Generally, we confuse such displaced persons as the same. But it is not the case. People having different reasons for moving from their places and settling in another country are not within the same meaning under International Law. In this post, we will discuss two such classes of persons; Refugees and Migrants.

Migrants:

International Organisation for Migration, the United Nations Migration Agency, defines migrants as any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of

 (1) the person’s legal status;

(2) whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary;

(3) what the causes for the movement are; or

(4) what the length of the stay is.

IOM mainly deals with migrants and migration‐related issues and, in agreement with related countries, with migrants who are in need of international migration services.

Migration:

Migration is the movement of a person or a group of persons, either across an international border or within a State. It is a population movement, encompassing any kind of movement of people, whatever its length, composition, and causes; it includes migration of refugees, displaced persons, economic migrants, and persons moving for other purposes, including family reunification.

Refugee:

A person who “owing to well­-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”

In the case of a person who has more than one nationality, the term “the country of his nationality” shall mean each of the countries of which he is a national, and a person shall not be deemed to be lacking the protection of the country of his nationality if, without any valid reason based on well-founded fear, he has not availed himself of the protection of one of the countries of which he is a national.

Difference between migrant and refugee:

As such, there is no formal legal definition but in international law, a migrant is someone who changes their State of usual residence, irrespective of any reason. A refugee is a person who is outside their country of origin for reasons like feared prosecution, conflict, violence, or other circumstances that seriously disturb public order and requires international protection.

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

<<<CLICK HERE TO ASK ANY DOUBTS>>>

To be continued…

[i] Article 1A(2), Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951.

Data sources:

https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/statistics/

https://www.iom.int/key-migration-terms

The post International Refugee Law : Difference between Refugee and Migrant appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

●स्वतंत्रता प्राप्ति से पूर्व देश में स्वतंत्रता आंदोलन के साथ-साथ हिंदी को देश की राष्ट्रभाषा बनाये जाने की सर्वाधिक मांग की जाती रही थी।

●संविधान निर्माताओं ने हिंदी को राष्ट्रभाषा बनाए जाने की मांग को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए संविधान सभा ने 14/9/1949 को हिंदी को संघ की राजभाषा स्वीकार करते हुए राजभाषा हिंदी के संबंध में प्रावधान किए।

●संविधान के भाग 5 एवं 6 के क्रमश: अनुच्छेद 120 तथा 210 में तथा भाग 17 के अनुचछेद 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350 तथा 351 में राजभाषा हिंदी के संबंध में निम्न प्रावधान किये गए हैं। इन प्रावधानों के साथ ही संप्रति भारत की 22 भाषाओं को संविधान की अनुसूची-8 में मान्यता दी गई है।

●ये भाषाएँ इस प्रकार हैं-

हिंदी, पंजाबी, उर्दू, कश्मीरी, संस्कृत, असमिया, ओड़िया, बांगला, गुजराती, मराठी, सिंधी, तमिल, तेलुगु, मलयालम, कन्नड़, मणिपुरी, कोंकणी, नेपाली, संथाली, मैथिली, बोड़ो तथा डोगरी।

●सन 1967 में 21वें संविधान संशोधन द्वारा सिंधी भाषा 8वीं अनुसूची में जोड़ी गई थी। सन 1992 में 71वें संविधान संशोधन द्वारा कोंकणी, नेपाली तथा मणिपुरी भाषाएँ 8वीं अनुसूची में जोड़ी गई थीं। सन 2003 में 92वें संविधान संशोधन द्वारा संथाली, मैथिली, बोडो तथा डोगरी भाषाएँ 8वीं अनुसूची में जोड़ी गई थीं।

संसद में प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा

●संविधान के अनुच्छेद 120 के अंतर्गत संसद में प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा के संबंध में प्रावधान किया गया है।

