This document summarizes the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding a panel established to address issues related to sex workers and their rehabilitation and living conditions. The panel submitted recommendations in 2016, which the government considered but did not pass legislation for. To address this gap, the Supreme Court is exercising its constitutional powers to issue interim directions on rehabilitation measures and ensuring sex workers' rights until legislation is passed. These directions relate to equal protection under the law, access to support for victims of crimes, and not penalizing or harassing sex workers during police raids.
पिछले साल मई में न्यायमूर्ति एल नागेश्वर राव (सेवानिवृत्त) की अध्यक्षता वाली पीठ ने कहा था कि संरक्षण गृहों में उनकी इच्छा के विरुद्ध हिरासत में ली गई वयस्क महिलाओं को छोड़ने की अनुमति दी जानी चाहिए
2023 (और उससे पहले 2022) में सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा नफरत फैलाने वाले भाषण पर अंकुश लगाने के लिए जारी किए गए कई दिशानिर्देशों के बावजूद हेट स्पीच की घटनाएं सामने आती रहती हैं। नागरिक नफरत मुक्त 2024 कैसे सुनिश्चित कर सकते हैं?
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding the suo moto writ petition on the distribution of essential supplies and services during the COVID-19 pandemic. It lists the advocates present and notes that the Court directed the Union of India to file an affidavit addressing specific issues related to vaccination data, including the percentage of the population vaccinated with one and both doses in rural and urban areas, and data on the central government's vaccine purchases.
Criminal Justice Society v. UOI And Ors.pdfsabrangsabrang
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition filed by the Criminal Justice Society of India against the Union of India. It notes that many advocates were present on both sides and that the Additional Solicitor General stated that substantial developments have occurred since the previous affidavit was filed. The court then ordered the ASG to file an updated affidavit within 3 weeks and scheduled the next hearing for November 10, 2022.
The Supreme Court of India pronounced its judgment in a case related to eco-sensitive zones (ESZs) around protected forests. The Court directed that each protected forest must have a minimum 1 km wide ESZ, within which activities will be regulated according to guidelines. For areas where the existing ESZ is already wider than 1 km, the wider ESZ will apply. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Home Secretary of each State/UT will be responsible for compliance with the guidelines within ESZs of protected forests in their respective regions.
1. The Supreme Court of India heard an application (IA) regarding providing relief such as monthly dry rations and cash transfers to sex workers without requiring proof of identity.
2. The Court directed the applicant's counsel to serve the respondent states a copy of the application and the registry to email it to all states immediately.
3. The Court directed the Additional Solicitor General and state government counsels to obtain instructions on modalities for distributing relief to sex workers without identity proof and listed the matter for further hearing on September 29th.
SC ORDER FEB 03 2023 ISSUES NOTICE IN ANTI CONVERSION LAWS.pdfsabrangsabrang
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to citizens' rights and issued notices to state governments to file counters to the petitions within 3 weeks. The court also allowed the withdrawal of an additional affidavit in one case and scheduled for further hearing of the matters on March 17, 2023. The document provides details of the cases heard and orders issued by the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. It ordered that the process for receiving claims and objections to entries in the final NRC draft published on July 30, 2018 would begin on September 25, 2018, tentatively remaining open for 60 days. Claimants can rely on 10 types of documents dated up to March 24, 1971 as evidence, including land records, residential certificates, passports, insurance policies, licenses, employment records, and bank accounts.
पिछले साल मई में न्यायमूर्ति एल नागेश्वर राव (सेवानिवृत्त) की अध्यक्षता वाली पीठ ने कहा था कि संरक्षण गृहों में उनकी इच्छा के विरुद्ध हिरासत में ली गई वयस्क महिलाओं को छोड़ने की अनुमति दी जानी चाहिए
2023 (और उससे पहले 2022) में सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा नफरत फैलाने वाले भाषण पर अंकुश लगाने के लिए जारी किए गए कई दिशानिर्देशों के बावजूद हेट स्पीच की घटनाएं सामने आती रहती हैं। नागरिक नफरत मुक्त 2024 कैसे सुनिश्चित कर सकते हैं?
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding the suo moto writ petition on the distribution of essential supplies and services during the COVID-19 pandemic. It lists the advocates present and notes that the Court directed the Union of India to file an affidavit addressing specific issues related to vaccination data, including the percentage of the population vaccinated with one and both doses in rural and urban areas, and data on the central government's vaccine purchases.
Criminal Justice Society v. UOI And Ors.pdfsabrangsabrang
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition filed by the Criminal Justice Society of India against the Union of India. It notes that many advocates were present on both sides and that the Additional Solicitor General stated that substantial developments have occurred since the previous affidavit was filed. The court then ordered the ASG to file an updated affidavit within 3 weeks and scheduled the next hearing for November 10, 2022.
The Supreme Court of India pronounced its judgment in a case related to eco-sensitive zones (ESZs) around protected forests. The Court directed that each protected forest must have a minimum 1 km wide ESZ, within which activities will be regulated according to guidelines. For areas where the existing ESZ is already wider than 1 km, the wider ESZ will apply. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Home Secretary of each State/UT will be responsible for compliance with the guidelines within ESZs of protected forests in their respective regions.
1. The Supreme Court of India heard an application (IA) regarding providing relief such as monthly dry rations and cash transfers to sex workers without requiring proof of identity.
