Lynching won't stop until cow slaughter is banned says BJP minister

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.

New Delhi, Jun 20: After Prime Minister Narendra Modi said there are no foreign incursions into India, China has once again claimed that Galwan valley of Ladakh union territory is located on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

In an official statement on the step-by-step account of the Galwan face-off where 20 Indian soldiers were killed, China's foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian has said the Galwan valley is located on the Chinese side of the LAC in the west section of the China-India boundary.

"For many years, the Chinese border troops have been patrolling and on duty in this region," Zhao said alleging that since April this year, the Indian border troops have unilaterally and continuously built roads, bridges and other facilities at the LAC in the Galwan Valley.

China has lodged representations and protests on multiple occasions but India has gone even further to cross the LAC and make provocations, Zhao said.

By the early morning of May 6, the Indian border troops, who had crossed the LAC by night and trespassed into China's territory, built fortification and barricades, which impeded the patrol of Chinese border troops, Zhao said adding that they deliberately made provocations in an attempt to unilaterally change the status quo of control and management.

The Chinese border troops, he said, were "forced to take necessary measures to respond to the situation on the ground and strengthen management and control in the border areas."

In order to ease the situation, China and India have stayed in close communication through military and diplomatic channels, he said. "In response to the strong demand of the Chinese side, India agreed to withdraw the personnel who crossed the LAC and demolish the facilities, and so they did.

On June 6, the border troops of both countries held a commander-level meeting and reached consensus on easing the situation. The Indian side, he said, promised that they would not cross the estuary of the Galwan river to patrol and build facilities and the two sides would discuss and decide phased withdrawal of troops through the meetings between commanders on the ground.

"Shockingly, on the evening of June 15, India's front-line troops, in violation of the agreement reached at the commander-level meeting, once again crossed the Line of Actual Control for deliberate provocation when the situation in the Galwan Valley was already easing, and even violently attacked the Chinese officers and soldiers who went there for negotiation, thus triggering fierce physical conflicts and causing casualties."

"The adventurous acts of the Indian army have seriously undermined the stability of the border areas, threatened the lives of Chinese personnel, violated the agreements reached between the two countries on the border issue, and breached the basic norms governing international relations," the spokesperson said.

Beijing, he said, hopes that India will work with China, follow faithfully the important consensus reached between the two leaders, abide by the agreements reached between the two governments, and strengthen communication and coordination on properly managing the current situation through diplomatic and military channels, and jointly uphold peace and stability in the border areas.

New Delhi, Jun 25: India registered its worst single-day increase in COVID-19 cases on Thursday, recording more than 16,000 coronavirus infections, to push the overall tally to 4.73 lakh as the number of fatalities also jumped by 418, the Union Health Ministry said.

This was the sixth consecutive day when coronavirus cases increased by more than 14,000. On June 20, the country registered an increase of 14,516 cases. On June 21, the increase was of 15,413 cases; 14,821 cases on June 22; 14,933 cases on June 23; and 15,968 cases on June 24.

Consequently, India added 92,573 cases since June 20, and over 2.82 lakh this month since June 1.

The health ministry data updated at 8am on Thursday showed the daily tally increased by the highest-ever 16,922 cases to reach 4,73,105, while the total deaths climbed to 14,894 with 418 new fatalities.

However, according to the data, the recovery rate has improved to 57.43 per cent. The number of active cases stands at 1,86,514 while 2,71,696 people have recovered; one patient has migrated.

The total number of confirmed cases included foreigners.

According to ICMR, a total of 75,60,782 samples have been tested up to June 24 with 2,07,871 samples being tested on Wednesday.

Of the 418 new deaths, 208 were in Maharashtra, 64 in Delhi, 33 in Tamil Nadu, 25 in Gujarat, 14 in Karnataka, 11 in West Bengal, 10 each in Rajasthan and Haryana, nine in Madhya Pradesh, eight each in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, five each in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Uttarakhand.

Bihar, Goa and Jammu and Kashmir have reported one COVID-19 fatality each.

Of the total fatalities, Maharashtra tops the tally with 6,739 deaths followed by Delhi (2,365), Gujarat (1,735), Tamil Nadu (866), Uttar Pradesh (596), West Bengal (591), Madhya Pradesh (534), Rajasthan (375) and Telangana (225).

The COVID-19 death toll reached 188 in Haryana, 164 in Karnataka, 124 in Andhra Pradesh, 113 in Punjab, 88 in Jammu and Kashmir, 57 in Bihar, 35 in Uttarakhand, 22 in Kerala and 17 in Odisha.

Chhattisgarh has registered 12 deaths, Jharkhand 11, Assam and Puducherry nine each, Himachal Pradesh eight, Chandigarh six, Goa two and Meghalaya, Tripura and Ladakh have reported one fatality each.

More than 70 per cent deaths took place due to comorbidities, the health ministry said.

Maharashtra has reported the highest number of cases at 1,42,900 followed by Delhi at 70,390, Tamil Nadu at 67,468, Gujarat at 28,943, Uttar Pradesh at 19,557, Rajasthan at 16,009 and West Bengal at 15,173, according to ministry data.

The number of COVID-19 cases has gone up to 12,448 in Madhya Pradesh, 12,010 in Haryana, 10,444 in Telangana,10,331 in Andhra Pradesh and 10,118 in Karnataka.

It has risen to 8,209 in Bihar, 6,422 in Jammu and Kashmir, 6,198 in Assam and 5,752 in Odisha. Punjab has reported 4,627 novel coronavirus infections so far, while Kerala has 3,603 cases.

A total of 2,623 people have been infected by the virus in Uttarakhand, 2,419 in Chhattisgarh, 2,207 in Jharkhand, 1,259 in Tripura, 970 in Manipur, 951 in Goa, 941 in Ladakh and 806 in Himachal Pradesh.

Puducherry has recorded 461 COVID-19 cases, Chandigarh has 420, Nagaland has 347, Arunachal Pradesh has 158 and Mizoram has 142 cases.

Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu together have reported 120 COVID-19 cases.

Sikkim has 84, Andaman and Nicobar Islands has registered 56 infections so far while Meghalaya has recorded 46 cases.

"Our figures are being reconciled with the ICMR (Indian Council of Medical Research)," the ministry said, adding 8,493 cases are being reassigned to states.

State-wise distribution is subject to further verification and reconciliation, it added.