‘Madrasas unsuitable place for children to receive proper education’: NCPCR’s claim in SC

News Network
September 12, 2024

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.

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
December 12,2024

cabinet.jpg

New Delhi: The Union Cabinet on Thursday approved bills to implement 'One Nation, One Election', and the draft legislations are likely to be introduced in Parliament in the ongoing Winter session, sources said.

The decision was taken at a meeting of the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The government is keen on holding wider consultations on bills which are likely to be referred to a parliamentary committee.

Sources said the government was also keen to consult the Speakers of various state legislative assemblies through the committee.

Moving ahead with its 'one nation, one election' plan, the government in September accepted the recommendations of the high-level committee for holding simultaneous polls for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies and local bodies in a phased manner.

Citing recommendations of the high-level committee, sources had said one of the proposed bills would seek to amend Article 82A by adding sub-clause (1) relating to the appointed date. It will also seek to insert sub-clause (2) to Article 82A relating to the end of terms of the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies together.

It also proposes to amend Article 83(2) and insert new sub-clauses (3) and (4) relating to the duration and dissolution of the Lok Sabha. It also has provisions related to the dissolution of the legislative assemblies and amending Article 327 to insert the term simultaneous elections.

This bill will not require ratification by at least 50 per cent of the states, the recommendation said.

However, any move to hold local body elections together with Lok Sabha and state assemblies will require ratification by at least 50 per cent of the state assemblies as it deals with matters relating to state affairs.

Another bill will be an ordinary one to amend provisions in three laws dealing with Union territories having legislative assemblies -- Puducherry, Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir -- to align the terms of these Houses with other legislative assemblies and the Lok Sabha as proposed in the first constitutional amendment bill.

The statutes it proposes to amend are the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act-1991, the Government of Union Territories Act-1963 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act-2019.

The proposed bill will be an ordinary legislation not requiring a change in the Constitution and will also not need ratification by the states.

The high-level committee had proposed amendments to three Articles, insertion of 12 new sub-clauses in the existing articles and tweaking three laws related to Union Territories having legislative assemblies. The total number of amendments and new insertions stands at 18.

In its report submitted to the government in March, just before the general election was announced, the panel recommended implementing one nation, one election in two phases.

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
December 7,2024

In a stark reminder of the growing menace of cyber fraud, a man was duped of ₹46 lakh after falling prey to a fake stock market trading scam orchestrated via WhatsApp. The incident highlights the need for heightened awareness about online financial schemes and the importance of verifying investment opportunities.

How the Scam Unfolded
The victim reported receiving a WhatsApp message from a person posing as "Shraddha Belani," a supposed representative of ARES Management Corporation. The fraudster lured the victim with promises of a 500% profit through stock market trading. Trusting the offer, the victim followed an online registration link and was added to a WhatsApp group named ‘H 777 ARES Stock Exchange Group.’

The scam began small, with the victim transferring ₹2 lakh on October 24 to purchase stocks. He received a ₹50,000 profit the very next day, creating a false sense of trust. Encouraged by this, the victim made phased investments totaling ₹46 lakh.

The Trap Tightens
The fraud came to light on November 29 when the victim attempted to withdraw ₹20 lakh to meet financial needs. Unable to access his funds, he contacted the scamsters, who demanded an additional ₹8.78 lakh to "unlock" his account. At this point, the victim realized he had been duped and promptly filed a complaint via the Cyber Crime Portal.

Police Action and Awareness Message
A case has been registered at the Mangaluru Cyber Economic & Narcotics Crime (CEN) station, and an investigation is underway. Authorities are urging the public to exercise caution while engaging in online financial transactions and to verify the authenticity of investment opportunities before parting with their money.

Avoid Falling Victim

  1. Verify Sources: Never trust unsolicited messages, emails, or calls about investments.
  2. Beware of Unrealistic Promises: Offers of guaranteed high returns are often fraudulent.
  3. Consult Experts: Always seek advice from trusted financial advisors or institutions.
  4. Report Suspicious Activity: Use the Cyber Crime Portal to report scams promptly.

The incident serves as a stark warning against the perils of online fraud. Staying vigilant and skeptical can save you from falling into similar traps.

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
December 16,2024

The Supreme Court on Monday while hearing a petition against the stand of Karnataka High Court's view that shouting 'Jai Sriram' inside a mosque was not an offence, sought the stand of the State of Karnataka in the matter.

A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Sandeep Mehta was hearing the matter.

"Alright, they were shouting a particular religious slogan. How is that an offence?" Justice Mehta asked, as bench posted the matter for January 2025.

The bench asked if the accused persons had been identified. Kamat replied that CCT visuals had been collected and the police identified the accused persons, as recorded in the remand report. The bench asked if merely spotting the accused near the mosque would mean that they shouted the slogans.

"Are you able to identify the actual accused? What material you have brought?" the Court asked. Kamat clarified that he was only representing the complainant (caretaker of the mosque) and it is for the police to conduct the investigation and collect the evidence. The FIR need only give information about the offence and need not be an 'encyclopedia' containing all evidence, he added.

This comes after a petition was filed in the Supreme Court questioning the Karnataka High Court's order of September 13, 2024 which quashed an FIR lodged against two men for raising the 'Jai Shri Ram' slogan within mosque premises.

The high court's single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna had said, "It is ununderstandable as to how if someone shouts 'Jai Shri Ram' it would outrage the religious feeling of any class, when the complainant himself states that Hindu - Muslims are living in harmony in the area".

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.