Jamia Millia Islamia varsity’s new night out rule for girls sparks row

News Network
September 28, 2017

New Delhi, Sept 28: Amid an ongoing row over the alleged police crackdown on girls at the Banaras Hindu University (BHU), a fresh 'night out' rule framed by the Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University for its female students has now triggered a fresh controversy.

The new rules framed by Delhi's central university requires its female students to ask their parents – preferably their fathers – to send a text message to the hostel warden approving their wards' plan to spend a night out.

However, no such rules exist for the male students of Jamia university, a DNA report said.

JMI's new 'night out' rules are applicable to all female students, including undergraduate and postgraduate ones, besides research scholars.

The rules require the parents to send a text message to the warden expressing their consent about their child's decision to spend the night out along with her name and her room number in the hostel.

It should also mention dates of absence from the hostel. Earlier, the residents of girls' hostels only had to get a form filled by their local guardians to get their hostel leaves approved.

Students said they have been asked to get permission preferably from the father as the university feels the mother can easily be "manipulated".

Agitated by the "regressive" move, a group of women from JMI's Hall of Girls Residence (Old) wrote to the Provost, saying the rule has been imposed without giving any prior intimation to them.

"We have been verbally told by the warden and the Provost about this new diktat, and no written notice or circular was issued by the university," said a third-year undergraduate student.

Azra Khursheed, the Provost of the Hall of Girls Residence (Old), however, termed it a "disciplinary" rule rather than a "discriminatory" one.

"There have been several instances of girls saying that they were going to visit their local guardians, but they actually went somewhere else. Keeping in mind their safety and security, the university has decided to keep their parents in the loop," she said.

Asked why such a rule is not there for the residents of boys' hostels, Khursheed said, "The safety of girls is our priority as boys can handle several situations on their own. Moreover, parents of girls trust us with their safety when they choose us over hundreds of PGs available around Jamia campus."

"The rule is a sheer violation of our privacy. We are capable of taking our own decisions. We don't need our parents' permission for each and everything," said a Ph.D. scholar.

Meanwhile, some residents of boys' hostels also criticised the move. "This is not the first time when different rules are being imposed on girls. The university has set a curfew limit of 8 pm for them even as there is no such limit for us. Unlike girls, we don't need to mark attendance every night," a first-year management student said.

Comments

Agreed. What you say is true. They will blame the university for "not taking care".

 

But, they should impose such restrictions on boys too. Although they are less vulnerable unlike females, there are chances of them falling into drugs, liquor, and othe rforms of corruption. This can also bring disrepute to the university, No.?

P
 - 
Thursday, 28 Sep 2017

Young minds never understand the wolves n sheeps skin... If something gone wrong (i hope not)  the parents , the authorities, the society will all blame the university for not taking care .

 

This is the reality...

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
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

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.
News Network
November 14,2024

Bengaluru: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Thursday backed Chief Minister Siddaramaiah over his claim that the BJP had offered Rs 50 crore each to 50 Congress MLAs in an attempt to "topple" the state government.

Addressing reporters here, Shivakumar, also the Congress state president, said, “The BJP indeed lured 50 Congress MLAs with Rs 50 crore each.”

He defended Siddaramaiah’s statement and said the Congress MLAs were briefed about the BJP’s alleged 'Operation Lotus', a term used to describe the BJP's attempts to destabilise ruling governments through horse-trading.

“Some of our MLAs informed the Chief Minister about this matter, and he, in turn, shared it with the media,” Shivakumar said.

At an event in Mysuru, Siddaramaiah reiterated the claim that "none of the Congress MLAs had accepted the offer".

He also accused the BJP of filing false cases against him in a bid to "remove him and overthrow his government".

The BJP has yet to respond to the allegations.

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.
News Network
November 11,2024

Mangaluru: Six youths including teenagers have been arrested by the Bantwal Rural Police in connection with a brutal assault on 21-year-old Aboobakar (name changed to hide identity), an incident that was widely shared on social media after footage revealed the victim tied to a pole and violently beaten.

The arrested individuals, all from Kanchinadkapadavu, Sajipanadu village in Ullal Taluk, have been identified as Mohammad Sapwan (25), Mohammad Rizwan (25), Irfan (27), Anis Ahmad (19), Nasir (27), and Shakeer (18). According to police reports, the assault took place on November 7 in Kanchinadkapadavu.

The sequence of events began when Aboobakar was reportedly called to a residence in Kanchinadkapadavu by a female relative. Upon his arrival, he was confronted by the accused, who questioned his presence, tied him to a pole with ropes, and attacked him while he was shirtless. 

Aboobakar managed to file a police complaint the following day, detailing the assault. As his injuries worsened, he was admitted to a private hospital in Mangaluru.

While in the hospital, Aboobakar alleged that his attackers intended to kill him during the assault. This statement led to additional charges of attempted murder being filed. 

Police officials stated that the suspects were subsequently apprehended, charged with group assault and attempted murder, and placed in judicial custody. The investigation is ongoing, and further details are awaited.

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.