'Provocative' song case: SC quashes case filed by Gujarat Police against Cong MP Imran Pratapgarhi
New Delhi (PTI): Observing that freedom of speech and expression is an integral part of democracy, the Supreme Court on Friday quashed an FIR lodged by Gujarat Police against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi for allegedly posting an edited video of a provocative song.
A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said it is the duty of court to protect the fundamental rights of citizens.
"Even if a large number of persons dislike the views expressed by another, the right of person to express the views must be respected and protected. Literature, including poetry, drama, films, satire and art, make the life of human beings more meaningful," the bench said.
The Congress leader had challenged the January 17 order of the Gujarat High Court which dismissed his petition for quashing the FIR filed against him, saying investigation was at a very nascent stage.
On January 3, Pratapgarhi was booked for the alleged provocative song in the backdrop of a mass marriage function he attended in Jamnagar.
Among other sections, Pratapgarhi, national chairman of the Congress' minority cell, was booked under Section 196 (promoting enmity between different groups on the basis of religion, race, etc.) and 197 (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
The 46-second video clip, uploaded by Pratapgarhi on X, showed him being showered with flower petals as he walked waving his hands and a song playing in the background which the FIR alleged had lyrics that were provocative, detrimental to national unity and hurt religious feelings.
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.
Cong seeks law for SC, ST quota in private, non-minority educational institutions
New Delhi (PTI): The Congress on Monday demanded that the government bring in a legislation for SC, ST and OBC quota in private, non-minority educational institutions in the country.
In a statement, Congress general secretary, communications, Jairam Ramesh noted that the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth, and Sports had recommended a new legislation to implement Article 15(5).
Article 15(5) allows the state to make special provisions by law for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes, including reservation in educational institutions, both public and private, except for minority educational institutions.
Ramesh said the Congress had during the last Lok Sabha polls committed itself to bringing legislation to implement Article 15(5) of the Constitution in private educational institutions.
"In its 364th Report on the Demand for Grants for the Department of Higher Education, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth, and Sports also recommended a new legislation to implement Article 15(5) as well. The Indian National Congress reiterates this demand," Ramesh said.
The Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act, 2005 took effect from January 20, 2006 and this amendment introduced Article 15(5) in the Constitution.
"Nothing in this article or sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of Article 19 shall prevent any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes insofar as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of Article 30," it reads.
Explaining the chronology of legislation to implement Article 15 (5), Ramesh said the Central Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admission) Act, 2006 was passed in Parliament and reservations for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in central educational institutions introduced with effect from January 3, 2007.
Citing the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur versus Union of India on April 10, 2008, he said by a 2-0 margin Article 15(5) is held Constitutionally valid only for state-run and state-aided institutions and reservations in private unaided institutions left open to be decided in the appropriate course.
In the IMA versus Union of India May 12, 2011, he said, by 2-0 margin, Article 15 (5) is upheld for private unaided non-minority educational institutions.
Citing another case, Ramesh said, "Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust versus Union of India Jan 29, 2014. By 5-0 margin Article 15(5) is, for the first time, upheld as it is explicitly.
"This means reservations for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in private educational institutions is also constitutionally permissible," he added.
