Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

bResponding to as many as 17 petitions related to interfaith marriages, the <keyword id="48834" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court" source="Orion">Allahabad High Court</keyword> has asked the Central government to consider setting up a panel for implementing the mandate of <keyword id="2067191" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="article-44" source="Orion">Article 44</keyword>, which says that the "state shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a <keyword id="6374514" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Uniform-Civil-Code" source="Orion">Uniform Civil Code</keyword> (<keyword id="6519955" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="ucc" source="Orion">UCC</keyword>) throughout the territory of India". The court directed marriage registrar or officer of petitioners' districts to immediately register the marriage of the petitioners without insisting or awaiting approval of the competent district authority with regard to conversion of faith. "The UCC is necessity and mandatorily required today. It cannot be made 'purely voluntary' as was observed by <keyword id="751878" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="b-r-ambedkar" source="Orion">B.R. Ambedkar</keyword> 75 years back, in view of the apprehension and fear expressed by the members of the minority community," the court said. Justice Suneet Kumar said it is the need of the hour that the Parliament comes up with a "single family code" to protect interfaith couples from being "hounded as criminals". "The stage has reached that the Parliament should intervene and examine as to whether the country requires multiplicity of marriage and registration laws or the parties to a marriage should be brought under the umbrella of single-family code," the court observed. The standing counsel appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government pointed out that the petitioners' marriage could not be registered without an enquiry by the district authority as they did not get the mandatory approval from district magistrate before converting to the faith of their partner for the purpose of marriage. The petitioners' counsel, however, asserted that citizens have the right to choose their partner and faith; and the conversion took place out of free will. "Interference by the state or by the private respondents (family members) would tantamount to encroaching upon their constitutional right to freedom, choice, life, liberty and to live life on their own terms as man and woman," the counsel said, adding that prior approval of the district authority followed by registration of marriage is not an essential condition before conversion of faith and marriage. The bench then observed that "Marriage is just an association of two persons recognized by law. There is nothing 'special' about marriage to subject it under different laws for various communities, thus erecting barriers in the free intermingling of the citizens. The petitioners herein cannot be hounded as criminals." The court later directed the marriage registrar or officer of the petitioners' districts to immediately register the marriage of the petitioners without insisting or awaiting approval of the competent district authority with regard to the conversion of faith. Justice Suneet Kumar, who passed the court order while allowing the petitions filed by one Mayra a.k.a. Vaishnavi and 16 others pertaining to interfaith marriage contracted by the petitioners, further called upon the Union government to initiate the process as the stage has been reached. "Marriage is just an association of two persons, recognized by law," the court added. The court, in an attempt to envisage the possible effect of UCC on the Indian population if implemented, referred to the Hindu Family Code (HFC), which in the court's opinion acted as uniform civil code and integrated the citizens into an integrated and united Indian citizenry, on terms that is equal and uniform, in so far as the law regulating family law is concerned. Significantly, the court observed the HFC laid the foundation of transforming the traditional Hindu society, and the legislations lifted and transported the Hindu personal law from the shastra or religion and placed it within the domain of the Parliament. The petitioners were major and one of the parties to the marriage had converted to the religion or faith of his or her partner. The petitioners had apprehended threats to their life, liberty and well-being. Hence, they had filed writ petitions seeking protection and registration of their marriages. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/education/news/supreme-court-rejects-the-plea-to-conduct-cbse-icse-class-10-and-12-term-exams-via-hybrid-mode/articleshow/87777517.cms">Supreme Court rejects the plea to conduct CBSE, ICSE class 10 and 12 term exams via hybrid mode</a>

Allahabad High Court says uniform civil code is a necessity and mandatorily required today