●अनुच्छेद 120 के खंड (1) के अंतर्गत प्रावधान किया गया है कि संविधान के भाग-17 में किसी बात के होते हुए भी किंतु अनुच्छेद 348 के उपबंधों के अधीन रहते हुए संसद में कार्य हिंदी में या अंग्रेजी में किया जायेगा, परंतु यथा स्थिति लोक सभा का अध्यक्ष या राज्य सभा का सभापति अथवा उस रूप में कार्य करने वाला व्यक्ति सदन में किसी सदस्य को, जो हिंदी में या अंग्रेजी में अपनी पर्याप्त अभिव्यक्ति नहीं कर सकता है, तो उसे अपनी मातृभाषा में सदन को संबोधित करने की अनुमति दे सकता है।

●अनुच्छेद 120 के खंड (2) के अंतर्गत प्रावधान किया गया है कि जब तक संसद विधि द्वारा अन्यथा उपबंध न करे, तब तक संविधान के प्रारंभ के समय से पन्द्रह वर्ष की अवधि की समाप्ति के पश्चात यह अनुच्छेद इस प्रकार प्रभावी होगा मानो- या अंग्रेजी में शब्दों का लोप कर दिया गया हो।

विधान मंडल में प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा

●संविधान के अनुच्छेद 210 के अंतर्गत विधान मंडल में प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा के संबंध में प्रावधान किया गया है।

●अनुच्छेद 210 के खंड (1) के अंतर्गत प्रावधान किया गया है कि संविधान के भाग-17 में किसी बात के होते हुए भी किंतु अनुच्छेद 348 के उपबंधों के अधीन रहते हुए, राज्य के विधान मंडल में कार्य राज्य की राजभाषा या राजभाषाओं में या हिंदी में या अंग्रेजी में किया जायेगा, किंतु यथा स्थिति, विधान सभा का अध्यक्ष या विधान परिषद का सभापति अथवा उस रूप में कार्य करने वाला व्यक्ति सदन में किसी भी सदस्य को, जो अपने राज्य की राजभाषा या राजभाषाओं अथवा हिंदी अथवा अंग्रेजी में से किसी भी भाषा में अपनी पर्याप्त अभिव्यक्ति नहीं कर सकता है, तो उसे अपनी मातृभाषा में सदन को संबोधित करने की अनुमति दे सकता है।

●अनुच्छेद 210 के खंड (2) के अंतर्गत प्रावधान किया गया है कि जब तक राज्य का विधान मंडल विधि द्वारा अन्यथा उपबंध न करे, तब तक संविधान के लागू होने के समय से पन्द्रह वर्ष की अवधि की समाप्ति के बाद यह अनुच्छेद ऐसे प्रभावी होगा मानो- या अंग्रेज़ी में शब्दों का उसमें से लोप कर दिया गया हो।

संघ की राजभाषा

●संविधान के भाग-17 के अनुचछेद 343 से 351 तक में राजभाषा संबंधी प्रावधान किये गए हैं।

●संविधान के अनुच्छेद 343 के अंतर्गत संघ की राजभाषा के संबंध में प्रावधान किया गया है।

●अनुच्छेद 343 के खंड (1) के अनुसार देवनागरी लिपि में लिखित हिंदी संघ की राजभाषा है। संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग होने वाले अंकों का रूप भारतीय अंकों का अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रूप होगा। तथापि संविधान के इसी अनुच्छेद 343 के खंड (2) के अनुसार किसी बात के होते हुए भी इस संविधान के लागू होने के समय से पन्द्रह वर्ष की अवधि (अर्थात 26 जनवरी, 1965) तक संघ के उन सभी राजकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए वह संविधान के लागू होने के समय से ठीक वह संविधान के लागू होने के समय से ठीक पहले प्रयोग की जाती थी। (अर्थात् 26 जनवरी, 1965 तक अंग्रेजी उन सभी प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग की जाती रहेगी, जिनके लिए वह संविधान के लागू होने के समय से पूर्व प्रयोग की जाती थी।)

●अनुच्छेद 343 के खंड (2) के अंतर्गत यह भी प्रावधान किया गया है कि उक्त पन्द्रह वर्ष की अवधि में भी अर्थात् 26 जनवरी, 1965 से पूर्व भी राष्ट्रपति आदेश द्वारा किसी भी राजकीय प्रयोजन के लिए अंग्रेजी के साथ साथ देवनागरी रूप के प्रयोग की अनुमति दे सकते हैं।

