Aizawl, May 21 (IANS) The Chief of Army’s Eastern Command, Lt Gen R.C. Tiwari, on Tuesday held separate meetings with Mizoram Governor and Chief Minister and discussed the prevailing security situation along the borders with Myanmar and the operational preparedness of the Assam Rifles to meet the challenges.

A Mizoram government official said that Lt Gen Tiwari, accompanied by senior Army officers, held a meeting with Governor Hari Babu Kambhampati at the Raj Bhavan and discussed the prevailing security situation along the India-Myanmar borders.

“The Army officers apprised the Governor about the operational preparedness of the Assam Rifles to meet the challenges along the frontiers,” the official said.

Lt Gen Tiwari also held a meeting with Chief Minister Lalduhoma at the civil secretariat and discussed the border and other related issues.

The Chief Minister later said in a post on X: “Today, I met Lt. Gen. R.C. Tiwari, the Gen. Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Eastern Command. We discussed increasing local use of the AR ground, developing the Zokhawsang bypass road for farmers, and addressing drug-related activities, among other topics, to improve coordination.”

Mizoram shares 510 km of borders with Myanmar, and 318 km of borders with Bangladesh. The Myanmar border is being guarded by the Assam Rifles, while the Border Security Force (BSF) provides security along the Bangladesh border.

After the military coup in Myanmar in February 2021, over 34,350 Myanmarese from the Chin state fled to Mizoram.

Due to the ethnic troubles in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh, 1,433 tribals from the neighbouring country have taken shelter in Mizoram since November 2022.

Smuggling of drugs and other contraband is also rampant along the India-Myanmar borders.

Citing the vulnerability of the India-Myanmar borders spanning Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Nagaland, and Mizoram, the Central government has decided to fence the frontiers to scrap the Free Movement Regime (FMR).

Mizoram and Nagaland governments, along with various political parties and organisations, are strongly opposing the government’s move.

–IANS

sc/arm

Bengaluru, May 21 (IANS) JD-S MP Prajwal Revanna, who is still an accused, has already been labelled a criminal by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, JD-S leader and former CM H.D. Kumaraswamy said on Tuesday.

Prajwal Revanna — the grandson of former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda and nephew of Kumaraswamy — is the prime accused in the sex video scandal in Karnataka who is presently absconding,

Speaking to reporters here, Kumaraswamy maintained that Prajwal Revanna is still an accused in the case.

“Has his offence been proved? The investigating team leaked information to the media that there is no visible face of a person in the alleged videos. Doesn’t the CM know this? To uphold morality, Prajwal Revanna was suspended from the party when the charges surfaced against him. We have not shown arrogance like CM Siddaramaiah,” he said.

“Due to his arrogance, the CM’s son’s case was hushed up. A video showed him asking over the phone why there was a sixth name on the list when he had given only five names. When questions were raised about his son’s role in the transfer mafia, he maintained that the conversation was regarding CSR funds. The people of the state know about this,” Kumaraswamy alleged.

“The Chief Minister has proved that evidence can be twisted by misusing power. Presently, he is engaged in the same task. The accused who distributed the pen drives has not been touched to date.

“The CM should not make light comments. He is escaping my questions. The case is being used for political campaigning. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) is nothing but a waste,” Kumaraswamy claimed.

–IANS

mka/arm

Chandigarh, May 21 (IANS) Manish Tewari, the INDIA bloc Lok Sabha candidate from Chandigarh, on Tuesday lashed out at Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath for his statements on Covid management and for describing the Congress leader as an ‘Udan Khatola’.

“It is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black,” Tewari said, adding, “Uttar Pradesh under Yogi Adityanath was the most mismanaged state during the Covid pandemic with bodies overflowing in the Ganga river. Yet, that man has the audacity to question our Covid management.”

Reacting to Adityanath’s ‘Udan Khatola’ remark, Tewari said, “I am not sure if he actually meant me or was targeting his own Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is from Gujarat and is fighting elections from Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh and with whom Adityanath does not enjoy a comfortable relationship.”

Reacting to the UP CM’s election speech here on Monday, where he made claims on Covid management, Tewari said that not a single person from his previous parliamentary constituency (Anandpur Sahib) needed to move out or walk back home.

He said as an MP, he ensured that everyone got proper food and care during the lockdown which the BJP had imposed arbitrarily.

Tewari also asked his rival BJP candidate, Sanjay Tandon, to provide the balance sheet for 10 years of BJP government, in an apparent dig at Tandon for describing the Congress manifesto as a “bunch of lies”.

Stating that manifestoes are promises that cannot be dismissed instantly, Tewari said, “You need to wait and watch before being dismissive.”

The lone Lok Sabha seat in Chandigarh will go to the polls on June 1.

–IANS

vg/arm

New Delhi, May 21 (IANS) The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of review pleas filed against the Constitution Bench verdict upholding the revocation of Article 370 as valid.

“Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed,” a bench, headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, said.

Further, the 5-judge Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Boppana, dismissed the applications seeking listing of the review petition in open court and seeking permission to appear and argue in person.

The review petition, filed under Article 137 of the Constitution, against the decision rendered on December 11, said that the impugned judgment should not have left open the question of whether the Parliament can extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories.

In its verdict delivered on December 11, a Constitution Bench, headed by CJI Chandrachud had upheld the status of Ladakh as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which permits the formation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from any state.

However, it did not deal with the question of whether the Parliament could extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories.

“In view of the submission made by the Solicitor General that statehood would be restored of Jammu and Kashmir, we do not find it necessary to determine whether the reorganisation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories of Ladakh and Jammu & Kashmir is permissible under Article 3,” the apex court had said.

Further, the SC held that the President has the power to issue a notification declaring that Article 370 ceases to exist even after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. It added that Article 370 was a temporary provision, considering the historical context in which it was included in the Constitution of India.

In its verdict, the top court had also asked the Election Commission of India to take steps to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024.

Generally, review petitions are tested on very narrow grounds like mistakes of law, an error apparent on the face of the record, etc., and are often dismissed in chambers and are rarely given open court hearings.

–IANS

pds/vd

New Delhi, May 21 (IANS) The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of review pleas filed against the Constitution Bench verdict upholding the revocation of Article 370 as valid.

“Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed,” a bench, headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, said.

Further, the 5-judge Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Boppana, dismissed the applications seeking listing of the review petition in open court and seeking permission to appear and argue in person.

The review petition, filed under Article 137 of the Constitution, against the decision rendered on December 11, said that the impugned judgment should not have left open the question of whether the Parliament can extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories.

In its verdict delivered on December 11, a Constitution Bench, headed by CJI Chandrachud had upheld the status of Ladakh as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which permits the formation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from any state.

However, it did not deal with the question of whether the Parliament could extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories.

“In view of the submission made by the Solicitor General that statehood would be restored of Jammu and Kashmir, we do not find it necessary to determine whether the reorganisation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories of Ladakh and Jammu & Kashmir is permissible under Article 3,” the apex court had said.

Further, the SC held that the President has the power to issue a notification declaring that Article 370 ceases to exist even after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. It added that Article 370 was a temporary provision, considering the historical context in which it was included in the Constitution of India.

In its verdict, the top court had also asked the Election Commission of India to take steps to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024.

Generally, review petitions are tested on very narrow grounds like mistakes of law, an error apparent on the face of the record, etc., and are often dismissed in chambers and are rarely given open court hearings.

–IANS

pds/vd