The <keyword id="48834" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> has asked the Uttar Pradesh <keyword id="26362" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Government">government</keyword> to consider a night curfew situation as the state witnesses a surge in the number of coronavirus cases. The <keyword id="6355578" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="court">court</keyword> also asked the government to consider vaccination for all. The court directed the state government to ensure Covid protocols are followed in nomination and campaigning in the ongoing <keyword id="49290" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="panchayat">Panchayat</keyword> elections. The directive has been given by a bench comprising Chief Justice <keyword id="845160" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Govind-Mathur">Govind Mathur</keyword> and Justice <keyword id="398263" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="siddharth-verma">Siddharth Verma</keyword>. The court has ordered the police and district administration to make sure people wear masks. The court directed that all citizens should be vaccinated and that officials should visit from house to house to vaccinate people. The court has also asked the state government to consider crowd control in late evening celebrations as well as imposing a night curfew. All schools in Uttar Pradesh, from Classes 1 to 8, have been closed till April 11. Examinations will be conducted with Covid-19 protocol. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/for-the-third-consecutive-day-a-new-unicorn-is-born-from-india-as-pharmeasy-joins-the-billion-dollar-club/articleshow/81943929.cms">For the third consecutive day, a new unicorn is born from India as PharmEasy joins the billion dollar club</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/restaurants-in-maharashtra-are-staring-at-a-slow-death-as-another-lockdown-threatens-to-kill-their-business/articleshow/81924727.cms">Maharashtra restaurant owners fear the current lockdown could be the final nail in the coffin for their business</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/earth-isnt-the-only-planet-with-rain-and-it-could-be-the-key-to-finding-a-habitable-planet-outside-the-solar-system/articleshow/81926108.cms">Raindrops on other planets could be key in search for life beyond the solar system</a>

Allahabad High Court asks UP government to consider night curfew as the state witnesses surge in COVID-19 cases

The <keyword id="48834" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> on Monday ordered a complete lockdown in five cities in Uttar Pradesh till April 26. The five cities are <keyword id="6355192" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Lucknow">Lucknow</keyword>, <keyword id="3481192" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="prayagraj">Prayagraj</keyword>, <keyword id="6357478" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="kanpur">Kanpur</keyword>, <keyword id="11123997" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="varanasi-and-gorakhpur">Varanasi and Gorakhpur</keyword>. All these cities have been reporting a high virus load. Responding to a Public Interest Litigation, the bench, comprising <keyword id="6357043" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="justice">Justice</keyword> Siddhartha Verma and Justice Ajit Kumar, directed the state government to strictly enforce the curbs. The court said that all establishments, be it government or private, except financial institutions and financial departments, medical and health services, industrial and scientific establishments, essential services including municipal functions, and public transport, shall remain closed till April 26. The judiciary will however, function on its own discretion. All shopping complexes and malls shall remain closed during this period and all grocery shops and other commercial shops, excluding medical shops, with more than three workers shall also remain closed. All hotels, restaurants and even the small eating points on carts etc shall remain closed. The court further said that all institutions like educational institutions and other institutions relating to other disciplines and activities, be it government, semi government or private shall remain closed -- their teachers and instructors and other staff included. No social functions and gatherings including marriage functions shall be permitted till April 26. However, in case of already fixed marriages, a necessary permission would have to be taken from the <keyword id="6381069" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="District-Magistrate">District Magistrate</keyword> of the district concerned. Gatherings would be limited to 25 persons and the District Magistrate concerned shall take decision after giving due consideration to the prevailing situation of the impact of Covid-19 including notification of containment zones in the area where such marriage has to take place. All religious activities in public of any kind, is directed to remain suspended in this period and all religious establishments of any kind will also remain closed. All hawkers, including fruits and vegetable vendors, milk vendors and bread vendors, shall go off the road by 11 AM every day till April 26. Containment zones shall be notified every day in two leading Hindi and English newspapers having wide circulation in the districts of Prayagraj, Lucknow, Varanasi, Kanpur Nagar/Dehat, and Gorakhpur. All public movements on roads would remain restricted completely, subject to above directions. Movements would be only allowed in case of medical help and emergencies. The court has further directed the state government to continue implementing the current vaccination programme. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/what-is-allowed-and-what-is-not-during-the-15-days-lockdown-in-rajasthan/articleshow/82138686.cms">Here’s the list of what is allowed and what is not during the 15 days lockdown in Rajasthan</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/checkout-what-is-allowed-and-what-is-not-during-the-curfew-in-delhi-as-per-the-new-guidelines-of-19th-april-2021/articleshow/82142384.cms">Delhi’s one week curfew: checkout what is permitted and what is not</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/whatsapp-users-need-to-update-their-apps-and-report-malicious-links-as-new-malware-makes-the-round-and-cert-in-warns-of-multiple-vulnerabilities/articleshow/82140756.cms">WhatsApp under threat — multiple vulnerabilities in older versions of the app and a new ‘Pink’ malware on the prowl</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/dream11-parent-company-looking-for-an-ipo-in-the-us/articleshow/82139123.cms">Dream11’s parent company is reportedly the latest contender for a public market debut in the US</a>

