India beat Pakistan by 6 wickets in Women's T20 World Cup
Dubai, Oct 6: Skipper Harmanpreet Kaur's years of experience saved India from blushes as they huffed and puffed to a six wicket win over arch rivals Pakistan, keeping their semi-final hopes alive in the Women's T20 World Cup, here Sunday.
Indian batters made a heavy weather of a paltry 106-run target as it required a 24-ball-29 from their experienced skipper to eke out the crucial win.
Harmanpreet retired hurt when two runs were required for victory. Sajana Sajeevan, playing her first game, finished it off with a boundary.
The defensive approach by opener Shafali Verma (32 off 35 balls) and new No. 3 Jemimah Rodrigues (23 off 28 balls) meant that India could not boost their Net Run Rate which could prove very costly in the larger context of making it to the last-four stage.
Despite the victory, India's NRR is currently -1.217 and they remain below Pakistan, who are in third place with NRR of -0.555.
India would need to beat both Australia and Sri Lanka by comfortable margins to harbour any hopes of a semi-final berth.
The entire Indian innings had only five boundaries and none of the top three looked like getting a move on.
The chase was not exactly a cakewalk as Smriti Mandhana (7 off 16 balls) was out early while Shafali and Jemimah concentrated on taking singles.
The running between the wickets wasn't impressive as some easy doubles and a sure triple was not even tried, probably due to sapping heat. Even as Jemimah showed some interest in pushing fielders, Shafali's poor fitness came in the way.
Despite a negative net run-rate of -2.90, there was no intent shown by the Indian batters to surpass the paltry target in a good time.
Shafali could hit only three shots to the fence in her 35-ball knock and she increased the pressure on the batting unit with the below-par effort.
As far as Jemimah was concerned, power isn't diminutive Mumbaikar's forte as she is more of a batter who relies on timing and ability to find gaps.
Once Fatima removed both Jemimah and Richa Ghosh (0) off successive deliveries, the onus was on Harmanpreet to take the team past home.
Earlier, the Indian bowling unit fired in unison against a clueless Pakistan, restricting the arch-rivals to a lowly 105 for 8.
Having conceded 160 against New Zealand on a slow track under lights in their opener, the Indian bowlers read the pitch well, and more importantly, took the pace off deliveries to make stroke-making all the more difficult.
Such was their control that Indian bowlers were able to deliver 58 dot balls.
Seamers Renuka Singh Thakur (1/23) and Arundhati Reddy (3/19) neither erred in line nor in length while off-spinners Deepti Sharma (1/24) and Shreyanka Patil (2/12) got enough grip and bounce to keep the Pakistani batters on tenterhooks.
Leg-spinner Asha Sobhana (1/24) went for a few boundaries but got rival skipper Fatima with a big leg-break after the batter was brilliantly snapped by Richa Ghosh behind the stumps.
Renuka bowled a tight first over and her inswinger had Gull Feroza (0) bowled through the gate.
Deepti, who gave a much better account of herself, albeit against an inferior batting lineup, decreased the pace of her deliveries and also flighted a few.
Pakistan managed only 29 for 2 in the powerplay and the Indian bowlers increased their stranglehold on the opposition batters with only Nida Dar's 28 providing some resistance to take the team past 100-run mark.
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.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