2. The Court directed the applicant's counsel to serve the respondent states a copy of the application and the registry to email it to all states immediately.
3. The Court directed the Additional Solicitor General and state government counsels to obtain instructions on modalities for distributing relief to sex workers without identity proof and listed the matter for further hearing on September 29th.
SC ORDER FEB 03 2023 ISSUES NOTICE IN ANTI CONVERSION LAWS.pdfsabrangsabrang
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to citizens' rights and issued notices to state governments to file counters to the petitions within 3 weeks. The court also allowed the withdrawal of an additional affidavit in one case and scheduled for further hearing of the matters on March 17, 2023. The document provides details of the cases heard and orders issued by the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. It ordered that the process for receiving claims and objections to entries in the final NRC draft published on July 30, 2018 would begin on September 25, 2018, tentatively remaining open for 60 days. Claimants can rely on 10 types of documents dated up to March 24, 1971 as evidence, including land records, residential certificates, passports, insurance policies, licenses, employment records, and bank accounts.
1. The Supreme Court of India heard an application regarding the contagion of COVID-19 in child protection homes.
2. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) filed an affidavit stating that as of now there are 9346 children who have been abandoned, lost one parent, or lost both parents.
3. The Court extended the deadline for district authorities to upload information on affected children to the NCPCR portal to June 5th and directed NCPCR to file an affidavit with the collated information by June 6th.
In re contagion of covid in protection homesZahidManiyar
The Supreme Court of India heard a case regarding the protection of children affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly those who have become orphans. It directed district authorities to upload information on orphaned children to a government portal and immediately attend to their basic needs. The Court will receive updated information on identification and support of orphaned children from the central and state governments at a further hearing.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding various applications and reports submitted related to pollution control and thermal power plants. It lists the counsel present for various parties and respondents. The matter was heard by a bench of three Honorable Justices.
The Supreme Court of India took suo moto cognizance of inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials in India. It constituted a committee of amici curiae to examine the issues and submit a report with proposed amendments to rules. The committee submitted its report. The Supreme Court noted that only 5 of 24 High Courts submitted responses and directed the remaining High Courts to submit substantive responses within 2 weeks or have their Registrar Generals appear before the Court. It also constituted a new committee to examine suggestions for digitizing records and facilitating timely filing of appeals by convicts to reduce delays, and directed High Courts to submit responses to this committee within 2 weeks. The matter was listed for further hearing after 4 weeks.
This document summarizes the proceedings of a Supreme Court of India hearing regarding the implementation of orders to install CCTV cameras in police stations across several states. The Court directs the states of Haryana, Telangana, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh to allocate funds for CCTV installation within 4 weeks. These states must then complete installation within 5 months. For Uttar Pradesh, budget allocation is to be completed within 3 months and installation within 9 months, given its large size. The Court finds that timelines provided by states have been too long and its orders have not been fully complied with.
Witness protection order sc in legislator casesZahidManiyar
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the discussion during the hearing. The amicus curiae presented a report analyzing information provided by various High Courts on pending criminal cases against elected representatives. Key issues highlighted include the need for improved video conferencing infrastructure to record witness testimony, exempting witnesses from applying for protection under the witness protection scheme, appointing nodal prosecution officers to ensure cases progress swiftly, having judicial officers handle such cases for at least 2 years for continuity, and addressing specific issues faced by High Courts of Kerala and Calcutta where police are reluctant to take action against legislators. The Court will consider the suggestions to rationalize the process for expeditious disposal
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions and interim applications. It summarizes that the Court, after hearing from lawyers representing various parties, ordered the inter-cadre transfer of Mr. Prateek Hajela, the State Coordinator for the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, to the state of Madhya Pradesh on deputation for the maximum period allowed under relevant rules. The notification for this transfer must be issued within 7 days. All other issues in the case will be heard again by the Court on November 26, 2019.
Farmers protests order dated 12-01-2021 by Supreme Court of IndiaOm Prakash Poddar
This document summarizes the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding several petitions challenging the validity of three farm laws recently passed by the Indian parliament. It notes that negotiations between the government and farmers' organizations have not yielded any results. The court proposes constituting an expert committee to negotiate between the parties and issuing an interim stay of implementation of the farm laws. While the Attorney General opposed a stay, some farmers' representatives agreed to participate in committee negotiations and supported a stay. The court adjourned the matter for further hearing.
This document summarizes the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding several petitions challenging the validity of three farm laws passed by the Indian parliament. The Court heard arguments from lawyers representing petitioners against the laws as well as the government. The Court proposed forming an expert committee to negotiate between farmers' groups and the government to resolve the issue, and staying implementation of the laws until negotiations are complete. However, the government opposed staying the laws, arguing the Court should not interfere with laws passed by Parliament without specific provisions being shown as harmful.
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to implementation of its previous orders on police reforms. It directed the Union of India to make necessary budgetary allocations for six agencies within one month to implement the orders. These agencies must then implement the orders in full within six months of receiving funds. The Court also reviewed progress in some states but noted no progress in Andaman & Nicobar Islands, directing its Principal Secretary to allocate funds within a month or implement the orders in full within six months of funding. It thanked the Amicus Curiae for assistance and scheduled review on a future date.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions related to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. It notes that the Court heard from the Attorney General of India and the State Coordinator of the NRC on the status of the NRC update work. The Court observed that no specific difficulties had been brought to its attention requiring further orders. It then directed the State Coordinator to continue the NRC upgrade work to meet the July 31st, 2019 deadline set by the Court, and that the deadline would not be extended under any circumstances. The Court will review the matter again on April 10th, when the State Coordinator will submit a report on work done so far.
