People’s Union For Democratic Rights is deeply disturbed by the underlying basis for the majority view of the three-judge bench in the Ayodhya case.
People’s Union For Democratic Rights is deeply disturbed by the underlying basis for the majority view of the three-judge bench in the Ayodhya case.
While slum dwellers had to always reckon with administrative high handedness, the Commonwealth Games have raised the baton power of the police.
We strongly condemn the recent spate of state perpetrated violence in Kashmir and its persistent framing as a law and order problem. Surely the unrelenting struggles of millions of Kashmiris must force us to question the reprehensible language of externally induced disturbance—indeed, if the most ordinary people are pelting stones on the streets of Kashmir, certainly they would have something very urgent on their minds. But over the years, the Indian state has consciously and deliberately chosen to turn a deaf ear to their voices. Instead, it has declared a state of permanent emergency by the imposition of the AFSPA since 1990.
The judgement delivered by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Dispute on 30 September 2010 has raised serious concerns because of the way history, reason and secular values have been treated in it. . . . judgement as yet another blow to the secular fabric of our country
0 | ... | 6805 | 6810 | 6815 | 6820 | 6825 | 6830 | 6835 | 6840 | 6845 | ... | 8495