Latest news with #VinayakDamodarSavarkar
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Savarkar Sadan file on heritage status lost in 2012 Mantralaya fire: State to HC
MUMBAI: The papers pertaining to the according of heritage status to Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar's Dadar residence, Savarkar Sadan, were lost in the 2012 Mantralaya fire, claimed the state government in its response to the public interest litigation (PIL) filed in the Bombay high court on the issue. In the 1980s and early 1990s, three floors were added to the two-storey bungalow courtesy the regime of Transferable Development Rights (TDR), which enabled developers to construct floors above existing buildings The reply submitted to the high court says, '...further action in the present matter could not be carried out as the relevant government records pertaining to this case were destroyed in the fire that occurred on 21.06.2012 on the fourth floor of Mantralaya, where the urban development department is situated.' The state claimed that it had taken efforts to look for and recreate the destroyed files and records from the available secondary records and sources, including correspondence with other departments and offices. 'However, despite taking all possible steps... the documents could not be traced, which seems to have caused a constraint in proceeding further with the subject matter,' says the reply. The BMC had given its final recommendation for heritage status for Savarkar's home in August 2010, and had forwarded this to the state government's urban development department. After the fire, the civic body on July 31, 2012, through a public notice, decided to revise the draft list of heritage buildings and precincts. Savarkar Sadan did not find a place in it. After Hindustan Times reported on May 5, 2025 that Savarkar's erstwhile residence was to be pulled down shortly to make way for a new building, a PIL was filed by Prof Pankaj Phadnis of the Abhinav Bharat Congress to revive the plea to accord heritage status. Commenting on the state's submission in court wherein the Mantralaya fire and the civic body were blamed, Phadnis told Hindustan Times, 'This charade must end. If the file was lost in a fire, nothing stops the government from getting the papers from the BMC... instead, the government has resorted to machinations by asking the BMC to take a fresh look. The obvious intention is to benefit the builder, who would now have the locus to raise an objection if public notices were to be reissued.' Lambasting the BJP-led government in the state, the petitioner added that he believed that the government's view was that the lot of the Savarkar family was only to suffer while everyone else made merry. Savarkar Sadan was constructed as a two-storey bungalow in 1938 on a plot measuring around 405 square metres in Dadar's Shivaji Park. Savarkar, founder of Abhinav Bharat Society, a secret grouping of Hindutva activists, and a leading figure in the Hindu Mahasabha, a political party, lived here. He met several top leaders at the bungalow, including Subhas Chandra Bose in 1940, and Nathuram Godse and Narayan Apte in 1948, before they left for Delhi to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi. Savarkar's descendants continued to live in the building after his death in 1966. In the 1980s and early 1990s, three floors were added to the two-storey bungalow courtesy the regime of Transferable Development Rights (TDR), which enabled developers to construct floors above existing buildings.
News18
25-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
Important cases heard by Supreme Court on July 25
Important cases heard by the Supreme Court on Friday, Jul 25: * Outlining the rise in suicides and mental health issues among students in educational institutions, SC issued pan-India guidelines to combat the problem. * SC 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. * SC directed the Delhi HC to hear on July 28 the pleas challenging the Centre's nod to release 'Udaipur Files – Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder". * SC dismissed a plea for conducting delimitation exercise in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana for increasing the assembly seats in both the states. * SC allowed the Kerala government to withdraw its pleas against Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. * SC rapped a Kerala-based journalist for allegedly publishing a defamatory video against a prominent woman politician on his YouTube channel 'Crime Online". * SC said the rehabilitation of homeless persons suffering from psychosocial disabilities was a sensitive issue and directed the Centre to take it up 'very seriously". * SC sought responses from the Uttarakhand government and its public services commission on a plea challenging exclusion of persons with blindness and locomotor disability from taking up judicial services examination. * SC said it was worried whether deer from Deer Park in Delhi's Hauz Khas were tranquillised before being transported to Rajasthan. PTI ABA HIG view comments First Published: July 25, 2025, 19:30 IST 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.
Hans India
25-07-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
SC extends relief for Rahul Gandhi in Veer Savarkar defamation case
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday extended its order staying the summons issued to Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case related to his alleged derogatory remarks about freedom fighter Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. In November 2022, during his Bharat Jodo Yatra, Rahul Gandhi made defamatory remarks against Savarkar at a rally in Maharashtra's Akola. A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih deferred the scheduled hearing for four weeks after a letter seeking adjournment was submitted in the matter. In the meantime, the Justice Datta-led Bench ordered extension of the interim relief originally granted to Rahul Gandhi on April 25. Further, it asked the complainant, advocate Nripendra Pandey, to file his reply within two weeks and granted liberty to Rahul Gandhi to file a rejoinder affidavit, if any, within two weeks thereafter. In an earlier hearing, the apex court had cautioned Rahul Gandhi against making 'irresponsible statements', specifically asking him not to speak anything against freedom fighters. The Supreme Court had warned that if the Congress leader made any such comments in the future, it would initiate "suo motu" action against him. 'Let's be clear, any further statement and we will take suo moto! We will not allow you to speak anything about our freedom fighters. They have given us freedom, and this is how we treat them?' said the Justice Datta-led bench as it dealt with Rahul Gandhi's petition to quash a 2022 defamation case filed against him. After senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Rahul Gandhi, gave an oral undertaking that the Congress leader would refrain from making such comments in future, the apex court had passed an interim order staying the order of the lower court summoning him to face trial for the offences under Sections 153-A and 505 of the now-repealed Indian Penal Code (IPC). Before this, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court had declined to exercise its inherent powers in favour of Rahul Gandhi, who had sought the quashing of the entire legal proceedings. A single-judge Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, in its order passed on April 4, said that Rahul Gandhi had the statutory remedy of filing a revision against the order of the trial court. Under the IPC, 1860, Section 153-A addressed the offence of 'promoting enmity between different groups based on religion, race, caste, etc.," and Section 505 dealt with 'statements conducing to public mischief".