The Supreme Court of India heard a suo moto writ petition regarding problems faced by migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court noted submissions from petitioners regarding inadequate distribution of dry rations, cooked food and cash transfers to migrant workers. States provided details of steps taken to help migrant workers, including transportation, food and registration processes.
The Court emphasized the need to complete registration of unorganized workers under new social security laws to help workers access welfare schemes. It directed the central government to file an affidavit with details on developing a national database for registration of all unorganized workers across states. The Court also stressed the need to effectively monitor welfare schemes to ensure benefits reach beneficiaries.
- This document outlines proceedings in the High Court of Delhi regarding several petitions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
- The Court has appointed Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, a Senior Advocate, to serve as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in handling the complex issues raised across multiple petitions.
- The Court directed for complete records of all relevant writ petitions to be sent to the Amicus Curiae to help in their role of advising the Court.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition filed by Firoz Iqbal Khan against the Union of India and others. It summarizes the hearing held on September 23, 2020. During the hearing, the Solicitor General requested deferring the hearing to allow the central government time to issue a notice to Sudarshan News and take action. The court agreed to defer the hearing to October 5, 2020 and ordered the notice's proceedings and any actions to be subject to the outcome of this case. The interim order from September 15, 2020 will remain in effect until further orders.
The Supreme Court of India heard a contempt petition regarding the vaccination and rehabilitation of persons with mental illness.
The Court directed all states to vaccinate inmates of mental health institutions within 1 month and submit a progress report by October 15th. It noted issues with some states merely redesignating existing facilities as halfway homes instead of establishing new ones per court orders.
The Court highlighted problems with Maharashtra shifting patients to beggar homes and old age homes, directing proper relocation by November 30th. It also found fault with Uttar Pradesh redesignating old age homes as halfway homes.
To monitor progress, the Court ordered the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to create an online dashboard with real
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Romila Thapar and others against the Union of India and others. The Court issued a notice to the respondents and ordered them to file a counter affidavit by September 5, 2018. As an interim measure, the Court ordered that if Varavara Rao, Arun Ferreira and Vernon Gonsalves are arrested, they must be kept under house arrest at their own homes, extending the existing house arrest orders for Gautam Navalakha and Sudha Bharadwaj passed by the High Court. The matter was listed for further hearing on September 6, 2018.
Prominent Indians from across the political spectrum, historian Romila Thapar, academic Devaki Jain, left economist, professor Prabhat Patnaik, professor of s0ciology Satish Deshpande and human rights lawyer, Maja Daruwala have approached the SC urging that the highest court intervenes and seeks an explanation from the Maharashtra government on the recent spate of arrests of lawyers, academics and activists.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a petition for special leave to appeal. It lists the parties involved, their legal counsel, and the orders from the court. The court issued a notice on IA No. 6140/2021, making it returnable in 4 weeks. A reply affidavit may be filed in the meantime by the respondent, and the applicant is permitted to file a rejoinder affidavit.
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Ana Parveen regarding the Union of India. The Additional Solicitor General requested two weeks to consider the position and file a counter affidavit. The petitioners were given one week to file a rejoinder thereafter. The petition will next be heard on April 11, 2022.
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a bunch of writ petitions challenging the validity of two sets of rules related to the prevention of animal cruelty.
2) The Additional Solicitor General informed the Court that the Union of India will not seek modification of the interim order by the Madras High Court staying the operation of the rules.
3) The Union of India stated that representations have been received regarding the allegedly unworkable rules and the issues are under fresh consideration, with potential changes to be made and the amended rules to be re-notified.
4) The Court directed that sufficient time be given after any amended rules are notified, before implementation, so stakeholders have opportunity to challenge them. The writ petitions
El Puerto de Algeciras continúa un año más como el más eficiente del continente europeo y vuelve a situarse en el “top ten” mundial, según el informe The Container Port Performance Index 2023 (CPPI), elaborado por el Banco Mundial y la consultora S&P Global.
El informe CPPI utiliza dos enfoques metodológicos diferentes para calcular la clasificación del índice: uno administrativo o técnico y otro estadístico, basado en análisis factorial (FA). Según los autores, esta dualidad pretende asegurar una clasificación que refleje con precisión el rendimiento real del puerto, a la vez que sea estadísticamente sólida. En esta edición del informe CPPI 2023, se han empleado los mismos enfoques metodológicos y se ha aplicado un método de agregación de clasificaciones para combinar los resultados de ambos enfoques y obtener una clasificación agregada.
1. The Supreme Court of India heard an application regarding the contagion of COVID-19 in child protection homes.
2. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) filed an affidavit stating that as of now there are 9346 children who have been abandoned, lost one parent, or lost both parents.
3. The Court extended the deadline for district authorities to upload information on affected children to the NCPCR portal to June 5th and directed NCPCR to file an affidavit with the collated information by June 6th.