अनुच्छेद 343. संघ की राजभाषा—

(1) संघ की राजभाषा हिंदी और लिपि देवनागरी होगी, संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग होने वाले अंकों का रूप भारतीय अंकों का अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रूप होगा।

(2) खंड (1) में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, इस संविधान के प्रारंभ से पंद्रह वर्ष की अवधि तक संघ के उन सभी शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए अंग्रेजी भाषा का प्रयोग किया जाता रहेगा जिनके लिए उसका ऐसे प्रारंभ से ठीक पहले प्रयोग किया जा रहा था , परन्तु राष्ट्रपति उक्त अवधि के दौरान, आदेश द्वारा, संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों में से किसी के लिए अंग्रेजी भाषा के अतिरिक्त हिंदी भाषा का और भारतीय अंकों के अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रूप के अतिरिक्त देवनागरी रूप का प्रयोग प्राधिकृत कर सकेगा।

(3) इस अनुच्छेद में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, संसद् उक्त पन्द्रह वर्ष की अवधि के पश्चात्‌, विधि द्वारा

(क) अंग्रेजी भाषा का, या

(ख) अंकों के देवनागरी रूप का,

ऐसे प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग उपबंधित कर सकेगी जो ऐसी विधि में विनिर्दिष्ट किए जाएं।

अनुच्छेद 344 राजभाषा के संबंध में आयोग और संसद की समिति—

(1) राष्ट्रपति, इस संविधान के प्रारंभ से पांच वर्ष की समाप्ति पर और तत्पश्चात्‌ ऐसे प्रारंभ से दस वर्ष की समाप्ति पर, आदेश द्वारा, एक आयोग गठित करेगा जो एक अध्यक्ष और आठवीं अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट विभिन्न भाषाओं का प्रतिनिधित्व करने वाले ऐसे अन्य सदस्यों से मिलकर बनेगा जिनको राष्ट्रपति नियुक्त करे और आदेश में आयोग द्वारा अनुसरण की जाने वाली प्रक्रिया परिनिश्चित की जाएगी।

(2) आयोग का यह कर्तव्य होगा कि वह राष्ट्रपति को–

(क) संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए हिंदी भाषा के अधिकाधिक प्रयोग,

(ख) संघ के सभी या किन्हीं शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए अंग्रेजी भाषा के प्रयोग पर निर्बंधनों,

(ग) अनुच्छेद 348 में उल्लिखित सभी या किन्हीं प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा,

(घ) संघ के किसी एक या अधिक विनिर्दिष्ट प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग किए जाने वाले अंकों के रूप,

(ड़) संघ की राजभाषा तथा संघ और किसी राज्य के बीच या एक राज्य और दूसरे राज्य के बीच पत्रादि की भाषा और उनके प्रयोग के संबंध में राष्ट्रपति द्वारा आयोग को निर्देशित किए गए किसी अन्य विषय, के बारे में सिफारिश करे।

(3) खंड (2) के अधीन अपनी सिफारिशें करने में, आयोग भारत की औद्योगिक, सांस्कृतिक और वैज्ञानिक उन्नति का और लोक सेवाओं के संबंध में अहिंदी भाषी क्षेत्रों के व्यक्तियों के न्यायसंगत दावों और हितों का सम्यक ध्यान रखेगा।

(4) एक समिति गठित की जाएगी जो तीस सदस्यों से मिलकर बनेगी जिनमें से बीस लोक सभा के सदस्य होंगे और दस राज्य सभा के सदस्य होंगे जो क्रमशः लोक सभा के सदस्यों और राज्य सभा के सदस्यों द्वारा आनुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्व पद्धति के अनुसार एकल संक्रमणीय मत द्वारा निर्वाचित होंगे।

(5) समिति का यह कर्तव्य होगा कि वह खंड (1)के अधीन गठित आयोग की सिफारिशों की परीक्षा करे और राष्ट्रपति को उन पर अपनी राय के बारे में प्रतिवेदन दे।

(6) अनुच्छेद 343 में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, राष्ट्रपति खंड (5) में निर्दिष्ट प्रतिवेदन पर विचार करने के पश्चात्‌ उस संपूर्ण प्रतिवेदन के या उसके किसी भाग के अनुसार निदेश दे सकेगा।

