If INDIA bloc was only for parliamentary polls, better wind it up: Omar Abdullah
Jammu (PTI): Asserting that there was no time limit attached to the INDIA bloc, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Thursday expressed dismay over the lack of clarity regarding its leadership and agenda, saying the alliance should be wound up if it was meant only for the parliamentary elections.
Abdullah said the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Congress, and other political parties on the ground will decide how to effectively compete with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
"After the Assembly elections in Delhi, they should call all the alliance members for a meeting. If this alliance was only for the parliamentary elections, it should be wound up, and we will work separately. But if it is meant for Assembly elections as well, we will have to sit together and work collectively," Abdullah told reporters here.
The National Conference leader was replying to a question about an RJD leader's statement that the INDIA bloc was meant only for Lok Sabha elections.
"As far as I remember, no time limit was set for this. The issue is that no meeting of the INDIA bloc is being convened," he said.
Claiming that there is no clarity regarding the main leadership, the party, or the agenda for future strategy (in the INDIA bloc), he said, "Whether this alliance will continue is also unclear."
Abdullah also said that perhaps the members of the INDIA bloc will be called for a meeting after the Delhi elections, and a clarity would emerge.
Replying to another query on increasing support for AAP ahead of next month's Delhi elections, Abdullah said, "I cannot say anything about this at the moment because we have no involvement with Delhi polls. The Aam Aadmi Party, Congress, and other political parties on the ground will decide how to compete with the BJP strongly."
Stating that AAP succeeded twice in Delhi previously, Abdullah said, "This time, we will have to wait and see what the people of Delhi decide."
The Jammu and Kashmir Assembly is convening an orientation programme here on Thursday for the newly-elected legislators.
"Many of us have been members of this House before, but that was when Jammu and Kashmir was a state. The system is different today. We need to understand how we are going to work and what the powers of this Assembly are," Abdullah said.
The chief minister also said that to familiarise everyone with the procedures of this system, the speaker has organised the orientation programme.
"The deputy chairman of Rajya Sabha also participated in this exercise. I believe the experience of the senior members will prove beneficial. In the upcoming sessions, the MLAs will represent the people better and raise their issues effectively," he added.
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.
SC dismisses pleas seeking review of 2023 verdict declining legal sanction to same-sex marriage
New Delhi, Jan 9: The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a batch of pleas seeking to review its October 2023 verdict declining legal sanction to same-sex marriage.
A five-judge bench of Justices B R Gavai, Surya Kant, B V Nagarathna, P S Narasimha and Dipankar Datta took up about 13 petitions related to the matter in chambers and dismissed them.
"We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record. We further find that the view expressed in both the judgements is in accordance with law and as such, no interference is warranted. Accordingly, the review petitions are dismissed," the bench said.
It said the judges have carefully gone through the judgements delivered by Justice (since retired) S Ravindra Bhat speaking for himself and for Justice (since retired) Hima Kohli as well as the concurring opinion expressed by Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, constituting the majority view.
The bench also rejected a prayer made in the review petitions for hearing in an open court.
According to practice, the review pleas are considered in chambers by the judges.
The new bench was constituted after Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the present CJI, recused from hearing the review petitions on July 10, 2024.
Notably, Justice P S Narasimha is the only member of the original Constitution bench comprising five judges which delivered the verdict, as former CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices S K Kaul, Ravindra Bhat and Hima Kohli have retired.
A five-judge Constitution bench led by then CJI Chandrachud on October 17, 2024, refused to accord legal backing to same-sex marriages and held there was "no unqualified right" to marriage with the exception of those recognised by law.
The apex court, however, made a strong pitch for the rights of LGBTQIA++ persons so that they didn't face discrimination in accessing goods and services available to others, safe houses known as "garima greh" in all districts for shelter to members of the community facing harassment and violence, and dedicated hotlines in case of trouble.
In its judgement, the bench held transpersons in heterosexual relationships had the freedom and entitlement to marry under the existing statutory provisions.
It said an entitlement to legal recognition of the right to union, akin to marriage or civil union, or conferring legal status to the relationship could be only done through an "enacted law".
The five-judge Constitution bench delivered four separate verdicts on a batch of 21 petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.
All five judges were unanimous in refusing the legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act and observed it was within Parliament's ambit to change the law for validating such a union.
While former CJI Chandrachud wrote a separate 247-page verdict, Justice Kaul penned a 17-page judgement where he broadly agreed with the former's views.
Justice Bhat, who authored an 89-page judgement for himself and Justice Kohli, disagreed with certain conclusions arrived at by the former CJI, including on applicability of adoption rules for such couples.
Justice Narasimha in his 13-page verdict was in complete agreement with the reasoning and conclusion of Justice Bhat.
The judges were unanimous in holding that queerness was a natural phenomenon and not an "urban or elite" notion.
In his judgement, the former CJI recorded Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's assurance of forming a committee chaired by the cabinet secretary to define and elucidate the scope of entitlements of such couples in a union.
The LGBTQIA++ rights activists, who won a major legal battle in 2018 in the Supreme Court, which decriminalised consensual gay sex, moved the apex court seeking validation of same-sex marriages and consequential reliefs such as rights to adoption, enrolment as parents in schools, opening of bank accounts and availing succession and insurance benefits.
Some of the petitioners sought the apex court to use its plenary power besides the "prestige and moral authority" to push the society to acknowledge such a union and ensure LGBTQIA++ persons led a "dignified" life like heterosexuals.