In re contagion of covid in protection homesZahidManiyar
The Supreme Court of India heard a case regarding the protection of children affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly those who have become orphans. It directed district authorities to upload information on orphaned children to a government portal and immediately attend to their basic needs. The Court will receive updated information on identification and support of orphaned children from the central and state governments at a further hearing.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding various applications and reports submitted related to pollution control and thermal power plants. It lists the counsel present for various parties and respondents. The matter was heard by a bench of three Honorable Justices.
The Supreme Court of India took suo moto cognizance of inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials in India. It constituted a committee of amici curiae to examine the issues and submit a report with proposed amendments to rules. The committee submitted its report. The Supreme Court noted that only 5 of 24 High Courts submitted responses and directed the remaining High Courts to submit substantive responses within 2 weeks or have their Registrar Generals appear before the Court. It also constituted a new committee to examine suggestions for digitizing records and facilitating timely filing of appeals by convicts to reduce delays, and directed High Courts to submit responses to this committee within 2 weeks. The matter was listed for further hearing after 4 weeks.
This document summarizes the proceedings of a Supreme Court of India hearing regarding the implementation of orders to install CCTV cameras in police stations across several states. The Court directs the states of Haryana, Telangana, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh to allocate funds for CCTV installation within 4 weeks. These states must then complete installation within 5 months. For Uttar Pradesh, budget allocation is to be completed within 3 months and installation within 9 months, given its large size. The Court finds that timelines provided by states have been too long and its orders have not been fully complied with.
Witness protection order sc in legislator casesZahidManiyar
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the discussion during the hearing. The amicus curiae presented a report analyzing information provided by various High Courts on pending criminal cases against elected representatives. Key issues highlighted include the need for improved video conferencing infrastructure to record witness testimony, exempting witnesses from applying for protection under the witness protection scheme, appointing nodal prosecution officers to ensure cases progress swiftly, having judicial officers handle such cases for at least 2 years for continuity, and addressing specific issues faced by High Courts of Kerala and Calcutta where police are reluctant to take action against legislators. The Court will consider the suggestions to rationalize the process for expeditious disposal
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions and interim applications. It summarizes that the Court, after hearing from lawyers representing various parties, ordered the inter-cadre transfer of Mr. Prateek Hajela, the State Coordinator for the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, to the state of Madhya Pradesh on deputation for the maximum period allowed under relevant rules. The notification for this transfer must be issued within 7 days. All other issues in the case will be heard again by the Court on November 26, 2019.
Farmers protests order dated 12-01-2021 by Supreme Court of IndiaOm Prakash Poddar
This document summarizes the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding several petitions challenging the validity of three farm laws recently passed by the Indian parliament. It notes that negotiations between the government and farmers' organizations have not yielded any results. The court proposes constituting an expert committee to negotiate between the parties and issuing an interim stay of implementation of the farm laws. While the Attorney General opposed a stay, some farmers' representatives agreed to participate in committee negotiations and supported a stay. The court adjourned the matter for further hearing.
This document summarizes the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding several petitions challenging the validity of three farm laws passed by the Indian parliament. The Court heard arguments from lawyers representing petitioners against the laws as well as the government. The Court proposed forming an expert committee to negotiate between farmers' groups and the government to resolve the issue, and staying implementation of the laws until negotiations are complete. However, the government opposed staying the laws, arguing the Court should not interfere with laws passed by Parliament without specific provisions being shown as harmful.
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to implementation of its previous orders on police reforms. It directed the Union of India to make necessary budgetary allocations for six agencies within one month to implement the orders. These agencies must then implement the orders in full within six months of receiving funds. The Court also reviewed progress in some states but noted no progress in Andaman & Nicobar Islands, directing its Principal Secretary to allocate funds within a month or implement the orders in full within six months of funding. It thanked the Amicus Curiae for assistance and scheduled review on a future date.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions related to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. It notes that the Court heard from the Attorney General of India and the State Coordinator of the NRC on the status of the NRC update work. The Court observed that no specific difficulties had been brought to its attention requiring further orders. It then directed the State Coordinator to continue the NRC upgrade work to meet the July 31st, 2019 deadline set by the Court, and that the deadline would not be extended under any circumstances. The Court will review the matter again on April 10th, when the State Coordinator will submit a report on work done so far.
The Supreme Court of India heard a suo moto writ petition regarding problems faced by migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court noted submissions from petitioners regarding inadequate distribution of dry rations, cooked food and cash transfers to migrant workers. States provided details of steps taken to help migrant workers, including transportation, food and registration processes.
The Court emphasized the need to complete registration of unorganized workers under new social security laws to help workers access welfare schemes. It directed the central government to file an affidavit with details on developing a national database for registration of all unorganized workers across states. The Court also stressed the need to effectively monitor welfare schemes to ensure benefits reach beneficiaries.
- This document outlines proceedings in the High Court of Delhi regarding several petitions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
- The Court has appointed Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, a Senior Advocate, to serve as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in handling the complex issues raised across multiple petitions.
- The Court directed for complete records of all relevant writ petitions to be sent to the Amicus Curiae to help in their role of advising the Court.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition filed by Firoz Iqbal Khan against the Union of India and others. It summarizes the hearing held on September 23, 2020. During the hearing, the Solicitor General requested deferring the hearing to allow the central government time to issue a notice to Sudarshan News and take action. The court agreed to defer the hearing to October 5, 2020 and ordered the notice's proceedings and any actions to be subject to the outcome of this case. The interim order from September 15, 2020 will remain in effect until further orders.