अध्याय 2- प्रादेशिक भाषाएं अनुच्छेद 345. राज्य की राजभाषा या राजभाषाएं–

●अनुच्छेद 346 और अनुच्छेद 347 के उपबंधों के अधीन रहते हुए, किसी राज्य का विधान-मंडल, विधि द्वारा, उस राज्य में प्रयोग होने वाली भाषाओं में से किसी एक या अधिक भाषाओं को या हिंदी को उस राज्य के सभी या किन्हीं शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा या भाषाओं के रूप में अंगीकार कर सकेगाः

●परंतु जब तक राज्य का विधान-मंडल, विधि द्वारा, अन्यथा उपबंध न करे तब तक राज्य के भीतर उन शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए अंग्रेजी भाषा का प्रयोग किया जाता रहेगा जिनके लिए उसका इस संविधान के प्रारंभ से ठीक पहले प्रयोग किया जा रहा था।

अनुच्छेद 346. एक राज्य और दूसरे राज्य के बीच या किसी राज्य और संघ के बीच पत्रादि की राजभाषा-–

●संघ में शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग किए जाने के लिए तत्समय प्राधिकृत भाषा, एक राज्य और दूसरे राज्य के बीच तथा किसी राज्य और संघ के बीच पत्रादि की राजभाषा होगी :

●परंतु यदि दो या अधिक राज्य यह करार करते हैं कि उन राज्यों के बीच पत्रादि की राजभाषा हिंदी भाषा होगी तो ऐसे पत्रादि के लिए उस भाषा का प्रयोग किया जा सकेगा।

●अनुच्छेद 347. किसी राज्य की जनसंख्या के किसी भाग द्वारा बोली जाने वाली भाषा के संबंध में विशेष उपबंध–
यदि इस निमित्त मांग किए जाने पर राष्ट्रपति का यह समाधान हो जाता है कि किसी राज्य की जनसंख्या का पर्याप्त भाग यह चाहता है कि उसके द्वारा बोली जाने वाली भाषा को राज्य द्वारा मान्यता दी जाए तो वह निदेश दे सकेगा कि ऐसी भाषा को भी उस राज्य में सर्वत्र या उसके किसी भाग में ऐसे प्रयोजन के लिए, जो वह विनिर्दिष्ट करे, शासकीय मान्यता दी जाए।

अध्याय 3 – उच्चतम न्यायालय, उच्च न्यायालयों आदि की भाषा

अनुच्छेद 348. उच्चतम न्यायालय और उच्च न्यायालयों में और अधिनियमों, विधेयकों आदि के लिए प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा–
(1) इस भाग के पूर्वगामी उपबंधों में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, जब तक संसद् विधि द्वारा अन्यथा उपबंध न करे तब तक–

(क) उच्चतम न्यायालय और प्रत्येक उच्च न्यायालय में सभी कार्यवाहियां अंग्रेजी भाषा में होंगी,

(ख) (i) संसद् के प्रत्येक सदन या किसी राज्य के विधान-मंडल के सदन या प्रत्येक सदन में पुरःस्थापित किए जाने वाले सभी विधेयकों या प्रस्तावित किए जाने वाले उनके संशोधनों के,

(ii) संसद या किसी राज्य के विधान-मंडल द्वारा पारित सभी अधिनियमों के और राष्ट्रपति या किसी राज्य के राज्यपाल द्वारा प्रख्यापित सभी अध्यादेशों के ,और

(iii) इस संविधान के अधीन अथवा संसद या किसी राज्य के विधान-मंडल द्वारा बनाई गई किसी विधि के अधीन निकाले गए या बनाए गए सभी आदेशों, नियमों, विनियमों और उपविधियों के, प्राधिकृत पाठ अंग्रेजी भाषा में होंगे।

(2) खंड(1) के उपखंड (क) में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, किसी राज्य का राज्यपाल राष्ट्रपति की पूर्व सहमति से उस उच्च न्यायालय की कार्यवाहियों में, जिसका मुख्य स्थान उस राज्य में है, हिन्दी भाषा का या उस राज्य के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग होने वाली किसी अन्य भाषा का प्रयोग प्राधिकृत कर सकेगाः

