A 55-year-old executive director of an NGO committed suicide by jumping off a building here after becoming depressed when a girl accused him of rape, police said Wednesday.
Khurshid Anwar, who ran a non-governmental organisation, was found in a pool of blood outside his residential building in Vasant Kunj area in south Delhi. He lived alone on the second floor.
A labourer working in an under-construction building told police that he saw Anwar falling from the building.
He told his neighbours and they took Anwar to a hospital where doctors declared him dead.
Police said a three-page note was found in his diary, where Anwar said he was being targeted by the girl, a member of another NGO.
He also said he was upset with the allegation.
"I am upset about the way the girl is campaigning against me without any fault of mine, and maligning my 30 years of career and reputation," a police officer quoted the note as saying.
A former Jawaharlal Nehru University scholar, Anwar was living in the house for the past several years.
Police said a case of rape was registered against him Tuesday, after a complaint from the girl.
In her complaint, the girl said she attended a party Sep 12 with nine members of Anwar's NGO.
During the party, she got drunk and started vomiting. Anwar and the others advised her to stay at Anwar's flat. She agreed and went to sleep.
The next morning when she woke up, she found out she was sexually assaulted but kept silent as she feared her identity would be revealed. A few days later, the girl filed a complaint before the National Commission for Women, which forwarded it to police.
Thursday, 26 December 2013
Wednesday, 25 December 2013
Sunday, 22 December 2013
Guilty if charged - Times Of India
Views : Laws without safety measures of misusing are bad laws. Prove the innocence is almost impossible in sexual harassment cases. Nobody can video record all the interaction with women.
Guilty if charged - Times Of India
Saturday, 21 December 2013
TN Police arrests Editor of Captain TV on sexual harassment charges ....
Views: A sacked employee can do revenge. However, that does not matter in the cases.Prove the innocence is the burden of the accused before court.
TN Police arrests Editor of Captain TV on sexual harassment charges
The arrest was made after a former employee alleged that she was sexual harassed by the accused.
The company, Captain Media is however saying that the charges are false and that the complainant was sacked from the company earlier.
Captain TV is the official channel of the DMDK party in Tamil Nadu.
TN Police arrests Editor of Captain TV on sexual harassment charges
Kajal Iyer CNN-IBN | 22-Dec-2013 10:26 AM
Chennai: Tamil Nadu Police on Sunday arrested an Editor of Chennai based TV company - Captain TV on charges of sexual harassment.The arrest was made after a former employee alleged that she was sexual harassed by the accused.
The company, Captain Media is however saying that the charges are false and that the complainant was sacked from the company earlier.
Captain TV is the official channel of the DMDK party in Tamil Nadu.
Depressed over rape charges, man commits suicide :
Views : A mere sexual accusation is enough to spoil the life of the a man.
Whether it is truth or not? That is immaterial. Now,Accusation is punishment. When the allegation raises, the media and public starts chasing the accused and published his name and all details and start discussion . The reputation of the man grounded zero at the single moment of accusation.
The accused name should be protected from the public till the guilty is proved.
Prosecution procedure should not be a public entertainment.
Depressed over rape charges, man commits suicide
Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013, 23:57 IST | Place: Delhi | Agency: IANS
A 55-year-old executive director of an NGO committed suicide by jumping off a building after becoming depressed when a girl accused him of rape.
Another allegation of sexual harassment made against retired Supreme Court justice; Supreme Court declines to interfere once again] | [Bar & Bench]
Views : A peaceful retirement life has gone to another judge also ..? However, sexual harassment cases should be deal with confidential manner. Before finding guilty , publishing the name of the accused is unfair ;In case of common man or judge also.
Another allegation of sexual harassment made against retired Supreme Court justice; Supreme Court declines to interfere once again] | [Bar & Bench]
Friday, 20 December 2013
Government moves Supreme Court for review of Gay Sex Verdict.-News
Views : Be hopeful . Let the human rights prevail. Nobody has the right to deny the life of the people
Gay sex verdict: Government moves Supreme Court for review
My Saved articles
RELATED
NEW DELHI: Government on Friday moved the Supreme Court with a review petition seeking re-examination of its verdict on Section 377 of IPC, reviving the penal provision making gay sex an offence punishable with life imprisonment.
