Journalist Gauri Lankesh, who led crusade against communalism, shot dead

Ramanagara, Sep 19: A case of rape, sexual harassment and criminal intimidation has been registered against BJP MLA Munirathna and six others, police said on Thursday.

It was registered following the complaint of a 40-year-old woman who alleged that the incident took place at a private resort within the Kaggalipura police station’s jurisdiction.

“We received a complaint on Wednesday night and based on it, we have registered case against seven people, including the BJP MLA under various sections for rape by public servant, sexual harassment, criminal intimidation, criminal conspiracy, voyeurism, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, Information Technology Act, and others,” a senior police officer said.

The matter is being investigated, he said.

The fresh FIR against the BJP MLA, also a former Minister, comes days after he was arrested by the Bengaluru Police in connection with the two cases filed against him for alleged harassment, threats and casteist abuse, police said.

NRI professionals hailing from the coastal and Malnad regions of Karnataka, now based in Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Australia, have been urging the Indian government and airlines to introduce a direct flight between Mangalore International Airport (MIA) and Singapore’s Changi Airport.

These professionals argue that Singapore’s strategic location as a hub connecting India with East Asia makes this flight essential. They highlight that this route would serve over 12 million people from the coastal and hill regions of southern India, fostering stronger ties with East Asian economies.

The group, consisting of individuals from Dakshina Kannada, Uttara Kannada, Udupi, Chikkamagaluru, Kodagu, Shivamogga, and Hassan, is spearheaded by Rajesh H Acharya, director of HQ Connections Pte Ltd, Singapore, and coordinator of the Singapore Tuluver community. Acharya emphasized the significance of the Indian government’s Act East policy, which aims to strengthen relationships between India and ASEAN, East Asia, and the Asia-Pacific region.

“This flight will open new doors for cultural, trade, tourism, and technological exchanges between these regions,” Acharya said.

The Mangalore Chapter of IndUS Entrepreneurs (TiE) has also proposed positioning the region as the 'Silicon Beach of India.' A direct flight would provide greater opportunities for entrepreneurs and investors from both Singapore and Mangaluru, boosting business exchanges.

Moreover, Singapore’s Changi Airport could see increased tourism from the Karnataka coast, while Coastal Karnataka would benefit from a surge in visitors from ASEAN countries, the Far East, Australia, New Zealand, and the US West Coast.

While a similar attempt in 2017 did not succeed, Acharya and his team are hopeful that this time their appeal will be taken seriously, tapping into the immense growth potential of the eastern half of the globe.

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.