Indian Express
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Bombay HC disposes of PIL seeking directive to Rahul Gandhi to stop ignoring Savarkar's contribution
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday disposed of a PIL that sought direction to Leader of Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi to stop ignoring the contribution of Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar to the 'cause of nation.' A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V Marne passed an order on PIL by one Pankaj Phadnis, who claimed to be founding president of Abhinav Bharat Congress, a public policy think tank. Phadnis claimed that he had filed the plea to protect legal rights of a large number of citizens whose duty is to fulfill fundamental duties under Article 51A of the Constitution 'to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom.' The PIL said that the same are being impeded by Gandhi through his 'immature and irresponsible statements about late Savarkar'. The petitioner sought direction from court to Gandhi that he shall personally study contents of the plea and books authored by the petitioner to 'remove his ignorance about the contribution of Shri Vinayak Damodar Savarkar to the cause of this nation.' 'This court cannot issue any direction to respondent Rahul Gandhi to study the contents of the PIL and to remove ignorance about the contribution of Shri Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. It is a well-settled legal proposition that this court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot issue any writ to the legislature to amend the law. Therefore, the reliefs prayed for by the petition in the PIL cannot be granted,' the HC observed. The bench also noted that utterances made by Gandhi are already subject matter of the case pending before the Pune magistrate court.
Indian Express
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Decode Politics: SC rejects plea to include Savarkar name in Emblems Act. What is this Act
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking a direction to the Centre to include the name of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in the list of a 1950 Act meant to prevent improper use of certain emblems and names for professional and commercial purposes. The petitioner, who was appearing in person, told the Bench that he had been researching Savarkar for 30 years, adding: 'I want to request the Court to issue directions to respondent number two (Union of India) and respondent number three (Ministry of Home Affairs) to include his name in the Schedule to the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.' The Act prevents 'the improper use of certain emblems and names for professional and commercial purposes', which are listed in a Schedule adjoining the legislation. The Schedule can be altered by the Central government through a notification in the Official Gazette. The Act mandates that 'no person shall, except in such cases and under such conditions as may be prescribed by the Central Government, use, or continue to use, for the purpose of any trade, business, calling or profession, or in the title of any patent, or in any trade mark or design, any name or emblem specified' in the Act's Schedule. 'Any colourable imitation without the previous permission of the Central Government' is also prohibited. Besides, the Act prohibits the registration of any company, firm or other body from registering a trademark or design which bears any emblem or name that finds a place in the Schedule. A patent which bears a title containing any emblem or name of the mentions in the Schedule is also prohibited. Any person who contravenes the provisions is punishable with fine. As per the Act, the name, emblem or official seal of the United Nations, the name, emblem or official seal of the World Health Organisation,'The Indian National Flag, and the official Government of India seal cannot be utilised for professional and commercial purposes. The name, emblem or seal of the President, or any pictorial representation of the Rashtrapati Bhavan also finds place in the Act. Certain freedom fighters and historical figures are not available for commercial usage. These include the name or pictorial representation of Mahatma Gandhi, former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, the Prime Minister of India. The words 'Gandhi' 'Nehru' or 'Shivaji', are not permitted except for pictorial use on calendars. Even in the case of calendars, only the name of the manufacturers and printers of the calendars are to be mentioned and they should not be used for advertising goods. The medals, badges or decorations instituted by the Government from time to time also find a mention. The word 'Interpol' which is an integral part of the International Criminal Police Organisation is part of the Schedule. Certain other organisations find their place in the Schedule, such as the Tuberculosis Association of India, the St. John's Ambulance Association (India), the Ramakrishna Math, the Sharada Math, and the Bharat Scouts and Guides, among others. The name and emblem of Auroville, the town in Pondicherry, also falls under the purview of the Act. In 2004, the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust founded by Sathya Sai Baba and the National Human Rights Commission were included among organisations use of whose name or emblem is prohibited. In 2013, the name and emblem of the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) were added to the list. A key Supreme Court judgement 2004 answered 'whether the right to fly the National Flag' by an Indian citizen is a fundamental right within the meaning of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Industrialist Naveen Jindal had filed a writ petition on the subject in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, after a Jindal group factory in Raigarh was prohibited from flying the National Flag at the office premises of his factory as per The Flag Code of India. The High Court allowed the petition and held the Flag Code of India was not a valid restriction on the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the Constitution. The Union of India filed an appeal against this decision to the Supreme Court, saying the decision on citizens being free to fly the national flag was not subject to court interference. The SC found no merit in the Union's appeal and ruled that the right to fly the National Flag freely with respect and dignity is a fundamental right of a citizen within the 'meaning of Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India — which is 'being an expression and manifestation of his allegiance and feelings and sentiments of pride for the nation. However, it qualified that the fundamental right to fly the 'flag is not an absolute right but a qualified one being subject to reasonable restrictions under clause 2 of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, and the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, regulate the use of the National Flag'.
