Why concerned with only madrasas, SC asks NCPCR
New Delhi, Oct 22: The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) why was it concerned with madrasas after the child rights body said students of such institutions weren't able to pursue medical and engineering professions.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj made the remarks while reserving the verdict on petitions challenging the Allahabad High Court judgement.
The high court had declared the 2004 Uttar Pradesh law on madrasas as unconstitutional on the ground it violated the principles of secularism.
Senior advocate Swarupama Chaturvedi, representing the NCPCR, said madrasas cannot be seen as an alternative to mainstream education. Moreover, madrasa students will not have the opportunity to pursue careers in fields like navy, medical, engineering and other professions, added Chaturvedi.
"Has NCPCR issued any instructions, cutting across communities, that you will not take children into your religious institutions unless they are taught secular subjects?” asked the CJI.
The child rights body said it had no objection if madrasa education supplemented school education. But, it cannot be a substitute, the counsel for NCPCR said, adding the body had filed a report on the deficiencies of the madrasa system and written to states to inspect them.
The bench asked if the NCPCR had taken a similar stand against institutes of other religions and was aware there were religious instructions provided across India to young children by institutions of their respective religions.
NCPCR's stand, the counsel said, was that religious instructions should not be a substitute to mainstream education.
The top court, however, questioned, “So tell us, has the NCPCR issued a directive that across communities, that don't send children to any monasteries, pathshalas, etc.”
The apex court further asked the NCPCR if the latter had issued a directive saying children must be taught science, maths, when they are sent to these institutions.
“Why are you only concerned with madrasas? We would like to know if you have dealt with other institutes. Has NCPCR been even-handed in its treatment of all communities," asked the bench.
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.
Sanjay Raut demands re-election, alleges irregularities in EVMs during Maharashtra polls
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.
