Shocking: No passport for PM's wife, as she has no marriage certificate

November 8, 2015

Ahmedabad, Nov 8: The Prime Minister Narendra Modi's estranged wife Jashodaben Modi's application seeking passport has been returned by the regional Passport office in Gujarat saying its "incomplete."

modi wifeThe regional passport officer ZA Khan said that the application was incomplete and therefore it was not accepted.

"We have not accepted the application because there was no marriage certificate or a joint affidavit with the spouse," Mr. Khan said, adding, "marriage certificate or a joint affidavit is a required document to get the passport."

Mrs. Modi had sought passport to go abroad and meet their "family friends and relatives."

"We have many family friends abroad and they asked her to visit them so she had applied for the passport but the application has been turned down," her brother Ashok Modi said.

He added that she may have to explore "legal options" to get the passport, which is a right of every citizen of the country.

Earlier, she had applied under the Right to Information (RTI) seeking details of her security and order of the government of India to provide her security. Mehsana Superintendent of Police (SP) had refused to give the information saying the matter pertained to the security which is not disclosed under the RTI.

In his election affidavit filed in 2014 during the parliamentary polls, Mr. Narendra Modi had mentioned Jashodaben's name as his spouse.

After he became the Prime Minister following a landslide victory in the national polls, Jashodaben was given security cover with four police constables posted her residence.

She is a retired school teacher and lives with her brother Ashok Modi in a village in North Gujarat.

Comments

Lashawnda
 - 
Monday, 18 Jan 2016

Lecial zaczerpnac marek z poczesnego kolegia urzytkowników
na fakt Rekuperacji dodatkowo GWC.
Lub czlowiek z szanownych nabywców ów twor stanowi w równym gospodarstwie?

Bawia ugniata nieabstrakcyjne zalety i pozytki z obracania takiego
porzadku.
Jak patrzy partia wrzasku wywolywanego przez rekuperacje?

Wyrywnie wejde z czlowieku w stosunek w sensie opracowania

Also visit my site :: wentylacja mechaniczna: http://nongbenshe.com/comment/html/?746.html

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 3: Bengaluru mayor Gautam Kumar on Tuesday said that the decision to ban protests in front of Town Hall was made by the council and not only by him.

"The decision to ban the protest in front of the Town Hall was made by the entire council and not only my decision. Also, the things which are approved by the councillor are also read by the ruling party leaders," Bengaluru mayor told media.

"Still it is the discretion of the Commissioner to take a call after the council also. As of now, we have banned any protests in front of Town Hall," he added.

Meanwhile, Congress leaders staged a protest against Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Mayor Gautam Kumar and BJP at Council BBMP building against the decision.

"If people will start protesting, it will badly affect the traffic of the city," said Kumar, while commenting on the protest. If they want to talk about the matter, let us have a healthy discussion. I don't have a problem with and I don't think the ruling party has a problem too," he added.

On Sunday, pro-Kannada activist and former MLA Vatal Nagraj staged a protest in front of Sir KP Puttanna Chetty Town Hall (Bangalore Town Hall) against the decision taken by Bengaluru mayor.

Talking to reporters, Nagraj had said: "He does not know the history of the Town Hall. It is a historic building and protests can be staged there."

"Mayor's decision is against Bengaluru's tradition and culture, that's why we are condemning it and are protesting against this decision. We will not allow Mayor's programs in Bengaluru and he will be shown black flags", he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 9,2020

Hubli, Mar 9: A Hubli court on Monday rejected the bail application of three Kashmiri students, who were booked for sedition, after their video allegedly raising pro-Pakistan slogans went viral.

The plea was filed under Section 439 of CrPC.

This comes after the Hubli Bar Association earlier withdrew its resolution against representing the three Kashmiri students and said that advocates who wish to appear for them can approach Dharwad Principal District Court to file bail plea.

The three students are Basit Ashik Sophi (19), Talib Majid (19) and Amir Mohiuddin (23). They were booked under sedition charges for raising pro-Pakistan slogan in a video shared on social media.

They were earlier transferred to Belgaum Hindalga jail from Hubli sub-jail and the case, registered in Gokul Road police station, was also transferred to the rural police station because the video was recorded in the college hostel room, which is in its jurisdiction.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 23,2020

Bengaluru, July 23: The High Court of Karnataka has directed the state government to formulate Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for child protection, particularly for cases of child pornography and child missing.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice M Nagaprasanna passed a detailed order and asked the state government to submit compliance within three months.

The division bench passed the order on two PILs, including a suo motu litigation registered in 2018. The PILs were registered to ensure effective implementation of the directions of the Supreme Court on the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act).

The bench observed that in normal courses, courts do not issue writ of mandamus to the legislature on rule-making aspects. However, when the failure of the state is demonstrated under exceptional circumstances, courts can issue directions. The bench directed the state government to expedite the rule-making process to ensure proper implementation of the JJ Act.

The bench expressed displeasure on the insensitive police investigation in cases of child pornography. “The police machinery did not show the sensitivity expected from it while dealing with cases of alleged child pornography. Therefore, it will be appropriate if the state issues SOP or guidelines for dealing with cases of child pornography so that proper investigation is carried out in such cases. As we are directing the formation of SOP for dealing with child pornography cases, the state is also directed to formulate guidelines on child missing cases,” the bench said.

The bench had been issuing several directions since 2018 and has also been monitoring police investigations. The court observed that while the state government has incorporated several directions, some issues still remain unaddressed.

The bench directed the government to have dedicated staff for the Directorate of Integrated Child Protection Scheme considering the sensitive nature of work.

On working of Juvenile Justice Boards (JJB), the court asked the Registrar General of the Karnataka High Court to issue directions to the principal magistrates of all the JJBs in the state to sit on all working days for a minimum of six hours a day. 

The high court directed the state to exercise the rule-making powers for obtaining an annual report from the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.