The Supreme Court of India heard a contempt petition regarding the vaccination and rehabilitation of persons with mental illness.
The Court directed all states to vaccinate inmates of mental health institutions within 1 month and submit a progress report by October 15th. It noted issues with some states merely redesignating existing facilities as halfway homes instead of establishing new ones per court orders.
The Court highlighted problems with Maharashtra shifting patients to beggar homes and old age homes, directing proper relocation by November 30th. It also found fault with Uttar Pradesh redesignating old age homes as halfway homes.
To monitor progress, the Court ordered the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to create an online dashboard with real
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Romila Thapar and others against the Union of India and others. The Court issued a notice to the respondents and ordered them to file a counter affidavit by September 5, 2018. As an interim measure, the Court ordered that if Varavara Rao, Arun Ferreira and Vernon Gonsalves are arrested, they must be kept under house arrest at their own homes, extending the existing house arrest orders for Gautam Navalakha and Sudha Bharadwaj passed by the High Court. The matter was listed for further hearing on September 6, 2018.
Prominent Indians from across the political spectrum, historian Romila Thapar, academic Devaki Jain, left economist, professor Prabhat Patnaik, professor of s0ciology Satish Deshpande and human rights lawyer, Maja Daruwala have approached the SC urging that the highest court intervenes and seeks an explanation from the Maharashtra government on the recent spate of arrests of lawyers, academics and activists.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a petition for special leave to appeal. It lists the parties involved, their legal counsel, and the orders from the court. The court issued a notice on IA No. 6140/2021, making it returnable in 4 weeks. A reply affidavit may be filed in the meantime by the respondent, and the applicant is permitted to file a rejoinder affidavit.
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Ana Parveen regarding the Union of India. The Additional Solicitor General requested two weeks to consider the position and file a counter affidavit. The petitioners were given one week to file a rejoinder thereafter. The petition will next be heard on April 11, 2022.
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a bunch of writ petitions challenging the validity of two sets of rules related to the prevention of animal cruelty.
2) The Additional Solicitor General informed the Court that the Union of India will not seek modification of the interim order by the Madras High Court staying the operation of the rules.
3) The Union of India stated that representations have been received regarding the allegedly unworkable rules and the issues are under fresh consideration, with potential changes to be made and the amended rules to be re-notified.
4) The Court directed that sufficient time be given after any amended rules are notified, before implementation, so stakeholders have opportunity to challenge them. The writ petitions
Similar to SC directs issuance of Aadhaar card to sex workers.pdf (20)
El Puerto de Algeciras continúa un año más como el más eficiente del continente europeo y vuelve a situarse en el “top ten” mundial, según el informe The Container Port Performance Index 2023 (CPPI), elaborado por el Banco Mundial y la consultora S&P Global.
El informe CPPI utiliza dos enfoques metodológicos diferentes para calcular la clasificación del índice: uno administrativo o técnico y otro estadístico, basado en análisis factorial (FA). Según los autores, esta dualidad pretende asegurar una clasificación que refleje con precisión el rendimiento real del puerto, a la vez que sea estadísticamente sólida. En esta edición del informe CPPI 2023, se han empleado los mismos enfoques metodológicos y se ha aplicado un método de agregación de clasificaciones para combinar los resultados de ambos enfoques y obtener una clasificación agregada.
04062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
Acolyte Episodes review (TV series) The Acolyte. Learn about the influence of the program on the Star Wars world, as well as new characters and story twists.
Essential Tools for Modern PR Business .pptxPragencyuk
Discover the essential tools and strategies for modern PR business success. Learn how to craft compelling news releases, leverage press release sites and news wires, stay updated with PR news, and integrate effective PR practices to enhance your brand's visibility and credibility. Elevate your PR efforts with our comprehensive guide.
Here is Gabe Whitley's response to my defamation lawsuit for him calling me a rapist and perjurer in court documents.
You have to read it to believe it, but after you read it, you won't believe it. And I included eight examples of defamatory statements/
An astonishing, first-of-its-kind, report by the NYT assessing damage in Ukraine. Even if the war ends tomorrow, in many places there will be nothing to go back to.
SC directs issuance of Aadhaar card to sex workers.pdf
1. 1
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s).135/2010
BUDHADEV KARMASKAR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Respondent(s)
(I.A NO. 80140/2020 APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS TO BE LISTED)
Date : 19-05-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)
Ms. Reena George, Adv.
Mr. Ketan Pual, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Bhushan, Adv.
Mr. Amartya Bhushan, Adv.
Mr. Piyush K. Roy, Adv.(A.C.)
Mrs. Kakali Roy, Adv.(A.C.)
Ms. Indrani Dey, Adv.
For the parties: Jail Petition
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Umang Tripathi, Adv
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR
Mr. Sweena Nair, Adv.
Mr. P. Mohith Rao, Adv.
Ms. A. Subhashini, AOR
Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR
Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Suhaan Mukerji, Adv.
Digitally signed by
GEETA AHUJA
Date: 2022.05.24
16:30:54 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
2. 2
Mr. Raghent Basant, Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Parikshith, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Manchanda, Adv.
Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Adv.
Mr. Tanmay Sinha, Adv.
