Minorities and the law: India - Revision history

Jyoti: /* Not defined by Constitution or Supreme Court */

2021-08-15T22:43:27Z

‎Not defined by Constitution or Supreme Court

Jyoti: /* Muslims */

2017-11-11T04:31:14Z

‎Muslims

Jyoti: /* Definition of ‘Minority’ */

2016-11-08T21:10:58Z

‎Definition of ‘Minority’

Jyoti: /* Sikhs */

2016-09-20T20:33:06Z

‎Sikhs

Pdewan: /* Definition of ‘Minority’ */

2016-07-08T08:48:52Z

‎Definition of ‘Minority’

Pdewan: /* Minorities: Constitution and Supreme Court */

2016-07-08T08:47:54Z

‎Minorities: Constitution and Supreme Court

Pdewan: /* HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP */

2016-07-08T08:46:42Z

‎HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP

Pdewan: /* Sikhs */

2016-07-08T08:45:47Z

‎Sikhs

Pdewan: /* HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP */

2016-07-08T08:45:03Z

‎HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP

Pdewan: /* Minorities: Constitution and Supreme Court */

2016-01-28T18:28:35Z

‎Minorities: Constitution and Supreme Court

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 15 August 2021
Line 36:		Line 36:

	dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com		dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
		+
		+	===2019/ Minority status is determined by pan-India population===
		+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2019%2F12%2F18&entity=Ar01106&sk=447DFB26&mode=text Dhananjay Mahapatra, Dec 18, 2019 ''Times of India'']
		+
		+	The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a PIL seeking minority status for Hindus in several states where Muslims or Christians are in the majority and said religious minority status could be given only on the basis of pan-India population.
		+
		+	A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) S A Bobde and Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant disagreed with petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay that the current scheme of using the country as a whole as the unit for determining religious minority should be replaced by one where population of different communities in each state is used as the yardstick.
		+
		+	Appearing for Upadhyay, Mohan Parasaran said that in two cases concerning the establishment of educational institutions — T M A Pai and P A Inamdar — constitution benches of the Supreme Court had used “state” for determining linguistic minority. However, the CJI-led bench said, “States were formed on linguistic basis. That is not the case with religion. It has to be pan-India. What is the problem if a community is majority in Jammu & Kashmir but minority in all other states. In Lakshadweep, Hindus may be 2% but they follow Hinduism which is majority in India.”
		+
		+	Parasaran said Section 2(c) of National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, “arbitrarily” notified Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists and Parsis as minority communities on October 23, 1993, based on their national population. He said some of these communities, despite being in majority in some states, were cornering government sponsored benefits meant for minority communities of those states.
		+
		+	In his petition, Upadhyay had cited the example of J&K and said, “In Jammu & Kashmir, the government allotted 717 out of a total 753 scholarships to Muslim students based on the 1993 notification and none to Hindu students.”
		+
		+	Attorney general K K Venugopal, whose assistance had been sought by the bench, said Hindu population was in minority in seven states and Union Territories.
		+
		+	As per the Census, Hindus were in minority in Punjab (Sikh majority), Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland (all with Christian majority), J&K and Lakshadweep (Muslim majority).
		+
		+	However, the majority community in these states and Union Territories were enjoying ‘minority’ status and communities which were the real minorities were not getting legitimate share because of non-identification of minorities, Upadhyay said. When Parasaran pressed for framing of new criteria for determination and notification of minority community, the bench said, “Where is the problem? We cannot declare anyone as minority. It is always done by the government.”
		+
		+	[[Category:India\|L
		+	MINORITIES AND THE LAW: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary\|C
		+	MINORITIES AND THE LAW: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Name\|ALPHABET
		+	MINORITIES AND THE LAW: INDIA]]

