Indian ambassador met 8 former Navy men on death row in Qatar, 2 hearings on appeal held: MEA
New Delhi, Dec 7: The Indian ambassador to Qatar met eight former Indian Navy personnel on death row four days back and two hearings took place on an appeal filed against the capital punishment handed down to them by a Qatari court.
Spokesperson in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) Arindam Bagchi said this at a media briefing on Thursday.
The Navy veterans were on October 26 given death sentence by Qatar's Court of First Instance. India described the ruling as "deeply" shocking and vowed to explore all legal options in the case.
An appeal was filed against the death sentence by the family members of the Indians.
"As you know, we filed an appeal that is from the families and the detainees. Two hearings have since been held. One, I think on November 30 and the other on November 23," Bagchi said when asked about the case.
"I think the next hearing is coming up soon. We are closely following the matter and extending all legal and consular assistance. Meanwhile, our ambassador got consular access to meet all eight of the men in prison on December 3. We will continue to follow (the matter)," he added.
Asked whether Prime Minister Narendra Modi took up the matter with Qatar's Amir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani when they met on the sidelines of the COP28 summit in Dubai last week, Bagchi did not give a direct reply and referred to Modi's post on 'X'.
"We had a good conversation on the potential of bilateral partnership and the well-being of the Indian community in Qatar," the prime minister had said.
The Indian envoy was given consular access earlier as well.
The Indian nationals, who worked with private company Al Dahra, were arrested in August last year reportedly in an alleged case of espionage.
Neither the Qatari authorities nor New Delhi made the charges against the Indian nationals public.
In its reaction to the ruling by the Qatari court, the MEA last month said that it is attaching "high importance" to this case and is exploring all legal options.
The charges were filed against the eight Indian Navy veterans on March 25 and they were tried under Qatari law.
All of the former Navy officers had "unblemished stints" of up to 20 years in the Indian Navy and had held important positions including that of instructors in the force, former military officials had said.
In May, Al Dahra Global closed its operations in Doha and all those working there (primarily Indians) have since returned home.
On December 1, Navy Chief Admiral R Hari Kumar said the government is putting all-out efforts to bring back the former naval personnel from Qatar.
"There is total support and effort being put in by the government," he said.
In the past, the Navy had taken up the case of the former naval personnel with top brass of the government for securing their release.
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.
