The Evening Wrap: Supreme Court begins hearing petitions against abrogation of Article 370

The Supreme Court on Wednesday prima facie interpreted that the President’s power to notify that Article 370 of the Constitution, granting special status to Jammu and Kashmir, is inoperative “continued to hold the field” after the dissolution of the erstwhile State’s Constituent Assembly on January 26, 1957. Clause (3) of Article 370 (b) gave the President power to notify the Article “inoperative” or modify it. But a proviso had made it “necessary” that such a move would have to be recommended by the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) Constituent Assembly. “A Constituent Assembly is not a permanent body like the Parliament and the Supreme Court. No Constituent Assembly can have an indefinite life... The J&K Constituent Assembly was constituted for a specific purpose — to draft the Constitution of J&K. It became functus officio once the J&K Constitution was framed… This proviso making the Constituent Assembly’s ‘recommendation’ necessary before abrogation has no application. If the proviso ceased to operate, surely the substantive part of Clause 3 in Article 370 (b) will remain,” Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, heading a Constitution Bench, observed orally on the first day of hearing. “Are you saying the President has blanket powers?” senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mohd. Akbar Lone and the lead lawyer for the petitioners’ side, asked. “Can the will of the people of J&K be caged or silenced in this fashion? There has been no representative democracy in J&K in the past five years… In the guise of restoring democracy, we have decimated democracy. The State of J&K historically represented a unique relationship unlike princely states which integrated into the Union. Can that unique relationship between two sovereigns be jettisoned like this?” he asked the court. Sibal asked how the Parliament could have declared itself the legislature of J&K in place of the J&K Constituent Assembly in order to abrogate Article 370. “The Parliament was a creature of the Constitution. It could not have acted outside the Constitution,” he contended. The Governor took on the role of the ‘State government’ after keeping the State Legislative Assembly in suspended animation. Sibal said J&K was an “exception” to the amalgamation of princely states into the Union. “This exception was grafted into the Constitution. You cannot suddenly jettison the people of J&K when two sovereigns had committed themselves to a process which was grafted into the Constitution under Article 370. Otherwise, what is the difference between J&K and the annexation of Hyderabad or Junagarh. Then it becomes an act of paramountcy,” Sibal submitted. By abrogating Article 370 and carving a full-fledged State into union territories, Sibal said the “Parliament took upon itself the responsibility of the State legislature”. “Where is it said in the Constitution that the Parliament can do that? It was an exercise of political power. They said we know the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and we will do it,” he said. Justice B.R. Gavai asked Sibal why Article 370 was mentioned in the Constitution only as a “temporary” provision. “So, you are saying that though Article 370 was created as a temporary provision, it became permanently engrafted into the Constitution after 1957 with the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly,” Justice S.K. Kaul asked Sibal. “Article 370 was there when India became a Republic. The Article mentions a Constituent Assembly for J&K. However, the Constituent Assembly was not convened until December 1951. It was then left to the people of J&K, through their Constituent Assembly, to decide if Article 370 ought to be abrogated at all. Article 370 was called ‘temporary’ because the Constitution always wanted the J&K people to decide their future… Article 370 could have been abrogated only by a vote of confidence in the Constituent Assembly,” he responded. He said the Government of India, taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances under which the State acceded to India, had declared at the time that it was the people of the J&K, acting through their Constituent Assembly, who were to finally determine their own Constitution and the jurisdiction of Union of India regards the State. Sibal highlighted that the Union and the State of J&K had enjoyed a “collaborative relationship with constant dialogue” through the years. This had led to many parliamentary laws being made applicable to J&K through successive Constitution Orders passed by the President with the consent of the J&K government. He said there was no doubt that J&K was an integral part of India. “The Constitution of J&K itself says ‘we are an integral part of India’. The State of J&K was ad idem with the Union of India,” he submitted. The senior lawyer said the “unique constitutional structure and the collaborative relationship” was abruptly brought to an end on August 6, 2019 with the abrogation of special constitutional status of J&K. “Suddenly they said in Parliament ‘we are doing this at 11 o’clock’. Nobody knew about the abrogation in the Parliament. There was no consultation. The government, Parliament and ‘powers that be’ decided to do this one morning and tossed it [Article 370] out,” Sibal said. The Supreme Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that bestowed special status on