

Related Articles
Gandhinagar: currency settlement business in name of Wedding expenses after ban of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 notes
In Gandhinagar, currency settlement business in the name of Wedding expenses has started due to recent ban of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 old currency notes. Charge of Rs 2000 to Rs 5000 is taken for Printing of minimum 5 Wedding Invitation Cards. Rs 2.50 lakhs could be withdrawn from bank in the name of […]
Ahmedabad: gangrape on minor girl by 3 persons in Pipalaj village
Today in Ahmedabad, incident of gangrape on minor girl by 3 persons in Pipalaj village near Narol. Before 4 days incident of gangrape oin 16 year old girl took place. After escaping from rapists victim girl has lodged a police complaint in Vatva police station. 4 days before 3 persons Pramod Virendra Dube, Dharmendra and […]
Varun and Kiara visited Ahmedabad for movie promotion of JugJugg Jeeyo
BY DARSHANA JAMINDAR Today Bollywood actors Varun Dhawan and Kiara Advani visited Ahmedabad. Varun and Kiara dance in Ahmedabad at movie promotion of JugJugg Jeeyo and delighted theirmillions of fans and followers. Both had a media interaction and launched song from the movie.
The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutional validity of the SC/ST Amendment Act, 2018, and said a court can grant anticipatory bail only in cases where a prima facie case is not made out.
A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said a preliminary inquiry is not essential before lodging an FIR under the act and the approval of senior police officials is not needed.
Justice Ravindra Bhat, the other member of the bench, said in a concurring verdict that every citizen needs to treat fellow citizens equally and foster the concept of fraternity.
Justice Bhat said a court can quash the FIR if a prima facie case is not made out under the SC/ST Act and the liberal use of anticipatory bail will defeat the intention of Parliament.
The top court’s verdict came on a batch of PILs challenging the validity of the SC/ST Amendment Act of 2018, which was brought to nullify the effect of the apex court’s 2018 ruling, which had diluted the provisions of the stringent Act.