Temple rape: Lawyer braves threats, says it’s a fight for her daughter too

New Delhi, Jul 5: With highest-ever single-day spike of 24,850 COVID-19 cases in 24 hours, India's coronavirus count stood at 6,73,165, informed the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Sunday.

Out of the total cases, 2,44,814 are active cases. On the other hand, India's cured/discharged patients count crossed the 4 lakh mark with 4,09,082 patients cured/discharged and one patient migrated.

As many as 613 deaths due to coronavirus were reported in the country in the last 24 hours taking the death toll in the country to 19,268.

Meanwhile, the ministry said that collective and focused efforts for containment and management of COVID-19 by the government of India along with the States/UTs have led to the number of recovered cases among COVID-19 patients rise to 4,09,082 as of today.

"During the last 24 hours, a total of 14,856 COVID-19 patients have been cured. So far, there are 1,64,268 more recovered patients than COVID-19 active cases. This takes the national recovery rate amongst COVID-19 patients to 60.77 per cent," the ministry said.

"With 786 labs in government sector and 314 private labs, there are as many as 1,100 labs in India," it added.

As per the Health Ministry, coronavirus cases in Maharashtra -- the worst affected state from the infection -- has breached the 2 lakh mark with 2,00,064 cases including 8,671 deaths.

Tamil Nadu reported 4,150 fresh COVID-19 cases and 60 deaths today, taking total cases to 1,11,151 and death toll to 1,510. Number of active cases stands at 46,860, according to the State Health Department.

Delhi's coronavirus tally nears the 1 lakh mark with 99,444 cases and the number of people succumbing to the virus stands at 3,067 in the national capital. As many as 9,873 RT-PCR tests and 13,263 rapid antigen tests were conducted today in Delhi. Total tests done so far stands at 6,43,504.

Meanwhile, Indian Council of Medical Research informed that the total number of samples tested up to July 4 is 97,89,066 of which 2,48,934 samples were tested yesterday.

There were seven new COVID-19 cases in the last 24 hours in Chandigarh, taking total cases to 466 including 395 recoveries and six deaths.
Himachal Pradesh Health Department informed that COVID-19 cases reach 1,048 in the state, of which, 309 cases are active and 715 have recovered.

Andhra Pradesh has reported 998 new COVID-19 cases and 14 deaths in the last 24 hours, according to a media bulletin released by AP state COVID nodal officer.

A total of 1,155 COVID-19 cases were reported in the last 24 hours in Uttar Pradesh on Sunday, taking the total number of active cases to 8,161 in the state, an official said. According to the official data, a total of 18,761 people have been cured while 785 people have died due to the virus in the state.

Eighteen more personnel of Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) tested positive for COVID-19 in the last 24 hours. There are total 151 active cases and 270 have recovered till date.

While, in the last 24 hours, 36 more Border Security Force (BSF) personnel tested positive for COVID-19 and 33 have recovered. There are 526 active cases and 817 personnel have recovered till date.

In Rajasthan, 224 fresh COVID-19 positive cases and 6 deaths were reported today. The total number of cases rose to 19,756 including 3,640 active cases and 453 deaths.

Odisha reported 469 new COVID19 positive cases in the last 24 hours, taking the total number of positive cases in the state to 9,070 including 5,934 recovered cases and 3,090 active cases, according to the health department.

Uttarakhand reported 31 new COVID-19 cases in the last 24 hours, taking total cases to 3,124. Recovery rate among COVID-19 patients stands at 80.79 per cent.

Howrah, Jan 8: Following the 'Bharat Bandh' called by trade unions, protesters blocked railway tracks in Howrah and Kanchrapara in North 24 Parganas on Wednesday.

They raised anti-government slogans and criticised the Center for its policies. They were holding placards, posters and banners against the government.

Commuters faced difficulties as bus services were also affected. CPI (M) protesters also stopped the operation of state transport buses. In Odisha, the public agitation started around 6 am at Talcher, Bhubaneswar, Brahmapur, Bhadrak and Kendujhargarh.

Due to the protests, the following trains are detained enroute at different stations --Bhadrak-Brahmapur passenger at Bhadrak, Kendujhargarh-Bhubaneswar passenger at Kendujhargarh, Bhubaneswar-Balangir InterCity at Bhubaneswar, Howrah-Yesvantpur Express at Brahmapur, Ichhapur-Cuttack MEMU at

Brahmapur and Puri-Rourkela passenger at Bhubaneswar.

The ten central trade unions including Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU), Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), among others have given the call for strike with a 12-point charter of demand. Trade union Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) is not taking part in the strike.

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.