BJP raking up Waqf issue with eye on by-polls, Maharashtra election: Siddaramaiah
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Thursday alleged that BJP was raking up the "Waqf issue" with an eye on the upcoming assembly by-polls in the state and elections in neighboring Maharashtra.
Following allegations by a section of farmers in certain parts of the state that their lands were marked as Waqf properties, he reiterated that none of them will be evicted, and notices issued to them will be withdrawn.
"BJP is doing politics. Notices were issued during their (BJP) tenure too, what do they have to say about it? During BJP's tenure over 200 notices were given. One should not practice such dual politics," Siddaramaiah said.
Speaking to reporters here, the CM said, "I have already said that the notices will be withdrawn, where is the issue? In case the notices are issued they will be withdrawn and no one will be evicted, where is the issue?"
"Whichever district it is...They (BJP) had also given notices in several districts. Why did they give? Why are they doing such politics? In case notices were served by our government, they will be withdrawn and no farmers will not be evicted....the protest they have planned on November 4 is for politics keeping in mind by-polls in three segments and Maharashtra elections," he added.
A section of farmers from Vijayapura district have alleged that their lands were marked as Waqf properties, and similar allegations have surfaced from a few other places.
The BJP is planning a statewide agitation on November 4, demanding the resignation of Minority Welfare and Waqf Minister B Z Zameer Ahamed Khan, and against the Congress government over the issue.
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.
Madras HC rules spousal privacy as a fundamental right, disallows evidence obtained through snooping
Chennai: In a landmark judgment, the Madras High Court emphasized the protection of spousal privacy as a fundamental right, ruling that evidence obtained by one spouse snooping on the other is inadmissible in court. This ruling came as Justice G.R. Swaminathan overturned a lower court's decision that had allowed a husband to submit his wife's call records in a marital dispute case.
The court made it clear that privacy, as a constitutionally guaranteed right, includes the privacy of married individuals from each other, rejecting the notion that marital misconduct permits invasion of personal privacy. "Law cannot proceed on the premise that marital misconduct is the norm. Privacy as a fundamental right includes spousal privacy, and evidence obtained by invading this right is inadmissible," stated the court.
The case originated in Paramakudi Subordinate Court, where the husband submitted the wife's call data as evidence to support claims of adultery, cruelty, and desertion. He had obtained these records without her consent, an act the High Court deemed a violation of privacy. Additionally, the call records were not accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, making them procedurally inadmissible.
Justice Swaminathan noted that allowing such evidence would open doors to spouses spying on each other, damaging the foundational trust in marital relationships. “Trust forms the bedrock of matrimonial relationships. The spouses must have implicit and total faith in each other. Snooping destroys the fabric of marital life,” he stated.
The High Court further advised that allegations of misconduct could be pursued through authorized methods, such as interrogatories or affidavits, cautioning that the court must not assume marital misconduct as a norm justifying privacy breaches.
