High jumper Shailesh opens India''s account with gold at World Para Athletics C''ships
_vb_75.jpeg)
New Delhi (PTI): Shailesh Kumar and Varun Singh Bhati opened hosts India's account at the World Para Athletics Championships, winning the gold and bronze medals respectively in the men's high jump T63 event here on Saturday.
The 25-year-old Shailesh shattered the Championship record and Asian record with a personal best effort of 1.91m in the T42 category to stand atop the podium.
Former Para Asian Games medallist Bhati clinched the bronze while reigning Olympic champion USA's Ezra Frech took home the silver.
Bhatti and Frech both finished with a best clearance of 1.85m but the American beat the Indian on count-back.
Rahul, the third Indian in fray, finished fourth with a personal best effort of 1.78m.
Shailesh, Bhati and Rahul are T42 athletes who have single above-the-knee amputations or a disability that is comparable.
T63 classification is for athletes with single through knee or above knee limb deficiency.
T63 and T42 athletes can be combined in a single event, and the process was followed on Saturday.
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.