the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir. A five-judge constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud heard extensive arguments from senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing on behalf of the petitioners. The Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, and Surya Kant, will resume hearing the case tomorrow from 10:30 am onwards. Haryana communal violence | Death toll rises to six, 116 arrested so far The death toll in the communal violence which began early on August 1 in Haryana rose to six, Chief Minister Manohar Lal said on August 2. So far, 116 people have been arrested. Badshapur Bajrang Dal co-ordinator Pradeep Sharma succumbed to injuries at Delhi’s Safdarjang Hospital in the morning, taking the toll to six, including two home guards. Lal told a news agency that the sporadic incidents of violence in the State were controlled and normalcy was restored. He said those injured were under treatment at Nalhar medical college in Nuh, Medanta Hospital in Gurugram and other hospitals. The Chief Minister said search operations were going on to arrest those responsible for the “unfortunate and tragic” incident. “Those arrested will be taken on remand for further investigation into the incident,” he said. Making an appeal for peace, Lal said 30 companies of Haryana Police and 20 companies of Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) were deployed across the State. Of the CAPF companies, a maximum of 14 were deployed in Nuh, three in Palwal, two in Gurugram and one in Faridabad. Meanwhile, several incidents of arson in scrap dealer shops and godowns were reported in and around Badshahpur in Gurugram late on August 1. Fire Department officials said that more than half-a-dozen incidents of fire were reported till midnight. Haryana communal violence | Supreme Court does not stop VHP demonstrations, asks authorities to ensure there is no violence, hate speeches A Special Bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday did not stay “demonstrations” held by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal outfits in communal violence-hit Nuh district of Haryana. A Bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna restricted itself to passing an “omnibus” order urging the Centre and the police to take steps to prevent instances of any violence and hate speech at the “rallies”. “There cannot be a quarrel on the point that hate speech vitiates the atmosphere… Authorities must take precautions that no violence, no hate speech is made. The Union government should immediately get in touch with the States’ authorities concerned… Rule of law has to be maintained,” Justice Khanna observed orally. The court directed the Centre and the States to consult with each other to ensure there was no law and order situations at the demonstrations. The Bench directed CCTV and video coverage of the events and preservation of the recordings made. The Bench reminded the Centre of the Supreme Court’s order on October 21, 2022 directing police and State authorities to suo motu register cases against makers of hate speech without waiting for a complaint to be filed The top court in its October 2022 order directed that First Information Reports (FIRs) be registered and criminal proceedings initiated against the makers of hate speech “irrespective of their religion so that the secular character of the country is preserved”. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju said that the Centre would “definitely try” to ensure that nothing untoward happened. “We are bound by the court’s orders,” Raju assured. The plea, represented by senior advocate C.U. Singh and Nizam Pasha, said “23 protest marches are coming to the capital and there is violence in the neighbouring State of Haryana”. He said though the notices described the events as “demonstrations”, there were already instances of hate speech. “Hate speech is happening… There are five more demonstrations scheduled in very sensitive areas,” Singh highlighted. Justice Khanna indicated that the authorities would be aware of the precautions to be taken to avoid violence. “No government will like any violence happening within their jurisdiction,” Justice Khanna addressed Singh. The case was listed for an out-of-turn hearing after Singh mentioned it before two separate Benches, stressing the need for an urgent intervention by the Supreme Court. The Special Bench listed the case again on Friday. The October 2022 order had rued how hate speeches made the atmosphere toxic when “the Constitution envisages Bharat as a secular nation and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of the country is one of the guiding principles enshrined in the Preamble”. It had said there could not be fraternity unless members of the different communities and castes were able to live in harmony. Listen to today’s episode of the In Focus podcast Decoding the new Israeli law that limits the Supreme Court’s power On July 24, Israel’s coalition government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu passed a key part of its proposed judicial reforms. The reforms, which essentially aim to give the executive control over the judiciary, had sparked massive protests both inside and outside the Knesset. The Opposition staged a walkout when the Bill came up for vote, and it was passed with 64 votes in favour and zero against, in the 124-member assembly. So, what does the Bill that was passed mean for Israel’s judiciary? What other proposals are under consideration in