Next game in Delhi not before 2020, courtesy rotation policy

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.

Mumbai, Feb 5: Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray on Wednesday said there was no need to fear the Citizenship Amendment Act, but asserted his government will not allow the proposed National Register of Citizens to be implemented as it would "impact people of all religions".

Throwing out Bangladeshi and Pakistani migrants out of the country was an old demand of the Shiv Sena, the chief minister said in the third and concluding part of his interview to party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

"I can confidentally say the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) is not meant to throw Indian citizens out of the country. But, the National Register of Citizens (NRC) is going to impact Hindus as well," the Sena president said.

India has the right to know the number of minorities from neighbouring nations who applied for Indian citizenship after being persecuted in their home countries, he said.

"When they come here, will they get homes under the 'Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana'? What about employment and education of their children? All these issues are important and we have the right to know," hesaid in the interview to Saamana's executive editor and Sena MP Sanjay Raut.

"As chief minister, I should know where will these people be relocated in my state. Our own people don't have adequate housing. Will these people go to Delhi, Bengaluru or Kashmir, since Article 370 is now scrapped?" he wondered.

Several Kashmiri Pandit families are staying like refugees in their own country. The CAA is not to throw citizens out of the country, Thackeray said.

"However, the NRC will impact Hindus and Muslims and the state government will not allow it to be implemented," he asserted.

Under the NRC, all citizens will have to prove their citizenship. In Assam, 19 lakh people could not prove their citizenship. Of these, 14 lakh are Hindus, Thackeray claimed.

In a veiled attack on his cousin and MNS chief Raj Thackeray, who will lead a rally in support of the CAA and NRC in Mumbai on February 9, the chief minister said the NRC is not yet a reality and there is no need for a 'morcha' in support of or against it.

"If the NRC is enforced, those who are supporting it will also be affected," he said.

Under the NRC, even Hindus will have to prove their citizenship. "I will not allow the law to be enacted. Whether I am chief minister or not, I will not allow injustice to anybody," he said.

The chief minister also took a veiled dig at the Centre's decision to give the Padma Shri award to Pakistani-origin musician Adnan Sami.

"A migrant is a migrant. You can't honour him with the Padma award. Throwing out illegal migrants was the stand of (late Shiv Sena supremo) Balasaheb Thackeray," he said without naming anyone.

New Delhi, Jan 14: The curative petitions of Vinay Sharma and Mukesh, who were sentenced to death in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, was on Tuesday rejected by a five-judge Supreme Court Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana.

In a three-page order, the Bench concluded, after an in chamber consideration that began about 1.45 p.m., that there was no merit in their pleas to spare them from the gallows.

“We have gone through the curative petitions and relevant documents. In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra. Hence, the curative petitions are dismissed,” the court held.

Curative is a rare remedy devised by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the Rupa Ashok Hurra case in 2002. A party can take only two limited grounds in a curative petition - one, he was not heard by the court before the adverse judgment was passed, and two, the judge was biased. A curative plea, which follows the dismissal of review petition, is the last legal avenue open for convicts in the Supreme Court. Sharma was the first among the four convicts to file a curative.

The Bench also rejected their pleas to stay the execution of their death sentence and for oral hearing in open court.

Besides Justice Ramana, the Bench comprised Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.

Curative petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by both convicts on January 9. The petitions had come just days after a Delhi sessions court schedulled the execution of all the four convicts in Tihar jail on January 22.

Sharma and Mukesh, in separate curative petitions, argued that there was a “sea change” in the death penalty jurisprudence since their convictions. Carrying out the death sentence on such changed circumstances would be a “gross miscarriage of justice”.

In his plea, Sharma said the Court had commuted the death penalty in several rape and murder cases since 2017, when it first confirmed the death penalty to the Nirbhaya convicts.

“fter the pronouncement of judgment in 2017, there have been as many as 17 cases involving rape and murder in which various three-judge Benches of the Supreme Court have commuted the sentence of death,” the petition contended.

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by Akshay Singh, another of the four four condemned men, to review its May 5, 2017 judgment confirming the death penalty. It also refused his plea to grant him three weeks' time to file a mercy petition before the President of India.

A Bench led by Justice R. Banumathi had said it was open for the Nirbhaya case convicts to avail whatever time the law prescribes for the purpose of filing a mercy plea.

Akshay (33), Mukesh (30), Pawan Gupta (23) and Sharma (24) had brutally gang-raped a 23-year-old paramedical student in a moving bus on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. She died of her injuries a few days later.

The case shocked the nation and led to the tightening of anti-rape laws. Rape, especially gang rape, is now a capital crime.

One of the accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar jail. A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board. He was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.