Allahabad High Court orders complete lockdown in UP's  Lucknow, Prayagraj, Kanpur, Varanasi and Gorakhpur districts till April 26

Prayagraj (Uttar Pradesh), Nov 26 (IANS) The Allahabad High Court has asked the state government and the UP Pollution Control Board to apprise it of the steps being taken to prevent air pollution in Uttar Pradesh. A Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Wednesday directed the two to file counter-affidavits within six weeks to indicate the proposed measures to improve the atmosphere. A bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Saurabh Lavania gave the directions on a public interest lawsuit filed by a Lucknow resident, Radhika Singh, on Wednesday. Appearing for the petitioner, senior counsel Prashant Chandra expressed concern over the increasing air pollution and sought preventive measures to check the smog. The petitioners wanted a complete ban on firecrackers besides seeking other effective measures to improve the air quality in Lucknow and elsewhere in the state. After issuing notices to the respondents, the bench tagged the petition along with another one on the same issue pending in the court since 2017. --IANS amiat/dpb

Allahabad HC asks Yogi govt about steps taken to check pollution

A Waqf is a body recognized by Muslim Law, the Sharia, which owns and manages properties donated for a religious purpose. They are regulated earlier under the Waqf Act of 1954, and now under the Waqf Act of 1995, approved by the Indian Parliament. <keyword id="1037861" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Waqf-Boards">Waqf Boards</keyword> have perpetual succession and they have power to acquire and hold property. In the <keyword id="6354931" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ayodhya">Ayodhya</keyword> title dispute⁠— Ram temple versus Babri Masjid⁠— there are two Waqf Boards involved. One of them represents the Sunni sect and the other represents the Shia sect. The Sunni Waqf Board has spearheaded the claims of the Muslim community’s appeal from 1960s. In 1961, the state government had seized control of the disputed site through the Faizabad court verdict. The Sunni Waqf Board wanted control over the mosque and the removal of the idols inside, which were reportedly placed under the mosque’s dome in on December 22, 1949. The <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> ordered in 2010 that the disputed land should be divided into three parts and one part should go to the Sunni Waqf Board⁠— the other two parts must go to the Hindu sides represented by Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla Virajman (the deity). But the Waqf Board wants the entire land and the mosque to be restored as it was before its demolition in 1992. Shia vs Sunni The Shia Waqf Board has claimed ownership of the disputed land, not the Sunni Waqf Board. Babur, who is said to have built a mosque in the disputed site, was from the Shia sect among Muslims. However, the Shia WAQF Board has supported the construction of Ram temple at the site where the mosque (<keyword id="43572" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Babri-Masjid">Babri Masjid</keyword>) stood earlier. In return, the Shia Waqf Board has demanded that the government must give an alternative site for the mosque construction.

The Waqf Boards and their stance on the Ayodhya dispute awaiting Supreme Court verdict

The Supreme Court on Wednesday made it clear that it will conclude today the day-to-day hearing in the politically sensitive Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case at <keyword id="6354931" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ayodhya">Ayodhya</keyword>, saying "enough is enough". A 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said that it is hearing the Ayodhya land dispute case for the last 39 days and no more time beyond today will be granted to parties to conclude the hearing in the case. "This matter is going to be finished today by 5 PM. Enough is enough," the bench, which also comprises justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer, said at the start of the proceedings on the 40th day. The apex court had earlier said the hearing would be concluded on October 17. Now deadline has been advanced by one more day. The CJI is demitting office on November 17. The bench also rejected a plea of a party seeking to intervene in the ongoing hearing and said no such interventions will be allowed now at this stage of proceedings. Senior advocate C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for a Hindu party, has commenced his submission in response to a lawsuit filed by Sunni Waqf board in 1961 seeking title claim over the 2.77 acre disputed land at Ayodhya. Fourteen appeals have been filed in the apex court against the 2010 <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

