SC slaps petty fines on 7 states for not responding on human rights court

Agencies
August 13, 2019

New Delhi, Aug 13: The Supreme Court Tuesday slapped cost of up to Rs 1 lakh on seven states for failing to file responses on setting up human rights courts despite its direction last year.

The top court imposed cost of Rs 1 lakh each on Rajasthan and Uttarakhand while noting that neither have they filed the responses nor were their advocates present in the court during the hearing.

A bench comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and B R Gavai also slapped cost of Rs 50,000 each on Telengana, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, Meghalaya and Mizoram after it was told that they have not filed their responses.

The bench said all these states can file their response within four weeks subject to payment of cost.

The top court had on January 4, 2018 directed all the states to file their responses on the issue of setting up of human rights courts as mandated in the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, and appointment of special public prosecutors.

During the hearing on Tuesday, the apex court was told that there were two issues -- setting up of human rights courts and appointment of special public prosecutors -- in all the states.

The bench observed that on July 25 the top court, while hearing another matter, had directed setting up of a centrally-funded designated court in each districts having more than 100 FIRs under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to deal exclusively with cases of sexual offences against children.

"We do not think any further order is required as far as appointment of special public prosecutor is concerned," the bench said while referring to the July 25 direction.

The bench also asked, "How many states have not filed their replies on the issue of human rights courts?"

When it was informed by a lawyer appearing in the matter that seven states have not filed their responses, the bench slapped cost on them and directed these states to deposit the amount in the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.

It said the amount deposited by these states would be used for issues related to juveniles.

It posted the matter for hearing after six weeks.

The apex court had passed the January 4 last year order while hearing an appeal filed by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) against a Calcutta High Court order staying its proceedings in a case related to alleged gross violation of rights of orphaned children in West Bengal.

The NCPCR had alleged that the West Bengal government had illegally formed adhoc committees for adoption and given away orphans for adoption in gross violation of law and rules.

The top court had expanded the scope of the plea filed by the NCPCR and ordered that all states be made parties through their chief secretaries.

It had asked the states to respond with details about orphanages and facilities being given to orphan children at those centres and also the procedure followed in giving children on adoption.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 16,2025

bengal.jpg

The deletion of over 58 lakh names from West Bengal’s draft electoral rolls following a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has sparked widespread concern and is likely to deepen political tensions in the poll-bound state.

According to the Election Commission, the revision exercise has identified 24 lakh voters as deceased, 19 lakh as relocated, 12 lakh as missing, and 1.3 lakh as duplicate entries. The draft list, published after the completion of the first phase of SIR, aims to remove errors and duplication from the electoral rolls.

However, the scale of deletions has raised fears that a large number of eligible voters may have been wrongly excluded. The Election Commission has said that individuals whose names are missing can file objections and seek corrections. The final voter list is scheduled to be published in February next year, after which the Assembly election announcement is expected. Notably, the last Special Intensive Revision in Bengal was conducted in 2002.

The development has intensified the political row over the SIR process. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and her Trinamool Congress have strongly opposed the exercise, accusing the Centre and the Election Commission of attempting to disenfranchise lakhs of voters ahead of the elections.

Addressing a rally in Krishnanagar earlier this month, Banerjee urged people to protest if their names were removed from the voter list, alleging intimidation during elections and warning of serious consequences if voting rights were taken away.

The BJP, meanwhile, has defended the revision and accused the Trinamool Congress of politicising the issue to protect what it claims is an illegal voter base. Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari alleged that the ruling party fears losing power due to the removal of deceased, fake, and illegal voters.

The controversy comes amid earlier allegations by the Trinamool Congress that excessive work pressure during the SIR led to the deaths by suicide of some Booth Level Officers (BLOs), for which the party blamed the Election Commission. With the draft list now out, another round of political confrontation appears imminent.

As objections begin to be filed, the focus will be on whether the correction mechanism is accessible, transparent, and timely—critical factors in ensuring that no eligible voter is denied their democratic right ahead of a crucial election.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 6,2025

pilot.jpg

New Delhi: IndiGo, India’s largest airline, faced major operational turbulence this week after failing to prepare for new pilot-fatigue regulations issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). The stricter rules—designed to improve flight safety—took effect in phases through 2024, with the latest implementation on November 1. IndiGo has acknowledged that inadequate roster planning led to widespread cancellations and delays.

Below are the key DGCA rules that affected IndiGo’s operations:

1. Longer Mandatory Weekly Rest

Weekly rest for pilots has been increased from 36 hours to 48 hours.

The government says the extended break is essential to curb cumulative fatigue. This rule remains in force despite the current crisis.

2. Cap on Night Landings

Pilots can now perform only two night landings per week—a steep reduction from the earlier limit of six.

Night hours, defined as midnight to early morning, are considered the least alert period for pilots.

Given the disruptions, this rule has been temporarily relaxed for IndiGo until February 10.

3. Reduced Maximum Night Flight Duty

Flight duty that stretches into the night is now capped at 10 hours.

This measure has also been kept on hold for IndiGo until February 10 to stabilize operations.

4. Weekly Rest Cannot Be Replaced With Personal Leave

Airlines can no longer count a pilot’s personal leave as part of the mandatory 48-hour rest.

Pilots say this closes a loophole that previously reduced actual rest time.

Currently, all airlines are exempt from this rule to normalise travel.

5. Mandatory Fatigue Monitoring

Airlines must submit quarterly fatigue reports along with corrective actions to DGCA.

This system aims to create a transparent fatigue-tracking framework across the industry.

The DGCA has stressed that these rules were crafted to strengthen flight safety and align India with global fatigue-management standards. The temporary relaxations are expected to remain until February 2025, giving IndiGo time to stabilise its schedules and restore normal air travel.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 7,2025

SHRIMP.jpg

Mangaluru, Dec 7: A rare bamboo shrimp has been rediscovered on mainland India more than 70 years after it was last reported, confirming for the first time the presence of Atyopsis spinipes in the country. The find was made by researchers from the Centre for Climate Change Studies at Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, during surveys in Karnataka and Odisha.

The team — shrimp expert Dr S Prakash, PhD scholar K Kunjulakshmi, and Mangaluru-based researcher Maclean Antony Santos — combined field surveys, ecological assessments and DNA analysis to identify the elusive species. Their findings, published in Zootaxa, resolve decades of taxonomic confusion stemming from a 1951 report that misidentified the species as Atyopsis moluccensis without strong evidence.

The shrimp has now been confirmed at two locations: the Mulki–Pavanje estuary near Mangaluru and the Kuakhai River in Bhubaneswar. Historical specimens from the Andaman Islands, previously labelled as A. moluccensis, were also found to be misidentified and actually belong to A. spinipes.

The rediscovery began after an aquarium hobbyist in Odisha spotted a shrimp in 2022, prompting systematic surveys across Udupi, Karwar and Mangaluru. Four female specimens were collected in Mulki and one in Odisha, all genetically matching.

Researchers warn the species may exist in very small, vulnerable populations as freshwater habitats face increasing pressure from pollution, sand mining and infrastructure development. All verified specimens have been deposited with the Zoological Survey of India for future reference.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.