The review petition contended that the December 11 judgment of the apex court setting aside the Delhi high court verdict decriminalizing sexual intercourse between same sex of consenting adults is "unsustainable".
The Centre's petition settled by attorney general G E Vahavati sought that oral arguments be heard in an open court before disposing of its review petition.
The review petitions are generally decided in chamber hearing.
In the petition filed through advocate Devdutt Kamath, the Centre has taken 76 grounds to contend that the judgment passed by Justice G S Singhvi (since retired) and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya "suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record, and is contrary to well-established principles of law laid down by this court enunciating the width and ambit of Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution."
"The govt has filed the review petition on Section 377 in the Supreme Court today. Let's hope the right to personal choices is preserved, Union law minister Kapil Sibal tweeted on Friday.
The Supreme Court recently dealt a cruel blow to lakhs of homosexuals, many of whom had started living together after the Delhi high court decriminalized same-sex relationships four years ago, by making it a crime again, even if it is consensual and done between adults in private. The 'crime' will attract a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
The bench of Justices Singhvi and S J Mukhopadhaya reversed the Delhi HC's 2009 verdict and held that the 150-year-old Section 377, criminalizing gay sex, "does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality."
The bench said: "In the light of plain meaning and legislative history of the section, we hold that Section 377 IPC would apply irrespective of age and consent." It added that the section does not discriminate any group with a particular sexual preference, a stand that was diametrically opposite to that by the Delhi HC.
"It is relevant to mention here that Section 377 IPC does not criminalize a particular people or identity or orientation. It merely identifies certain acts, which if committed, would constitute an offence. Such prohibition regulates sexual conduct regardless of gender identity and orientation," Justices Singhvi said.
The review petition contended that the December 11 judgment of the apex court setting aside the Delhi high court verdict decriminalizing sexual intercourse between same sex of consenting adults is "unsustainable".
The Centre's petition settled by attorney general G E Vahavati sought that oral arguments be heard in an open court before disposing of its review petition.
The review petitions are generally decided in chamber hearing.
In the petition filed through advocate Devdutt Kamath, the Centre has taken 76 grounds to contend that the judgment passed by Justice G S Singhvi (since retired) and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya "suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record, and is contrary to well-established principles of law laid down by this court enunciating the width and ambit of Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution."
"The govt has filed the review petition on Section 377 in the Supreme Court today. Let's hope the right to personal choices is preserved, Union law minister Kapil Sibal tweeted on Friday.
The Supreme Court recently dealt a cruel blow to lakhs of homosexuals, many of whom had started living together after the Delhi high court decriminalized same-sex relationships four years ago, by making it a crime again, even if it is consensual and done between adults in private. The 'crime' will attract a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
The bench of Justices Singhvi and S J Mukhopadhaya reversed the Delhi HC's 2009 verdict and held that the 150-year-old Section 377, criminalizing gay sex, "does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality."
The bench said: "In the light of plain meaning and legislative history of the section, we hold that Section 377 IPC would apply irrespective of age and consent." It added that the section does not discriminate any group with a particular sexual preference, a stand that was diametrically opposite to that by the Delhi HC.
"It is relevant to mention here that Section 377 IPC does not criminalize a particular people or identity or orientation. It merely identifies certain acts, which if committed, would constitute an offence. Such prohibition regulates sexual conduct regardless of gender identity and orientation," Justices Singhvi said.
Tuesday, 17 December 2013
Both houses pass Lokpal Bill.... !A most wanted news...
Views : A most wanted news waiting to hear for 44 years ....!
New Delhi: The Lok Sabha on Wednesday passed the Lokpal Bill. With this, the Bill has been passed by both the houses. The Rajya Sabha had cleared the bill on Tuesday.
The term 'Lokpal' was added in Hindi vocabulary by the L M Singhvi. On 3rd April 1963, independent member of Lok Sabha, L M Singhvi in course of participation in a debate on having an anti-corruption ombudsman in India, attempted to find out what Indian equivalent was and added the term Lokpal and Lokayukta to our dictionary.
Following are the salient features of the amended Lokpal bill passed Tuesday by the Rajya Sabha:
1. Lokayuktas: The new bill mandates states to set up Lokayuktas within 365 days. States have the freedom to determine the nature and type of Lokayukta.
