CMs flag opposition to NCTC

April 17, 2012
17Th

New Delhi, April 17: The Opposition-ruled States used the annual Chief Ministers' meeting on internal security on Monday to focus attention again on their objections to the Centre's proposal to set up a National Counter-Terrorism Centre, saying it violated the principle of federalism.

This was even though Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in his opening remarks, told them that a separate meeting, scheduled for May 5, would be devoted to the subject: “We will discuss the National Counter-Terrorism Centre on May 5 at a separate meeting as some Chief Ministers have suggested.”

The government's internal security agenda included a host of issues, ranging from Left-wing extremism to Kashmir to the Northeast to terrorism, but Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa ensured that the spotlight remained on the Centre-State divide.

The gathering of Chief Ministers provided her with the opportunity to hold parleys of her own at the Tamil Nadu House with her counterparts from Odisha and Gujarat, Naveen Patnaik and Narendra Modi. Punjab Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal, too, was meant to join them, but was unable to make it as his speech got delayed and Ms. Jayalalithaa left for Chennai by a special flight at 4.15 p.m.

However, the three Chief Ministers did not have a joint meeting; Ms. Jayalalithaa had a one-on-one meeting, first with Mr. Patnaik and then with Mr. Modi.

‘No political forum'

Later, Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot, making a pointed reference to the Gujarat and Tamil Nadu Chief Ministers, said a nationally significant conference should not be converted into a “political forum.”

West Bengal's Mamata Banerjee who, like the Opposition Chief Ministers, has been waving the anti-NCTC flag, absented herself from the conference.

More assistance

But in her speech, read out by her Finance Minister Amit Mitra, she said her State could not be an “island of peace” unless the neighbouring States tackled the Maoist problem and the Centre pitched in with more assistance.

Earlier, opening the conference, the Prime Minister struck a conciliatory note: “Internal security,” he said, “is a matter in which the States and the Centre must work together, hand in hand, and in harmony.”

Effective mechanisms

Admitting that the “burden of the fight against terrorism falls largely on the States' machinery,” he stressed that the Centre was “ready to work with the States to put in place strong and effective institutional mechanisms…”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 21,2020

Pune, Jan 21: The Pune session court on Tuesday rejected the bail application of accused Vikram Bhave in the Dabholkar murder case.
Last year, Pune Sessions Court had granted an extension of 90 days to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file a charge-sheet against Bhave.

On August 17, 2019, the court had rejected Bhave's bail plea.

During the course of hearing, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Prakash Suryavanshi, appearing for the CBI, had in June last year contended that Bhave helped the assailants to escape.

The CBI had arrested Bhave and another accused Sanjeev Punalekar from Mumbai on May 25, 2019 in connection with the matter.

Founder of the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (MANS), Dabholkar was shot dead by bike-borne assailants while returning home from a morning walk on August 20, 2013. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 26,2020

Jaipur, Jan 26: Rajasthan on Saturday on Saturday became the third state in the country to pass a resolution urging the Centre to repeal the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

he resolution was passed in the state Assembly amid opposition by the BJP which accused the ruling Congress of pursuing appeasement politics.

It is the second Congress-ruled state to pass such a resolution after Punjab. The Kerala Assembly too had passed such a resolution against the CAA moved jointly by the ruling Left Front alliance and the opposition Congress-led UDF.

The Rajasthan Assembly resolution, passed by voice vote, also asked the Centre to withdraw the new fields of information that have been sought for updation of the National Population Register (NPR) 2020.

"It is evident that the CAA violates the provisions of the Constitution. Therefore, the House resolves to urge upon the government of India to repeal the CAA to avoid any discrimination on the basis of religion in granting citizenship and to ensure equality before law for all religious groups of India," the state's parliamentary affairs minister Shanti Dhariwal said, moving the resolution.

Leader of the opposition Gulab Chand Kataria of the BJP questioned the state's right to challenge the Act.

"Granting citizenship is a matter for the Centre. In such a situation do we have the right to challenge the CAA? The Congress should stop doing appeasement and vote bank politics," he said.

Comments

abdullah
 - 
Sunday, 26 Jan 2020

Salute to Rajasthan Govt for rejecting communal and black CAA bill.   This bill is agaisnt the teach of our Constitution and bjp has never done anything as per our constitutin.   Its trying its best to scrap the constitution and restore it with RSS agenda.    We should oppose any move by bjp against the value of constitution.   As bjp has no respect to our constitution, it has no right to be in power.    Many of bjp leaders are giving statemetns against the value of constitution and such leaders should be treated as anti indians and action be taken on them.   

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 14,2020

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.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.