World's tallest statue of Lord Ram to be built in Ayodhya

New Delhi, Mar 12: The Supreme Court told the Uttar Pradesh government on Thursday that as of now, there was no law that could back their action of putting up roadside posters of those accused of vandalism during anti-CAA protests in Lucknow.

An apex court bench refused to stay the March 9 Allahabad High Court order directing the Yogi Adityanath administration to remove the posters.

The top court, which grilled the Uttar Pradesh government for putting up such posters in public, described the plea as a matter that needed "further elaboration and consideration".

A vacation bench of justices U U Lalit and Aniruddha Bose said a "bench of sufficient strength" would consider next week the Uttar Pradesh government's appeal against the Allahabad High Court order directing the state administration to remove the posters of those accused of vandalism during anti-CAA protests.

It directed the apex court registry to put up the case file before Chief Justice of India (CJI) S A Bobde so that a "bench of sufficient strength can be constituted at the earliest to hear and consider" the case next week.

During the hearing, the bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, that it was a matter of "great importance".

It asked Mehta whether the state government had the power to put up such posters.

The top court, however, said there was no doubt that action should be taken against rioters and they should be punished.

Mehta told the court that the posters were put up as a "deterrent" and the hoardings only said that these persons were liable to pay for their alleged acts during the violence.

Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for former IPS officer S R Darapuri whose poster has also been affixed in Lucknow, told the bench that the state was duty-bound to show the authority of law backing its action.

He said the action of the Uttar Pradesh government amounted to a "mega blanket" approach of naming and shaming these persons without final adjudication and it was an open invitation to common men to lynch them as the posters also had their addresses and photographs.

Patna, Jan 25: JD Women's College in Patna has issued a direction to the students to follow the prescribed dress code on the campus while stating that wearing a 'burqa' in college is prohibited.

"All students have to come to college in the prescribed dress code, every day except on Saturday. Students are prohibited from wearing 'burqa' in college", reads a notice signed by the Principal and Proctor of the college.

The college administration has also imposed a fine of Rs. 250 for violation of the norm.

New Delhi, July 10: Hours before gangster Vikas Dubey was killed in an alleged police encounter on Friday, a plea was filed in the Supreme Court demanding urgent listing for action into his "possible killing" by Uttar Pradesh Police.

Advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay had apprehended in his plea that there is a high possibility that Dubey will also be killed in a 'fake' encounter after his arrest from Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh a day ago.

Upadhyay claimed that the UP Police was expected to "concoct the same story of encounter" for Dubey like it did when four of his associates were killed after the 2 July incident.

Dubey was the primary accused in the killing of eight policemen in Kanpur on July 2. He was arrested from Ujjain on Thursday. He was killed in a police encounter, when he allegedly tried to flee on Friday morning.

"During the hunt for Dubey and co-accused, five of his accused aides were arrested/caught and then killed by the police in the name of encounter...Thus, there is every possibility that even Dubey shall be killed by Uttar Pradesh Police like other co-accused once his custody is obtained," Upadhyay feared.

He submitted that the killing of the accused by the police in the name of encounter no matter how heinous the crime was "against the rule of law and serious violation of human rights and nothing sort of Talibanisation of the country". Upadhyay sought hearing in the matter on Friday itself, citing extreme urgency.