On 9 March, Hidme Markam, a human rights activist from the Adivasi indigenous community, was arrested as part of the UAPA for exposing sexual violence against women by state security forces. On 8 April, various UN special rapporteurs wrote to the Indian government challenging the allegations against it. The government refused to share the legal basis for his arrest. Sources: Legal Services India, The Hindu, Pathlegal + more In addition to citizens` protests, the CAA was challenged in court almost immediately after its adoption. The first challenge came from the Muslim League of the Indian Union (IUML), and there are now 143 petitions challenging the constitutionality of the law before the Supreme Court. Petitions and criticisms of the law in a broader sense have argued that the CAA violates India`s secular character enshrined in the constitution and Article 14 (equality before the law). Even Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, filed a petition against the law in the Supreme Court. Protesters for and against the controversial citizenship law clashed in Delhi, killing 53 people and injuring more than 200. The violence took place just hours before US President Donald Trump was expected in Delhi. Protesters threw stones, set fire to vehicles and shops, turned parts of the nation`s capital into a war zone, forced the deployment of security personnel to ban large gatherings in the affected areas, and responded with tear gas and tear gas. A few days after the unfortunate incident, the game of political blame also began. While Congress Speaker Sonia Gandhi called for the resignation of Union Home Minister Amit Shah, under whose control the Delhi police appear, Shah said the Congress had no right to point the finger at a party given its record. Political tensions escalated when Gandhi called the unrest a “conspiracy” and UNION ministers responded by saying, “Politicizing this violence is a mistake.” Delhi Prime Minister Arvind Kejriwal and the center also had a confrontation over the Delhi unrest, where statements by political leaders focused on blame rather than confidence-building measures.
On the 11th. In December 2019, Parliament passed the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Law despite large protests against it across the country. This law has been criticized for making religion the basis for granting citizenship for the first time in independent India. Controversy has the power to influence the outcome of an incident, change the course of an event, and sometimes even correct what might otherwise have gone wrong; On the other side of the coin, it sometimes also ruins the true essence of the subject. India has had a number of controversial court cases that have led to changes in laws or shaped new laws altogether. Here we analyze a list of the top 5 controversial court cases that have changed the Indian legal system in one way or another. The first legal challenge to the IT rules came from The Wire, its founding publisher M.K. Venu and The News Minute editor-in-chief Dhanya Rajendran, which were filed with the Delhi Supreme Court. The petition argued that the rules violate the general information technology law under which they were formulated. Since then, several media houses – including LiveLaw, Malayala Manorama, The Quint, PTI and others – have filed complaints in high courts across the country. The petitions argued that the rules violated the Information Technology Act, as well as Articles 14 (equality before the law) and 19 (1) (g) (right to freely exercise a profession or to exercise a profession, trade or enterprise) of the Constitution. Section 377, a law of the British era, criminalized any form of sexual intercourse that was not vaginal and considered it “contrary to nature.” In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court struck down the controversial law on September 7, 2018.
In September 2020, both houses of parliament passed agricultural laws amid protests from opposition parties and a longtime ally of the ruling party. Opposition lawmakers shouted slogans, tore up documents and tried to grab the president`s microphone in the upper house of parliament before the bills passed by a vote. While the government said the law would make it easier for farmers to sell their produce directly to big buyers, the opposition cut bills, calling them “anti-farmers” and “pro-business.” On September 24, the controversial bills received presidential approval and became law. And with it, the political confrontation has intensified. While the opposition continued to attack the government and push for the repeal of the “black” law, the government accused the opposition of “hijacking” the peasants. The anti-religion conversion law, which came into effect on November 28 in the form of an ordinance, aims to give legal teeth to the BJP`s fight against the so-called “jihad of love,” the unproven conspiracy theory that Hindu women are falsely lured and converted by Muslim men. When prime minister Yogi Adityanath`s government approved the ordinance and proposed a maximum sentence of 10 years for the offenses of “jihad of love,” it sparked a political dispute.
