Zameer retaliates against Tanveer for ‘not popular MLAs’ statement
Bengaluru, June 19: “I won’t claim that I am a popular leader of the Muslim community. I am just a public servant. I’ll also come to former minister Tanveer Sait’s constituency. Let him also come. Then people will know who can pull the crowd”, Food and Civil Supplies Minister Zameer Ahmed Khan challenged Tanveer Sait.
Speaking to reporters at his office at Vidhana Soudha here on Tuesday, the Minister said that “I am not a film star to become popular leader. I am a social worker. But I have a challenge to Tanveer Sait. I’ll also come to his constituency. Let him also come. Truth will come out”, he said.
“I am not a relative of AICC president Rahul Gandhi to give me the minister post. The party high command has taken all considerations into account and based on that, it has given the opportunity to those who are efficient. In the same way, I was also given the minister post and this might have caused disappointment to senior leaders”, he said.
After becoming the minister, he met the community senior leaders like Rehman Khan, CM Ibrahim and NA Haris. He has called Roshan Baig. As he has gone out, he could not meet Baig and he was waiting for his phone call, he said.
I knew my strength
He has not done anything to defeat Tanveer Sait. But he came to know about his strength from the people who termed ‘he is not the leader of Muslim community’, he said.
I want that car
“It is true that I have asked Fortuner car. I am comfortable travelling in big cars. So, I have asked for Fortuner. It was used by Siddaramaiah, for which I have asked that car. I want the same car, because I love the car as it was used by Siddaramaiah. I like Siddaramaiah also. So I have asked that car. There is nothing good and bad. Power is not permanent and it is not possible to keep everything forever”, he said.
“I am committed to my earlier statement that I will make a Guinness record I became a minister. But let me give some time and I will show my achievement in the department”.
-Zameer Ahmed Khan, Minister
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.
Bombay High Court strikes down Centre's plan to set up Fact-Check Unit
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has struck down the central government's plan to establish a fact-checking unit (FCU) under the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2023. The decision comes in response to a petition filed by standup comedian Kunal Kamra, challenging the constitutional validity of the Centre's move.
Justice A.S. Chandurkar, delivering the final verdict, declared that the proposed IT Amendment Rules violated key provisions of the Indian Constitution, namely Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), and 19(1)(g) (right to profession).
“I have considered the matter extensively. The impugned rules are violative of Articles 14, 19, and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India,” Justice Chandurkar said in his judgment. He further remarked that terms like "fake, false, and misleading" in the IT Rules were "vague" and lacked a clear definition, making them unconstitutional.
This judgment followed a split verdict issued by a division bench of the Bombay High Court in January. The bench, consisting of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale, was divided in their opinions. While Justice Patel ruled that the IT Rules amounted to censorship and struck them down, Justice Gokhale upheld the rules, arguing that they did not pose a "chilling effect" on free speech, as the petitioners had claimed.
The matter was then referred to a third judge, leading to today's decision. The Supreme Court had previously stayed the Centre's notification that would have made the fact-checking unit operational, stating that the government could not proceed until the Bombay High Court ruled on the case.
Kunal Kamra and other petitioners had argued that the amendments posed unreasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression. They contended that the provisions would lead to government-led censorship, effectively granting the government unchecked powers to determine what constitutes 'truth' online. The petitioners further claimed that such powers would turn the government into "prosecutor, judge, and executioner" in matters of online content.
With the Bombay High Court’s ruling, the Centre's move to create fact-checking units has been effectively halted, reaffirming the importance of protecting freedom of speech and expression in the digital space.