	=Jains=		=Jains=

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 Sources said the status was delayed due to the Patidar reservation stir in the state, where 5.8 lakh Jains account for 0.96% of the state's population. Jain scholar Jitendra Shah lauded the move and said the status would give Jains a distinct socio-religious identity .
 =Muslims=
@@ Line 85: / Line 112: @@
 It is a welcome judgment, although overdue. It is a virtual indictment of the UPA VIJAY KUMAR MALHOTRA SENIOR BJP LEADER
 =Sikhs=
 ==A minority in Punjab? ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:10, 8 November 2016
Line 36:		Line 36:

	dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com		dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
		+
		+	=Jains=
		+	==A minority in Gujarat==
		+	[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Now-Jains-get-minority-status-in-Guj-08052016020040 ''The Times of India''], May 08 2016
		+
		+	Now, Jains get minority status in Guj
		+
		+	The Gujarat government on Saturday announced minority status for the state's Jain community .This comes nearly two years after the previous Congressled Centre granted minority status to the community in June 2014. “CM Anandiben Patel has approved minority status for Jains in the state,“ minister Vijay Rupani told.
		+
		+	Rupani, a Jain, said all Jain institutions would now become autonomous minority institutions. “Poor Jains would be entitled to several welfare schemes of the central government like education scholarship, higher subsidy in finance for self-employment etc.“
		+
		+	Sources said the status was delayed due to the Patidar reservation stir in the state, where 5.8 lakh Jains account for 0.96% of the state's population. Jain scholar Jitendra Shah lauded the move and said the status would give Jains a distinct socio-religious identity .

	=Muslims=		=Muslims=

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 20 September 2016
Line 99:		Line 99:

	A three-judge bench of the SC on August 8, 2005 had said in Bal Patil case, “It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.“		A three-judge bench of the SC on August 8, 2005 had said in Bal Patil case, “It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.“
		+
		+	=Low conviction rate where minorities are victims=
		+	==2008 Kandhamal riot cases==
		+	[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=SC-Minorities-as-much-children-of-soil-as-04082016019032 ''The Times of India''], Aug 04 2016
		+
		+	Amit Anand Choudhary
		+
		+	'''SC: Minorities as much `children of soil' as majority'''
		+
		+	Expre cern over the low rate of conviction in 2008 Kandhamal riot cases in Odisha, the Supreme Court cited on Wednesday its four-decade-old judgment that minorities are as much children of the soil as the majority , and held that members of the minority community should not be deprived of their rights to conserve their religion and culture.
		+
		+	A bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justice U U Lalit reiterated a 1974 verdict in which the apex court had batted for the rights of minority communities as granted by the Constitution.
		+
		+	“The minorities are as much children of the soil as the majority and the approach has been to ensure that nothing should be done, as might deprive the minorities of a sense of belonging, of a feeling of security , of a consciousness of equality and of the awareness that the conservation of their religion, culture, language and script as also the protection of their educational institutions is a fundamental right enshrined in the constitution,“ the bench said while referring to the 1974 verdict.
		+
		+	The spiral of communal violence, triggered by the killing of Vishwa Hindu Parishad member Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati, had claimed 39 lives while 232 churches were damaged.According to an NHRC report, the violence spread after Swami's body was taken through various parts of the district in a procession.
		+
		+	While 6,495 people were arrested, only 493 have been convicted and trial is going on in 150 cases. Of the 827 communal violence cases that were registered, chargesheets were filed in 512 cases and 315 cases were closed as police did not find any evidence or offenders could not be detected. The accused were convicted in 78 cases out of 362 cases in which trial was completed, marking the conviction rate at a dismal 21%.
		+
		+	Terming the figure of conviction rate in 2008 riot cases as “disturbing“, the bench asked the state government to re-examine all cases and take appropriate steps.