the judicial reform package? Is Israeli democracy under threat, as critics of judicial reform say? Bombay HC extends interim relief till Sept. 26 to Rahul Gandhi in defamation case The Bombay High Court on August 2, 2023 extended the interim relief granted to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi from appearing before the magistrate till September 26. The case pertains to a defamation suit filed by a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) over his statement of calling Prime Minister Narendra Modi, ‘Commander In Thief’. Gandhi is challenging the summons issued to him by a magistrate court in the case. A Single Bench of Justice S.V. Kotwal did not hear the matter but extended the interim relief given to Gandhi in November 2021 till September 26. The complaint was filed by Mahesh Shrishrimal (43), member of the BJP Maharashtra State Committee, on September 20, 2018. It said, “in relation to the Rafale Aircraft deal, while addressing a public rally at Jaipur then at Amethi, Mr. Gandhi defamed the prime minister, Narendra Modi, and BJP party members with the remark ‘choukidar chor hain’ (guard is a thief)... these derogatory remarks has defamed the image of PM at the national and international level. The said remarks and related news were broadcasted on various news channels, newspapers and social media causing serious defamation.” The complainant also attached tweets by Gandhi on September 24, 2018 that read, “the sad truth about India’s Commander in Thief. Modi ji ne kaha tha main desh ka PM nahin banna chahta hoon, main desh ke chaukidaar banna chahta hoon. Aur aaj desh ke dil mein, ek nayi awaaz utt rahi hain, gali gali mein shor hain, Hindustan ka chaukidaar chor hain.” (I don’t want to be the country’s PM, I want to be a guard. But today in the country, people are saying - the guard is the country’s thief) The metropolitan magistrate court had issued accused summons on August 28, 2019 and said, “whereas, your (Mr Gandhi) attendance is necessary to answer to a charge of Section 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). You are hereby required to appear in person or by a pleader in the case before the metropolitan magistrate court on October 3, 2019.” The order had said, “On perusal of the complaint, it appears that the complainant being a member of BJP has locus to file present complaint. The fact stated by complainant on oath reveals that the alleged defamation has caused not only of the PM but also its members too. The complainant has made out a prima facie case for issuance of process against the accused under section 500 of the IPC.” One more cheetah dies at Kuno National Park; toll rises to nine One more cheetah has been confirmed dead at the Kuno National Park (KNP), a senior official associated with Project Cheetah told The Hindu on August 2, making it the sixth adult feline to have died since March. “This morning, one of the female cheetahs — Dhatri (Tiblisi) — was found dead. To determine the cause of the death, a post-mortem is being conducted,” the statement read. While 14 cheetahs — seven males, six females and one female cub — are kept in the bomas in Kuno, a female cheetah is out in the open and is being intensively monitored by a team. Efforts are on to bring her back to the boma for a health examination, a statement by the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department said. Under Project Cheetah, a total of 20 radio-collared animals were imported from Namibia and South Africa to the KNP and later four cubs were born from Namibian cheetah ‘Jwala’. Out of these 24 feline, nine including three cubs have died. The Supreme Court had on July 20 observed the death of cheetahs in the KNP doesn’t present a “good picture”. The top court had on May 18 expressed serious concern over the cheetah deaths at KNP and asked the Centre to rise above politics and consider shifting them to Rajasthan. It had told the government that from reports of experts and articles, it appeared that KNP is not sufficient to accommodate such a large number of cheetahs and the Union Government may consider shifting the animals that went extinct from the country in 1947-48 to other sanctuaries. The top court is hearing an application filed by the Centre seeking direction from the court that it is no longer necessary for the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) to continue taking guidance and advice from the expert committee appointed by the apex court through an order dated January 28, 2020. In Brief: The Rajya Sabha on Wednesday passed the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2023, and the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, in the absence of Opposition after members of the Indian National Developmental, Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc walked out of the Upper House. INDIA MPs staged a walkout after Deputy Chairman Harivansh Narayan Singh denied them an opportunity to address in the House, violent incidents happening in the country. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 02 August 2023 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( President ‘holds the field’ on Article 370 after J&K Constituent Assembly ceased to exist: Supreme Court [The Supreme Court on Wednesday prima facie interpreted that the President’s power to notify that Article 370 of the Constitution, granting special status to Jammu and Kashmir, is inoperative “continued to hold the field” after the dissolution of the erstwhile State’s Constituent Assembly on January 26, 1957.]