Senior RSS leader shot at in Punjab, critical

New Delhi, Feb 17: The Supreme Court said on Monday that people have a fundamental right to protest against a law but the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there has to be a balancing factor.

Hearing pleas over the road blocks due to the ongoing protests at Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), a bench comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said its concern is about what will happen if people start protesting on roads.

Democracy works on expressing views but there are lines and boundaries for it, the bench said.

It asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde and advocate Sadhana Ramachandran to talk to Shaheen Bagh protestors and persuade them to move to an alternative site where no public place is blocked.

The matter has been posted for next hearing on February 24.

People have a fundamental right to protest but the thing which is troubling us is the blocking of public roads, the bench said.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Shaheen Bagh protestors should not be given a message that every institution is on its knees trying to persuade them on this issue.

The apex court said that if nothing works, we will leave it to the authorities to deal with the situation.

Protestors have made their made their point and the protests have gone on for quite some time, it said.

Restrictions have been imposed on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and the Okhla underpass, which were closed on December 15 last year due to the protests against CAA and Register of Citizens.

The top court had earlier said the anti-CAA protesters at Delhi's Shaheen Bagh cannot block public roads and create inconvenience for others.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni, who had approached the Delhi high court seeking directions to the Delhi Police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which was blocked by anti-CAA protesters on December 15.

While dealing with Sahni's plea, the high court had asked local authorities to deal with the situation keeping in mind law and order.

Separately, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg has filed a petition in the apex court seeking directions to the authorities to remove the protestors from Shaheen Bagh.

One of the pleas has sought laying down of comprehensive and exhaustive guidelines relating to outright restrictions for holding protests or agitations leading to obstruction of public place.

In his plea, Garg has said that law enforcement machinery was being "held hostage to the whims and fancies of the protesters" who have blocked vehicular and pedestrian movement from the road connecting Delhi to Noida.

State has the duty to protect fundamental rights of citizen who were continuously being harassed by the blockage of arterial road, it said.

"It is disappointing that the state machinery is muted and a silent spectator to hooliganism and vandalism of the protesters who are threatening the existential efficacy of the democracy and the rule of law and had already taken the law and order situation in their own hand," the plea had said.

In his appeal, Sahni had sought supervision of the situation in Shaheen Bagh, where several women are sitting on protest, by a retired Supreme Court judge or a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court.

Sahni has said in his plea that protests in Shaheen Bagh has inspired similar demonstrations in other cities and to allow it to continue would set a wrong precedent.

New Delhi, Feb 5: Following is the chronology of events in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case in which the Delhi High Court on Wednesday said the all the four convicts have to be hanged together, not separately.

- Dec 16, 2012: Paramedical student gang-raped and brutally assaulted by six men in a private bus and thrown out of the moving vehicle along with her male friend. The victims admitted to Safdarjung Hospital.

- Dec 17: Widespread protests erupt demanding stringent action.

- Police identify the accused - bus driver Ram Singh, his brother Mukesh Kumar, Vinay Sharma and Pawan Gupta.

- Dec 18: Ram Singh and three others arrested.

- Dec 20: Victim's friend testifies.

- Dec 21: A delinquent juvenile nabbed from Anand Vihar bus terminal in Delhi. Victim's friend identifies Mukesh as one of the culprits. Police conduct raids in Haryana and Bihar to nab the sixth accused, Akshay Kumar.

- Dec 21-22: Akshay arrested in Aurangabad district of Bihar and brought to Delhi. Victim records statement before the SDM in hospital.

- Dec 26: Following a cardiac arrest, victim flown to Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital by the government.

- Dec 29: Victim succumbs to injuries and other medical conditions. Police add murder charge in the FIR.

- Jan 2, 2013: The then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir inaugurates fast track court (FTC) for speedy trial in sexual offence cases.

- Jan 3: Police file charge sheet against five adults accused of murder, gang-rape, attempt to murder, kidnapping, unnatural offences and dacoity.

- Jan 17: FTC starts proceedings against the five adult accused.

- Jan 28: Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) says minority of the juvenile accused is proved.

- Feb 2: FTC frames charges against five adult accused.

- Feb 28: JJB frames charges against the minor.

- Mar 11: Ram Singh commits suicide in Tihar Jail.

- Jul 8: FTC completes recording of testimonies of prosecution witnesses.

- Jul 11: Delhi High Court allows three international news agencies to cover the trial in the case.

- Aug 22: FTC begins hearing final arguments in trial against four adult accused.

- Aug 31: JJB convicts the minor for gang-rape and murder and awards three-year term at probation home.