परंतु इस खंड की कोई बात ऐसे उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा दिए गए किसी निर्णय, डिक्री या आदेश को लागू नहीं होगी।

(3) खंड (1) के उपखंड (ख) में किसी बात के होते हुए भी, जहां किसी राज्य के विधान-मंडल ने,उस विधान-मंडल में पुरःस्थापित विधेयकों या उसके द्वारा पारित अधिनियमों में अथवा उस राज्य के राज्यपाल द्वारा प्रख्यापित अध्यादेशों में अथवा उस उपखंड के पैरा (iv‌) में निर्दिष्ट किसी आदेश, नियम, विनियम या उपविधि में प्रयोग के लिए अंग्रेजी भाषा से भिन्न कोई भाषा विहित की है वहां उस राज्य के राजपत्र में उस राज्य के राज्यपाल के प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित अंग्रेजी भाषा में उसका अनुवाद इस अनुच्छेद के अधीन उसका अंग्रेजी भाषा में प्राधिकृत पाठ समझा जाएगा।

●अनुच्छेद 349. भाषा से संबंधित कुछ विधियां अधिनियमित करने के लिए विशेष प्रक्रिया–
इस संविधान के प्रारंभ से पंद्रह वर्ष की अवधि के दौरान, अनुच्छेद 348 के खंड (1) में उल्लिखित किसी प्रयोजन के लिए प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा के लिए उपबंध करने वाला कोई विधेयक या संशोधन संसद के किसी सदन में राष्ट्रपति की पूर्व मंजूरी के बिना पुरःस्थापित या प्रस्तावित नहीं किया जाएगा और राष्ट्रपति किसी ऐसे विधेयक को पुरःस्थापित या किसी ऐसे संशोधन को प्रस्तावित किए जाने की मंजूरी अनुच्छेद 344 के खंड (1) के अधीन गठित आयोग की सिफारिशों पर और उस अनुच्छेद के खंड (4) के अधीन गठित समिति के प्रतिवेदन पर विचार करने के पश्चात्‌ ही देगा, अन्यथा नहीं।

●अध्याय 4– विशेष निदेश
अनुच्छेद 350. व्यथा के निवारण के लिए अभ्यावेदन में प्रयोग की जाने वाली भाषा–
प्रत्येक व्यक्ति किसी व्यथा के निवारण के लिए संघ या राज्य के किसी अधिकारी या प्राधिकारी को, यथास्थिति, संघ में या राज्य में प्रयोग होने वाली किसी भाषा में अभ्यावेदन देने का हकदार होगा।

●अनुच्छेद 350 क. प्राथमिक स्तर पर मातृभाषा में शिक्षा की सुविधाएं–
प्रत्येक राज्य और राज्य के भीतर प्रत्येक स्थानीय प्राधिकारी भाषाई अल्पसंख्यक-वर्गों के बालकों को शिक्षा के प्राथमिक स्तर पर मातृभाषा में शिक्षा की पर्याप्त सुविधाओं की व्यवस्था करने का प्रयास करेगा और राष्ट्रपति किसी राज्य को ऐसे निदेश दे सकेगा जो वह ऐसी सुविधाओं का उपबंध सुनिश्चित कराने के लिए आवश्यक या उचित समझता है।

●अनुच्छेद 350 ख. भाषाई अल्पसंख्यक-वर्गों के लिए विशेष अधिकारी–
(1) भाषाई अल्पसंख्यक-वर्गों के लिए एक विशेष अधिकारी होगा जिसे राष्ट्रपति नियुक्त करेगा।

(2) विशेष अधिकारी का यह कर्तव्य होगा कि वह इस संविधान के अधीन भाषाई अल्पसंख्यक-वर्गों के लिए उपबंधित रक्षोपायों से संबंधित सभी विषयों का अन्वेषण करे और उन विषयों के संबंध में ऐसे अंतरालों पर जो राष्ट्रपति निर्दिष्ट करे,

