The court clarified that for an act to constitute an atrocity under this section, there must be a specific intent to humiliate. It is not enough for an insult to occur; the accused must have the knowledge or awareness that the victim belongs to a SC or ST. The court noted that this awareness could be inferred from long-term association or residence in the same locality.
The Union has exclusive power for reasons connected with defense, foreign affairs, or the security of India (List I, Entry 9).
Both the Union and States have concurrent power for reasons connected with the security of a State, maintenance of public order, or maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community (List III, Entry 3).
Provision of Article 49 Provision of Article 49 reads as follows: 49. Protection of monuments and places and objects of
As the said site was declared as protected monument u/s 3 of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904, in 1921, do we really bound to carry over such declaration by the British Government under AMASR Act without any value assessment on the grounds of cultural, historical, artistic, national pride, etc.? Before such assessment we should take a note that British people were only here to loot this nation and we should not glorify any of such person in any way.
The Article 49 of the Constitution of India specifies that it shall be the obligation of the State to protect every monument or place or object of artistic or historic interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament to be of national importance, from spoliation, disfigurement, destruction, removal, disposal or export, as the case may be.”
1. Under Section 2(j) of the AMASR Act, respondents declared the said tomb and circular vault as ancient monument merely on account of its existence for more than 100 years. The said site does not fulfill any criteria of an ancient monument, as it contains only the remains of close person of the then former Governor. This site does not have any historical, archaeological or artistic significance which need to be protected as ancient monument by respondents on government spending.
मामले की सामान्य जानकारी: मामले का नाम: श्री रंगा रेड्डी बनाम पी सी सी टी- हैदराबाद- जीएसटी आदेश की तिथि:
General information about the case: Name of case: Mr. Ranga Reddy Male vs P C C T- Hyderabad- Gst Date
Service tax on the Government Consultancy Services in Telangana Read Post »
यह विस्तृत विश्लेषण सिद्ध करता है कि 1871 का यह अधिनियम अब अप्रासंगिक और दमनकारी हो चुका है। इसे पूरी तरह निरस्त कर एक ऐसे नए “एकीकृत पशु कल्याण और अतिचार प्रबंधन अधिनियम” की आवश्यकता है जो पशुओं को “राजस्व की वस्तु” नहीं, बल्कि “जीवंत प्राणी” माने, किसानों और पशुपालकों के हितों में संतुलन बनाए एवं भारतीय पंचायती राज और डिजिटल इंडिया की सोच को आत्मसात करे।
आपका मासूम बच्चा, जो स्कूल से लौटकर आपका फोन खोलता है, और अचानक उसके सामने ऐसी सामग्री आ जाती है जो उसके कोमल मन को हमेशा के लिए बदल देती है। क्या आपने कभी सोचा है कि फेसबुक, इंस्टाग्राम, एक्स या यूट्यूब जैसे विदेशी प्लेटफॉर्म भारत को एक डिजिटल यौन बाजार में क्यों बदल रहे हैं?
