NDA’s Waqf Bill is against ‘social justice’; it proves they are communals: Karnataka CM

In response to a surge in dengue cases, the Karnataka government has declared dengue an epidemic, laying out specific responsibilities for the public and government agencies, and empowering officials to take necessary actions.

A recent gazette notification announced the amendment of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Regulations, 2020, now titled the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Regulations, 2024. These updated regulations, effective from August 31, mandate comprehensive measures to prevent mosquito breeding, which is a primary cause of dengue.

The regulations specify that owners, builders, managers, institutions, and occupants of any land, building, household, or public space—such as parks, water tanks, or playgrounds—are responsible for enforcing measures to prevent mosquito breeding. These measures include:

• Covering water storage containers and tanks.
• Proper disposal of solid waste to prevent water accumulation.
• Ensuring that unused tanks, pits, burrows, or buildings under construction do not collect water.

These requirements apply to both private and government-owned properties, as well as semi-government establishments.

Under the amended regulations, the Chief Commissioner of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in Bengaluru and the Deputy Commissioners of each district outside BBMP jurisdiction have been designated as the competent authorities to oversee the implementation of these measures. They have the authority to inspect properties, issue notices, and enforce compliance to prevent the spread of dengue.

As part of the enforcement, the authorities have the power to inspect lands, buildings, water tanks, parks, playgrounds, and other areas periodically. If they find any collection of water that could serve as a breeding ground for mosquitoes, they are authorized to issue notices requiring the responsible parties to eliminate the water and destroy the breeding sites. Failure to comply can result in a penalty of up to Rs 2,000. An additional 50% of the initial penalty may be levied for each week of continued non-compliance after a notice has been served.

In a proactive step, the BBMP and the state health department have launched a pilot study, installing 120 ovitraps in Gopalpura to help curb the spread of dengue.

As of September 2, Karnataka has reported a total of 25,408 dengue cases, resulting in 12 deaths.

The West Bengal Assembly on September 3 unanimously passed the state anti-rape Bill after Opposition lend full support to it.

The anti-rape Bill aims at quick investigation, fast justice delivery and enhanced punishment, Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee said in assembly.

The proposed amendments to the Bill moved by Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari, were, however, not accepted by the House. The Bill was tabled by state Law Minister Moloy Ghatak.

The draft legislation seeks capital punishment for persons convicted of rape if their actions result in the victim's death or leave her in a vegetative state.

Additionally, it stipulates a life sentence without parole for those convicted of rape.

A two-day special session of the assembly has been summoned on September 2 in the wake of the rape-murder of a woman medic at the state-run RG Kar Medical College and Hospital last month.

Also Read | All about Bengal’s Aparajita Bill that proposes death sentence for rape convicts

Titled the 'Aparajita Woman and Child Bill (West Bengal Criminal Laws and Amendment) Bill 2024,' the legislation aims to strengthen protections for women and children by revising and introducing new provisions related to rape and sexual offences.

The bill is aimed at amending the existing provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, “in their application to the state of West Bengal to enhance punishment and to constitute the framework for…expeditious investigation and trial of the heinous act of violence against women and children.”

The Bill also seeks to set up fast-track courts for rape cases. “To expedite investigations and ensure swift justice for victims, this Bill proposes dedicated special courts and investigation teams. These specialised units will be equipped with the necessary resources and expertise to handle cases of rape of women and sexual offences against children efficiently, effectively and timely, thereby minimising the trauma experienced by victims and their families”.

‘Aparajita Task Force’ will be constituted to investigate cases of rape or atrocities on women and children. The task force will be formed at the district level and headed by a deputy superintendent of police for the investigation.

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.