M/S. PLR Chambers And Co., AOR
M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR
Ms. Diksha Rai, AOR
Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. P. V. Dinesh, AOR
Manpreet Singh Doabia, Adv.
Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, AOR
Ms. Aswathi M.K., AOR
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Mr. Anand Grover, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Savita Singh, AOR
Ms. Tripti Tandon, Adv.
Ms. Aparna Bhat, AOR
Ms. Liz Mathew, AOR
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, AOR
Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR
Mr. Abdulla Naseen V.T., Adv.
Ms. Meena K.P., Adv.
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.
Ms. Ritu Rastogi, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR
Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.
Mr. S. Harini, Adv.
Mr. M. T. George, AOR
Mrs. Swarupama Chaturvedi, AOR
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR
Mr. Saurabh Trivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. D. Mahesh Babu, AOR
3. 3
Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR
Ms. Nupur Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Shobhit Dwivedi, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mahara, Adv.
M/S. Corporate Law Group, AOR
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR
Mr. Pradeep Misra,Adv.
Mr. Suraj Singh,Adv.
Mr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Adv.
Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv.
Mr. Pratham Sethi, Adv.
Ms. Jaspreet Gogia, AOR
Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR
Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anil K. Jha, AOR
Mr. Jayant K. Sud, ASG
Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Sanskriti Pathak, Adv.
Mr. B.K. Satija, Adv.
Mr. Jayant K Sud, ASG
Mr. Himanshu Satija, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sardar Kumar Singhania, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay kumar Tyagi, Adv.
Ms. Sakshi kakkar, Adv.
Mr. Mohammed Akhil, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Jayant K Sud,ASG
Mrs. Sunita Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Mr. B.K. Satija,Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi,Adv.
Mr. Mohammad Akhil,Adv.
Mr. Om Prakash Shukla,Adv.
Mr. Jayant K. Sud Ld. ASG
Mr. Anil Hooda Adv.
Mr. Harish Pandey Adv.
Ms. Sansriti Pathak, Adv.
Ms. Megha Karnawal Adv.
Mr. Jitender Hooda Adv.
Mr. Shafik Ahmed Adv.
4. 4
Mr. Ajay Sharma Adv.
Mr. Piyush Beriwal,Adv.
Mr. G. S. Makker AOR
Mr. Jayant K. Sud, ASG
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Om Prakash Shukla, Adv.
M. B.K. Satiza, Adv.
Mr. Mohammad Akhil, Adv.
Mr. Himashu Satija, Adv.
Ms. Shakshi kakkar. Adv.
Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania Adv.
Mr. Rajesh singh chauhan Adv.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup Adv.
Ms. Priyadarshini Pyiya Adv.
Mr. G.S. Makker, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Om Prakash Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Mohammad Akhil, Adv.
Mr. Himashu Satija, Adv.
Ms. Shakshi kakkar. Adv.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Adv.
Ms. Priyadarshni Priya, Adv.
Mr. Anil Hooda, Adv.
Mr. Saraswat Parihar, Adv.
Ms. Megha Karnawal, Adv.
Mr. Sarad kr. Singhania, Adv.
Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR
Mr. Randeep Sachdeva, Adv.
Mr. Kartik Jasra, Adv.
Mr. Harish Nadda, Adv.
Mr. Adit Khorana, Adv.
Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv.
Mr. Jitender Hooda adv.
Mr. Shafik Ahmed adv.
Mr. Ajay Sharma adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, AOR
Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Ishaan Borthakur, Adv.
Mr. Kabir Shankar Bose, Adv.
5. 5
Ms. Taruna Ardhendumauli Prasad, AOR
Mr. Jogy Scaria, AOR
Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR
Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR
Mrs. Bihu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Adv.
Mr. Akshay C Shrivastava, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR
Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv.
Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv.
Ms. Shewtal Shepal, Adv.
Mr. Risvi Muhammad, Adv.
Mr. Aravindh S., AOR
Mr. C. Aravind, Adv.
Ms. C. Rubavathi, Adv.
Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR
Mr. Siddhesh Kotwal, Adv
Ms. Anu Upadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Manya Hasija, Adv.
Mr. Akash Singh, Adv.
Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, AOR
Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Arpit Parkash, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR
Mr. Tanmaya Agarwal, AOR
Mr. Wrick Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR
Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv.
Mr. Wahengbam Immanuel Meitei, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR
Mr. P.S. Negi, Adv.
Mr. S.R. Kochar, Adv.
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. K. V. Kharlyngdoh, Adv.
Mr. T.K. Nayak, Adv.
6. 6
Mr. S.C. Verma, Sr. Adv./Adv Gnl.
Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR.
Mr. Anvit Seemansh, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, AOR
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR
Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv.
Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR
Ms. Anindita Pujari, AOR
Mr. Siddhartha Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Azad Bansala, Adv.
Mr. Prakriti Rastogi, Adv.
Mr. Mohit Kaushik,Adv.
Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AAG
Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Addl. Standing Counsel
Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Shwetank Singh, Adv.
Ms. Aastha Shrestha, Adv.
Mr. P.S. Sudheer, Adv
Mr. Beenu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, AOR
Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv.
Mr. Shoaib Alvi, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR
Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Rakshit Jain, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Bansal, Adv.
Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv.
Mr. P. V. Yogeshwaran, AAG
Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR
Mr. Akbar Ali,Adv.
