Latest news with #VidhiCentreforLegalPolicy
Time of India
03-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Even as SC hears case, road from Haryana to Rajasthan for illegal mining rebuilt
Gurgaon: Between Supreme Court hearings and five months after the Haryana forest department razed it, an illegal road connecting Basai Meo in Nuh to Gadhaner in Rajasthan was rebuilt by miners. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It was this 6km road, originally built in Oct 2024, that led the miners through the Aravali forests to a hillock in Nuh's Rava. TOI reported in Dec last year that the Rava hillock was blasted into pieces and the stones were then transported across state borders through the same road. The matter of illegal mining and construction of the road eventually reached the Supreme Court, which pulled up Haryana's chief secretary last month for failing to act against those violating environmental laws in the state. On Monday, the forest department blocked the road once again. "This is the same road that was illegally built last year under the pretext of village land consolidation," a forest official said, adding: "We have now blocked it again and filed an FIR against two villagers involved in its reconstruction. We have increased surveillance as well." The area where the road was built falls under sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA), which prohibits any construction in forests. It also violates Section 2 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, which bars construction in protected forests without approval of the central govt. The forest department official told TOI no such permissions were obtained. Experts said the road being carved through the Aravalis for a second time despite an ongoing case in the Supreme Court shows the impunity with which mining is carried out in the area. "The fact that a road is being carved through protected forest land while the matter is sub judice reflects blatant disregard for the rule of law. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It underscores a systemic failure in enforcement and a culture of impunity that emboldens violators. If such violations can occur under the court's watch, one can only imagine the unchecked damage happening elsewhere," said Debadityo Sinha, lead (climate and ecosystems) at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. The matter first came to light in Oct 2024, when Basai Meo residents alleged that the road was illegally constructed on forest and farm lands, disrupting natural drainage system of the area. A month later, villagers filed a petition before SC, alleging that the road was built by mining mafia "in collusion" with officials. On the night of Dec 19, miners flattened the hillock in Rava, just 10km from Basai Meo. Locals said they had heard the blast and some eyewitnesses captured videos of it. TOI also reported about the incident on Dec 23. Forest officials believe mined stones from Rava were taken to Rajasthan's Gadhaner through this road. "Mining the Aravalis is banned in Nuh, but there is no such prohibition in Rajasthan. This allows the miners to sell the stones, used in the construction industry, after crossing the state borders," said Sunil Harsana, an ecologist. The forest department, in Jan 2025, blocked the road to stop all illegal activities. It also ordered an FIR to be registered against three revenue officials for allowing this construction to take place in the Nuh village. The Supreme Court, hearing the petition, directed the central empowered committee (CEC) to investigate the allegations. CEC, in its report, confirmed the violations and recommended action against erring officials. Last month, Haryana's chief secretary filed an affidavit that said the state's forest department did not act against violations. The top court did not agree, and in its latest hearing on May 29, it pulled up the chief secretary for "passing the buck" to the forest department and not taking action against other officials. "It appears that (mining) mafia is strong enough to protect not only its members but also the officers of the state govt who acted in collusion with them," Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said. On Monday, environmentalists said repeated violations of norms in the Aravalis was alarming. "Aravalis are not just ancient hills, they are the lungs of northern India. Every illegal encroachment, every tree felled, is a blow to our future. Protecting them is not a choice, it is a necessity. Construction of a road through Aravalis is illegal and it also fragments the eco-sensitive zone," said Vaishali Rana, an activist.