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 = Definition of ‘Minority’=
+==Not defined by Constitution or Supreme Court==
 ''' Constitution and Supreme Court Have Never Attempted To Define ‘Minority’ '''
 Dhananjay Mahapatra | TNN
@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 From these two judgments, it is clear that the court envisaged a situation where a religious or linguistic group is in minority on the numerical strength without putting any benchmark, beyond which a community will lose its minority tag. However, it did not deter the three-judge Bench from stating that ‘‘ideal of a democratic society, which has adopted right of equality as its fundamental creed, should be elimination of majority and minority and the so-called forward and backward classes’’.
 dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
-−
 =Muslims=
 ==HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 8 July 2016
Line 97:		Line 97:

	It is a welcome judgment, although overdue. It is a virtual indictment of the UPA VIJAY KUMAR MALHOTRA SENIOR BJP LEADER		It is a welcome judgment, although overdue. It is a virtual indictment of the UPA VIJAY KUMAR MALHOTRA SENIOR BJP LEADER
		+	=Sikhs=
		+	==A minority in Punjab? ==
		+	[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Are-the-Sikhs-a-minority-in-Punjab-19012016010014 ''The Times of India''], Jan 19 2016
		+
		+	''' Are the Sikhs a minority in Punjab? '''
		+
		+	DhananjayMahapatra
		+
		+	'' SC to examine demand that could have far-reaching consequences ''
		+
		+	It may sound ridiculous at first blush, but the Supreme Court agreed to examine whether Sikhs were a `minority group in homeland Punjab', saying the question had farreaching importance and consequences.
		+
		+	A Constitution bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justices FMI Kalifulla, A K Sikri, S ABobde and R Banumathi initially countered the plea by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi for treating Sikhs as a minority in Punjab by asking, “Can Muslims be treated as minority in Jammu and Kashmir?
		+	“For that matter, can Christians, who are the majority in the states of Nagaland and Meghalaya, be also treated as a minority community in these two northeastern states? Sikhs may be a minority in other states but can they be treated as a minority group in Punjab?“ But Dwivedi pointed out that another Constitution bench judgment had erroneously fixed twin criteria -whether the group was numerically a minority and whether they were dominated by other groups -to de termine if a community was in minority , while taking a state as the geographical entity for such determination.
		+
		+	He said the numerical strength of a community within a state should be the criterion and not whether they were dominated by other communities. “ A minority community may be affluent and not dominated in a state. This doesn't mean they can be denied the right to protect and further their cultural and educational rights as a minority group guaranteed under the Constitution,“ he said.
		+
		+	Dwivedi said Sikhs were those who owed allegiance to Guru Granth Sahib, and were enlisted as voters with Shiromani GurdwaraParbandhakCommitte. “The subsects and followers of Dera Sacha Sauda, RadhaSoami and similarly placed persons are not considered Sikhs even though they were born to Sikh parents,“ he added.
		+
		+	When the bench was deliberating on whom to appoint as amicus curiae for assistance in adjudication of this tricky and complex constitutional issue, senior advocate K KVenugopal said it surely presented an issue that had far-reaching consequences for many states.
		+
		+	“In Kerala, Christians are in minority but own majority of the educational institutions. If Christian-owned educational institutions turn into minority educational institutions, then it will have a telling effect,“ he said and agreed with the bench that former solicitor general T R Andhyarujina would be best suited to discharge duties as amicus curiae in this issue.
		+
		+	The bench issued notice to the ministry of minority affairs and sought its response within four weeks. It also requested attorney general MukulRohatgi and senior advocate Andhyarujina to assist the court in deciding this question.
		+
		+	A three-judge bench of the SC on August 8, 2005 had said in Bal Patil case, “It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.“