The old bill said the law shall be applicable to states only if they give consent to its application.
The old bill gave power to the central government to appoint state Lokayuktas while the new draft gives this power to the states.
2. Constitution of Lokpal: The Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, of which fifty percent shall be judicial members. Fifty percent members of Lokpal shall be from among SC, ST, OBCs, minorities and women.
The older version said the chairperson shall be the Chief Justice of India or a present or former judge of the Supreme Court or a non-judicial member with specified qualifications (chief justice or a judge of a high court).
3. Selection of Lokpal: The selection committee will have prime minister, Lok Sabha speaker, leader of the opposition in Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. A fifth member of the selection committee for selection of Lokpal under the category of "eminent jurist" may be nominated by the president on the basis of recommendation of the first four members of the selection committee.
In the old bill, selection of the fifth person was left entirely to the president.
4. Religious bodies and trust: The new bill includes societies and trusts that collect public money, receive funding from foreign sources, and have an income level above a certain threshold, it excludes bodies creating endowments for or performing religious or charitable functions.
The old bill expanded definition of public servant by bringing societies and trusts which receive donations from the public (over a specified annual income) and, organisations which receive foreign donations (over Rs.10 lakh a year) within the purview of the Lokpal.
5. Prosecution: In the new version, before taking a decision on filing a charge sheet in a case upon consideration of the investigation report, the Lokpal may authorise its own prosecution wing or the concerned investigating agency to initiate prosecution in special courts.
Under the old bill, prosecution of the case could be done only by the prosecution wing of the Lokpal.
6. Central Bureau of Investigation: For independence of the CBI, in the new bill a directorate of prosecution will be formed. Appointment of the director of prosecution will be on the recommendation of the Central Vigilance Commissioner.
Transfer of officers of CBI investigating cases referred by Lokpal will be only with the approval of Lokpal who will also have superintendence over CBI in relation to Lokpal referred cases.
7. Hearing: The new bill says a government servant will get a hearing before a decision is taken by the Lokpal.
8. Prime Minister: The prime minister will be under the purview of the Lokpal with subject matter exclusions and specific process for handling complaints against the prime minister.
9. Investigation: Inquiry has to be completed within 60 days and investigation to be completed within six months. Lokpal shall order an investigation only after hearing the public servant.
Inquiry against the prime minister has to be held in-camera and approved by two-thirds of the full bench of the Lokpal.
10. Penalty: False and frivolous complaints - imprisonment up to one year and a fine of up to Rs.1 lakh. Public servants - imprisonment up to seven years. Criminal misconduct and habitually abetting corruption - jail term up to 10 years.
Both houses pass Lokpal Bill
The Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, of which fifty percent are judicial members
Reuters
The term 'Lokpal' was added in Hindi vocabulary by the L M Singhvi. On 3rd April 1963, independent member of Lok Sabha, L M Singhvi in course of participation in a debate on having an anti-corruption ombudsman in India, attempted to find out what Indian equivalent was and added the term Lokpal and Lokayukta to our dictionary.
Following are the salient features of the amended Lokpal bill passed Tuesday by the Rajya Sabha:
1. Lokayuktas: The new bill mandates states to set up Lokayuktas within 365 days. States have the freedom to determine the nature and type of Lokayukta.
The old bill said the law shall be applicable to states only if they give consent to its application.
The old bill gave power to the central government to appoint state Lokayuktas while the new draft gives this power to the states.
2. Constitution of Lokpal: The Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, of which fifty percent shall be judicial members. Fifty percent members of Lokpal shall be from among SC, ST, OBCs, minorities and women.
The older version said the chairperson shall be the Chief Justice of India or a present or former judge of the Supreme Court or a non-judicial member with specified qualifications (chief justice or a judge of a high court).
3. Selection of Lokpal: The selection committee will have prime minister, Lok Sabha speaker, leader of the opposition in Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. A fifth member of the selection committee for selection of Lokpal under the category of "eminent jurist" may be nominated by the president on the basis of recommendation of the first four members of the selection committee.
In the old bill, selection of the fifth person was left entirely to the president.
