Khel Ratna Award renamed after Dhyan Chand
New Delhi: India's highest sporting honour Khel Ratna Award, which was named after former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, was on Friday rechristened in the honour of hockey wizard Dhyan Chand following the admirable performance of both men's and women's hockey teams in the Tokyo Olympics.
Making the announcement, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he had been getting many requests from citizens across India to name the Khel Ratna Award after Major Dhyan Chand.
"Respecting their sentiment, the Khel Ratna Award will hereby be called the Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award! Major Dhyan Chand was among India's foremost sportspersons who brought honour and pride for India. It is fitting that our nation's highest sporting honour will be named after him," he tweeted.
The exceptional performance of the men's and women's Hockey Team has captured the imagination of our entire nation, the prime minister said, adding that there is a renewed interest towards the sport that is emerging across the length and breadth of India.
This is a very positive sign for the coming times, he said. The prestigious award carries a prize money of Rs 25 lakh.
I have been getting many requests from citizens across India to name the Khel Ratna Award after Major Dhyan Chand. I thank them for their views.
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) August 6, 2021
Respecting their sentiment, the Khel Ratna Award will hereby be called the Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award!
Jai Hind! pic.twitter.com/zbStlMNHdq
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.
When a woman says no, it means no: HC upholds conviction of three men for gang rape
Mumbai (PTI): The Bombay High Court has upheld the conviction of three men for raping one of their partners, ruling that when a woman says no, it means no, and there can be no presumption of consent based on her past sexual activities.
“No means no”, the bench of Justices Nitin Suryawanshi and M W Chandwani said in its May 6 judgment refusing to accept the attempt made by the convicts to question the morals of the survivor.
Sexual intercourse when done without the consent of a woman is an assault on her body, mind and privacy, said the court, terming rape the most morally and physically reprehensible crime in society.
“A woman who says ‘NO’ means ‘NO’. There exists no further ambiguity and there could be no presumption of consent based on a woman's so-called immoral activities,” HC said.
The court refused to quash the conviction of the three persons but reduced their sentence from life imprisonment to 20 years in jail.
In their appeal, the trio had claimed that the woman was initially involved with one of them but later got into a live-in relationship with another man.
In November 2014, the three barged into the survivor’s house, assaulted her live-in partner and forcibly took her to a nearby deserted spot where they raped her.
The bench in its judgment said that even if a woman was an estranged wife and lived with another man without getting divorced from her husband, a person cannot force the woman to have intercourse with him without her consent.
The bench said even though the survivor and one of the convicts were in a relationship in the past, any sexual act without her consent would amount to rape if she was not willing to have intercourse with him and the other accused.
“A woman who consents to sexual activities with a man at a particular instance does not ipso facto (by the fact itself) give consent to sexual activity with the same man at all other instances. A woman’s character or morals are not related to the number of sexual partners she has had,” the court said.
The court said sexual violence diminishes the law and unlawfully encroaches on the privacy of a woman.
“Rape cannot be treated only as a sexual crime but it should be viewed as a crime involving aggression. It is a violation of her right to privacy. Rape is the most morally and physically reprehensible crime in society, as it is an assault on the body, mind and privacy of the victim,” HC said.
The court also upheld the trio’s conviction for the assault of the survivor’s live-in partner.
