Election not a beauty contest: Sushil Modi on Priyanka Gandhi's entry into politics

Visakhapatnam, May 7: Unconscious children being carried by parents in their arms, people laying on roads, health workers scrambling to attend to those affected by the styrene vapour leak and residents fleeing were some of the scenes that played out near here on Thursday, bringing back grim memories of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy.

The leak of styrene, a chemical used to make synthetic rubber and resins, among others, occurred in the wee hours of Thursday while people were still fast asleep.

Women and children were seen lying on roads struggling to breath, reminiscent of the infamous Bhopal gas tragedy when a leak from the Union Carbide plant left around 3,500 dead and many maimed.

The worst-hit Gopalapatnam village reverberated with cries of people for help.

Many people fell unconscious during their sleep, a villager said.

Affected people, suffering writ large on their faces, were rushed to hospitals in autorickshaws and on two wheelers.

Visakhapatnam Collector Vinay Chand said 20 ambulances were pressed into service as soon information about the gas leak was received.

Exposure to styrene, also known as ethenylbenzene, vinylbenzene can affect the central nervous system (CNS), causing headache, fatigue, weakness, and depression.

It is primarily used in the production of polystyrene plastics and resins.

The gas leak took place at LG Polymers chemical plant.

LG Polymers was established in 1961 as "Hindustan Polymers" for manufacturing Polystyrene and its co-polymers at Visakhapatnam. It merged with McDowell & Co. Ltd of UB Group in 1978, according to the company's website.

Taken over by LG Chem (South Korea), Hindustan Polymers was renamed LG Polymers India Private Limited (LGPI) in July, 1997.

New Delhi, Apr 22: Philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has lauded Prime Minister Narendra Modi's leadership in dealing with COVID-19 pandemic by adopting several measures including lockdown and increasing health expenditure to strengthen the health system response.

"We commend your leadership and the proactive measures you and your government have taken to flatten the curve of the COVID-19 infection rate in India, such as adopting a national lockdown, expanding focused testing to identify hot spots for isolation, quarantining, and care, and significantly increasing health expenditures to strengthen the health system response and promote R&D and digital innovation," Gates wrote.

He added: "I'm glad your government is fully utilising its exceptional digital capabilities in its COVID-19 response and has launched the Aarogya Setu digital app for coronavirus tracking, contact tracing, and to connect people to health services."

Prime Minister Modi had on March 24 announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown as a precautionary measure to contain the spread of COVID-19. The lockdown was later extended to May 3.

Gates further stated, "Grateful to see that you are seeking to balance public health imperatives with the need to ensure adequate social protection for all Indians."

With 1,486 new cases and 49 deaths in the last 24 hours, India's total number of coronavirus positive cases have risen to 20,471 while the death toll stands at 652, Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said on Wednesday.

Out of the total number of cases, 15,859 are active cases, 3,959 cured or discharged or migrated and 652 deaths.

Bill Gates met Prime Minister Modi in New Delhi on November 18 last year.

During his visit, Gates had addressed a function organised by NITI Aayog for the release of its report on 'Health Systems for a New India: Building Blocks - Potential Pathways to Reforms' wherein he lauded the country for its healthcare system and talked about how digital tools can help improve it further.

At that time, the philanthropist had commended the Central government for stepping up and eradicating polio.

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.