Mr. Mamohan Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Harendra Kumar Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Raghvendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Anand Kr. Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Nishant Verma, Adv.
7. 7
Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Rajlakshmi Singh, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Saraogi, Adv.
Mr. Varun Singh, Adv
Mr. Narendra Kumar, AOR
Mr. Mahfooz A. Nazki, AOR
Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Adv.
Mr. Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Adv.
Mr. T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Adv.
Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Girish Chowdary, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Human rights jurisprudence in India has
acquired a constitutional status and sweep, owing to the
full potential breathed by this Court into Articles 14,
19 and 21 of the Constitution of India since Maneka
Gandhi v. Union of India1
. The constitutional regard for
human decency and dignity has been explicitly
incorporated into Article 21 by this Court. While
expounding on the scope of the right to life under
Article 21, this Court in Francis Coralie Mullin v.
Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi2
extended the
meaning of the right to life beyond the protection of
limb or faculty to include the right to live with human
dignity and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare
necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing
and shelter and also the right to carry on such functions
and activities as constitute the bare minimum expression
1 (1978) 1 SCC 248
2 (1981) 1 SCC 608
8. 8
of the human-self. Needless to say, this basic protection
of human decency and dignity extends to sex workers and
their children, who, bearing the brunt of social stigma
attached to their work, are removed to the fringes of the
society, deprived of their right to live with dignity and
opportunities to provide the same to their children.
Pursuant to an order passed by this Court on
19.07.2011, a Panel was constituted with Mr. Pradip Ghosh
as the Chairman of the Panel, Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Senior
counsel, Usha Multipurpose Co-operative Society through
its President/Secretary, Durbar Mahila Samanwaya
Committee through its President/Secretary, and Roshni
through Ms. Saima Hasan.
The terms of reference made to the panel are:
(1) Prevention of trafficking,
(2) Rehabilitation of sex workers who wish to
leave sex work, and
(3) Conditions conducive for sex workers who wish
to continue working as sex workers with dignity.
By an order dt. 26.07.2012, this Court modified
the third term of reference to conditions conducive to
sex workers to live with dignity in accordance with the
provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
After conducting a detailed discussion with all
the concerned stakeholders, the Panel submitted a
comprehensive report on the terms of reference. When the
matter was listed in the year 2016, this Court was
9. 9
informed that the recommendations made by the panel were
considered by the Government of India and a draft
legislation was published incorporating the
recommendations made by the panel. Thereafter,
periodically adjournments were taken by the Union of
India on the ground that the Bill is on the anvil. As
the legislation has not been made till date even though
the recommendations were made by the Panel in the year
2016 and the said recommendations have to be implemented,
we are exercising our powers conferred under Article 142
of the Constitution of India, to issue the following
directions which will hold the field till a legislation
is made by the Union of India. In a catena of decisions
of this Court, this power has been recognised and
exercised, if need be, by issuing necessary directions to
fill the vacuum till such time the legislature steps in
to cover the gap or the executive discharges its role.
The directions that are issued today relate only
to the rehabilitation measures in respect of sex workers
and other connected issues. The panel has recommended in
respect of the third term of reference in the following
terms:
(i) Sex workers are entitled to equal
protection of the law. Criminal law must apply
equally in all cases, on the basis of ‘age’ and
‘consent’. When it is clear that the sex worker
is an adult and is participating with consent,
10. 10
the police must refrain from interfering or
taking any criminal action.
There have been concerns that police view
sex workers differently from others. When a sex
worker makes a complaint of criminal/sexual/any
other type of offence, the police must take it
seriously and act in accordance with law.
ii) Any sex worker who is a victim of
sexual assault should be provided with all
facilities available to a survivor of sexual
assault, including immediate medical assistance,
in accordance with Section 357C of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with “Guidelines
and Protocols: Medico-legal care for
survivor/victims of sexual violence”, Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare (March, 2014).
iii) Whenever there is a raid on any
brothel, since voluntary sex work is not illegal
and only running the brothel is unlawful, the sex
workers concerned should not be arrested or
penalised or harassed or victimised.
iv) The State Governments may be directed
to do a survey of all ITPA Protective Homes so
that cases of adult women, who are detained
against their will can be reviewed and processed
for release in a time-bound manner.
v) It has been noticed that the attitude
11. 11
of the police to sex workers is often brutal and
violent. It is as if they are a class whose
rights are not recognised. The police and other
law enforcement agencies should be sensitised to
the rights of sex workers who also enjoy all
basic human rights and other rights guaranteed in
the Constitution to all citizens. Police should
treat all sex workers with dignity and should not
abuse them, both verbally and physically, subject
them to violence or coe4rce them into any sexual
activity.
vi) The Press Council of India should be
urged to issue appropriate guidelines for the
media to take utmost care not to reveal the
identities of sex workers, during arrest, raid
and rescue operations, whether as victims or
accused and not to publish or telecast any photos
that would result in disclosure of such
identities. Besides, the newly introduced Section
354C, IPC which makes voyeurism a criminal
offence, should be strictly enforced against
electronic media, in order to prohibit
telecasting photos of sex workers with their
clients in the garb of capturing the rescue
operation.
Vii) Measures that sex workers employ for
their health and safety (e.g., use of condoms,
12. 12
etc.)must neither be construed as offences nor
seen as evidence of commission of an offence.
