An action-packed 2017 for Indian Parliament

Feb 26: In his first reaction to incidents of violence in Delhi which have left at least 20 people dead, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday appealed for peace and brotherhood, and said he has held an extensive review of the prevailing situation in various parts of the national capital.

He also said it was important that calm and normalcy was restored at the earliest.

“Had an extensive review on the situation prevailing in various parts of Delhi. Police and other agencies are working on the ground to ensure peace and normalcy,” Modi tweeted.

Stressing that peace and harmony are “central to our ethos”, Modi said, “I appeal to my sisters and brothers of Delhi to maintain peace and brotherhood at all times.”

At least 20 people have been killed since Sunday in communal violence in Northeast Delhi, triggered after clashes between pro and anti-CAA protestors over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

Patna, Feb 28: Social and cultural activists from far and wide converged here on Thursday to lend their support to a massive rally that marked the conclusion of Kanhaiya Kumar's 'Jan Gan Man Yatra' across Bihar to galvanise public opinion against CAA-NPR-NRC.

Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan fame, Mahatma Gandhi's grandson Tushar Gandhi and former IAS officer Kannan Gopinathan, who gave up his career at a young age in protest against abrogation of Article 370, shared the stage with the former JNU students' leader.

Shabnam Hashmi -- founder of socio-cultural organisation ANHAD and sister of slain Marxist playwright and director Safdar Hashmi -- also joined them.

Congress MLA Shakil Ahmed Khan, a former president of JNU students' union himself who accompanied Kanhaiya during his tour that commenced at Champaran on January 30, Mahatma Gandhi's death anniversary, and leaders of state units of CPI and CPI(M) also addressed the rally held at Gandhi Maidan.

Kanhaiya began his speech with a one-minute silence held in the memory of those who lost their lives in Delhi violence.

Defending his frequent use of the term "azadi" (freedom) which supporters of the Sangh Parivar hold to be tantamount to supporting secession, Kanhaiya said, "We must talk about the virtues of azadi here since today happens to be the day when legendary revolutionary Chandrashekhar Azad had given up his life fighting the British."

Charging the ruling BJP with pitting Hindus against Muslims, he said, "Let us resolve to defeat their agenda by emulating the fabled friendship of Ram Prasad Bismil and Ashfaqullah Khan."

The young CPI leader, who made an unsuccessful debut from his native Begusarai Lok Sabha constituency last year, seemed unimpressed with the resolution passed by the Bihar Assembly earlier this week against NRC and inclusion of contentious clauses in NPR forms.

"Both the government and the opposition are busy congratulating themselves. I extend my congratulations as well. But to all those who are present here, I would say it is a half-victory. We must not allow our movement to fizzle out and draw inspiration from Gandhi's model of civil disobedience when the NPR exercise gets underway," he said.

"Villagers should ask their respective panchayat heads to ensure that no NPR official is allowed to come knocking in their areas of jurisdiction when NPR is scheduled to be undertaken in May," the CPI leader said.

"We have to brace for a long and tough fight. We are living under a regime which sends conscientious professionals like Dr Kafeel Ahmed behind the bars and declares anybody questioning its actions as an anti-national," said Kanhaiya, who has himself been slapped with a sedition case.

Earlier, in his address, Tushar Gandhi likened CAA, NPR and NRC to the "three bullets that killed the Mahatma" and asserted that these measures would "harm the poor, belonging to all religious communities and not just the Muslims".

"If the government does not care about the poor, we must tell those in power -- 'chale jaao' (go away) just as we had done to the British colonisers... it is going to be a long fight. Independence was achieved five years after the call for Quit India Movement," he said.

"We need to keep repeating the importance of non-violence over and over again while those with other value systems simply have to utter inciting statements," he said, in an oblique reference to the controversial poll campaign of Union minister and BJP leader Anurag Thakur during the recently-held Delhi Assembly elections, which the party lost.

Kannan Gopinathan said, "The claim that CAA is all about granting citizenship and not taking it away is bunkum. Any law which seeks to favour one section of the society on the basis of religion can be tweaked to harm another social segment... people say this government is Fascist. I am not sure of that but it is certainly stupid."

"This government brought in demonetisation and wrecked the economy but failed to achieve its promise of eradicating black money. It abrogated Article 370 and now it is clueless as to what to do with the situation in Kashmir," he said.

"Union minister Amit Shah had declared in Parliament that NRC will be implemented. Faced with public resistance, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had to say he does not know what NRC is. Keep up the stir for a little longer, he will start saying he does not know Amit Shah," said Kannan, evoking peals of laughter.

In the course of his speech, Kanhaiya also made the crowds sing after him the National Anthem but skipped a few words towards the end. Participants at the rally were viciously trolled on social media for the slip-up.

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.