Preethi Pal wins bronze in T35 100m for India's first track medal at Paralympics
Paris, Aug 30: Preethi Pal won India's first athletics medal in a Paralympics track event as she clinched a bronze in the women's T35 100m competition with a personal best time of 14.21 seconds at the Paris Games on Friday.
All the athletics medals India had won since the 1984 edition of the Paralympics have come from field events.
The 23-year-old Preethi, a farmer's daughter from Muzaffarnagar in Uttar Pradesh, opened India's athletics medal account on the second day of competitions.
Preethi had come to Paris after winning a bronze in the same event at the World Para Athletics Championships in May.
China's Zhou Xia (13.58) and Guo Qianqian (13.74) won the gold and silver respectively.
"More glory for India as Preeti Pal wins a Bronze medal in the 100m T35 event at the #Paralympics2024. Congratulations to her. This success will certainly motivate budding athletes," Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted.
The result was a repeat of the 2024 World Para Athletics Championships in Kobe, Japan, as the same Chinese runners Xia and Qianqian had won gold and silver there too.
T35 classification is meant for athletes who have coordination impairments such as hypertonia, ataxia and athetosis.
"This was my first Paralympics and I am still yet to believe that I have won a medal," she said.
"I am feeling proud that I have won India's first track medal in the Paralympics."
Preethi will also compete in the T35 200m event in which she also won a bronze in World Para Athletics Championships.
She was born to a farmer's family in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. She faced significant physical challenges when she was born as her lower body was plastered for six days after birth. Weak legs and an irregular leg posture made her prone to various diseases.
She underwent various traditional treatments to strengthen her legs, including wearing calipers for eight years from the age of five.
At 17, Preethi's perspective began to change when she watched the Paralympic Games on social media. But her life-changing moment came when she met Paralympic athlete Fatima Khatoon, who introduced her to para-athletics.
With Fatima's support, Preethi competed in the state championships and national events from 2018 onwards. She qualified for the Asian Para Games last year in China, where she finished fourth in both the 100m and 200m sprints.
She moved to Delhi to train under coach Gajender Singh and fine tuned her running techniques, leading to her winning a bronze medal each in 100m and 200m in World Para Athletics Championships.
She also received out of pocket allowance under Target Olympic Podium Scheme of the government and other financial assistance for training and competition.
BRONZE 🥉 For INDIA 🇮🇳
— Doordarshan Sports (@ddsportschannel) August 30, 2024
🏃♀️ Preethi Pal wins bronze medal in the Women's 100m T35 Final.#Paris2024 #Cheer4Bharat #Paralympics2024 #ParaAthletics @mansukhmandviya @MIB_India @PIB_India @IndiaSports @ParalympicIndia @PCI_IN_Official @Media_SAI @AkashvaniAIR @DDNational… pic.twitter.com/igEYUhtpmu
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.