Enough is enough, says Supreme court Chief Justice on Ayodhya--wants to end arguments today

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing the Muslim parties in the Ram-Janmbhoomi-Dabri masjid land dispute case, tore up a pictorial map showing the exact birthplace of Lord Ram during the hearings in the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The reference to the pictorial map showing the exact birthplace of Lord Ram at the disputed site in Ayodhya by Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing the All India Hindu Mahasabha, was objected to by Dhavan. Dhavan then asked the bench as to what he should do with it, to which the bench said that he can shred it into pieces. Dhavan then tore the pictorial map, provided by the counsel for All India Hindu Mahasabha, in the courtroom. During the arguments, Singh referred to various aspects of the <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> judgement and said there has been long faith and belief on the part of Hindus with regard to the scared nature of the birthplace of Lord Ram. Dhavan had also objected to Singh's attempt to refer to a book on Ayodhya, written by former IPS officer <keyword id="207684" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kishore-Kunal">Kishore Kunal</keyword>, saying such attempts should be disallowed. The bench had then asked Singh to proceed with the hearing saying, "Mr Dhavan, we have taken note of your objection."

Lawyer tears up pictoral map as courtroom drama peaks on the last day of Ayodhya arguments

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> Wednesday allowed the Uttar Pradesh government to fill up vacancies for 69,000 assistant basic <keyword id="6356089" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="teachers">teachers</keyword> in the state as per the results it declared in May this year. A bench headed by Justice U U Lalit dismissed a batch of petitions including the one filed by the 'Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Mitra Association' challenging the Allahabad High Court decision to uphold the cut off marks for selection of assistant basic teachers in the states. The association and several other individual 'Shiksha Mitras' had challenged the <keyword id="95895" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="UP-government">UP government</keyword>'s order of January 7, 2019 by which the qualifying marks for the Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination 2019 were fixed at 65 and 60 for general and reserved categories respectively. The bench, in its judgement, said it has recorded the submission of the state government that a 'Shiksha Mitra' who has been unable to crack the test, would be given another chance to compete in the next selection. The top court said it will be open to the state to give another chance to 'Shiksha Mitra' to compete for selection as assistant basic teachers. The court had earlier sought the state's reply on pleas challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict upholding Uttar Pradesh government's decision to keep higher cut-off marks in the appointment of 69,000 assistant basic teachers. It had asked the state government to explain as to why it changed the earlier criteria of 45 per cent cut-off marks for general category and 40 per cent cut-off marks for reserved category. The state submitted that the cut off was increased to previous selection process to attract best candidates and there was nothing illegal in its decision. Several petitions were filed challenging the May 6 decision of the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court which paved the way for completing the process for appointment assistant basic teachers. It had directed the state government to complete the process within the next three months. On July 25, 2017, the top court had asked the state government to cancel the recruitment of 1,37, 517 teachers to the post of TET Assistant Teacher but give them the benefit of experience in two recruitments. Six months later, on January 17, 2018, the government had issued the order for the written examination for the assistant teachers' posts for the first time to hire 69,000 teachers.

Supreme Court allows UP government to fill up the 69,000 vacancies for teachers

In some relief to daily commuters, the <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> ordered the Delhi-Noida-Direct(DND) flyway to be toll free. 
 Pronouncing its order on a PIL filed by the <keyword id="2489659" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Federation-of-Noida-Residents-Welfare-Associations">Federation of Noida Residents Welfare Associations</keyword> (FONRWA), the high court directed the order to be implemented with immediate effect. 
 
The DND flyway connects Delhi on the west bank of the Yamuna with Noida and East Delhi. 
 
The DND flyway witnessed several protests and demonstrations seeking scrapping of the Rs 28 toll following allegations that the operator of the 9.2-km-long stretch (including the Mayur Vihar link) has already made significant profits. 
 
