Tiger claw locket case: Court reserves bail order of accused Varthur Santhosh till Friday
Bengaluru: In a fresh development in the Tiger claw locket case, The second Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) court, which heard the bail plea application of Bigg Boss Kannada season 10 contestant Varthur Santhosh, following his arrest on Sunday, has reserved its decision for Friday, October 27.
Santhosh's lawyer, Nataraj, and the government prosecutor presented the case before the court. Following the hearing, the judge reserved the decision on the bail application for Friday.
Santhosh was taken into custody by forest officials in response to a complaint alleging that he possessed a tiger claw pendant. During his arrest, the officials also confiscated the tiger claw pendant worn by Santhosh. Subsequently, he was presented before the court and remanded to judicial custody for a period of 14 days. Santhosh applied for bail at the time of his arrest.
In the meantime, following Santosh’s arrest, several popular personalities including Sandalwood actors Darshan, Jaggesh and JD(S) Leader Nikhil Kumaraswamy also came under the forest department’s scanner. This has led to a growing chorus for stringent action against the individuals. Simultaneously, the state government on Wednesday formed a high-level committee, in order to create public awareness and to submit a comprehensive report on the measures to be taken to tackle the sale of wildlife articles made from any body part of wild animals.
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 to hear on Aug 14 plea for restoring Jammu & Kashmir statehood
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court would on Thursday hear a plea for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.
A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran is likely to hear the matter, according to the causelist.
On December 11, 2023, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the revocation of Article 370, even as it ordered that assembly elections be held in Jammu and Kashmir by September 2024 and its statehood be restored "at the earliest".
Last year, a plea was filed in the top court seeking directions to the Centre for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir within two months.
The application was filed by Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, an academician, and Khurshaid Ahmad Malik, a socio-political activist.
"It is submitted that the delay in the restoration of statehood would cause serious reduction of democratically elected government in Jammu and Kashmir, causing a grave violation of the idea of federalism which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India," the application said.
The assembly elections and the Lok Sabha polls were conducted peacefully in Jammu and Kashmir without any incident of violence, disturbance or any security concerns being reported, it said.
"Therefore, there is no impediment of security concerns, violence or any other disturbances which would hinder or prevent the grant/restoration of the status of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir as had been assured by the Union of India in the present proceedings," the plea said.
The non-restoration of the status of statehood of Jammu and Kashmir, the plea said, would result in a lesser form of elected democratic government to the state, particularly given legislative assembly results were declared on October 8, 2024.
Despite the apex court's directions for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir "at the earliest and as soon as possible", no steps have been taken by the Centre to provide any timeline for the implementation of such directions, it claimed.
"Jammu and Kashmir is being operated as a Union Territory for a period of almost five years now, which has caused many impediments and grave losses to the development of Jammu and Kashmir and has affected the democratic rights of its citizens," the plea added.
In its December 2023 verdict, the apex court held that Article 370, which was incorporated in the Indian Constitution in 1949 to grant special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was a temporary provision. The President of India was empowered to revoke the measure in the absence of the Constituent Assembly of the erstwhile state whose term expired in 1957, the court said.
