. Trump and administration officials contend that people who use the app to report their own removal will be provided an opportunity to return to the country legally. But under current law, anyone living in the United States for more than six months without permission cannot return as an immigrant for at least three years. Immigrants who were in the country for more than a year could be blocked from reentering for at least 10 years. Immigrants with a record of deportation also are more likely to face lengthy waiting periods, or outright denials, when applying for visas. 'We're gonna pay each one a certain amount of money and get them a beautiful flight back to where they came from, and they have a period of time, and if they make it, we're gonna work with them so that maybe someday, with a little work, they can come back in,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday. 'If they're good people, if they're the kind of people we want in our company, industrious people that could love our country. And if not they, won't. But it will give them a path to you know coming back into the country,' he added. 'If they miss that limit, they're gonna be taken out of our country, and they never have, and they have never, they will never get a path to come back in, and it'll be a much tougher process. And it's called self-deportation,' he said. The proposal follows stagnant deportation numbers within the first few months of Trump's presidency despite his anti-immigration agenda promising sweeping removals. The administration shut down the Joe Biden-era CBP One app, which granted immigrants a legal pathway to enter the United States, and relaunched the app as CBP Home so users can notify the government their intent to leave the country. At least 5,000 immigrants have reportedly used CBP Home to announce they were voluntarily leaving the country, according to the Migration Policy Institute, an immigration think tank. The Trump administration is now battling in courtrooms across the country to summarily remove dozens of alleged Tren de Aragua gang members, labelled 'alien enemies' who can be summarily deported from the country under his invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, a centuries-old wartime law most recently used to detain Japanese Americans during the Second World War. The law grants authority to the president to remove targeted immigrants during a declared war or if there is an 'invasion' or 'predatory incursion.' Last week, a Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas delivered yet another blow to the president's so-called 'mass deportation operation' with a ruling that found the government does 'not possess the lawful authority' to summarily deport alleged Venezuelan gang members under his use of the Alien Enemies Act. Federal judges across the ideological spectrum have also rebuked the administration for failing to retrieve a Salvadoran father living in Maryland who the administration admitted was wrongly deported to a notorious jail in his home country by 'error' despite a court order preventing that from happening. A unanimous Supreme Court agreed that the government must 'facilitate' Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return, and that 'the United States acknowledges that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal.' The president and his allies have raged at court decisions blocking his agenda, accusing judges of obstructing what he calls a 'mandate' from voters to remove millions of undocumented immigrants. Trump and his allies have accused judges of demanding 'trials' for targeted immigrants, despite the fact that immigration courts do not have juries or witnesses and serve under the Department of Justice and at the direction of the attorney general. 'It's a very difficult thing with the courts. The courts have all of a sudden out of nowhere have said maybe you have to have trials. We're gonna have 5 million trials? Doesn't work. Doesn't work,' he said Monday. 'You wouldn't have a country left. But hopefully the Supreme Court will save it.'
