In addition, Darshan Solanki’s father, Ramesh Solanki, requested that action be taken against the police.

The 18-year-old is believed to have committed suicide at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay in Mumbai by leaping from the seventh floor of a hostel building on campus on February 12, a day after his semester exams concluded.

The Powai police filed an Accidental Death Report (ADR) and initiated an investigation into the incident.

Solanki was a native of Ahmedabad and a B Tech student at IIT Bombay in Mumbai.

As soon as the police received word of the suicide, they rushed to the scene and pronounced him deceased at the hospital.

Solanki’s family had previously alleged foul play in his death and claimed he was subjected to discrimination at the IITB because he belonged to the Scheduled Caste (SC) community.

On February 28, the case was transferred to the city crime branch’s SIT in response to his parents’ demands for a thorough investigation.

On March 3, however, the SIT discovered a “suicide note” in Darshan Solanki’s dorm room in which he accused a fellow student of harassing and threatening him.

The Special Investigations Team (SIT) of the Mumbai Police Department discovered a suicide note in which the deceased (18-year-old IIT Bombay student) accused another student of harassing and menacing him.

Police will interrogate the students whose names appear in the suicide note, the Mumbai Police Department said.

Also read this:“Minimum school enrollment age in Kerala will remain at five:” Minister Sivankutty

So far, the state police have recorded the statements of 25 individuals, in which it has been revealed that Darshan had argued with his fellow pupils a week prior to his suicide.

The post Darshan Solanki suicide case: Father requests police “harassment” action from Maharashtra CM appeared first on Republic Aeon.

The EC stated in the affidavit that the order was well-reasoned and addresses all of the concerns raised by the Uddhav Camp.

The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Uddhav Thackeray challenging Election Commission’s decision to grant the party names “Shiv Sena” and “Bow and Arrow” to the faction led by Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

Election Commission stated that it issued the challenged order dated 17 February 2023 in the exercise of its quasi-judicial powers under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. (Symbols Order).

EC argued that the challenged order was not issued by the Commission in its administrative capacity, but rather in a quasi-judicial capacity pursuant to the Symbols Order.

However, EC chose not to make any arguments on the merits of the case and stated that its decision was well-reasoned and addresses all of the Petitioner’s concerns. “Therefore, the Election Commission has become functus officio in this case, as it has already fulfilled its duty to adjudicate the petition submitted under Paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order following the issuance of the challenged order,” the affidavit stated.

The EC also argued that, in a multitude of cases, the courts have held that, when an order issued by a quasi-judicial body is challenged before an appellate court, the quasi-judicial body need not be named as a party to the appeal.

Prior to this, Uddhav Thackeray challenged the Election Commission’s decision to give the party name “Shiv Sena” and the symbol “Bow and Arrow” to the faction commanded by Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

In his petition against the Election Commission’s decision to grant the party name “Shiv Sena” and the symbol “Bow and Arrow” to the faction led by Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, Uddhav Thackeray argued that the ECI failed to take into account his faction’s majority in the Legislative Council and Rajya Sabha.

Uddhav Thackeray argued in his petition that the legislative majority alone could not be the foundation for the EC’s order in this instance.

Uddhav Thackeray argued that the EC’s decision was erroneous, stating that “the entire edifice of the impugned order (EC’s decision) is founded on the purported legislative majority of the Respondent (Shinde), which is a matter to be decided by the apex court’s Constitution Bench.”

Uddhav Thackeray stated that the ECI erred in concluding that there is a split in the political party and argued, “in the absence of any pleadings and evidence that there was a split in a political party, the ECI’s finding on this ground is entirely erroneous.”

Uddhav Thackeray argued that the ECI has failed to recognise that the Petitioner enjoys overwhelming support from the party’s rank and file. He stated that his faction holds an overwhelming majority in the Pratinidhi Sabha, the supreme representative body representing the desires of the Primary members and other party stakeholders.

Uddhav Thackeray, in raising questions about the Election Commission, stated that the commission disregards the constitutionality test by asserting that the party’s constitution cannot be considered sacred because it cannot be deemed ‘democratic.’

Also read this:CM Eknath Shinde, Dy Fadnavis meet farmers’ reps at 3 pm in Mantralaya amid protest.

Uddhav Thackeray argued that the ECI has failed to fulfil its responsibilities as a neutral dispute arbitrator and has acted in a manner that undermines its constitutional standing.

The ECI has disregarded the 2018 party constitution, which was acknowledged by the Respondent Shinde to be the party constitution, on the grounds that such a constitution is undemocratic and that the Commission was not informed of its existence.

The post EC justifies decision to award Shiv Sena symbol to Shinde camp appeared first on Republic Aeon.

Farmers are marching from Nashik to Mumbai to urge government action.

“We discussed 14 topics they raised. We accepted most of their demands. We had in-depth talks. We invited CPI and angry farmers to meet CM and Dy CM at Mantralaya. He said they agreed to meet the chief minister and deputy CM at 3pm in Mantralaya tomorrow.

After meeting the farmers, state minister Atul Save said 40–50% of issues were settled.

All farmer concerns were discussed. He said 40–50% of their issues have been resolved and the rest will be handled after meeting the CM Eknath Shinde and Dy CM Devendra Fadnavis tomorrow.

The farmers began protesting at Azad Maidan on March 14 after arriving in Bombay.

Due to the big protest, security was increased to control traffic in two lines and avoid commuter delays.

“Considering the scale of protest, we deployed ample policemen for emergency law enforcement. DCP Kiran Kumar Chavan said, “As the foot march is from Nashik to Mumbai, we have deployed forces to manage traffic in two lines and avoid commuter inconvenience.”

“We started this march to draw government notice to our problems. “We have 14-15 demands and will debate them with the government,” a protesting farmer told media.

Another farmer requested a fair onion price, loan waiver, energy bill waiver, and 12-hour power supply.

Another farmer demanded government insurance firms compensate them for unseasonal rains and other natural disasters.

On Tuesday, Maharashtra’s opposition parties protested on Vidhan Bhawan’s steps to demand Abdul Sattar’s resignation over his comments on farmers.

Sattar’s Sunday comment on state farmer deaths caused controversy.

Rival leaders of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) protested and demanded Sattar’s resignation after he said farmers killing themselves was nothing new.

On February 28, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) MLAs arrived at the Vidhan Sabha with onions on their heads and onion garlands to oppose a drop in wholesale onion prices.

Farmers halted auctions at Lasalgaon Agriculture Produce Market Committee in Nashik on February 27 due to low wholesale onion prices (APMC).

Also read this:In the High Court, Tejashwi Yadav challenges the CBI summons

The Maharashtra State Onion Growers’ Union then protested the government.

The post CM Eknath Shinde, Dy Fadnavis meet farmers’ reps at 3 pm in Mantralaya amid protest. appeared first on Republic Aeon.