Muslims shouldn’t live in India; they must go to Pak or Bangla: BJP MP

Bengaluru, May 20: A mysterious "boom" heard in large parts of Bengaluru this afternoon left residents of the city and social media users puzzled. While the source of the sound is being investigated, the Indian Air Force (IAF) indicated that it could be the result of "routine test flights that necessitate going supersonic a times".

The sound was heard from as far as the Bengaluru airport in Devanahalli to the IT hub of Electronic City 54 km away. It was also heard in Kalyan Nagar in east Bengaluru, central Bengaluru's MG Road and areas such as Marathahalli, Whitefield, Sarjapur and Hebbagodi.

IAF said no aircraft of training command was flying in the area. "However, ASTE (Aircraft and Systems Testing Establishment) and HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) could have been undertaking their routine test flying, which necessitates going supersonic at times. These are done well beyond the city limits in specified sectors. However, considering the atmospheric conditions and reduced noise levels in the city during these times, the aircraft sound may become clearly audible even if it happened way out from the city," said the air force statement.

Many people had speculated that the sound could have been caused by a fighter jet such as a Mirage 2000.

"We have also asked the Air Force Control Room to check if it was a jet or supersonic sound. Bengaluru police are awaiting confirmation from the Air Force," Bengaluru police commissioner Bhaskar Rao said in a statement.

It was not an earthquake, Karnataka's state disaster monitoring centre had tweeted earlier.

"Earthquake activity will not be restricted to one area and will be widespread. We have checked our sensors and there is no earthquake activity recorded today," the Karnataka State Natural Disaster Monitoring Centre said, quoting its director Srinivas Reddy.

"The activity reported in Bengaluru is not due to an earthquake. The seismometers did not capture any ground vibration as generally happens during a mild Tremor. The activity is purely a loud unknown noise," the agency tweeted.

#Bangalore and #BangaloreBoom was among the top trends on Twitter this afternoon.

"We are trying to ascertain the source of the noise," a senior police officer said. "In Whitefield area, we have searched on the ground and so far, there is no damage to any property," he added. There were no calls to the police control room reporting any damage.

Lucknow, Feb 4: Even as anti-NRC protests continue to rage across the country, the Lucknow University has queered the pitch by demanding citizenship proof from RTI applicants.

The Lucknow University (LU) refused to provide the information sought by the people who filed the Right to Information (RTI) unless they furnished the proof that they were Indian citizens.

Alok Chantia, one of the RTI applicants who was refused information by the varsity, said that he had lodged a complaint with the vice-chancellor of the varsity but even then he could not get the desired information.

"It is shocking how the university has twisted the RTI law as per its whims and fancy. It does not have any authority to do so," said the RTI applicant.

Chantia, also a faculty member at a degree college here, had sought details of appointment of teachers for self-financed courses and their pay scale.

"It is possible that some applicants who may not be familiar with the provisions of the RTI, may have furnished proof of their citizenship to the varsity to get the information but that cannot become a rule," he pointed out.

When contacted, university officials admitted that such a practice had been going on in the varsity for the past few years.

"This practice started during the tenure of the former vice-chancellor S.P. Singh and still continues," said a senior varsity official.

New Delhi, Jan 14: The curative petitions of Vinay Sharma and Mukesh, who were sentenced to death in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, was on Tuesday rejected by a five-judge Supreme Court Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana.

In a three-page order, the Bench concluded, after an in chamber consideration that began about 1.45 p.m., that there was no merit in their pleas to spare them from the gallows.

“We have gone through the curative petitions and relevant documents. In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra. Hence, the curative petitions are dismissed,” the court held.

Curative is a rare remedy devised by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the Rupa Ashok Hurra case in 2002. A party can take only two limited grounds in a curative petition - one, he was not heard by the court before the adverse judgment was passed, and two, the judge was biased. A curative plea, which follows the dismissal of review petition, is the last legal avenue open for convicts in the Supreme Court. Sharma was the first among the four convicts to file a curative.

The Bench also rejected their pleas to stay the execution of their death sentence and for oral hearing in open court.

Besides Justice Ramana, the Bench comprised Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.

Curative petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by both convicts on January 9. The petitions had come just days after a Delhi sessions court schedulled the execution of all the four convicts in Tihar jail on January 22.

Sharma and Mukesh, in separate curative petitions, argued that there was a “sea change” in the death penalty jurisprudence since their convictions. Carrying out the death sentence on such changed circumstances would be a “gross miscarriage of justice”.

In his plea, Sharma said the Court had commuted the death penalty in several rape and murder cases since 2017, when it first confirmed the death penalty to the Nirbhaya convicts.

“fter the pronouncement of judgment in 2017, there have been as many as 17 cases involving rape and murder in which various three-judge Benches of the Supreme Court have commuted the sentence of death,” the petition contended.

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by Akshay Singh, another of the four four condemned men, to review its May 5, 2017 judgment confirming the death penalty. It also refused his plea to grant him three weeks' time to file a mercy petition before the President of India.

A Bench led by Justice R. Banumathi had said it was open for the Nirbhaya case convicts to avail whatever time the law prescribes for the purpose of filing a mercy plea.

Akshay (33), Mukesh (30), Pawan Gupta (23) and Sharma (24) had brutally gang-raped a 23-year-old paramedical student in a moving bus on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. She died of her injuries a few days later.

The case shocked the nation and led to the tightening of anti-rape laws. Rape, especially gang rape, is now a capital crime.

One of the accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar jail. A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board. He was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.