Time of India
28-05-2025
- Time of India
Cops bypass tougher BNS section on vehicle thefts as law lost in translation
Hyderabad: Call it lack of awareness or difference in interpretation, cops in Telangana are yet to use the more stringent provision for vehicle thefts under BNS, defeating the very purpose of having a tougher law to deter crime. The state with over 7,500 vehicle thefts annually is among the top 10 in the country, as per NCRB figures. Though it has been 10 months since the new criminal laws were implemented across the country, there seems to be no uniformity in enforcement in states. In the case of vehicle thefts, cops in Delhi and a few other states are using section 305 (b) of BNS – specifically meant for it – which carries a maximum sentence of seven years and a fine. But many states, including Telangana, are applying a more lenient section 303(2) of BNS (meant for general thefts) – it provides for a maximum sentence of only three years. Anyone charged under under BNS section 303 (2) can easily walk out on station bail and even if jailed, is out in about a year. But under section 305 (b), though he is still eligible for station bail, the accused faces a mandatory fine and is likely to get more prison time. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Tem rota inédita na Azul Azul Clique aqui Undo A quick look at two recent two-wheeler theft reports this month in New Delhi revealed that cops there had applied section 305 (b). But on Sunday, when car driver Opender Singh Bhadau (48) lodged a complaint with Banjara Hills police about his bike being stolen from in front of his house, cops registered a case under BNS section 303(2) "We were told to use the equivalent section in IPC while registering an FIR under BNS sections. In IPC, section 379 was used for vehicle thefts and its equivalent is 303 (2) in BNS. But BNS section 305 is equivalent to 380 of IPC, which for something stolen from a building," a station house officer (SHO) in city said. The answer may lie in the sub-sections. As the SHO said, IPC section 380 is equivalent to BNS section 305 (a) (theft in a building, tent, or vessel used as a human dwelling or used for the custody of property), but BNS 305 has other sub-sections (b-e) that wasn't available under IPC. The subsection in question here is BNS section 305 (b) which applies to "whoever commits theft of any means of transport used for the transport of goods or passengers". This too has been interpreted by cops in the state differently. "Section 305 (b) should be used for vehicle thefts. But whether it applies to commercial transport vehicles such as autos, cabs, cargo vans and trucks or also applies to personal vehicles needs to be verified," said a senior police official. Naveed Mehmood Ahmad, a senior resident fellow and lead with the Crime and Punishment team at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Delhi, said, "Section 305 (b) specifically mentions theft of any means of transport, which was not there in IPC. Also, BNS looks at vehicle theft more seriously with higher punishment than what is prescribed under 303. So, it is appropriate to use 305 (b) instead of 303, which is a general section for theft. Otherwise, the intent of the law is lost." Also, under section 176 (3) of BNSS, in any offence which is punishable for seven years or more, a forensic expert's visit and videography of the crime scene is required. In vehicle theft cases, crime scene videography is being done by the police implementing 305 (b). This is aimed at increasing the conviction rate, but by booking cases under BNS 303 (2), videography gets omitted.
The Hindu
02-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Is a candidate winning an election ‘unopposed' unconstitutional?
Is a candidate winning an election 'unopposed' unconstitutional? According to Section 53 (2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, if there is only candidate contesting an election, then she can be declared elected unopposed. Now a legal think tank, the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of this provision. It cites the 2013 order of the Supreme Court which held that the right to cast a negative vote by choosing 'NOTA' was protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. It argues that this right is independent of how many candidates are contesting – therefore, not holding the election on the grounds that there is only one candidate deprives voters of this right. Last week, the Supreme Court, while hearing this petition, suggested that in cases where there is only one candidate, there could be a requirement that the candidate should win a prescribed minimum of vote share – be it 20% or 25% or whatever – in order to be declared as elected. But the Election Commission seems keen to retain the status quo, arguing that cases of candidates winning unopposed are rare and therefore the court should not entertain such a petition. Is the Election Commission right? What if the phenomenon of candidates standing unopposed becomes more widespread in the future? What happens to the NOTA option then? Guest: Arghya Sengupta, Founder and Research Director at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Delhi. Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu. Edited by Shivaraj S and Sharada Venkatasubramnian Listen to more In Focus podcasts:
Indian Express
27-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Question before SC: are ‘unopposed' election victories unconstitutional?
