BJP workers begin 'protest day', block highways against arrest of Surendran
Thiruvananthapuram, Nov 18: BJP workers in Kerala blocked highways on Sunday to protest the arrest of party general secretary Surendran, who was taken into custody on Saturday while on his way to the Lord Ayyappa shrine.
The protestors, including women, squatted on roads, blocking traffic at various places, including in state capital, Kochi, Thrissur, Palakkad and in front of Kottarakkara sub-jail, where Surendran has been lodged, and also the northernmost Kasaragod district.
In all the places, the protesters were seen clapping and chanting "Swamiye Ayyappa".
Addressing workers at Thiruvananthapuram, BJP leader M S Kumar said police had so far not succeeded in bringing even a single young woman to the Lord Ayyappa Temple at Sabarimala after the Supreme Court on September 28 allowed women of all age groups to offer prayers at the shrine.
While the CPI(M)-led LDF government's stand is that they were constitutionally bound to implement the court order, the main opposition Congress has said they are with the believers.
The BJP/RSS and right wing outfits have made it clear that they would not allow any woman in the 10-50 age group to offer prayers at the shrine, where the deity is "Naishtika Brahmachari" (perennial celibate).
Surendran and two others with him had been taken into preventive custody Saturday night and brought to the Chittar police station, about 50 km from Sabarimala, after they forcibly tried to leave for the hill shrine at Sabarimala.
Police had cited law and order issues and tense situation at the temple complex to deter him from going to Sabarimala.
However, when they insisted, Surendran and the others, all with the "Irumudikettu" (bundle of offerings for Lord Ayyappa)were taken into preventive custody. They were then produced before the Thiruvalla magistrate, who remanded them to 14-day judicial custody.
Surendran was later taken to the Kottarakkara sub jail.
The BJP protest comes a day after the hartal called by the Hindu Aikya Vedi against the preventive custody of their leader K P Sasikala.She was later granted bail.
When the Ayyappa temple had opened for monthly pujas in October and early this month, it witnessed a string of protests from frenzied devotees against the entry of young women.
A few of them who made a bid to offer prayers, could not come anywhere close to the holy shrine.
A 46-year-old woman, who arrived from neraby Kazhakootam to go to Sabarimala, was turned back from Chengannur Saturday, following protests from devotees.
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 frowns upon Jharkhand HC for not pronouncing verdict in criminal cases, seeks report from all HCs
_vb_42.jpeg)
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday expressed surprise that the Jharkhand High Court has not pronounced verdicts in 67 criminal appeals after reserving judgement and asked all high courts to submit report in a month on cases where judgements are pending.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh termed the development as "disturbing", and said it will law down some mandatory guidelines on the issue.
"This cannot be allowed to happen," the bench said, as it sought reports from all the high courts in four weeks on cases where judgement has been reserved on or before January 31, 2025 but verdict has not been pronounced till date.
The top court passed the directions after perusing the report filed by registrar general of the Jharkhand High Court in which it said in 56 criminal appeals heard by division bench from January, 2022 till December, 2024, the verdict has not been pronounced despite order being reserved.
It also noted that before the single bench judge, judgement has not been pronounced in 11 criminal appeals despite order being reserved.
The top court was hearing a plea of four life convicts, who have approached through advocate Fauzia Shakil, claiming that the Jharkhand high court had reserved orders on their appeals against conviction in 2022 but did not pronounce verdicts due to which they were not able to claim the benefit of remission.
