Video of BJP minister peeing on roadside goes viral

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, Mar 5: The primary classes of all schools in the national capital will remain closed till March 31 to prevent a possibility of spread of coronavirus, Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia announced on Thursday.

According to Directorate of Education (DoE) officials, while elaborate guidelines have been issued about preventive measures for coronavirus, students of nursery and primary classes are too young to understand the risk, making them more prone to infectious diseases.

Sisodia, who also holds the education portfolio, tweeted, "As a precautionary measure to prevent the possibility of spread of COVID-19 amongst our children, Delhi Government has directed the immediate closure of all primary schools (Govt/ aided/ private/MCD/NDMC) till 31/3/20(sic)."

A senior DoE official said, "Elaborate guidelines have already been issued. However, students of nursery and primary classes are too young to understand the risks associated with COVID-19. Thus they are more prone to infectious diseases and mingle around with classmates more often."

"It will be good if they are trained in the do's and dont's under the care and supervision of their parents at home. However, students of classes other than primary will continue to come to schools or examination centres for writing their examination as per schedule. The teaching, as well as non-teaching staff, will also attend regular school," the official said.

As of now, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the country stands at 30, including 16 Italian tourists. The figure includes the first three cases reported from Kerala last month who have already been discharged following recovery.

Alerted by the coronavirus case reported in Delhi-NCR, schools in the region have sent out advisories to parents suggesting that they do not send their wards to attend classes even in case of mild cough or cold, and saying that they may declare holidays if the need arises. A few schools have announced already holidays and others have advanced their spring break.

New Delhi, Feb 29: The father of Intelligence Bureau staffer Ankit Sharma, whose body was pulled out of a drain in northeast Delhi's riot-hit Chand Bagh, complained to police that goons had assembled at the residence of former AAP counselor Tahir Hussain and were throwing petrol bombs from the rooftop.

According to the FIR which was registered on Thursday on the basis of the complaint lodged by Ankit's father Ravinder, the goons were also firing from the rooftop.

On Tuesday, Ankit returned from his office at 5 pm and then went outside to buy groceries. When he did not return, the family started looking for him and later filed a missing report, the FIR stated.

They got to know from their neighbours that a body has been recovered from a drain… later it was found to be that of Anikt, it said, adding the body had multiple stab injuries on the face, head, back, and chest.

The family has alleged in the FIR that it was Hussain and the goons at his residence who killed Ankit. In the FIR, Hussain has been accused of murder, destruction of evidence and abduction.

Soon after the FIR was registered on Thursday, the AAP suspended Tahir Hussain from the primary membership of the party till the police completed its probe.

The death toll in Delhi's communal violence rose to 42 on Friday as the situation showed some signs of returning to normalcy and clouds of smoke cleared to reveal the extent of the damage from the worst riots in the city in over three decades.

A total of 148 FIRs have been registered and 630 people have been either arrested or detained so far in connection with the communal violence, a Delhi Police spokesperson said.