The Supreme Court suggested last week that in case there is only one candidate in an election, she should be required to obtain a prescribed minimum vote share in order to be declared elected, rather than winning without the election being held. The court was hearing a petition by legal research think tank Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy questioning the constitutionality of Section 53(2) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951, as far as Lok Sabha and Assembly elections are concerned. This section ('Procedure in contested and uncontested elections') says that 'if the number of…candidates is equal to the number of seats to be filled, the returning officer shall forthwith declare all such candidates to be duly elected to fill those seats'. The court has asked the Union government to file its response within four weeks. Petition and argument The petition, filed in August 2024, argues that not holding the election in case of a single candidate prevents voters from choosing the 'None of the Above' (NOTA) option, which amounts to a violation of their fundamental right. The petition cites the Supreme Court's 2013 judgment in People's Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India, in which the court held that the right to cast a negative vote by choosing NOTA was protected in direct elections under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. It argues that 'this right, by which the voter indicates her disapproval of the entire field of candidates, must be agnostic to the number of candidates in the fray'. Uncontested elections Candidates were elected uncontested to Lok Sabha at 26 constituencies between 1951 and 2024, the petition says, citing statistical reports of the Election Commission of India for these years. As such, more than 82 lakh electors had been deprived of the chance to cast their vote in these elections, it says. Of these 26 no-contests, seven took place during the Lok Sabha election of 1957, five each in the elections of 1951 and 1967, three in 1962, two in 1977, and one each in the elections of 1971, 1980, 1989, and 2024, according to the petition. Last year, the BJP candidate from Surat, Mukeshkumar Dalal, was declared elected 'unopposed' after all other candidates either dropped out or had their nominations rejected. Uncontested elections are more common in state Assemblies, the petition says. Response of ECI In its counter affidavit submitted earlier this month, the Election Commission pointed out that only nine of the 20 Lok Sabha elections held from 1951 to 2024 had seen uncontested elections of MPs. And in the more than three decades since 1989, only one candidate had entered Lok Sabha uncontested. 'With the evolution of democracy, more number of political parties are contesting elections and hence, the number of candidates also increases automatically and the voters have also become more aware and eager to exercise their franchise to right to vote. The chance of an election being uncontested has become a rarity which is proven from the statistical data and hence, in such a scenario, [the] court ought not to entertain the present petition,' the ECI said. The Commission argued that 'NOTA' cannot be assumed to have automatically contested every election. It cited the court's NOTA judgment that a button should be added to the electronic voting machine (EVM) to give an option to those who did not wish to vote for any of the candidates in the fray. 'Hence', the ECI said, 'NOTA option can be exercised when the polling takes place where the voters come to the polling booths to cast their votes… Therefore, treating NOTA as a mandatorily contesting candidate in all direct uncontested elections does not find place in the statute and the same would require legislative amendments in the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of the Elections Rules, 1961.' Justice Surya Kant, who presided over the two-judge Bench, said during the hearing on April 24: 'Will it not be a very welcome and progressive step where only one candidate is left in [fray] and still you say that you will be declared [elected] only when you get at least 10%, 15% [votes], whatever…?' 'When we talk of the majority as the foundation stone of the democracy, why not in furtherance of achieving that very goal, we prescribe that even in a default direction, there should be at least some voters who are liking you,' Justice Kant said. He asked the government to 'please examine' the question, because 'today you don't have a problem…but you can enact something visualising that if tomorrow this problem comes, I have a weapon ready to address it'. What that weapon can be, 'it's your wisdom, if Parliament will decide', he said. '[But] why should we allow somebody to enter Parliament by default who is unable to get even 5% vote? You may think of that because you are representing the will of the people.'
Hindustan Times
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Faith of citizens more in criminal justice than civil justice administration: NHRC chief
New Delhi, The faith of the common man in this criminal justice system is much more than the administration of civil justice, retired Supreme Court Judge Justice V Ramasubramanian said on Wednesday. Ramasubramanian, who is the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission , was speaking at the launch of the country's first comprehensive criminal law database titled 'The State of the System' by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy at the Constitution Club here, a release said. "As a society, our psyche is tuned to convert all civil cases into criminal cases. As a lawyer, I have seen people who have lent money, who could not get their money back, they used to come to me and tell me that somehow you convert this into a criminal case, so that they get their money back. "Therefore, despite all the pitfalls, you must admit this reality that despite all the pitfalls of the system of administration of criminal justice, the faith of the common man in this criminal justice system is much more than the administration of civil justice. They have more faith in criminal justice," the former apex court judge said. The NHRC chairperson also spoke on the wide-ranging implications of excessive criminalisation from the three perspectives of the citizen's ease of living, the business community's compliance burden and the state's resource allocation. During the event, a panel discussion was also held. "The database documents every act and omission criminalised under 370 Union laws enacted over the last 174 years and spanning 45 subject areas. It aims to empower citizens, researchers and policymakers with a deeper understanding of the scope and extent of criminalisation in the country. It highlights inconsistencies in the prescription of punishments and proposes a principled framework to guide future efforts towards decriminalisation and criminal law-making," the release said.