( Clause (3) of Article 370 (b) gave the President power to notify the Article “inoperative” or modify it. But a proviso had made it “necessary” that such a move would have to be recommended by the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) Constituent Assembly. “A Constituent Assembly is not a permanent body like the Parliament and the Supreme Court. No Constituent Assembly can have an indefinite life... The J&K Constituent Assembly was constituted for a specific purpose — to draft the Constitution of J&K. It became functus officio once the J&K Constitution was framed… This proviso making the Constituent Assembly’s ‘recommendation’ necessary before abrogation has no application. If the proviso ceased to operate, surely the substantive part of Clause 3 in Article 370 (b) will remain,” Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, heading a Constitution Bench, observed orally on the first day of hearing. “Are you saying the President has blanket powers?” senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mohd. Akbar Lone and the lead lawyer for the petitioners’ side, asked. “Can the will of the people of J&K be caged or silenced in this fashion? There has been no representative democracy in J&K in the past five years… In the guise of restoring democracy, we have decimated democracy. The State of J&K historically represented a unique relationship unlike princely states which integrated into the Union. Can that unique relationship between two sovereigns be jettisoned like this?” he asked the court. Sibal asked how the Parliament could have declared itself the legislature of J&K in place of the J&K Constituent Assembly in order to abrogate Article 370. “The Parliament was a creature of the Constitution. It could not have acted outside the Constitution,” he contended. The Governor took on the role of the ‘State government’ after keeping the State Legislative Assembly in suspended animation. Sibal said J&K was an “exception” to the amalgamation of princely states into the Union. “This exception was grafted into the Constitution. You cannot suddenly jettison the people of J&K when two sovereigns had committed themselves to a process which was grafted into the Constitution under Article 370. Otherwise, what is the difference between J&K and the annexation of Hyderabad or Junagarh. Then it becomes an act of paramountcy,” Sibal submitted. By abrogating Article 370 and carving a full-fledged State into union territories, Sibal said the “Parliament took upon itself the responsibility of the State legislature”. “Where is it said in the Constitution that the Parliament can do that? It was an exercise of political power. They said we know the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and we will do it,” he said. Justice B.R. Gavai asked Sibal why Article 370 was mentioned in the Constitution only as a “temporary” provision. “So, you are saying that though Article 370 was created as a temporary provision, it became permanently engrafted into the Constitution after 1957 with the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly,” Justice S.K. Kaul asked Sibal. “Article 370 was there when India became a Republic. The Article mentions a Constituent Assembly for J&K. However, the Constituent Assembly was not convened until December 1951. It was then left to the people of J&K, through their Constituent Assembly, to decide if Article 370 ought to be abrogated at all. Article 370 was called ‘temporary’ because the Constitution always wanted the J&K people to decide their future… Article 370 could have been abrogated only by a vote of confidence in the Constituent Assembly,” he responded. He said the Government of India, taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances under which the State acceded to India, had declared at the time that it was the people of the J&K, acting through their Constituent Assembly, who were to finally determine their own Constitution and the jurisdiction of Union of India regards the State. Sibal highlighted that the Union and the State of J&K had enjoyed a “collaborative relationship with constant dialogue” through the years. This had led to many parliamentary laws being made applicable to J&K through successive Constitution Orders passed by the President with the consent of the J&K government. He said there was no doubt that J&K was an integral part of India. “The Constitution of J&K itself says ‘we are an integral part of India’. The State of J&K was ad idem with the Union of India,” he submitted. The senior lawyer said the “unique constitutional structure and the collaborative relationship” was abruptly brought to an end on August 6, 2019 with the abrogation of special constitutional status of J&K. “Suddenly they said in Parliament ‘we are doing this at 11 o’clock’. Nobody knew about the abrogation in the Parliament. There was no consultation. The government, Parliament and ‘powers that be’ decided to do this one morning and tossed it [Article 370] out,” Sibal said. The Supreme Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that bestowed special status on the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir. A five-judge constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud heard extensive arguments from senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing on behalf of the petitioners. The Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, and Surya Kant, will resume hearing the case tomorrow from 10:30 am