ISRO launches record 20 satellites in one go

New Delhi, May 29: Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Friday met Prime Minister Narendra Modi and informed him about the views of all chief ministers on the extension of the ongoing nationwide lockdown beyond May 31, officials said.

During the meeting, Shah briefed Modi about the suggestions and the feedback he received from the chief ministers during his telephonic conversations on Thursday, a government official said.

The nationwide curbs were first announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on March 24 for 21 days in a bid to contain the spread of novel coronavirus. It was first extended till May 3 and then again till May 17. The lockdown was further extended till May 31.

The home minister's telephonic conversations with the chief ministers came just three days before the end of the fourth phase of the lockdown.

During his talks with the chief ministers, Shah sought to know the areas of concern of the states and the sectors they want to open up further from June 1, the official said.

Interestingly, till now, it was Modi who had interacted with all chief ministers through video conference before the extension of each phase of the coronavirus-induced lockdown and sought their views.

This was for the first time that the home minister spoke to the chief ministers individually before the end of another phase of the lockdown.

Shah was present in all the conferences of chief ministers along with the prime minister. It is understood that the majority of the chief ministers wanted the lockdown to continue in some form but also favoured opening up of the economic activities and gradual return of the normal life, another official said.

The central government is expected to announce its decision on the lockdown within the next two days.

The number of COVID-19 cases in India has climbed to 1,65,799 on Friday, making it the world's ninth worst-hit country by the coronavirus pandemic.

The Health Ministry said the death toll due to COVID-19 rose to 4,706 in the country. While extending the fourth phase of the lockdown till May 31, the central government had announced the continuation of the prohibition on the opening of schools, colleges and malls but allowed the opening of shops and markets.

It said hotels, restaurants, cinema halls, malls, swimming pools, gyms will remain shut even as all social, political, religious functions, and places of worship will remain closed till May 31.

The government, however, allowed limited operations of the train and domestic flights. The Indian Railways is also running special trains since May 1 for transportation of migrant workers from different parts of the country to their native states.

New Delhi, Feb 17: Indian officials denied entry to British lawmaker Debbie Abrahams on Monday after she landed at New Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport.

Debbie Abrahams, a Labour Party Member of Parliament who chairs a parliamentary group focused on the Kashmir, was unable to clear customs after her valid Indian visa was rejected, her aide, Harpreet Upal, told The Associated Press.

Abrahams and Upal arrived at the airport on an Emirates flight from Dubai at 9 am. Upal said the immigration officials did not cite any reason for denying Abrahams entry and revoking her visa, a copy of which, valid until October 2020, was shared with the AP. A spokesman for India's foreign ministry did not immediately comment.

Abrahams has been a member of Parliament since 2011 and was on a two-day personal trip to India, she said in a statement.

"I tried to establish why the visa had been revoked and if I could get a 'visa on arrival' but no one seemed to know," she said in the statement.

"Even the person who seemed to be in charge said he didn't know and was really sorry about what had happened. So now I am just waiting to be deported ... unless the Indian Government has a change of heart. I'm prepared to let the fact that I've been treated like a criminal go, and I hope they will let me visit my family and friends."

Abrahams has been an outspoken critic of the Indian government's move last August stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its semi-autonomy and bifurcating the state into two Union Territories.

Shortly after the changes to Kashmir's status were passed by Parliament, Abrahams wrote a letter to India's High Commissioner to the UK, saying the action "betrays the trust of the people" of Kashmir.

India took more than 20 foreign diplomats on a visit to Kashmir last week, the second such trips in six months.

Access to the region remains tight, with no foreign journalists allowed.

New Delhi, Jan 29: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed the plea by Mukesh Kumar Singh, one of the four death row convicts in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, challenging the rejection of his mercy petition by the President.

A three-judge bench headed by Justice R Banumathi said that expeditious disposal of mercy plea by the President doesn't mean non-application of mind by him.

The court also said that alleged sufferings in prison can't be grounds to challenge the rejection of mercy petition.

The bench said all relevant material including judgments pronounced by trial court, high court and Supreme Court were placed before the President when he was considering the mercy plea of the convict.

The bench also comprising justices Ashok Bhushan and A S Bopanna rejected the contentions of the counsel appearing for Singh that entire materials of the case were not placed before the President when he was considering his mercy plea.

The bench, while referring to two files placed before it by the Centre on Tuesday, said that as per the January 15 covering letter which was sent by the Delhi government to the Ministry of Home Affairs, all relevant documents were sent.

The bench noted that detailed judgements of trial court, high court and the Supreme Court, curative petition filed by Singh, his past criminal history and his family background were sent to the Home Ministry by the Delhi government.

"All the documents were taken into consideration by the President while rejecting the mercy petition," the bench said.

The bench also dealt with submissions advanced by the convict's counsel, who had argued that the mercy plea was rejected at "lightning speed".

The bench said that if a mercy petition is expeditiously dealt with, it cannot be assumed that it has been adjudicated upon in a pre-conceived mind.