Viii) The Central Government and the State
Governments must involve the sex workers and/or
their representatives in all decision-making
processes, including planning, designing and
implementing any policy or programme for the sex
workers or formulating any change/reform in the
laws relating to sex work. This can be done,
either by including them in the decision-making
authorities/panel and/or by taking their views on
any decision affecting them.
ix) The Central Government and the State
Governments, through National Legal Services
Authority, State Legal Services Authority and
District Legal Services Authority, should carry
out workshops for educating the sex workers abut
their rights vis-a-vis the legality of sex work,
rights and obligations of the police and what is
permitted/prohibited under the law. Sex workers
can also be informed as to how they can get
access to the judicial system to enforce their
rights and prevent unnecessary harassment at the
hands of traffickers or police.
x) As already recommended in the 6th
interim Report dated 22.03.2012, no child of a
sex worker should be separated from the mother
13. 13
merely on the ground that she is in the sex
trade. Further, if a minor is found living in a
brothel or with sex workers, it should not be
presumed that he/she has been trafficked. In
case the sex worker claims that he/she is her
son/daughter, tests can be done to determine if
the claim is correct and if so, the minor should
not be forcibly separated.”
We have heard Mr. Jayant Sud, learned ASG who
submitted that the Government of India has certain
reservations in respect of the recommendations that are
made by the panel except those in paras 2,4,5,6,7 and 9.
The State Governments/ UTs are directed to act in strict
compliance of the recommendations made in paras
2,4,5,6,7,9, in addition to the implementation of the
recommendations made by the panel as mentioned above,
the competent authorities under the Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, 1956 are directed to comply with the
provisions of the Act. It need not be gainsaid that
notwithstanding the profession, every individual in this
country has a right to a dignified life under Article 21
of the Constitution of India. The Constitutional
protection that is given to all individuals in this
country shall be kept in mind by the authorities who
have a duty under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act,1956.
The other recommendations that are made by the panel
shall be taken up after summer vacation.
14. 14
List this matter on 27.07.2022.
In the meanwhile, the Union of India is directed
to file its response to the recommendations made by the
panel within a period of six weeks from today.
Mr. Anand Grover, learned senior counsel,
brought to the notice of this Court that Aadhar Cards
are not being issued to sex workers as they were unable
to produce proof of their residence. We had issued
notice to UIDAI and sought its suggestions in respect of
waiving the requirement of proof of residence for the
sex workers, to enable them to get an identity by the
issuance of Aadhar cards. In the affidavit filed by the
UIDAI, it was proposed that sex workers who are on
NACO’s list and who apply for Aadhar card but cannot
submit proof of residence, can be issued Aadhar Cards
provided a ‘proforma certificate’ is submitted by a
Gazetted Officer at NACO or the State Health Department
certifying the particulars of the applicant. The
organisations representing sex workers have made the
following suggestions for the procedure to be followed
by UIDAI:
3.1 The Gazetted Officer of the State Health
Department, who is authorized to submit the
proforma certificate for a sex worker who applies
for an Aadhar Card but is unhable to furnish
proof of residence should be pecifically
designated as:- “The Project Director of the
15. 15
State AIDS Cotrol Society, or her/his nominee.”
3.2 The name and designation of the Gazette
Officers who will be authorised to submit the
‘proforma certificate’ for sex workers desirous
of applying for an Aadhar Card on behalf of NACO
must be publicized on its website.
3.3 NACO and the State AIDS Control Societies
should publicize the procedure for sex workers
who wish to apply for an Aadhar Card but who
cannot furnish proof of residence through their
websites as well as through outreach under the
Targetted Intervention Programmes that they
implement.
3.4 The sample ‘proforma certificate’ submitted
by UIDAI in its Additional affidavit dated
09.02.2022 in terms of the order dated 10.01.2022
as “Annexure R-1’ on pages 5 and 6 of the said
affidavit may be made readily available on the
websites of UIDAI, NACO and State Aids Control
Societies.
3.5. There should be no breach of confidentiality
in the process, including assignment of any code
in the Aadhar enrolment numbers that identity the
applicant/holder of the card as a sex worker.
3.6 The procedure proposed by the UIDAI in its
Additional affidavit dated 09.02.2011 may not be
restricted to sex workers on the NACO list but
16. 16
also extended to those who are identified by CBOs
after verification by the State Legal Services
Authority or the State AIDS control Society.
This is in line with the Hon’ble Court’s
directions to State Governments to extend dry
ration support and access to ration cards and
voter ID cards to sex workers who are not on
NACO’s list, vide orders dated 10.01.2022 and
28.02.2022.
UIDAI has examined the suggestions and accepted
that the procedure as proposed, can be followed.
In view of the aforementioned, Aadhar Cards
shall be issued to sex workers on the basis of a proforma
certificate which is issued by UIDAI and submitted by the
Gazetted Officer at NACO or the Project Director of the
State Aids Control Society, along with Aadhar enrolment
form/application. There shall be no breach of
confidentiality in the process, including assignment of
any code in the Aadhar enrolment numbers that identify
the card holder as a sex worker.
We appreciate the cooperation of Mr. Zoheb
Hossain, learned counsel appearing for the UIDAI, in
providing relief to sex workers who will have some
identity in the society.
(B.Parvathi) (Anand Prakash)
Court Master Assistant Registrar