Director of controversial 'Jaipur Dialogues' gets ticket from Congress in LS polls from Jaipur
'Jaipur Dialogues' is known for its inflammatory rhetoric, targeting religion, Congress
New Delhi: Sunil Sharma, a Partner and Director of 'Jaipur Dialogues', a contentious organization known for its far-right stance and provocative content, has been awarded a ticket by the Congress party to contest in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections from Jaipur.
'Jaipur Dialogues' has garnered attention for its controversial and often inflammatory rhetoric, particularly targeting religion and the Congress party. Sunil Sharma's association with the organization has raised eyebrows, considering its divisive nature.
A video circulating on social media platforms captures a moment where Sharma is questioned by a reporter about his involvement with 'Jaipur Dialogues'. In the footage, Sharma appears visibly taken aback by the inquiry, displaying evident discomfort before abruptly ending the interview and removing his garlands in apparent frustration.
Journalist and fact-checker Mohammed Zubair tweeted the video and wrote “Wow! So Congress has given a ticket to Sunil Sharma, Partner and Director of @JaipurDialogues. Hello @kharge @RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi, This handle @JaipurDialogues is one of the most hateful X handles. Most content against religion and Congress.”
Wow! So Congress has given a ticket to Sunil Sharma, Partner and Director of @JaipurDialogues.
— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) March 23, 2024
Hello @kharge @RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi, This handle @JaipurDialogues is one of the most hateful X handles. Most content against religion and Congress. pic.twitter.com/1Nk04nFeF4
Wow! So Congress has given a ticket to Sunil Sharma, Partner and Director of @JaipurDialogues.
— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) March 23, 2024
Hello @kharge @RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi, This handle @JaipurDialogues is one of the most hateful X handles. Most content against religion and Congress. pic.twitter.com/1Nk04nFeF4
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.
Where is question of offence when there is consensual relationship? SC asks
New Delhi (PTI): Where is the question of an offence when a relationship is consensual? the Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who had challenged an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that had quashed an FIR against her former live-in partner in a case of alleged sexual assault on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the woman lived together with the man and also had a child from him.
"Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They were living together and she also had a child from him and then there is no marriage and now, she says sexual assault? For 15 years they lived together," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
The woman's counsel told the court that she had lost her husband earlier and was introduced to the accused by her brother-in-law.
The court was also told that the accused had promised to marry her and sexually exploited her.
Justice Nagarathna then asked, "Why did she go and live with him before marriage?"
"She lived with him. She had a child from him. He walks out because there is no marriage bond. Legal bond is not there. He walks out, that is the risk in a live-in relationship. So once he walks out, it does not become a criminal offence," she said.
The woman's lawyer submitted that the accused was already married and had concealed this fact.
"See, if there was marriage, the question of her rights would have been better. She could have filed regarding bigamy. She could have filed for maintenance. She would have got those reliefs. Now since there is no marriage, they live together, this is the risk. They can walk out any day. What do we do?" Justice Nagarathna said.
She suggested that the woman could pursue remedies, such as maintenance for the child, and asked the parties to go for mediation.
"Even if he goes to jail, what will she gain? We can think of some maintenance for the child. Child is now seven years (old). At least, some monetary compensation can be made for the child," Justice Nagarathna said.
The apex court issued a notice in the matter and asked the parties to explore if a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.