onwards. Haryana communal violence | Death toll rises to six, 116 arrested so far The [death toll in the communal violence which began early on August 1 in Haryana rose to six]( Chief Minister Manohar Lal said on August 2. So far, 116 people have been arrested. Badshapur Bajrang Dal co-ordinator Pradeep Sharma succumbed to injuries at Delhi’s Safdarjang Hospital in the morning, taking the toll to six, including two home guards. Lal told a news agency that the sporadic incidents of violence in the State were controlled and normalcy was restored. He said those injured were under treatment at Nalhar medical college in Nuh, Medanta Hospital in Gurugram and other hospitals. The Chief Minister said search operations were going on to arrest those responsible for the “unfortunate and tragic” incident. “Those arrested will be taken on remand for further investigation into the incident,” he said. Making an appeal for peace, Lal said 30 companies of Haryana Police and 20 companies of Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) were deployed across the State. Of the CAPF companies, a maximum of 14 were deployed in Nuh, three in Palwal, two in Gurugram and one in Faridabad. Meanwhile, several incidents of arson in scrap dealer shops and godowns were reported in and around Badshahpur in Gurugram late on August 1. Fire Department officials said that more than half-a-dozen incidents of fire were reported till midnight. Haryana communal violence | Supreme Court does not stop VHP demonstrations, asks authorities to ensure there is no violence, hate speeches A Special Bench of the [Supreme Court on Wednesday did not stay “demonstrations” held by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal]( outfits in communal violence-hit Nuh district of Haryana. A Bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna restricted itself to passing an “omnibus” order urging the Centre and the police to take steps to prevent instances of any violence and hate speech at the “rallies”. “There cannot be a quarrel on the point that hate speech vitiates the atmosphere… Authorities must take precautions that no violence, no hate speech is made. The Union government should immediately get in touch with the States’ authorities concerned… Rule of law has to be maintained,” Justice Khanna observed orally. The court directed the Centre and the States to consult with each other to ensure there was no law and order situations at the demonstrations. The Bench directed CCTV and video coverage of the events and preservation of the recordings made. The Bench reminded the Centre of the Supreme Court’s order on October 21, 2022 directing police and State authorities to suo motu register cases against makers of hate speech without waiting for a complaint to be filed The top court in its October 2022 order directed that First Information Reports (FIRs) be registered and criminal proceedings initiated against the makers of hate speech “irrespective of their religion so that the secular character of the country is preserved”. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju said that the Centre would “definitely try” to ensure that nothing untoward happened. “We are bound by the court’s orders,” Raju assured. The plea, represented by senior advocate C.U. Singh and Nizam Pasha, said “23 protest marches are coming to the capital and there is violence in the neighbouring State of Haryana”. He said though the notices described the events as “demonstrations”, there were already instances of hate speech. “Hate speech is happening… There are five more demonstrations scheduled in very sensitive areas,” Singh highlighted. Justice Khanna indicated that the authorities would be aware of the precautions to be taken to avoid violence. “No government will like any violence happening within their jurisdiction,” Justice Khanna addressed Singh. The case was listed for an out-of-turn hearing after Singh mentioned it before two separate Benches, stressing the need for an urgent intervention by the Supreme Court. The Special Bench listed the case again on Friday. The October 2022 order had rued how hate speeches made the atmosphere toxic when “the Constitution envisages Bharat as a secular nation and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of the country is one of the guiding principles enshrined in the Preamble”. It had said there could not be fraternity unless members of the different communities and castes were able to live in harmony. Listen to today’s episode of the In Focus podcast Decoding the new Israeli law that limits the Supreme Court’s power [On July 24, Israel’s coalition government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu passed a key part of its proposed judicial reforms](. The reforms, which essentially aim to give the executive control over the judiciary, had sparked massive protests both inside and outside the Knesset. The Opposition staged a walkout when the Bill came up for vote, and it was passed with 64 votes in favour and zero against, in the 124-member assembly. So, what does the Bill that was passed mean for Israel’s judiciary? What other proposals are under consideration in the judicial reform package? Is Israeli democracy under threat, as critics of judicial reform say? Bombay HC extends interim relief till Sept. 26 to Rahul Gandhi in defamation case The [Bombay High Court on August 2, 2023 extended the interim relief granted to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi]( from appearing before the magistrate till September 