New Delhi, Oct 6: External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar called on Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu, who is in India on a bilateral visit, and expressed confidence that Muizzu's talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi will lend a "new impetus" to "our friendly ties".
Though the Maldivian president attended PM Modi's swearing-in ceremony in June, it is his first bilateral visit to India.
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), while announcing Muizzu's trip to India earlier this week, has said that it is expected to lend further momentum to cooperation and robust people-to-people ties between the two countries.
In a post on X on Sunday, Jaishankar said, "Pleased to call on President @MMuizzu today at the start of his State Visit to India. Appreciate his commitment to enhance India-Maldives relationship. Confident that his talks with PM @narendramodi tomorrow will give a new impetus to our friendly ties."
Along with the post, the external affairs minister also shared some pictures of their meeting.
The ties between India and the Maldives came under severe strain since Muizzu, known for his pro-China leanings, took charge of the top office in November.
During his visit, Muizzu will hold discussions with Modi on bilateral, regional and international issues of mutual interest, the MEA said.
Muizzu is also scheduled to meet President Droupadi Murmu.
Besides Delhi, he will also visit Mumbai and Bengaluru where he will be attending business events.
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.
New Delhi (PTI): The Bar Council of India on Wednesday sought the urgent intervention of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant following a "deeply disturbing" incident where a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reportedly sent a young advocate to
24-hour judicial custody over a procedural lapse.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson and senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, in a formal representation, termed the conduct of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao "grossly inappropriate" and "damaging to the confidence of the Bar".
“I most respectfully request your Lordship to kindly take immediate institutional cognizance of the matter and call for the video recording of the proceedings, the order passed, and the surrounding circumstances.
“I further request that appropriate administrative action may kindly be considered, including withdrawal of judicial work from the learned Judge pending review, his immediate transfer to some far off High Court, and his nomination for appropriate judicial training/orientation on court management, judicial temperament, Bar-Bench relations, and proportional exercise of contempt/judicial authority,” Mishra wrote.
This representation is made to preserve the “dignity, moral authority and public confidence of the judiciary”, he said, adding, “Judges command the highest respect not by fear, but by fairness, patience, restraint and constitutional humility”.
The communication urged the CJI to intervene at the earliest to ensure that the faith of Bar, particularly young advocates, in the protective and corrective role of the judiciary is restored.
The controversy stems from proceedings on May 5.
According to the BCI, a video circulating online shows Justice Rao rebuking a young advocate who was unable to produce a specific order copy during a hearing.
The letter said that despite the advocate "repeatedly seeking pardon and mercy" and claiming he was in physical pain, the judge remained "unmoved".
The judge allegedly told the lawyer, "now you will learn," and mocked his experience before directing the Registrar and police personnel to take him into custody for 24 hours.
The BCI chairperson said that the judge’s actions lacked proportionality and fairness.
"The dignity of the court is not enhanced when a lawyer is made to beg for grace in open court and is still sent to custody for a procedural lapse," the letter said.
"A young lawyer... is an officer of the Court, still learning, still growing, and entitled to correction without humiliation," it added.
The bar body said that such actions create a "chilling effect" on the legal fraternity, particularly among junior members, and undermine the mutual respect required between the Bench and the Bar.
