Chances of Sarabjit Singh’s survival slim, say Pak doctors

Feb 28: For 30-year-old Shabana Parveen, it was nothing sort of a miracle — giving birth to a healthy baby boy after surviving a brutal attack by a mob who kicked and assaulted her and her husband in northeast Delhi's Karawal Nagar.

Their home set afire by the mob, Ms Parveen's family is now pinning their hopes on the newborn who they called a "miracle baby".

Ms Parveen, her husband, two kids and mother-in-law were sleeping inside the house on Monday night when a mob barged into their house.

Narrating their ordeal, Ms Parveen's mother-in-law Nashima told PTI, "They hurled religious slurs, beat up my son. Some of them even kicked my daughter-in-law in the abdomen...as I went to protect her they came charging at me... We thought we would not survive that night. But with God's grace we somehow managed to escape from the clutches of the rioters."

"We rushed Parveen to a nearby hospital but doctors there asked us to go to Al-hind Hospital where she delivered a baby boy on Wednesday," she added.

Despite having lost their home for over two decades and all belongings, her family has overcome the initial shock and are now overjoyed with the birth of the "miracle baby".

Ms Nashima said she had no clue where the family would go after Ms Parveen was discharged from the hospital.

"It's all gone there. Nothing left. Maybe, we will go to some relative's place and see how we can re-build our life," she said.

Ali, 6, who held his one-day-old brother, caressing his forehead, said, "I will take care of him forever and save him from every ill."

The violence over the amended citizenship law in northeast Delhi has claimed 38 lives so far and left over 200 people injured. Frenzied mobs torched houses, shops, vehicles, a petrol pump and pelted stones at locals and police personnel.

Jaffrabad, Maujpur, Babarpur, Yamuna Vihar, Bhajanpura, Chand Bagh and Shiv Vihar are among the areas mainly affected by the clashes.

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, Apr 14: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday requested young scientists of the country to come forward and take the lead in developing a vaccine for novel coronavirus which has claimed over one lakhs lives worldwide.

"While India has limited resources today. I have a special request for India's young scientists. They should come forward and take a lead in developing a vaccine for coronavirus for the welfare of the world, for the welfare of the human race," the Prime Minister said in the address to the nation.

He said that if people continue to be patient and follow rules then the country will be able to defeat even a pandemic like coronavirus.
Prime Minister Modi also announced that the country will remain under lockdown till May 3 to contain COVID-19 cases. The 21-day lockdown, which was announced by the Prime Minister last month, was slated to end today.

However, he indicated at easing of lockdown restrictions in places where there are no hotspots after April 20.

"Till 20th April, all districts, localities, states will be closely monitored, as to how strictly they are implementing norms. The states which will not let hotspots increase, they could be allowed to let some important activities resume, but with certain conditions," Modi said.

Odisha, Punjab, Maharashtra, Telangana, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry have already announced the extension of lockdown.

India's total number of coronavirus positive cases has climbed to 10,363 including 8,988 active cases, 1,035 cured/discharged/migrated and 339 deaths, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said today.