Will consider handing over blast case to NIA if need arises: CM Siddaramaiah
Chikkamagaluru (PTI): Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Sunday said the government may consider handing over the Rameshwaram Caf blast case to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) if the need arises.
Speaking about the blast at popular eatery at Brookefield on March 1, which left 10 people injured, the chief minister said that the Central Crime Branch (CCB) is investigating the matter.
On the BJP's demand for an NIA probe, Siddaramaiah said, "We will see. The investigation has begun just now. No accused has been arrested yet. We will see if the need arises (for NIA investigation)."
On BJP's charge that instead of Brand Bengaluru, the city has become "Bomb Bengaluru", Siddaramaiah countered, "What should we call it when there were four bomb blasts during the BJP's tenure? Who was ruling when Mangaluru cooker blast took place? There was a blast in front of BJP's office in Malleswaram. Who was ruling then? Who is in charge of NIA, IB? It's not their failure?"
He clarified, "I am not supporting the bomb blast. I am condemning it but BJP should not do politics over it."
Bomb blasts are never silly incidents. Governments have always taken it seriously. Public safety and security is very important, he added.
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.
Message of 'live and let live': Sibal hails SC ruling on Section 6A of Citizenship Act
New Delhi (PTI): Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal on Friday hailed the Supreme Court upholding the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, saying it is a message to all that "live and let live" and conserve the culture of a multicultural and plural nation that India is.
In a significant judgement, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act which grants Indian citizenship to immigrants from Bangladesh who entered Assam before March 25, 1971.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud and Justices Surya Kant, M M Sundresh, and Manoj Misra further underscored the necessity for more robust policy measures to curb illegal immigration.
In a post on X, Sibal said, "Citizenship Act, 1955, Section 6-A, upheld by Supreme Court. Message to all: 'Live and let live'. Conserve the culture of a 'multicultural and plural nation that India is'.
"Bhakts listening? Bajrang Dal listening? Governments listening? Hope so!" Sibal said.
Section 6A was inserted in 1985 into the Citizenship Act of 1955 following the signing of the Assam accord between the then Rajiv Gandhi government at the Centre and the agitating groups led by Prafulla Mahanta, including All Assam Students Union in the state.
The verdict is believed to give a boost to those opposed to grant of Indian citizenship to immigrants who entered Assam after March 25, 1971.
According to the provision, all those who came to Assam on or after January 1, 1966, but before March 25, 1971, from Bangladesh at the time of commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985, and since then are residents of Assam, can register for Indian citizenship.
As a result, the provision fixes March 25, 1971, as the cut-off date for granting citizenship to migrants, particularly those from Bangladesh, residing in Assam.
While the CJI, Justices Kant, Sundresh, and Misra upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A, Justice J B Pardiwala dissented in a minority verdict.
Holding the cut-off date of March 25, 1971 as rational, the CJI, writing for himself, said Section 6A was included with the objective of reducing the influx of migrants to India and dealing with those who had already migrated.
CJI Chandrachud said Section 6A was not violative of Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution, which stipulates a cut-off date for conferring citizenship to migrants from east and west Pakistan at the commencement of the Constitution".
"The Assam Accord was a political solution to the issue of growing migration and Section 6A was a legislative solution. Section 6A must not be read detached from the previous legislation enacted by Parliament to deal with the problem of influx of migrants of Indian origin... Section 6A is one more statutory intervention in the long list of legislation that balances the humanitarian needs of migrants of Indian origin and the impact of such migration on economic and cultural needs of Indian states," he wrote.
Justice Surya Kant, writing for himself and Justices Sundresh and Misra, said, Section 6A falls within the bounds of the Constitution and does not contravene the foundational principles of fraternity.
