Bengaluru FC rope in Halicharan Narzary on three-year contract
Bengaluru (PTI): Bengaluru FC have inked a three-year contract with midfielder Halicharan Narzary ahead of the upcoming Indian Super League, the Blues announced on Wednesday.
Narzary, who joined Hyderabad FC in 2020, has previously turned out for FC Goa, NorthEast United FC, Kerala Blasters FC and Chennaiyin FC in the ISL.
"I'm excited to join Bengaluru FC, although I am sure that it will be a lot of hard work for me to take my place in the team," said Narzary, after completing the formalities on his deal.
"My target is to reach as many finals as possible and give everything I can for this badge. I have decided to move to BFC as it's one of the best clubs in India in my opinion, and I want to learn as much as I can from this experience."
Having started his career as a teenager at Pailan Arrows (now Indian Arrows) in 2010, Narzary has also turned out for I-League clubs DSK Shivajians FC and Dempo SC.
The 29-year-old represented India at the U19 and U23 levels, and has 27 caps for the senior national team.
"Halicharan is a hardworking and versatile player with a lot of experience in the ISL and we're delighted to be able to sign him. He's been a very important player in a successful period at Hyderabad FC over the last few years and adds competition for places within our team. With the amount of quality that he brings into our squad, we see him as a valuable addition," said Blues' boss Simon Grayson.
Narzary has 103 ISL appearances across nine seasons, and claimed six assists in his most recent campaign, the second highest of any Indian.
The winger was part of Hyderabad FC's title-winning 2021-22 campaign, and was runner-up in the Super Cup with Chennaiyin FC in 2019.
The club has also extended the contracts of Australian defender Aleksandar Jovanovic and midfielder Suresh Wangjam.
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.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