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:45, 8 July 2016
Line 60:		Line 60:

	dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com		dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
−
−	~~=Sikhs=~~
−	~~[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Are-the-Sikhs-a-minority-in-Punjab-19012016010014 ''The Times of India''], Jan 19 2016~~
−
−	~~''' Are the Sikhs a minority in Punjab? '''~~
−
−	~~DhananjayMahapatra~~
−
−	~~'' SC to examine demand that could have far-reaching consequences ''~~
−
−	It may sound ridiculous at first blush, but the Supreme Court agreed to examine whether Sikhs were a `minority group in homeland Punjab', saying the question had farreaching importance and consequences.
−
−	A Constitution bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justices FMI Kalifulla, A K Sikri, S ABobde and R Banumathi initially countered the plea by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi for treating Sikhs as a minority in Punjab by asking, “Can Muslims be treated as minority in Jammu and Kashmir?
−	“For that matter, can Christians, who are the majority in the states of Nagaland and Meghalaya, be also treated as a minority community in these two northeastern states? Sikhs may be a minority in other states but can they be treated as a minority group in Punjab?“ But Dwivedi pointed out that another Constitution bench judgment had erroneously fixed twin criteria -whether the group was numerically a minority and whether they were dominated by other groups -to de termine if a community was in minority , while taking a state as the geographical entity for such determination.
−
−	He said the numerical strength of a community within a state should be the criterion and not whether they were dominated by other communities. “ A minority community may be affluent and not dominated in a state. This doesn't mean they can be denied the right to protect and further their cultural and educational rights as a minority group guaranteed under the Constitution,“ he said.
−
−	Dwivedi said Sikhs were those who owed allegiance to Guru Granth Sahib, and were enlisted as voters with Shiromani GurdwaraParbandhakCommitte. “The subsects and followers of Dera Sacha Sauda, RadhaSoami and similarly placed persons are not considered Sikhs even though they were born to Sikh parents,“ he added.
−
−	When the bench was deliberating on whom to appoint as amicus curiae for assistance in adjudication of this tricky and complex constitutional issue, senior advocate K KVenugopal said it surely presented an issue that had far-reaching consequences for many states.
−
−	“In Kerala, Christians are in minority but own majority of the educational institutions. If Christian-owned educational institutions turn into minority educational institutions, then it will have a telling effect,“ he said and agreed with the bench that former solicitor general T R Andhyarujina would be best suited to discharge duties as amicus curiae in this issue.
−
−	The bench issued notice to the ministry of minority affairs and sought its response within four weeks. It also requested attorney general MukulRohatgi and senior advocate Andhyarujina to assist the court in deciding this question.
−
−	~~A three-judge bench of the SC on August 8, 2005 had said in Bal Patil case, “It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.“~~

	=Muslims=		=Muslims=

@@ Line 87: / Line 87: @@
 A three-judge bench of the SC on August 8, 2005 had said in Bal Patil case, “It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.“
-=HC says Muslims are not a minority in UP =
+=Muslims=
 '''Order May Roil Political Scene Ahead Of Polls'''
@@ Line 107: / Line 108: @@
 This was the third judgment in three years by the Allahabad high court challenging the privileges Muslims enjoy as a minority community. The same court had ordered the withdrawal of minority institution status for Aligarh Muslim University and later declared Haj subsidies given by the state as illegal. While the one on Haj was struck down by the supreme court, the one on AMU is under judicial review.
-==The verdict ==
+'''The verdict '''
 Citing the twin criteria of population and strength and relying on census reports of 1951 and 2001, Allahabad HC says that Muslims account for roughly 18.5% of UP’s population—hence don’t qualify to be treated as a religious minority
-==Minorities’ Rights==
+'''Minorities’ Rights'''
 According to a supreme court ruling of 2005, minority status is a guarantee of religious, cultural and educational rights (Articles 25-30). These also include managing religious affairs, participating in religious worship, and establishing and running educational institutions
-==ANGER==
+'''ANGER'''
 We will approach the apex court challenging the HC decision SYED AHMED SHAH BUKHARI SHAHI IMAM, JAMA MASJID
-==JOY==
+'''JOY''
 It is a welcome judgment, although overdue. It is a virtual indictment of the UPA VIJAY KUMAR MALHOTRA SENIOR BJP LEADER