4. Religious bodies and trust: The new bill includes societies and trusts that collect public money, receive funding from foreign sources, and have an income level above a certain threshold, it excludes bodies creating endowments for or performing religious or charitable functions.
The old bill expanded definition of public servant by bringing societies and trusts which receive donations from the public (over a specified annual income) and, organisations which receive foreign donations (over Rs.10 lakh a year) within the purview of the Lokpal.
5. Prosecution: In the new version, before taking a decision on filing a charge sheet in a case upon consideration of the investigation report, the Lokpal may authorise its own prosecution wing or the concerned investigating agency to initiate prosecution in special courts.
Under the old bill, prosecution of the case could be done only by the prosecution wing of the Lokpal.
6. Central Bureau of Investigation: For independence of the CBI, in the new bill a directorate of prosecution will be formed. Appointment of the director of prosecution will be on the recommendation of the Central Vigilance Commissioner.
Transfer of officers of CBI investigating cases referred by Lokpal will be only with the approval of Lokpal who will also have superintendence over CBI in relation to Lokpal referred cases.
7. Hearing: The new bill says a government servant will get a hearing before a decision is taken by the Lokpal.
8. Prime Minister: The prime minister will be under the purview of the Lokpal with subject matter exclusions and specific process for handling complaints against the prime minister.
9. Investigation: Inquiry has to be completed within 60 days and investigation to be completed within six months. Lokpal shall order an investigation only after hearing the public servant.
Inquiry against the prime minister has to be held in-camera and approved by two-thirds of the full bench of the Lokpal.
10. Penalty: False and frivolous complaints - imprisonment up to one year and a fine of up to Rs.1 lakh. Public servants - imprisonment up to seven years. Criminal misconduct and habitually abetting corruption - jail term up to 10 years.
•Diplomat row: India asks US diplomats to return IDs
- Diplomat row: India asks US diplomats to return IDs
Share
Print
E-mail
Comment
13:1 HRS IST
New Delhi, Dec 17 (PTI) In an escalating diplomatic row, India has asked the US to return IDs issued to all its consular officers posted in the country, a move which may be a precursor to reviewing immunity and benefits enjoyed by them as a protest to the treatment meted out to India's Deputy Consul General in New York.
"Government has asked the US to return the ID cards given to their consular officers posted in India," Government sources told PTI.
"Government has asked the US to return the ID cards given to their consular officers posted in India," Government sources told PTI.
•Standard procedures followed during Khobragade's arrest: US
- Standard procedures followed during Khobragade's arrest: US
10:18 HRS IST
From Lalit K Jha
Washington, Dec 17 (PTI) The US today virtually justified the reported strip search by New York police of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade, saying "standard procedures" have been followed during her arrest.
"Diplomatic Security, which is under the State Department purview, followed standard procedures during her arrest," State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf told reporters at her daily news conference
Washington, Dec 17 (PTI) The US today virtually justified the reported strip search by New York police of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade, saying "standard procedures" have been followed during her arrest.
"Diplomatic Security, which is under the State Department purview, followed standard procedures during her arrest," State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf told reporters at her daily news conference
Monday, 16 December 2013
Sunday, 15 December 2013
Saturday, 14 December 2013
A Man failed to marry the live in partner gets 7 years rigorous imprisonment.
Views : Live -in relationship is not a crime and a sin -Supreme court said recently in a judgement.
And its legal validity is also acknowledged by the supreme court . The domestic violence act can also be applied to live in relation as per the supreme court order. The supreme court also directed to the lawmakers to make laws to deal with this kind social change.
Considering the above facts , punish a man for rape who failed to marry the live in partner does not
fair and justice. People who choose live in relation as an alternative of the conventional marriage .
They are well known about the merits and demerits of the live in relation.
However, compensation is a right thing . Criminal prosecution for failing the marriage really against the purpose of the live in relations.
Man jailed for rape of live-in partner
My Saved articles
NEW DELHI: A trial court on Friday sentenced a man to seven years imprisonment for raping his live-in partner on the pretext of marrying her and later forcing her to abort.
Additional sessions judge Yogesh Khanna sentenced 31-year-old Hari Mohan Sharma, an MBA, after holding him guilty of raping the LLB student. "Considering the nature of offence, I sentence Sharma to rigorous imprisonment for seven years," the court said while imposing a fine of Rs 5,000 on the convict.
