BJP won't allow two prime ministers in India: Shah

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has prepared a draft for guidelines for home quarantine, as well as for the use of masks by public, in view of coronavirus.

What to do in Home Quarantine?

The government says, for those taking refuge to home quarantine should stay in a well-ventilated single-room preferably with an attached or separate toilet. It adds that if another family member needs to stay in the same room, it's advisable to maintain a distance of at least 1 metre between the two.

The government advised, coronavirus patients to stay away from elderly people, pregnant women, children and persons with co-morbidities within the household as their immune system may be low. The health minister also suggested to restrict the patient's movement within the house. "Under no circumstances attend any social/religious gathering e.g. wedding, condolences, etc, said the guideline.

It also instructed the corona virus infected person to avoid sharing household items like dishes, drinking glasses, cups, eating utensils, towels, bedding, or other items with others at home. The guideline also demanded that even though home quarantine, the patient should wear a surgical mask at all times. "The mask should be changed every 6-8 hours and disposed off. Disposable masks are never to be reused, it added.

"Masks used by patients/ caregivers/ close contacts during home care should be disinfected using ordinary bleach solution (5 per cent) or sodium hypochlorite solution (1%) and then disposed of either by burning or deep burial," instructs the government.

Even for family members of a patient, the health ministry clearly instructs to use disposable gloves when cleaning the surfaces or handling soiled linen. No visitors, under any circumstances will be allowed, said the guideline.

"In case the person being quarantined becomes symptomatic, all his close contacts will be home quarantined (for 14 days) and followed up for an additional 14 days or till the report of such case turns out negative on lab testing," states the draft.

How to wear & dump masks?

There is a specific and elaborate do's and don'ts also released by the ministry. For those unsure in which mask to choose, it says, "Medical masks of different sizes and shapes are available in the market. The common ones are flat pleated masks of woven fabric which covers the nose and mouth and affixed behind the head with straps/ elastic fasteners. There are also conical or duck bill shaped masks with valves (or without valves) that fit in the contour of face over the nose and mouth, but are costlier."

However, the ministry warns, medical masks should not be used by healthy persons who are not having any symptoms "because it creates a false sense of security". Instead, it suggests to refrain from touching face, mouth, nose and eyes as well as washing hands regularly with soap for 20 seconds each time.

However, when a person develops a cough or fever, the suspected patient needs to switch to medical masks. "Use of medical three layer masks when ill, will prevent your infection from spreading to others. However you also need to wash your hands frequently to avoid spreading infection to others," read the guideline.

Even if one is not tested positive but showing symptoms, they are advised to wear masks while visiting a healthcare facility. "Close family contacts of such suspect/confirmed cases undergoing home care should also use Triple layer medical mask," it warns.

The ministry has also given point by point guideline on how to use a mask like to make sure that they are facing down while unfolding or for that matter to ensure there are no gaps on either side of the mask.

It even warns, "Fit flexible nose piece (a metallic strip that can easily be located) over nose-bridge" to ensure no one else are infected. The government also warns against simple dumping of the masks once used. Instead one should disinfect "using ordinary bleach solution (5 per cent) or sodium hypochlorite solution (1 per cent) and then disposed of either by burning or deep burial," says the Health Ministry.

COVID-19 emerged in early December 2019 in China's Wuhan province and has now spread to over 100 countries. As on March 9, 2020, India has reported 42 cases mostly among those who had travelled from affected countries.

However the government says, "It causes a minor illness in majority of patients with symptoms of fever and or cough. A small proportion of such persons may progress to severe disease with difficulty in breathing."

New Delhi, May 25: Mahindra Group Chairman Anand Mahindra on Monday said lockdown extensions are not just economically disastrous but also create another medical crisis.

While acknowledging that choices are not easy for policymakers, he said a lockdown extension will not help.

"Lockdown extensions aren't just economically disastrous, as I had tweeted earlier, but also create another medical crisis," Mahindra said in a tweet.

He was referring to an article that highlighted "the dangerous psychological effects of lockdowns & the huge risk of neglecting non-COVID patients".

Mahindra, who had earlier proposed a comprehensive lifting after 49 days of lockdown, further said, "The choices aren't easy for policy makers but a lockdown extension won't help".

He said, "The numbers (coronavirus cases) will continue to rise & the focus must be on rapid expansion of field hospital beds with oxygen lines".

He further said, "The army has enormous expertise in this".

On March 22, before the government announced nationwide lockdown, Mahindra had proposed such a move expressing concerns over reports that India was likely to have already reached stage 3 of coronavirus transmission.

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.