Cook fails to get hundred in final Test as India reduce England to 198/7 on Day 1
London, Sep 7 :Former England skipper Cook, who called time on his illustrious career before the final rubber, top-scored for the hosts with a patient 71 off 190 balls before he was removed by Jasprit Bumrah. Joe Root had won the toss and elected to bat first.
Moeen Ali got to a 50 as well but India came roaring back in the third session after struggling to get wickets in the first two, to reduce England to 198 from 133/2 at one stage.
Pace spearhead Ishant Sharma returned best figures of 3/28, while Ravindra Jadeja -- playing his first match of the series -- and Bumrah grabbed two wickets each conceding 57 and 41 runs, respectively.
At stumps, Jos Buttler (11 batting) and Adil Rashid (4 batting) were at the crease.
Brief scores: England 1st innings 198/7 (Alastair Cook 71, Moeen Ali 50; Ishant Sharma 3/28, Jasprit Bumrah 2/41, R. Jadeja 2/57)
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
36 ex-judges slam Opposition move to impeach Justice Swaminathan
New Delhi (PTI): Thirty-six former judges on Saturday gave a call to people, including parliamentarians, to denounce opposition leaders' move to impeach Madras High Court judge Justice G R Swaminathan, saying such an attempt, if allowed to proceed, would cut at the very roots of democracy and independence of the judiciary.
On December 1, Justice Swaminathan held that the Arulmighu Subramania Swamy Temple was duty-bound to light the lamp at the Deepathoon, in addition to the customary lighting near the Uchi Pillaiyar Mandapam.
The single-judge bench said that doing so would not encroach upon the rights of the adjacent dargah or the Muslim community.
ALSO READ: 55-bed free palliative care centre to open near Bengaluru’s Nelamangala
The order sparked a row, and on December 9, several opposition MPs, led by the DMK, submitted a notice to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to move a motion for the removal of the judge.
Taking serious exception to the move, the former judges in a joint statement said this is a "brazen attempt to browbeat judges who do not fall in line with the ideological and political expectations of a particular section of society".
"If such an attempt is permitted to proceed, it would cut at the very roots of our democracy and the independence of the judiciary," they said.
"We therefore call upon all stakeholders -- Members of Parliament across party lines, members of the Bar, civil society, and citizens at large -- to unequivocally denounce this move and ensure that it is nipped in the bud at the very inception," they added.
The statement emphasised that the judges must remain answerable to their oath and to the Constitution of India, not to "partisan political pressures or ideological intimidation".
"The message from all constitutional stakeholders must be clear and firm: in a republic governed by the rule of law, judgments are tested by appeals and legal critique, and not by threats of impeachment for political nonconformity," it said.
The statement was signed by former Supreme Court judge Krishn Murari J as well as ex-chief justices and former judges of different high courts.
The statement said the opposition party's move is not an "isolated aberration". It fits into a "clear and deeply troubling pattern" in India's recent constitutional history, where sections of the political class have sought to discredit and intimidate the higher judiciary whenever outcomes do not align with their interests, it added.
"The unprecedented bid in 2018 to initiate impeachment proceedings against then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, the sustained campaigns of vilification directed at Chief Justices Ranjan Gogoi, S A Bobde and D Y Chandrachud while they were in office," the statement noted.
"The targeted attacks now being mounted against the incumbent CJI, Justice Surya Kant, whenever a judgment/remark displeases a political constituency, are all manifestations of the same trend," it said.
"This is not principled, reasoned criticism of judicial decisions; it is an attempt to weaponise impeachment and public calumny as instruments of pressure -- a practice that strikes at the heart of judicial independence and the basic norms of constitutional democracy," the statement added.
