SC throws out plea to ban Malayalam novel Meesha (GS-1/2) (Page-1) The Supreme Court on Wednesday threw out a petition seeking a ban on the Malayalam novel Meesha (Moustache), written by S. Hareesh, as it was perceived to be 'derogatory' to temple-going Hindu women. The court, in a 30-page judgment, said the creativity and imagination of an author cannot be held hostage to the vagaries of subjective perceptions, whims or fancies of individuals The court assured that it would safeguard the free flow of ideas in a democracy by quoting Voltaire's "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' * The court said the judiciary should remain committed to keeping the flag of democratic values and ideals of freedom and liberty flying high."We live not in a totalitarian regime but in a democratic nation, which permits free exchange of ideas and liberty." Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, who authored the judgment, observed.
The judgment said,"A writer should have imagination cannot be directed." free play with words,like a painter has it with colours.The passion of It is for the reader to read a creative work with a mature spirit, catholicity of approach, objective tolerance and a sense of acceptability founded on reality, it said. 'Intellectual cowardice' The Chief Justice, along with Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud, wrote that creative voices cannot be allowed to slip into a mode of"intellectual cowardice." The petitioner, N. Radhakrishnan, calling himself a "proud Hindu", alleged that the book contained "offending parts", which insult Brahmin priests and amounts to a "casteist/racist slur" The court held that the language used in the dialogue cannot remotely be thought of as obscene. The concept of defamation does not arise. Nurturing the idea that it is derogatory and hurtful to the temple-going is baseless.
Trade talks stuck as U.S. presses oil, aircraft sales to India (GS-2) (Page-1) India and the United States are in a deadlock over contentious trade issues after the Donald Trump administration sought a formal commitment of additional purchases of $10 billion annually for the next three years, as part of a trade agreement under negotiation As both countries seek to reiterate their strategic partnership at the first 2+2 dialogue in New Delhi orn Thursday, India is in the crosshairs of economic nationalists in the Trump administration. India has a surplus of $23 billion in trade with America, and the U.S. wants to wipe that off by forcing more imports by New Delhi, as part of a proposed trade agreement. "Our concerns are st has concerns... at this stage the discussions are going on," an Indian official speaking ahead of the 2+2 dialogue said. eel and aluminium tariffs, and a number of agricultural tariffs. So is the GSP review.The U.S
Core concerns India has a trade surplus of $23 billion with America .The U.S. is seeking to wipe out the surplus by forcing more imports by New Delhi -A draft agreement in the U.S. last month committed additional imports by India in civilian aircraft and natural gas India's core concerns are steel and aluminium tariffs levied by the U.S., and a U.S. proposal to review the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) status. GSP is a preferential tariff system that India enjoys
"Trade between countries is determined by competitive advantage and notions of enterprise of private parties. In democracies like India and the U.S., both governments have limited abilities to commit a trade value for future years..," another Indian official said in Delhi Officials of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) office also aggregated all existing market access issues with India in the negotiations that were initially planned on questions related to the American review of India's Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) status and the steel and aluminium tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. With talks in stalemate, the U.S is proceeding with its review of India's GSP status and India is moving ahead with retaliatory tariffs. Postponed twice, India's retaliatory tariffs are now set to come into force on September 18
Meanwhile, there is a shadow of uncertainty over the Trade Policy Forum (TPF) that was announced for the last week of October. India was expecting to negotiate general market access issues at the TPF, but the USTR wanted all of them resolved beforehand USTR Robert Lighthizer and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross were expected to travel to New Delhi for TPF and the Commercial Dialogue between the two countries in the last week of October, but these parallel events could be postponed, sources told The Hindu. Deputy USTR Jeffrey Gerrish, called off a trip to New Delhi scheduled for this week, but that could be rescheduled for later this month Pointing out that there has been a decrease in the deficit last year by about 5% or about $1.5 Bn, the first Indian official said. "..this is because US exports have increased by 10%. "we are importing gas and oil from the United States. ..According to ballpark figures, this calendar year we are likely to import up to US $2.5 billion in oil and gas. This is something we would like the US to acknowledge."
S. The USTR had launched a review of India's GSP status, that allows preferential treatment to certain number of specified goods from beneficiary countries, following complaints from AdvaDed, or Advanced Medical Technology Association, a group of companies that exports medical devices to India and a dairy association. Earlier signals from the USTR suggested there could be a resolution, with India changing its price control regime in medical devices by moving on to the more acceptable instrument of trade margin rationalisation, and the US discontinuing its GSP review and granting exemptions for India from the steel and aluminium tariffs. Compulsory Registration But the draft agreement prepared by the USTR sought concessions from India on Compulsory Registration Order that governs standards in telecom equipment, American exports of boric acid, pork, poultry and dairy. "In fact, the entire gamut of market access issues that the U.S has been raising for long," said a business leader who is familiar with the content. "We would like the US to understand that there are different ways of addressing the trade deficit. One of them is to address issues of direct concern, but the other is to look at new ways and new products and services to buy and sell both ways. But I can't comment on what the outcome of these talks will be as discussions are still underway," said the first official. entire eamut of market access isuoment American exports of
"The growth in civil aviation sector has resulted in placement of higher orders with Boeing by Indian airline operators. With the US restarting oil and natural gas exports Indian imports in these sectors have been going up In the first six months of this year, US exports to India have gone up by 28%vis a vis the corresponding period last year. So far as accommodating the interest areas and concern of each other both USTR and Dept of Commerce are engaging in talks to find a mutually satisfactory solution," said the second official
Supreme Court to pronounce today verdict on fate of Section 377 (GS-1/2) (Page-1) A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will pronounce on September 6 the judgment on the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a colonial era provision which criminalises private consensual sexual acts between same sex adults. The Bench is led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and comprises Justices Rohinton F Nariman,A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra There will be two opinions for the Bench. They will be authored by Chief Justice Misra and Justice Chandrachud. The judgment would be the first of the several major judgments, including Aadhaar, Sabarimala women entry ban, etc., waiting to be pronounced by various Constitution Benches led by Chief Justice Misra, who is retiring on October 2. The Constitution Bench hearing in the Section 377 case began on July 10, with Justice Chandrachud orally observing that a person's choice of a partner is a fundamental right to life, and a partner' includes same sex partner
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Mr. Suri, had argued that "everything changes with the passage of time Laws made 50 years can become invalid over time". He pointed out that Section 377 fell under the 'Unnatural Offences' chapter in the IPC. "What is unnatural? It can be between a man and man and also between a man and a woman. Sex done even between a man and woman, but not in the "conventional" way, also becomes unnatural under 377," he interpreted. The court heard arguments about how history has changed its view on homosexuality from pathological prejudice to a "normal and benign variation of human sexuality". Justice Malhotra had reacted that homosexuality was not confined to humans but extended to the animal kingdom too. In the hearing, the government chose to remain neutral on the legality of Section 377, leaving the decision entirely to the wisdom of the Supreme Court
Graduate in Economics. Gold medal in Dissertation, Prepared various documents on Demonetisation and GST, Share-trading and many more