26. The case pertains to a defamation suit filed by a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) over his statement of calling Prime Minister Narendra Modi, ‘Commander In Thief’. Gandhi is challenging the summons issued to him by a magistrate court in the case. A Single Bench of Justice S.V. Kotwal did not hear the matter but extended the interim relief given to Gandhi in November 2021 till September 26. The complaint was filed by Mahesh Shrishrimal (43), member of the BJP Maharashtra State Committee, on September 20, 2018. It said, “in relation to the Rafale Aircraft deal, while addressing a public rally at Jaipur then at Amethi, Mr. Gandhi defamed the prime minister, Narendra Modi, and BJP party members with the remark ‘choukidar chor hain’ (guard is a thief)... these derogatory remarks has defamed the image of PM at the national and international level. The said remarks and related news were broadcasted on various news channels, newspapers and social media causing serious defamation.” The complainant also attached tweets by Gandhi on September 24, 2018 that read, “the sad truth about India’s Commander in Thief. Modi ji ne kaha tha main desh ka PM nahin banna chahta hoon, main desh ke chaukidaar banna chahta hoon. Aur aaj desh ke dil mein, ek nayi awaaz utt rahi hain, gali gali mein shor hain, Hindustan ka chaukidaar chor hain.” (I don’t want to be the country’s PM, I want to be a guard. But today in the country, people are saying - the guard is the country’s thief) The metropolitan magistrate court had issued accused summons on August 28, 2019 and said, “whereas, your (Mr Gandhi) attendance is necessary to answer to a charge of Section 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). You are hereby required to appear in person or by a pleader in the case before the metropolitan magistrate court on October 3, 2019.” The order had said, “On perusal of the complaint, it appears that the complainant being a member of BJP has locus to file present complaint. The fact stated by complainant on oath reveals that the alleged defamation has caused not only of the PM but also its members too. The complainant has made out a prima facie case for issuance of process against the accused under section 500 of the IPC.” One more cheetah dies at Kuno National Park; toll rises to nine [One more cheetah has been confirmed dead at the Kuno National Park]( (KNP), a senior official associated with Project Cheetah told The Hindu on August 2, making it the sixth adult feline to have died since March. “This morning, one of the female cheetahs — Dhatri (Tiblisi) — was found dead. To determine the cause of the death, a post-mortem is being conducted,” the statement read. While 14 cheetahs — seven males, six females and one female cub — are kept in the bomas in Kuno, a female cheetah is out in the open and is being intensively monitored by a team. Efforts are on to bring her back to the boma for a health examination, a statement by the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department said. Under Project Cheetah, a total of 20 radio-collared animals were imported from Namibia and South Africa to the KNP and later four cubs were born from Namibian cheetah ‘Jwala’. Out of these 24 feline, nine including three cubs have died. The Supreme Court had on July 20 observed the death of cheetahs in the KNP doesn’t present a “good picture”. The top court had on May 18 expressed serious concern over the cheetah deaths at KNP and asked the Centre to rise above politics and consider shifting them to Rajasthan. It had told the government that from reports of experts and articles, it appeared that KNP is not sufficient to accommodate such a large number of cheetahs and the Union Government may consider shifting the animals that went extinct from the country in 1947-48 to other sanctuaries. The top court is hearing an application filed by the Centre seeking direction from the court that it is no longer necessary for the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) to continue taking guidance and advice from the expert committee appointed by the apex court through an order dated January 28, 2020. In Brief: The Rajya Sabha on Wednesday passed the [Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2023]( and the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, in the absence of Opposition after members of the Indian National Developmental, Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc walked out of the Upper House. [INDIA MPs staged a walkout]( after Deputy Chairman Harivansh Narayan Singh denied them an opportunity to address in the House, violent incidents happening in the country. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [Sign up for free]( Today’s Top Picks [[Congress’ choice of new Maharashtra LoP forefronts factionalism in party’s State unit] Congress’ choice of new Maharashtra LoP forefronts factionalism in party’s State unit]( [[Data | In India, women do seven hours of housework, men under three hours] Data | In India, women do seven hours of housework, men under three hours]( [[Business Matters | Does India have too few or too many pilots?] Business Matters | Does India have too few or too many pilots?]( [[Ashes 2023 will serve as a good advertisement for Test cricket] Ashes 2023 will serve as a good advertisement for Test cricket]( Copyright @ 2023, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( Manage your newsletter subscription preferences [here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](