The judge also recommended "appropriate compensation be awarded to the prosecutrix and a copy of the order be sent to Delhi Legal Service Authority to decide the compensation."
Sharma, a resident of UP, was arrested after the girl lodged a complaint in 2011 when he refused to marry her after she became pregnant. In her complaint, the girl alleged Sharma raped her several times between December 2010 and January 2011 on the pretext of marriage.
Sharma had claimed he was being falsely implicated. The court, however, rejected his plea saying a live-in relationship is not just residing together but also a commitment to be with the loved one in the future.
While convicting Sharma, the court dismissed his argument that the act was consensual. "The consent obtained cannot be said to be free consent because the girl believed that they would get married," the judge said.
Additional sessions judge Yogesh Khanna sentenced 31-year-old Hari Mohan Sharma, an MBA, after holding him guilty of raping the LLB student. "Considering the nature of offence, I sentence Sharma to rigorous imprisonment for seven years," the court said while imposing a fine of Rs 5,000 on the convict.
The judge also recommended "appropriate compensation be awarded to the prosecutrix and a copy of the order be sent to Delhi Legal Service Authority to decide the compensation."
Sharma, a resident of UP, was arrested after the girl lodged a complaint in 2011 when he refused to marry her after she became pregnant. In her complaint, the girl alleged Sharma raped her several times between December 2010 and January 2011 on the pretext of marriage.
Sharma had claimed he was being falsely implicated. The court, however, rejected his plea saying a live-in relationship is not just residing together but also a commitment to be with the loved one in the future.
While convicting Sharma, the court dismissed his argument that the act was consensual. "The consent obtained cannot be said to be free consent because the girl believed that they would get married," the judge said.
Friday, 13 December 2013
Sussanne has decided to end our 17-year relationship, says Hrithik Roshan
Views : Every marriage is legal institution . It is a personal choice to continue or not.
If a relation does not work , exit gracefully . Divorce is no more a taboo nowadays.
To continue in a bad relation for the sake of a false pride is really harmful to each other .
Hrithik Roshan, Sussanne split up
Sussanne has decided to end our 17-year relationship, says Hrithik Roshan
CorbisShow Thumbnails
1 of 14
Bollywood heartthrob Hrithik Roshan on Friday announced that he and his wife Sussanne have parted ways after the latter decided to annul their marriage.
“Sussanne has decided to separate from me and end our 17-year relationship. This is a very trying time for the entire family and I request the media and the people to grant us our privacy at this time,” said the 39-year-old in a statement.
The news has come just a few days before their 13th marriage anniversary. The duo tied the knot on December 20, 2000 post the success of Hrithik's debut film 'Kaho Naa... Pyaar Hai'. They have two sons - Hrehaan and Hridhaan.
“I do not wish this news to disempower my fans and the people about the institution of marriage in any way. I am a firm believer in this institution and respect and honour it at the highest level...,” Hrithik said.
Last month Hrithik headed to an undisclosed location abroad for his medical treatment. The 'Krrish' star has been suffering bouts of headache. In July this year, he had undergone a brain surgery for removal of a clot at the Hinduja Hospital.
“And once again I thank my fans for all the concern and prayers for my health, my treatment is going well and I should be able to resume my life in every way very soon. Thank you,” he said.
“Sussanne has decided to separate from me and end our 17-year relationship. This is a very trying time for the entire family and I request the media and the people to grant us our privacy at this time,” said the 39-year-old in a statement.
The news has come just a few days before their 13th marriage anniversary. The duo tied the knot on December 20, 2000 post the success of Hrithik's debut film 'Kaho Naa... Pyaar Hai'. They have two sons - Hrehaan and Hridhaan.
“I do not wish this news to disempower my fans and the people about the institution of marriage in any way. I am a firm believer in this institution and respect and honour it at the highest level...,” Hrithik said.
Last month Hrithik headed to an undisclosed location abroad for his medical treatment. The 'Krrish' star has been suffering bouts of headache. In July this year, he had undergone a brain surgery for removal of a clot at the Hinduja Hospital.
“And once again I thank my fans for all the concern and prayers for my health, my treatment is going well and I should be able to resume my life in every way very soon. Thank you,” he said.