(Image: Indiatimes)

Delhi-Noida expressway becomes toll free

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> today sought responses from senior <keyword id="6356617" type="POSITION" weightage="80" keywordseo="bjp-leader">BJP leader</keyword> L K Advani and others on a plea against dropping of criminal conspiracy charge against them in the Babri mosque <keyword id="6367653" type="PERSON" weightage="80" keywordseo="Demolition">demolition</keyword> case. 
 A bench headed by <keyword id="42759" type="POSITION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Chief-Justice">Chief Justice</keyword> H L Dattu issued notices to the BJP leader and the CBI on a separate plea filed by Haji Mahboob Ahmad, one of the petitioners in the Babri mosque case. 
 
 
Ahmad, in his plea, has alleged that CBI may dilute its stand in the wake of the change in the government at the Centre. 
 Earlier, the CBI had moved the apex court against <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword>'s verdict on dropping conspiracy charge against Advani and 19 others in Babri mosque demolition case. 
 
 
During the brief hearing, CBI today sought time for filing a fresh affidavit on delay in filing the appeal and on the merits of the case. 
 
The court allowed the plea of the probe agency and granted four weeks time to file the response. 
 
The apex court had earlier pulled up CBI for the delay in filing an appeal against the Allahabad High Court verdict. 
 
 
CBI has challenged in the Supreme Court the May 21, 2010 order of the high court, which had upheld a special court's decision to drop the charge against the leaders. 
 In its verdict, the high court had upheld the special <keyword id="6362306" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="CBI-court">CBI court</keyword> order dropping conspiracy charge against Advani, <keyword id="6361634" type="PERSON" weightage="80" keywordseo="Kalyan-Singh">Kalyan Singh</keyword>, <keyword id="42642" type="PERSON" weightage="80" keywordseo="Uma-Bharti">Uma Bharti</keyword>, Vinay Katiyar and Murli Manohar Joshi. 
 
The others against whom the charge was dropped included Satish Pradhan, C R Bansal, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, Sadhvi Ritambhara, V H Dalmia, Mahant Avaidhynath, R V Vedanti, Param Hans Ram Chandra Das, Jagdish Muni Maharaj, B L Sharma, Nritya Gopal Das, Dharam Das, Satish Nagar and Moreshwar Save. 
 
Bal Thackeray's name was removed from the list of accused persons after his death. 
 
While upholding the special court's order, the high court 
 
 While upholding the special court's order, the high court had allowed CBI to proceed with other charges against Advani and others in a <keyword id="2788382" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Rae-Bareily-court">Rae Bareily court</keyword>, under whose jurisdiction the case falls. 
 
The May 2010 order of the high court had said there was no merit in CBI's revision petition against the May 4, 2001 order of the special court which had directed dropping of criminal conspiracy charge against them. 
 
 
There are two sets of cases -- one against Advani and others who were on the dais at Ram Katha Kunj in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992 when the Babri mosque was demolished, while the other case was against lakhs of unknown 'karsevaks' who were in and around the disputed structure. 
 
CBI had charge sheeted Advani and 20 others under sections 153A (promoting enmity between classes), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505 (false statements, rumours etc. circulated with the intent to cause mutiny or disturb public peace) of the IPC. 
 
It had subsequently invoked charges under section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of IPC which was quashed by the special court whose decision was upheld by the high court. 
While upholding the special court's order, the high court had said CBI at no point of time, either during the trial at Rae Bareily or in its revision petition, ever stated that there was offence of criminal conspiracy against the leaders.

You Searched For "Allahabad High Court" and got 10 results

Allahabad High Court says uniform civil code is a necessity and mandatorily required today

IANS

Allahabad High Court asks UP government to consider night curfew as the state witnesses surge in COVID-19 cases

IANS

Allahabad High Court orders complete lockdown in UP's Lucknow, Prayagraj, Kanpur, Varanasi and Gorakhpur districts till April 26

IANS

Allahabad HC asks Yogi govt about steps taken to check pollution

IANS

The Waqf Boards and their stance on the Ayodhya dispute awaiting Supreme Court verdict

BI India Bureau

Enough is enough, says Supreme court Chief Justice on Ayodhya--wants to end arguments today

PTI

Lawyer tears up pictoral map as courtroom drama peaks on the last day of Ayodhya arguments

PTI

Supreme Court allows UP government to fill up the 69,000 vacancies for teachers

PTI

Delhi-Noida expressway becomes toll free

BI India Bureau

New Supreme Court notice to Advani, 19 others in Babri demolition case

BI India Bureau

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides