Center on Monday educated the Supreme
Court that it was "effectively" investigating the debate relating to a parallel legal framework being controlled by priests i...
https://todaylivevideos.blogspot.com/2016/03/center-on-monday-educated-supreme.html
Court that it was "effectively" investigating the debate relating to a parallel legal framework being controlled by priests issuing fatwas in various parts of the nation, including the one relating to Imrana in Uttar Pradesh.
In August a year ago, the SC had looked for reactions from the Center, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and others on a PIL documented by Vishwa Lochan Madan, looking for a prohibition on the foundation of a parallel Muslim legal framework. Ministers and Muslim individual associations had freely restricted the PIL.
With get together decisions drawing closer in different states, including Assam and West Bengal where Muslims shape a sizable piece of voters, the Center chose to tread a careful way and depended on a strategic stand of "investigating the issue" to look for additional time.
Extra specialist general Gopal Subramaniam submitted before a Bench including judges Ruma Pal and Dalveer Bhandari that "the Center is effectively occupied with investigating the issue".
The Bench then conceded the Center four weeks' a great opportunity to document its reaction to the appeal, which was recorded in the wake of a fatwa issued by Islamic theological school Darul Uloom of Deoband in UP, against a Muslim lady named Imrana, professedly assaulted by her dad in-law.
Rather than investigating the grave charges leveled by the lady, the pastors requesting that her relinquish her spouse and regard her dad in-law as her spouse. This had brought about broad furore.
The SC had additionally looked for reactions from the administrations of UP, Haryana, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Delhi and West Bengal, Darul Uloom and Mumbai-based Muslims for common Democracy.
In August a year ago, the SC had looked for reactions from the Center, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and others on a PIL documented by Vishwa Lochan Madan, looking for a prohibition on the foundation of a parallel Muslim legal framework. Ministers and Muslim individual associations had freely restricted the PIL.
With get together decisions drawing closer in different states, including Assam and West Bengal where Muslims shape a sizable piece of voters, the Center chose to tread a careful way and depended on a strategic stand of "investigating the issue" to look for additional time.
Extra specialist general Gopal Subramaniam submitted before a Bench including judges Ruma Pal and Dalveer Bhandari that "the Center is effectively occupied with investigating the issue".
The Bench then conceded the Center four weeks' a great opportunity to document its reaction to the appeal, which was recorded in the wake of a fatwa issued by Islamic theological school Darul Uloom of Deoband in UP, against a Muslim lady named Imrana, professedly assaulted by her dad in-law.
Rather than investigating the grave charges leveled by the lady, the pastors requesting that her relinquish her spouse and regard her dad in-law as her spouse. This had brought about broad furore.
The SC had additionally looked for reactions from the administrations of UP, Haryana, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Delhi and West Bengal, Darul Uloom and Mumbai-based Muslims for common Democracy.
