JD(S) MLA accuses Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah of 'luring' opposition MLAs
Bengaluru, Apr 12 (PTI): JD(S) MLA M T Krishnappa on Saturday accused Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah of "luring" opposition legislators to join the Congress party.
"If I ask for a polytechnic college for my constituency, Siddaramaiah tells me to join the Congress party. Is it right for a Chief Minister to behave like this?" he alleged.
The Turuvekere MLA made the allegation while participating in a massive protest held by JD(S) against the Congress government here over recent price hikes and alleged corruption.
"It’s been two years since we became MLAs, but not even Rs 50 crore has been granted for the development of our constituencies. They don’t even allocate funds to fill potholes. All they do is loot, nothing else. This is a poverty-stricken government. Those who can't even fix potholes hand out Rs 2,000," he alleged.
Krishnappa further claimed that even if it takes another 20 years, he will still stay with JD(S).
"When we ask for a polytechnic college, they say 'join the Congress.' Why Congress? It’s a sinking party. Even if it takes another twenty years, I will stay with JD(S)," he alleged.
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 notice to Centre on PIL against Muslim personal law sections being 'discriminatory' against women
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the Centre's response on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, on the ground that those are allegedly discriminatory against women.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Panchol took note of the submissions made by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who appeared in the matter for petitioners Poulomi Pavini Shukla and the Nyaya Naari Foundation, and issued a notice to the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs.
The plea says the current Shariat inheritance rules are "manifestly discriminatory" against women, often granting them only half or less of the share allocated to their male counterparts.
Bhushan said the 1937 Act violates Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
He said matters of succession are civil in nature and do not constitute an "essential religious practice" protected under Article 25.
"Saying women will get half or even less than half compared to male counterparts is discriminatory," the lawyer said.