Thursday, 12 December 2013
Gay sex verdict: Govt considers options, Sonia disappointed with SC ruling
My Saved articles
RELATED
NEW DELHI: With the Supreme Court order on gay sex creating a major uproar, the government on Thursday said it is considering all options to decriminalize homosexuality and filing a curative petition in the apex court could be one of them.
"The government is considering all options to restore the (Delhi) high court verdict on (Section) 377 (of IPC). We must decriminalize adult consensual relationships," law minister Kapil Sibal said.
Finance minister P Chidambaram said the Supreme Court ruling was "wrong" and all options would be looked at to set right the Supreme Court order.
Terming the judgment "disappointing", he said the court should have applied "current social and moral values" in the case.
He said the government should file a review or curative petition and that the matter should be heard by a five-bench judge.
Chidambaram, the former home minister, said the Delhi high court judgment was a "well-researched one" which the Union government accepted and did not challenge in the Supreme Court.
He added that the government's decision of not opposing the high court judgment in the Supreme Court was also his party's view.
Chidambaram noted that the bench that gave the order, should have referred the matter to a five-judge bench and that the interpretation of law cannot be static.
Sonia disappointed over SC verdict on gay rights issue
Amid an uproar over the Supreme Court verdict on gay rights issue, Congress chief Sonia Gandhi on Thursday said she was disappointed that the apex court and hoped Parliament would address the matter.
"I hope that Parliament will address the issue and uphold the constitutional guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens of India, including those directly affected by the judgement," the UPA Chairperson said.
Gandhi said that she was "disappointed" that the Supreme Court has reversed a previous Delhi high court ruling on the issue of gay rights but also noted that the Supreme Court also suggested another course.
She was obviously alluding to the option of legislation.
"The high court had widely removed an archaic repressive and unjust law that infringed on the basic human rights enshrined in our Constitution.
"This Constitution has given us a great legacy, a legacy of liberalism and openness, that enjoin us to combat prejudice and discrimination of any kind," the Congress President said in a statement.
She said, "We are proud that our culture has always been an inclusive and tolerant one".
In a big blow to the LGBT community, the Supreme Court had yesterday set aside the landmark high court judgment decriminalizing gay sex and threw the ball in Parliament's court for amending law.
"The government is considering all options to restore the (Delhi) high court verdict on (Section) 377 (of IPC). We must decriminalize adult consensual relationships," law minister Kapil Sibal said.
Finance minister P Chidambaram said the Supreme Court ruling was "wrong" and all options would be looked at to set right the Supreme Court order.
Terming the judgment "disappointing", he said the court should have applied "current social and moral values" in the case.
He said the government should file a review or curative petition and that the matter should be heard by a five-bench judge.
Chidambaram, the former home minister, said the Delhi high court judgment was a "well-researched one" which the Union government accepted and did not challenge in the Supreme Court.
He added that the government's decision of not opposing the high court judgment in the Supreme Court was also his party's view.
Chidambaram noted that the bench that gave the order, should have referred the matter to a five-judge bench and that the interpretation of law cannot be static.
Sonia disappointed over SC verdict on gay rights issue
Amid an uproar over the Supreme Court verdict on gay rights issue, Congress chief Sonia Gandhi on Thursday said she was disappointed that the apex court and hoped Parliament would address the matter.
"I hope that Parliament will address the issue and uphold the constitutional guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens of India, including those directly affected by the judgement," the UPA Chairperson said.
Gandhi said that she was "disappointed" that the Supreme Court has reversed a previous Delhi high court ruling on the issue of gay rights but also noted that the Supreme Court also suggested another course.
She was obviously alluding to the option of legislation.
"The high court had widely removed an archaic repressive and unjust law that infringed on the basic human rights enshrined in our Constitution.
"This Constitution has given us a great legacy, a legacy of liberalism and openness, that enjoin us to combat prejudice and discrimination of any kind," the Congress President said in a statement.
She said, "We are proud that our culture has always been an inclusive and tolerant one".
In a big blow to the LGBT community, the Supreme Court had yesterday set aside the landmark high court judgment decriminalizing gay sex and threw the ball in Parliament's court for amending law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)