Former minister Ramanatha Rai criticised suo moto case over prayer outside mosque
Mangaluru: Former minister B. Ramanatha Rai criticised the filing of a Suo moto case over a prayer conducted outside the Kankanady Masjid, deeming it an unnecessary issue. Rai spoke on the unity of God and asserted that such a minor matter did not warrant legal intervention.
Speaking at a press conference held at the Congress office, Rai highlighted that religious events often occur on public roads without consequence and shouldn't be deemed wrong. He questioned the need for a Suo moto case, especially when more significant incidents, such as provocative speeches, haven't seen similar actions in the past.
Rai urged for legal action against those who filmed the prayer outside the mosque, causing discord and harming communal harmony. Additionally, he appealed for support for Congress candidates contesting from the South West graduate and teacher constituency.
Addressing youth issues, Rai assured that the Congress government would address their concerns, including the implementation of old pension schemes promised in the party's manifesto. He acknowledged the challenges faced by government schools in the district and emphasized the government's commitment to resolving them.
KPCC general secretary Padmaraj R. echoed Rai's sentiments, suggesting that the police department should use discretion in minor matters like this and focus on addressing larger illegal activities that disrupt harmony.
The press conference was attended by various leaders, including Ashraf K., Appi, Ibrahim Kodijal, Shubhodaya Alva, Sasikala, and Deepak Pujari.
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.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
