In poll-bound Karnataka, JD(S) MLA S R Srinivas resigns, to join Congress
Bengaluru (PTI): JD(S) MLA S R Srinivas (Gubbi Srinivas) on Monday submitted his resignation as a legislator to the Karnataka Assembly Speaker, ahead of the polls in the state, and said he will be soon joining the Congress.
Mr Srinivas was accused of cross-voting in the June 2022 Rajya Sabha polls, which according to the JD(S), contributed to the defeat of its candidate D Kupendra Reddy.
Last year, the JD(S) had expelled Mr Srinivas, and had even moved a petition to have him, along with another MLA K Srinivas Gowda from Kolar, disqualified under the anti-defection law. "After my resignation is accepted (by the Speaker) I will discuss with Congress leaders about joining the Congress officially...I'm planning to join Congress officially on March 31, after discussing with taluk leaders, I will decide," Mr Srinivas said.
Stating that he was resigning as JD(S) legislator with a lot of pain, he claimed that he was forced to take such a step by the party leadership, who expelled him on the basis of "false allegations." "I had worked under the leadership of (H D) Deve Gowda and (H D) Kumaraswamy in JD(S) for about 20 years, today I'm resigning as that party MLA with a heavy heart and a lot of pain. Deve Gowda had treated me like a son and encouraged me to work, I thank him wholeheartedly. Kumaraswamy too used to treat me like his own younger brother, but not sure as to what made him oust me from the party," Mr Srinivas said.
Speaking to reporters, he said he has submitted his resignation as JD(S) MLA to Speaker of Karnataka Legislative Assembly Vishweshwar Hegde Kageri. "Speaker has said he will examine it." "I'm in a lot of pain today leaving JD(S), I have no options. In October, 2021 Kumaraswamy announced a JD(S) candidate from my seat even as I was still in the party, from that day the distance between us widened. He had also made certain false allegations against me, like holding me responsible for Deve Gowda's defeat in 2019 Lok Sabha polls from Tumakuru. I had never done such anti-party activity and had honestly served the party," he added.
Also noting that he was unnecessarily expelled from the party by making certain "confusing false allegations", by accusing him of cross voting during Rajya Sabha polls, Mr Srinivas said, "I don't know who said what against me to Kumaraswamy, he acted against me and expelled me."
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.
SC dismisses pleas seeking review of 2023 verdict declining legal sanction to same-sex marriage
New Delhi, Jan 9: The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a batch of pleas seeking to review its October 2023 verdict declining legal sanction to same-sex marriage.
A five-judge bench of Justices B R Gavai, Surya Kant, B V Nagarathna, P S Narasimha and Dipankar Datta took up about 13 petitions related to the matter in chambers and dismissed them.
"We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record. We further find that the view expressed in both the judgements is in accordance with law and as such, no interference is warranted. Accordingly, the review petitions are dismissed," the bench said.
It said the judges have carefully gone through the judgements delivered by Justice (since retired) S Ravindra Bhat speaking for himself and for Justice (since retired) Hima Kohli as well as the concurring opinion expressed by Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, constituting the majority view.
The bench also rejected a prayer made in the review petitions for hearing in an open court.
According to practice, the review pleas are considered in chambers by the judges.
The new bench was constituted after Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the present CJI, recused from hearing the review petitions on July 10, 2024.
Notably, Justice P S Narasimha is the only member of the original Constitution bench comprising five judges which delivered the verdict, as former CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices S K Kaul, Ravindra Bhat and Hima Kohli have retired.
A five-judge Constitution bench led by then CJI Chandrachud on October 17, 2024, refused to accord legal backing to same-sex marriages and held there was "no unqualified right" to marriage with the exception of those recognised by law.
The apex court, however, made a strong pitch for the rights of LGBTQIA++ persons so that they didn't face discrimination in accessing goods and services available to others, safe houses known as "garima greh" in all districts for shelter to members of the community facing harassment and violence, and dedicated hotlines in case of trouble.
In its judgement, the bench held transpersons in heterosexual relationships had the freedom and entitlement to marry under the existing statutory provisions.
It said an entitlement to legal recognition of the right to union, akin to marriage or civil union, or conferring legal status to the relationship could be only done through an "enacted law".
The five-judge Constitution bench delivered four separate verdicts on a batch of 21 petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.
All five judges were unanimous in refusing the legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act and observed it was within Parliament's ambit to change the law for validating such a union.
While former CJI Chandrachud wrote a separate 247-page verdict, Justice Kaul penned a 17-page judgement where he broadly agreed with the former's views.
Justice Bhat, who authored an 89-page judgement for himself and Justice Kohli, disagreed with certain conclusions arrived at by the former CJI, including on applicability of adoption rules for such couples.
Justice Narasimha in his 13-page verdict was in complete agreement with the reasoning and conclusion of Justice Bhat.
The judges were unanimous in holding that queerness was a natural phenomenon and not an "urban or elite" notion.
In his judgement, the former CJI recorded Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's assurance of forming a committee chaired by the cabinet secretary to define and elucidate the scope of entitlements of such couples in a union.
The LGBTQIA++ rights activists, who won a major legal battle in 2018 in the Supreme Court, which decriminalised consensual gay sex, moved the apex court seeking validation of same-sex marriages and consequential reliefs such as rights to adoption, enrolment as parents in schools, opening of bank accounts and availing succession and insurance benefits.
Some of the petitioners sought the apex court to use its plenary power besides the "prestige and moral authority" to push the society to acknowledge such a union and ensure LGBTQIA++ persons led a "dignified" life like heterosexuals.
