Doctors halt OPD services amid nationwide strike over Kolkata rape-murder

New Delhi: Two days after he was granted bail and walked out of prison after six months, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal announced his shock resignation from the top post at a party meeting this afternoon. "Two days later, I will resign as Chief Minister. I will not sit on that chair till the people announce their verdict. Elections in Delhi are months away. I got justice from the legal court, now I will get justice from the people's court. I will sit on the Chief Minister's chair only after the order of the people," he said. 

"I want to ask the people of Delhi, is Kejriwal innocent or guilty? If I have worked, vote for me," he said, adding that a meeting of AAP MLAs will be held within the next two days to choose the new Chief Minister for the national capital.

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader said a member of the party will be named Chief Minister after his resignation. He said he would go among the people and ask for their support. Mr Kejriwal also demanded that the elections in the national capital, scheduled for February, be held in November along with the polls in Maharashtra.

In his address to the AAP workers, Mr Kejriwal launched an all-out attack against the Narendra Modi government and said it was more dictatorial than the British.

He said he did not resign as Chief Minister despite being arrested because he wanted to save democracy. "They have registered cases against (Karnataka Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah, (Kerala Chief Minister) Pinarayi Vijayan, (Bengal Chief Minister) Mamata didi (Banerjee). I want to appeal to non-BJP, do not resign if they register cases against you. This is their new game," he said.

Mr Kejriwal said he had also spoken to former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia about the issue. Mr Sisodia too was recently granted bail in connection with corruption allegations surrounding Delhi's now-scrapped liquor policy. "I spoke to Manish, he too has said that he will handle the post only after the people say we are honest. My and Sisodia's fate are in your hands now," he said.

Responding to the shocking development, BJP's Harish Khurana questioned why the AAP leader is creating a drama. "Why after 48 hours? he should resign today. In the past too, he has done this. People of Delhi are asking, he can't go to the secretariat, can't sign documents? What is the point then?" Asked if the BJP was ready for early polls, Mr Khurana replied, "We are ready, whether it is today or tomorrow. We will return to power in Delhi after 25 years."

In a shocking development, a doctor, who worked for the mobile medical services of the Isha Foundation in Coimbatore district, has been arrested by the Coimbatore District Police on charges of sexually assaulting many girl students of a government school during a medical camp. 

The incident came to light during a meeting between education officers and the students, held following orders from Chief Secretary N Muruganandam. The meeting was part of a larger investigation after four staff members of a government college in Valparai were recently arrested for sexually harassing students.

The arrested doctor, identified as 33-year-old S Saravanamoorthy, was a native of Tirupattur district and was part of a mobile medical units team, operated by the Isha Foundation of Jaggi Vasudev alias Sadhguru.

These units have reportedly been conducting free medical camps for school students and general public across Coimbatore under their ‘Action for Rural Rejuvenation’ programme. 

During the meeting with the education officers on Wednesday, September 4, around 12 girl students belonging to classes 6 to 10, raised complaints about how they were touched inappropriately by Saravanamoorthy during these camps.

Immediately after this, the school management reached out to the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), who followed an inquiry with the students. Following this, the Perur All Women police were alerted.

The police officials visited the school and inquired with each of the survivors personally. After recording their statements, they registered a case against the doctor under Section 9(e) (whoever being on the management or staff of a hospital, whether government or private, commits sexual assault on a child in that hospital) read with 10 (punishment for aggravated sexual assault) of Pocso Act. The doctor was later arrested and has been remanded to judicial custody. 

The Isha Foundation, meanwhile, has put out a statement stating that they are fully cooperating with the investigation and that they have a zero tolerance policy for crimes against women and children. 

“It has been brought to our notice that a case has been registered against an employee who is a doctor with our outreach mobile medical services in the rural areas of Coimbatore. Isha holds a Zero Tolerance Policy for any crimes against women and children. We are cooperating with the ongoing police investigation and will take necessary actions by the legal,” read the statement.

New Delhi, Sep 12: Madrasas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court.

The child rights body told the top court that children, who are not in formal schooling system, are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements such as midday meal, uniform etc.

The NCPCR said madrassas merely teaching from a few NCERT books in the curriculum is a "mere guise" in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education.

"A madrassa is not only a unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said.

"Further, madrasas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court.

The child rights body stated that due to the absence of provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the madrassas are also deprived of entitlement as in Section 21 of the Act of 2009.

"A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.

"A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said.

It said most of the madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment to students, including planning social events, or extracurricular activities for 'experiential learning.

In a breather to about 17 lakh madrassa students, the apex court on April 5 had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court that scrapped the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 calling it "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism.

Observing that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government and others on the pleas against the high court order.

The top court said had the high court "prima facie" misconstrued the provisions of the Act, which does not provide for any religious instruction.

The high court had on March 22 declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate students in the formal schooling system.

The high court had declared the law ultra vires on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore.

It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it."

"We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said.

The petitioner had challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board as well as objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department.