Meet Sofia Firdous, Odisha’s first-ever woman Muslim MLA

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".

Bengaluru: Police Inspector of Khanapur station has been suspended for dereliction of duty by allegedly letting in political leaders and others inside the station while BJP MLC C T Ravi was in custody in connection with a case registered against him, officials said on Wednesday.

The suspension order was issued by the office of Inspector General of Police, North Zone, Belagavi on December 21, they said.

On December 19, Ravi was arrested by the police from the premises of Suvarna Vidhana Soudha in Belagavi for allegedly using a derogatory word against Minister Laxmi Hebbalkar in the legislative council hall.

According to the official order, when C T Ravi was taken to Khanapura police station for safety reasons, Police Inspector Manjunath Nayak, who was in-charge of the station, was told to use the staff and assign suitable duties to them.

It was also ordered to block the entry of any person other than the accused inside the police station. However, many political leaders and mediapersons stormed inside the police station. This created a noisy atmosphere inside the station, it stated.

The order further stated that as a responsible police inspector grade officer, Nayak failed to prevent several political leaders from entering Khanapur Police station, thus creating a tumultuous atmosphere.

He violated the order of superiors, showed negligence and carelessness while performing duty. Therefore, a departmental inquiry was initiated and Nayak was suspended from service with immediate effect for dereliction of duty, the order stated.

According to a police statement issued on Wednesday, after registration of case under section 75 (sexual harassment) and 79 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in Hirebagewadi police station here, Ravi was taken into custody and handed over to the investigating officers.

However, Ravi was shifted to Khanapura police station considering the security aspect and the huge crowd gathered near Hirebagewadi police station.

"A large number of mediapersons, supporters and party workers gathered and created a chaotic atmosphere in Khanapura police station. There was also the possibility of additional supporters and Congress workers arriving. All these factors also had the potential to disrupt public order," the police stated.

Keeping in mind Ravi's safety, he was shifted to Ramadurga, it said.

New Delhi: The Ministry of Law and Justice of Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government has made an amendment to the Conduct of Election Rules, restricting public access to certain electoral documents that were previously available.

The original Rule 93(2)(a) of the 1961 Conduct of Election Rules stated, “all other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.” However, following the amendment on Friday, the rule now reads, “all other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”

Activists have raised concerns, claiming that the insertion of the phrase “as specified in these rules” limits access to various official documents created during elections to Parliament and Assemblies, which are not explicitly mentioned in the rules.

RTI activist Venkatesh Nayak pointed out that there are numerous documents, though not listed in the rules, that are generated by election officials such as Presiding Officers, Sector Officers (responsible for constituency vulnerability mapping), and those in charge of EVM movement and replacement of defective machines on polling day. These include reports from general, police, and expenditure observers, as well as Returning Officers and Chief Electoral Officers.

Nayak emphasized, “Access to these documents is crucial for ensuring the fairness of elections and the accuracy of results.”

The amendment comes shortly after the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the Election Commission to provide video footage and documents related to votes cast at a polling station in the recent Haryana Assembly elections to lawyer Mehmood Pracha. Pracha has criticized the amendment, asserting that it will withhold essential information. “This is a reconfirmation of the Election Commission’s bias,” he said.

Nayak further stated, “This amendment undermines the principle of full transparency established by the Supreme Court in the Electoral Bonds case. The notification of this amendment on the very day Parliament was adjourned sine die has deprived MPs of the opportunity to challenge its necessity in real time.”