Law to punish husbands after instant talaq will be a New Year gift for Muslim women: Modi

coastaldigest.com news network
January 29, 2018

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday made a "humble request" to all political parties to help pass the bill on instant triple talaq in the Budget session of Parliament, saying it would be a New Year gift for Muslim women.

Speaking to reporters outside Parliament House, Modi, who is also the husband of helpless Jashodaben, said that despite his government's efforts and people's expectations the triple talaq bill could not be passed in the last session.

He said though there should be no politics on the issue as it relates to the rights of Muslim women, the Bill could not be passed.

While the so called Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, sailed through the Lok Sabha, it is pending in the Rajya Sabhja as several opposition parties demanded that it be referred to a select committee. The Budget session of Parliament got underway today.

While the government maintains that the bill is meant to ensure “gender justice and gender equality” for married Muslim women, the Muslim leaders across country including women claim that it violates minority rights. Social activists, too, have objected to the bill, questioning the need to criminalise a practice declared "void" by the Supreme Court. AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi has opined that triple talaq bill was a ploy to send Muslim men to jail.

Here’s a look at what The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights of Marriage) Bill, 2017 provides for:

— Under proposed bill, a Muslim man who resorts to Talaq-e-Biddat or instant talaq would be jailed for three years.

— The custody of any minor children from the marriage would be granted to the woman and legally husband loses rights on his kids (even if the woman was a murderer or child abuser)

— It makes instant divorce a non-bailable offence which can lead to an imprisonment of up to three years upon conviction.

— It also makes it mandatory for the husband to pay maintenance to his wife and child support towards any children (even if the woman was a billionaire and the man was a beggar).

Comments

ALTHAF MAHAMMED
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

  1. Pakoda Business is also a gift from Fenku

shaji
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

Thanks for the bill.  If our PM is a true indian, he should go to jail first respecting the Bill coz he has deserted his wife for no reason.   Secondly, why only appeasing muslim women.  How about Hindu sisters.  There are lakhs of Hindu women who are deserted by their husbands.   govt should also support muslim women by allowing them to marry more than one time like the men and Hindu women should be allowed to have 6 husbands like their Mother Draupadi from Mahabharatha.    When is our PM going to jail respecting the law he is going to introduce in Rajya Sabha.   Let us celebrate it. 

Syed Iftekhar Ahmad
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

Why not the same punishment to the PM himself?

Jasho
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

When our bhabhi Jashodaben will get such a wonderful gift?

Ismail Thafseer
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

Dear Mr. PM,

 

We support your decision but first you are the one who should get punish for leaving your wife and not taking care of her. 

 

Democracy died under your leadership.

Jashoda
 - 
Monday, 29 Jan 2018

Minority appeasement.. Shame on PM 

Why only gift for muslim women.. Why not hindu women too?

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 30,2020

Washington, Jun 30: Researchers in China have discovered a new type of swine flu that is capable of triggering a pandemic, according to a study published Monday in the US science journal PNAS.

Named G4, it is genetically descended from the H1N1 strain that caused a pandemic in 2009.

It possesses "all the essential hallmarks of being highly adapted to infect humans," say the authors, scientists at Chinese universities and China's Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

The researchers then carried out various experiments including on ferrets, which are widely used in flu studies because they experience similar symptoms to humans -- principally fever, coughing and sneezing. 

G4 was observed to be highly infectious, replicating in human cells and causing more serious symptoms in ferrets than other viruses.

Tests also showed that any immunity humans gain from exposure to seasonal flu does not provide protection from G4.

According to blood tests which showed up antibodies created by exposure to the virus, 10.4 percent of swine workers had already been infected.

The tests showed that as many as 4.4 percent of the general population also appeared to have been exposed.

The virus has therefore already passed from animals to humans but there is no evidence yet that it can be passed from human to human -- the scientists' main worry.

"It is of concern that human infection of G4 virus will further human adaptation and increase the risk of a human pandemic," the researchers wrote.

The authors called for urgent measures to monitor people working with pigs.

"The work comes as a salutary reminder that we are constantly at risk of new emergence of zoonotic pathogens and that farmed animals, with which humans have greater contact than with wildlife, may act as the source for important pandemic viruses," said James Wood, head of the department of veterinary medicine at Cambridge University.

A zoonotic infection is caused by a pathogen that has jumped from a non-human animal into a human.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

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.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 12,2020

New Delhi, May 12: Stranded for over 50 days due to the lockdown and suspension of passenger train services, many people in the national capital will finally be able to reach their destinations in different parts of the country after the railways resumed services on Tuesday.

Three special AC trains will leave the New Delhi railway station for Dibrugarh, Bengaluru and Bilaspur.

The train to Dibrugarh in Assam will leave at 4.45 p.m, while the one leaving for Bilaspur in Chhattisgarh and Bengaluru in Karnataka will leave the New Delhi station at 5.30 p.m and 9.15 p.m respectively.

Entry to the station has been facilitated from the Paharganj side for all confirmed ticket holders. No entry for passengers holding such tickets will be permitted from the Ajmeri Gate side, the railways said.

Railway authorities have put barricades outside the station premises and only those with confirmed tickets are being allowed to enter.

All passengers are undergoing thermal screening before entering the station premises. For this purpose, they have also been asked to reach the station 90 minutes prior to the departure of the train.

A senior Railway Police Force officer said every passenger is being subjected to thermal screening. Hand sanitiser machines have also been placed at the entrance and the passengers are being advised to sanitise their hands before entering the station premises.

Syed Yasir, a private retail sector executive, said due to the resumption of services he will now be able to go to Nagpur to be with his family on Eid. 

Surendra, an engineer with a PSU, was on an assignment in Agra when the lockdown was announced. After the Railways decided to resume passenger train services, he came to Delhi in a private vehicle to board the train to Bengaluru.

"I was on an assignment in Agra where I was stuck. I have come from Agra in a private vehicle and now going to board the train to Bengaluru," Surendra, who identified himself with his first name, said.

Five more trains bound for Delhi will leave from Patna, Bengaluru, Howrah, Mumbai and Ahmedabad, the railways said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.