- Sep 3: FTC concludes trial. Reserves verdict.

- Sep 10: Court convicts Mukesh, Vinay, Akshay, Pawan of 13 offences including gang-rape, unnatural offence and murder of the girl and attempt to murder her male friend.

- Sep 13: Court awards death penalty to all 4 convicts.

- Sep 23: HC begins hearing the convicts' death sentence reference sent to it by the trial court.

- Jan 3, 2014: HC reserves verdict on convicts' appeals.

- Mar 13: HC upholds death penalty to the 4 convicts.

- Mar 15: SC stays execution of 2 convicts, Mukesh and Pawan, after they file appeals. Later, stays execution of other convicts also.

- Apr 15: SC directs police to produce the dying declaration of the victim.

- Feb 3, 2017: SC says it would hear afresh the aspect of awarding death penalty to the convicts.

- Mar 27: SC reserves verdict on their appeals.

- May 5: SC upholds death penalty to four convicts, says the case falls under the category of 'rarest of rare' and the offence created "tsunami of shock".

- Nov 8: Mukesh, one of the four death row convicts in the case, moves SC seeking review of its verdict upholding the capital punishment awarded to him.

- Dec 12: Delhi Police opposes Mukesh's plea in SC.

- Dec 15: Convicts Vinay Sharma and Pawan Kumar Gupta move SC for review of its verdict.

- May 4, 2018: SC reserves order on review plea of Vinay and Pawan.

- Jul 9: SC dismisses review pleas of three convicts.

- Feb, 2019: Victim's parents move Delhi court for issuance of death warrants of the four convicts

- Dec 10, 2019: Akshay moves plea in SC seeking review of his death penalty.

- Dec 13: Victim's mother moves SC opposing review plea of convict

- Dec 18: SC dismisses Akshay's review plea.

- Delhi govt seeks death warrants for execution of death sentence to the 4 convicts

- Delhi court directs Tihar authorities to issue notice to convicts to avail their remaining legal remedies.

- Dec 19: Delhi HC dismisses plea of Pawan Kumar Gupta claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence.

- Jan 6, 2020: Delhi court dismisses complaint filed by Pawan's father seeking FIR against sole witness

- Jan 7: Delhi court orders 4 convicts to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail.

- Jan 14: SC rejects curative petition of Vinay and Mukesh Kumar.

Mukesh files mercy petition before President

- Jan 17: President Ram Nath Kovind rejects mercy plea of Mukesh.

- Trial court issues death warrants again with execution date as February 1, 6 am.

- Jan 25: Mukesh moves SC against rejection of mercy plea.

- Jan 28: SC hears arguments, reserves verdict

- Jan 29: Convict Akshya Kumar approaches SC with curative petition

- SC rejects plea of Mukesh challenging rejection of his mercy plea.

- Jan 30: SC dismisses curative plea of Akshay Kumar Singh.

- Jan 31: SC dismisses plea filed by Pawan seeking review of its order rejecting his juvenility claim.

- Delhi court again postpones execution of the black warrants till further order.

- Feb 1: Centre moves HC against the trial court order.

- Feb 2: HC reserves judgement on Centre's plea.

- Feb 5: HC dismisses Centre plea against trial court order; says all 4 convicts have to be hanged together. It directs the convicts to pursue all legal remedies within a week, failing which the authorities ordered to take action in accordance with law.

Thiruvananthapuram, Apr 20: Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Sunday alleged that efforts were being made to undermine the achievements of the state government in its fight against Covid-19 and said he was "ignoring" them as it was not the time for controversies.

The Opposition Congress has been raising allegations that a US-based company had been entrusted with the task of collecting data regarding the virus-infected patients in the state, in violation of fundamental rights.

"Many developed nations are in awe of the achievements of Kerala in its fight against Covid-19 pandemic. This is the speciality of Kerala model," Vijayan said. Referring to the data collection charge levelled by the opposition parties, Vijayan said some were engaged in slandering the state government.

"Those who think that the government should not have a reputation for effectively handling the coronavirus outbreak are engaged in slandering the state government. It has happened before, it's happening now also. This is not the time to go behind controversies. People are watching and they will evaluate," Vijayan said in his weekly interactive programme 'Naam munnott'.

He said he had decided to ignore such controversies. The ward-level committees, set up by the government for the anti-coronavirus fight, was collecting information of those under home isolation, elderly persons and those at the risk of the disease using a questionnaire in this regard and upload it on the server of the private agency. The Congress has alleged that the data, collected through the government machinery, was being uploaded not on the government server but on that of the foreign company.