Uniform laws: SC asks if it can direct legislature to make gender, religion-neutral laws
_vb_04.gif)
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court asked on Monday whether it can hear a range of pleas including PILs seeking a direction to the Centre to make religion and gender-neutral uniform laws governing subjects like marriage, divorce, inheritance and alimony.
A bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud made the observations about the scope of judicial powers with regard to issues falling within the legislative domain, and adjourned the hearing on as many as 17 petitions, including several PILs, on the issue by four weeks.
"The question is to what extent the court can intervene in these matters as the issues fall under the legislative domain," said the bench, which also comprised justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, "In principle, so far as I am concerned, there cannot be any objection to gender-neutral uniform laws applicable to all equally. It is for the Lordships to consider as to what can be done on the judicial side."
At the outset, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for a party, said he has a preliminary objection to the PILs filed by lawyer Ashwini Updhyay.
"Look at the prayers. Can such prayers be made before this court. This is for the government to decide whatever they wish to make (gender and religion-neutral uniform laws). The court had asked him (Upadhyay) last time as to what is the basis of these PILs," Sibal said.
"I can understand if these issues are taken up individually... These are for the government to decide... If the government wants to take it up, we have no problem," the senior lawyer said.
This court should not issue even "a prima facie order" in this matter as it falls entirely in the domain of the government, he said.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan, appearing for Updhyay, opposed the submissions of Sibal and said there have been individual petitions also and, in one of them, a Muslim woman said she wanted the personal laws, governing her, to be gender neutral.
"It can be done by judiciary to a certain extent," Sankarnarayanan said.
The bench then asked the lawyers to provide a list of prayers made in the PILs and other petitions and decided to hear them after four weeks.
The bench said it will decide whether it can hear the pleas.
The bench was hearing petitions seeking a direction to the government for enacting uniform religion and gender-neutral laws on a wide variety of issues.
Advocate petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay has filed five separate petitions seeking direction to the Centre to frame religion and gender-neutral uniform laws for divorce, adoption, guardianship, succession, inheritance, maintenance, marriage age, and alimony.
Upadhyay, in August 2020, filed a PIL seeking "uniform grounds of divorce" for all citizens, in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution and international conventions.
He filed another PIL through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey seeking "gender and religion-neutral" uniform grounds of maintenance and alimony for all citizens in line with the spirit of the Constitution and international conventions.
In another PIL, he sought the removal of anomalies in laws governing adoption and guardianship and to make them uniform for all citizens.
He also filed a petition seeking removal of anomalies in succession and inheritance laws and making them uniform for all.
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.
B'luru: "Least priority, shifted late," says brother of patient who died in Ramaiah hospital fire
_vb_17.jpeg)
Bengaluru: Hours after a fire broke out at the Critical Care Unit (CCU) of the MS Ramaiah Memorial Hospital on New BEL Road on Thursday, a 34-year-old patient, Sujay Sujathan Panicker, tragically passed away. His family has accused the hospital authorities of negligence, which they claim led to his death.
The fire at Ramaiah Memorial Hospital is believed to have been caused by a short circuit. Initial reports suggested that there were no casualties in the incident.
Sujay, originally from Kollam in Kerala, had been residing in Bengaluru with his family since 2004. He was undergoing treatment for pneumonia, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), and H1N1 since September 1 at the hospital.
Sujay's wife and father released a video accusing the hospital of negligence. In the video, his wife, Rohini Jayan, alleged that the hospital authorities took no action against those responsible for the fire.
Sujay’s brother, Sujin Sujathan Panicker, speaking to Vartha Bharathi, detailed the family’s ordeal. He said that despite his sister-in-law requesting assistance during the chaos, the hospital staff pushed her away, assuring her that all patients had been safely evacuated to the Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU). However, Sujin claims that his sister-in-law did not see Sujay being shifted.
He further stated, “Sometime later, when a doctor arrived, she (Rohini) inquired about Sujay. It was only after the doctor questioned the staff that they rushed to evacuate him.”
Sujin added that by the time his brother was evacuated, 50 minutes had already passed since the fire broke out. "He was still inside, while all the other patients were taken out first. He was admitted to the hospital with a respiratory illness, yet he was given the least priority during the chaos. He was the last one to be evacuated."
He also claimed that Rohini had already noticed that Sujay’s condition had deteriorated and believed he had passed away, though the hospital authorities did not officially declare his death.
Sujin further stated that the hospital authorities called him and his father to the board room at the 8th floor of the hospital, where senior executives and doctors who had treated Sujay were present “During the interaction they (hospital authorities) claimed that Sujay was still alive and that his condition had worsened amid the smoke and that his chances of survival were less, which was not true.”
"Despite staff being present to evacuate my brother, they remained negligent. The fire broke out at 1:00 p.m., so why did it take 50 minutes to get him out? He was in a corner bed in the CCU, and it seemed they either overlooked the room or ignored it. Even after repeated requests, it took them 50 minutes to evacuate him," Sujin added.
Sujin also expressed concerns that the hospital authorities might attempt to influence the investigation. "They can influence anyone—any hospital, any report."
At the time of the interview, Sujin stated that neither anyone from the government nor from the health department had contacted the family.
A complaint has been filed in connection with the incident at the Sadashivanagar police station. "The statements of the family members have been recorded, and an investigation into the matter is underway. An FIR has been lodged under Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) Section 106 (causing death due to negligence)," said Sadashivanagar police station Sub-Inspector.
Meanwhile, officials from Ramaiah Memorial Hospital were unavailable for comment.
