New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on pleas challenging the Allahabad High Court judgement, which declared the 2004 Uttar Pradesh law on madrasas as unconstitutional on the ground of it being violative of the principle of secularism.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra heard a battery of lawyers on behalf of eight petitioners besides Additional Solicitor General K M Natraj for the Uttar Pradesh government for almost two days before reserving the verdict.

Commencing the final arguments on the pleas against the verdict, the bench, on Monday heard senior lawyers including Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Salman Khurshid and Menaka Guruswamy for the petitioners.

On Tuesday, the top court also heard senior advocates including Mukul Rohatgi, P Chidambaram and Guru Krishna Kumar for various litigants.

On March 22, the Allahabad High Court had declared the Act as "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate madrasa students in the formal schooling system.

On April 5, the CJI-led bench had provided a breather to about 17 lakh madrasa students by staying the verdict of the High Court scrapping the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004.

The top court heard about eight petitions, including the lead one filed by Anjum Kadari against the high court verdict.

 

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.



Mumbai, Nov 25: Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut on Monday demanded a re-election in Maharashtra using ballot papers, claiming there were irregularities with the electronic voting machines (EVMs).

Talking to reporters, Raut alleged several complaints about EVMs malfunctioning and questioned the integrity of the recently held elections.

The BJP-led Mahayuti won 230 out of 288 seats in the assembly elections, while the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi managed 46 seats, with Shiv Sena (UBT) winning just 20 out of 95 seats it contested.

"We have received nearly 450 complaints regarding EVMs. Despite raising objections repeatedly, no action has been taken on these issues. How can we say these elections were conducted fairly? Hence, I demand that the results be set aside and elections be held again using ballot papers," Raut said.

Citing some instances, he said a candidate in Nashik reportedly received only four votes despite having 65 votes from his family, while in Dombivli, discrepancies were found in EVM tallies, and election officials refused to acknowledge the objections.

The Sena (UBT) leader also questioned the credibility of the landslide victories of some candidates, saying, "What revolutionary work have they done to receive more than 1.5 lakh votes? Even leaders who recently switched parties have become MLAs. This raises suspicions. For the first time, a senior leader like Sharad Pawar has expressed doubts about EVMs, which cannot be ignored."

Asked about the MVA's poor performance in the elections, Raut rejected the idea of blaming a single individual.

"We fought as a united MVA. Even a leader like Sharad Pawar, who commands immense respect in Maharashtra, faced defeat. This shows that we need to analyse the reasons behind the failure. One of the reasons is EVM irregularities and the misuse of the system, unconstitutional practices, and even judicial decisions left unresolved by Justice Chandrachud," he said.

Raut stressed that though internal differences might have existed within the MVA, the failure was collective.

He also accused the Mahayuti of conducting the elections in an unfair manner.

"I cannot call the elections fair given the numerous reports of discrepancies in EVMs, mismatched numbers, and vote irregularities across the state," Raut said.