Many killed in terror attack at Pakistan Stock Exchange in Karachi

New Delhi, Jan 10: The Supreme Court while hearing petitions challenging restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir on Friday stated that the right to access the internet is a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

"It is no doubt that freedom of speech is an essential tool in a democratic setup. The freedom of Internet access is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution," a two-judge bench headed by Justice N V Ramana stated while reading out the judgment.

The top court said that Kashmir has seen a lot of violence and that it will try to maintain a balance between human rights and freedoms with the issue of security.

It also directed the Jammu and Kashmir administration to review the restrictive orders imposed in the region within a week. “The citizens should be provided highest security and liberty,” the apex court added.

The top court made observations and issued directions while pronouncing the verdict on a number of petitions challenging the restrictions and internet blockade imposed in Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 in August last year.

The Supreme Court had on November 27 reserved the judgment on a batch of petitions challenging restrictions imposed on communication, media and telephone services in Jammu and Kashmir pursuant to revocation of Article 370.

The court heard the petitions filed by various petitioners including Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad and Kashmir Times editor Anuradha Bhasin.

The petitions were filed after the central government scrapped Article 370 in August and bifurcated Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories -- Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Following this, phone lines and the internet were blocked in the region.

The government had, however, contended that it has progressively eased restrictions.

Patna, Jan 12: Prashant Kishor, national vice-president of the Janata Dal (United), a key ally of the BJP-led NDA, has thanked Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi and former AICC chief Rahul Gandhi for their support in opposing CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) and NRC (National Register of Citizens).

Perceived as one of the closest associates of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who is also the party’s national president, PK (as Prashant is fondly called) also assured the two top Congress leaders that the contentious legislation would not be implemented in Bihar where JD (U) is ruling the State with the support of the BJP.

“I join my voice with all to thank #Congress leadership for their formal and unequivocal rejection of #CAA_NRC. Both @rahulgandhi and @priyankagandhi deserve special thanks for their efforts on this count….also would like to reassure to all – CAA/NRC won’t be implemented in Bihar,” tweeted PK on Sunday.

The development assumes significance as a day back, the Congress Working Committee (CWC) meeting, chaired by Sonia Gandhi, had strongly opposed CAA/NRC/NPR as it was aimed at “sinister design of the present regime to divide Indian people into religious lines.”

The latest tweet by PK is also being seen as a rebuff to the BJP, which again recently reiterated that “the BJP should project its own chief ministerial candidate during the 2020 Bihar Assembly elections.”

The JD (U) had taken umbrage over such provocative statements by BJP leaders and asked the saffron camp to rein in its ‘loudmouths’ as BJP chief Amit Shah had already made it clear that the next Assembly polls in Bihar would be fought under the leadership of Nitish.

Of late, PK has been quite vocal about his opposition to the Centre’s policies, particularly the contentious issues of NRC and CAA. Besides, he even dubbed senior BJP leader Sushil Modi as the man who became Bihar’s Deputy Chief Minister due to ‘circumstances’ as the BJP was decisively decimated during the 2015 Assembly elections.

Nitish never reprimanded PK for his jibe against Modi, thereby giving rise to speculations whether Bihar was again heading for a political churning ahead of Assembly polls slated for October this year.

Washington, Jan 12: The US State Department has described the recent visit of envoys of 15 countries to Jammu and Kashmir as an "important step" but expressed concern over the continued detention of political leaders and restrictions on internet in the region.

Alice Wells, the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, tweeted on Saturday that she was "closely following" the visit of the envoys to Kashmir, describing it an "important step".

Wells, who will be visiting India this week, added: "We remain concerned by detention of political leaders and residents and Internet restrictions. We look forward to a return to normalcy."

The group of diplomats made a two-day visit to the Union Territory on Thursday and Friday to see the conditions thereafter Jammu and Kashmir's special constitutional status was removed last August.

While some US politicians and media have criticised the action by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government, the US has officially appeared to support the abrogation of the Constitution's Article 370 on the special status.

Last October, Wells told the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that the State Department supported the objectives behind it, while not directly mentioning the abrogation.

"The Indian government has argued that its decision on Article 370 was driven by a desire to increase economic development, reduce corruption, and uniformly apply all national laws in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly in regard to women and minorities.

"While we support these objectives, the Department remains concerned about the situation in the Kashmir Valley, where daily life for the nearly eight million residents has been severely impacted since August 5," she had said.

Washington has banked on India's democratic institutions - the judiciary and public debates - being able to steer the country.

Bearing this out, the Supreme Court last week ordered the government to review its decision to shut down the internet in Kashmir, which it declared was a fundamental right, thus taking a step to address Wells's concern.