Centre's decision on caste census was taken keeping Bihar polls in mind: CM Siddaramaiah
Bengaluru, May 1 (PTI): Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Thursday said the Centre decided to conduct caste census keeping Bihar assembly elections in mind.
He said that Centre’s move on caste census was also due to the pressure built by the Congress, especially its former president Rahul Gandhi.
“The hurry in which the BJP led Centre took the decision regarding caste census on Wednesday made me believe that it was done in view of Bihar assembly elections,” Siddaramaiah said addressing a press conference.
The Chief Minister insisted that the 50 per cent ceiling on reservation should be relaxed.
There should be an analysis of the socio-economic and education status of the SC/ST, OBC and minorities and they should be given reservation accordingly, he insisted.
According to him, the verdict mandating 50 per cent ceiling was given in 1992 in the Indra Sawhney case. The division bench of Supreme Court while hearing about the Mandal Commission introduced ceiling on reservation, he explained.
“There were no scientific or constitutional reasons behind the ceiling on reservation but the SC put 50 per cent ceiling,” Siddaramaiah said.
The chief minister said the state government cannot revise the ceiling on the reservation because it is the Centre’s domain. The state government can only recommend to the Centre, he added.
When asked about the fate of the caste census report prepared by the Karnataka government, which was presented before the state cabinet, Siddaramaiah said, “The remaining portion of the report apart from caste census, such as social and educational survey recommendations will be implemented.”
To a question whether he would implement the social and educational survey report even after the Centre’s caste survey report is out, the Chief Minister said the survey report prepared by the Backward Class Commission is still at the discussion level in the government.
“We will discuss it in the cabinet and get the opinions of our ministers. Most likely, the cabinet meeting will be convened on May 9,” he added.
The Chief Minister underlined that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has been insisting that 50 per cent ceiling should be removed and reservation should be provided based on the population of the backward communities.
“Due to Gandhi’s insistence, the Congress government in Karnataka promised removing the 50 pre cent ceiling on reservation in its election manifesto. Due to the continuous pressure, the Centre agreed for caste census,” Siddaramaiah said.
He also said that the All India Congress Committee convention in Ahmedabad passed a resolution to this effect on April 9.
The Chief Minister further said that Rahul Gandhi has also sought to know the date when the enumeration process would start in the country.
“The caste census should not be like women’s reservation bill. Besides census and caste census, there should be enumeration of socio-economic and educational survey,” he added.
In a major decision, the Centre on Wednesday announced that caste enumeration will be included in the forthcoming census exercise in a 'transparent' manner.
Opposition parties, including the Congress, have been demanding a nationwide caste census, making it a major election issue, and some states like Bihar, Telangana and Karnataka have conducted such surveys.
Karnataka carried out a 'social and educational survey' covering 94 per cent of the state's population. After nine years of the exercise since 2015, the then Backward Class Commission Chairperson Jayaprakash Hegde submitted the report to the chief minister in February 2024.
Amid internal differences over the caste census report, a special meeting of the state cabinet that met on April 17, 2025 to discuss it, ended inconclusive, without any major decision.
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.
'Not as fragile as flowers': SC raps BJP Nishikant Dubey for 'scandalous' remarks on judiciary, CJI
New Delhi, May 8 (PTI): The Supreme Court has rapped BJP MP Nishikant Dubey for his remarks against it and Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, saying they tend to “scandalise” and lower the authority of apex court.
The top court, in a way, put an end to recent political debates as to who is supreme whether Parliament or the judiciary.
“It is the Constitution that is higher than all of us. It is the Constitution which imposes limits and restrictions on the powers vested in the three organs. The power of judicial review is conferred by the Constitution on the judiciary. Statutes are subject to judicial review to test their constitutionality as well as for judicial interpretation. Therefore, when the constitutional courts exercise their power of judicial review, they act within the framework of the Constitution,” a bench of CJI and Justice Sanjay Kumar said.
The top court, which spared the lawmaker from the contempt proceedings by dismissing a PIL, made scathing observations against Dubey for his remarks against it and the CJI following the hearings on a batch of petitions challenging the validity of 2025 Waqf law.
Dubey sparked a row when he said, “(the) Supreme Court is taking the country towards anarchy” and that “Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna is responsible for the civil wars taking place in the country”.
“We have examined the contents of the assertions made by respondent 4 (Dubey), which no doubt tend to scandalise and lower the authority of the Supreme Court, if not interfere or tend to interfere with the judicial proceedings pending before this Court, and have the tendency to interfere and obstruct the administration of justice,” the CJI said in the order.
The bench further said, “We are of the firm opinion that courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements.”
The comments were stated to be "highly irresponsible", reflecting a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court of India and its judges.
The bench on May 5 heard a plea for contempt action against Dubey over his remarks and said they were the ones who heard the petitions against the amended Waqf law.
The court found a clear intent to impute motives to the bench by naming the CJI as responsible for "all the civil wars happening in India in order to incite religious wars in this country, it is only and only the Supreme Court that is responsible".
Judicial pronouncements result in a decision which may aggrieve a party or sometimes a section of the public, it clarified.
The top court, however, acknowledged critical analysis and objective criticism of an order's reasoning or even its outcome was protected under the fundamental right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1) of the Constitution.
The bench said Dubey's utterances showed his ignorance about the role of the constitutional courts and the duties and obligations bestowed on them under the Constitution.
“We do not believe that the confidence in and credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such absurd statements, though it can be said without the shadow of doubt that there is a desire and deliberate attempt to do so,” it said.
Justifying its decision to dismiss the PIL filed by lawyer Vishal Tiwari against the lawmaker, the bench said, “judges are judicious”.
The bench went on, “Courts believe in values like free press, fair trial, judicial fearlessness and community confidence. Thus, courts need not protect their verdicts and decisions by taking recourse to the power of contempt. Surely, courts and judges have shoulders broad enough and an implicit trust that the people would perceive and recognise when criticism or critique is biased, scandalous and ill-intentioned."
Each branch of the state in a democracy, be it the legislature, executive or the judiciary, especially in a constitutional democracy, acts within the framework of the Constitution, it added.
“The judiciary, as an institution, is accountable to the people through various mechanisms....Judgments are put to scrutiny and critique. Decisions are debated and if required, corrected by exercise of right of appeal, review, in curative jurisdiction and by reference to a larger bench,” the top court said.
To deny the power of judicial review to the courts would be to rewrite and negate the Constitution, it added.
“While we are not entertaining the present writ petition, we make it clear that any attempt to spread communal hatred or indulge in hate speech must be dealt with an iron hand,” it noted.
The bench said hate speech couldn't be tolerated as it led to loss of dignity and self-worth of the targeted group members, contributed to disharmony among groups and eroded tolerance and open-mindedness -- must for a multi-cultural society committed to the idea of equality.
Any attempt to cause alienation and humiliation of the targeted group is a criminal offence and must be dealt with accordingly, it added.
