Class 12 student fakes own kidnapping to get Rs 3 cr to buy car

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.

Ahmedabad, Jan 12: Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Saturday unveiled over 5.5 lakh postcards written by Ahmedabad residents to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, thanking him for the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

The postcards were stacked on the dais as Shah addressed a gathering of BJP workers who formed letters `C A A’ in front of him.

The state BJP claimed that the party’s “largest awareness campaign” in support of the CAA had found a place in Limca Book of Records and World Record of India.

“It is not just words but a letter of thanks written from the heart. Our public outreach programme is a reply to the lies being spread against the CAA,” Shah said addressing BJP workers from his former Assembly constituency Naranpura.

The BJP had promised to enact the CAA in its manifesto, he said, asking why the Congress did not oppose it then.

Targeting Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot, Shah said, “Congress has a government in Rajasthan. The Congress party in that state had promised that Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan would be given citizenship.

“Why do you oppose it when we fulfill the promise made by you?” the Union home minister asked.

“In 2006 and 2009, Ashok Gehlot wrote a letter for the same. We covered Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians, all of them under the Act, you had only mentioned Hindus and Sikhs,” Shah claimed.

Saying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi, by bringing in the CAA, granted “human rights to lakhs of people”, he asked why opposition was against it.

He challenged “Rahul Baba” (Congress leader Rahul Gandhi), Mamata Banerjee and Arvind Kejriwal to show if any provision of the CAA took away the citizenship of Indian Muslims.

“There is no such provision. Lakhs and crores of people have come to India from Pakistan, Bangladesh to save their religion, their self-respect, to save themselves. Where else will they go?” he asked.

“From the first prime minister of the country Jawaharlal Nehru to the first home minister, first president of the country, and Mahatma Gandhi himself had said that whoever comes to India from Pakistan will be granted citizenship. Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains coming from Pakistan have nowhere else to go,” he said.

May 7: India is projected to record the highest number of births in the 9 months since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March, with more than 20 million babies expected to be born in the country between March and December, according to top UN body.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) warned that pregnant mothers and babies born during the pandemic across the world were threatened by strained health systems and disruptions in services.

An estimated 116 million babies will be born under the shadow of COVID-19 pandemic, UNICEF said on Wednesday, ahead of Mother's Day, observed on May 10.

These babies are projected to be born up to 40 weeks after COVID-19 was recognised as a pandemic on March 11.

The highest numbers of births in the 9 months since the pandemic was declared are expected to occur in India, where 20.1 million babies are projected to be born between March 11 and December 16. Other countries with the expected highest numbers of births during this period are China (13.5 million), Nigeria (6.4 million), Pakistan (5 million) and Indonesia (4 million), it said.

"Most of these countries had high neonatal mortality rates even before the pandemic and may see these levels increase with COVID-19 conditions," UNICEF said.

It is estimated that there will be 24.1 million births in India for the January-December 2020 period.

UNICEF warned that COVID-19 containment measures can disrupt life-saving health services such as childbirth care, putting millions of pregnant mothers and their babies at great risk.

Even wealthier countries are affected by this crisis. In the US, the sixth-highest country in terms of the expected number of births, over 3.3 million babies are projected to be born between March 11 and December 16.

"New mothers and newborns will be greeted by harsh realities," UNICEF said, adding they include global containment measures such as lockdowns and curfews; health centres overwhelmed with response efforts; supply and equipment shortages; and a lack of sufficient skilled birth attendants as health workers, including midwives, are redeployed to treat COVID-19 patients.

"Millions of mothers all over the world embarked on a journey of parenthood in the world as it was. They now must prepare to bring a life into the world as it has become – a world where expecting mothers are afraid to go to health centres for fear of getting infected, or missing out on emergency care due to strained health services and lockdowns," UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore said.

"It is hard to imagine how much the coronavirus pandemic has recast motherhood" Fore said.

UNICEF said its analysis was based on data from World Population Prospects 2019 of the UN Population Division.

An average full-term pregnancy typically lasts a complete 9 months, or 39 to 40 weeks. For the purposes of this estimate, the number of births for a 40-week period in 2020 was calculated.

The 40-week period of March 11 to December 16 is used in this estimate based upon the WHO's March 11 assessment that COVID-19 can be characterised as a pandemic.

UNICEF warned that although evidence suggests that pregnant mothers are not more affected by COVID-19 than others, countries need to ensure they still have access to antenatal, delivery and postnatal services.

Similarly, sick newborns need emergency services as they are at high risk of death. New families require support to start breastfeeding, and to get medicines, vaccines and nutrition to keep their babies healthy, it said.

"This is a particularly poignant Mother's Day, as many families have been forced apart during the coronavirus pandemic, but it is also a time for unity, a time to bring everyone together in solidarity. We can help save lives by making sure that every pregnant mother receives the support she needs to give birth safely in the months to come," Fore said.

Issuing an urgent appeal to governments and health care providers to save lives in the coming months, UNICEF said efforts must be made to help pregnant women receive antenatal checkups, skilled delivery care, postnatal care services, and care related to COVID-19 as needed.

Ensure health workers are provided with the necessary personal protective equipment and get priority testing and vaccination once a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available so that can deliver high quality care to all pregnant women and newborn babies during the pandemic, it said.

While it is not yet known whether the virus is transmitted from a mother to her baby during pregnancy and delivery, UNICEF advised all pregnant women to follow precautions to protect themselves from exposure to the virus.

Closely monitor themselves for symptoms of COVID-19 and seek advice from the nearest designated facility if they have concerns or experience symptoms. Pregnant women should also take the same precautions to avoid COVID -19 infection as other people: practice physical distancing, avoid physical gatherings and use online health services, it said.

UNICEF said even before COVID-19 pandemic, an estimated 2.8 million pregnant women and newborns died every year, or 1 every 11 seconds, mostly of preventable causes.

The agency called for immediate investment in health workers with the right training, who are equipped with the right medicines to ensure every mother and newborn is cared for by a safe pair of hands to prevent and treat complications during pregnancy, delivery and birth.