●राष्ट्रपति को प्रतिवेदन दे और राष्ट्रपति ऐसे सभी प्रतिवेदनों को संसद् के प्रत्येक सदन के समक्ष रखवाएगा और संबंधित राज्यों की सरकारों को भिजवाएगा।

●अनुच्छेद 351. हिंदी भाषा के विकास के लिए निदेश–
संघ का यह कर्तव्य होगा कि वह हिंदी भाषा का प्रसार बढ़ाए, उसका विकास करे जिससे वह भारत की सामासिक संस्कृति के सभी तत्वों की अभिव्यक्ति का माध्यम बन सके और उसकी प्रकृति में हस्तक्षेप किए बिना हिंदुस्थानी में और आठवीं अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भारत की अन्य भाषाओं में प्रयुक्त रूप, शैली और पदों को आत्मसात करते हुए और जहां आवश्यक या वांछनीय हो वहां उसके शब्द-भंडार के लिए मुख्यतः संस्कृत से और गौणतः अन्य भाषाओं से शब्द ग्रहण करते हुए उसकी समृद्धि सुनिश्चित करे।

कैलाशा फाउंडेशन द्वारा प्रस्तुत 

 Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn पर जाकर हमें फॉलो करें|

<<<किसी भी प्रकार के प्रश्न के लिए यहाँ क्लिक करें>>>

The post राजभाषा हिंदी की संवैधानिक स्थिति appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

Homosexuality, sexual interest is an attraction to members of one’s own sex. The term gay is frequently used as a synonym for the homosexual; female homosexuality is often referred to as lesbianism. At different times and in different cultures, homosexual behavior has been variously approved of, tolerated, punished, and banned.

Homosexuality was not uncommon in ancient Greece and Rome, and the relationships between adult and adolescent males, in particular, have become a chief focus of Western classicists in recent years. Judeo-Christian, as well as Muslim cultures, have generally perceived homosexual behavior as sinful. Many Jewish and Christian leaders, however, have gone to great lengths to make clear that it is the acts and not the individuals or even their “inclination” or “orientation” that their faiths prescribe.

Others—from factions within mainstream Protestantism to organizations of Reform rabbis—have advocated, on theological as well as social grounds, the full acceptance of homosexuals and their relationships. The topic has threatened to cause outright schisms in some denominations.[i]

Background of the legal battle in India:

The first step towards the law was taken by the Naz Foundation, an NGO, working to create awareness of HIV/AIDS and other sexual health issues. They filed a petition challenging the law in the Delhi High Court in 2001. New Delhi’s High Court decriminalized homosexuality among consenting adults in 2009, finding that applying its ban on “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” to consenting adults breached the rights to life, liberty, and equality enshrined in the country’s Constitution.

But the Supreme Court overturned the decision in 2012 while considering appeals from religious groups. In 2016, five petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by prominent LGBTQ activists to overturn the law. They claimed that Section 377 violated their sexual autonomy, privacy, and right to equality. The Court delivered the final judgment on 06.09.2108, Thursday/

Key Observations by the Supreme Court:

The five-judge bench of the SC led by CJI Dipak Misra decriminalized consensual gay sex unanimously in case of NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR & ORS. V. UNION OF INDIA. The main observations made by the Court are:

1. Section 377 of IPC in so far as it criminalizes consensual sexual acts between man and man, man and woman or woman and woman is unconstitutional and struck down. Sex with an animal will, however, remain criminal. (The provisions of Section 377 will continue to govern non-consensual sexual acts against adults, all acts of carnal intercourse against minors, and acts of bestiality.)
2. LGBT community possesses equal rights under the Constitution.
3. History owes an apology to members of the community for the delay in ensuring their rights,” said justice Indu Malhotra.
4. The primary objective of having a Constitutional society is to transform the society progressively; Constitutional provisions should not be interpreted in the literal sense.
5. The sexual orientation of an individual is natural and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a violation of Freedom of Expression.
6. “Criminalising carnal intercourse under section 377 Indian penal code is irrational, indefensible and manifestly arbitrary,” the Chief Justice, Dipak Misra.
7. The provision of IPC had resulted in collateral effect in that consensual sex between LGBT person is criminalized and is violative of Article 14.
8. Justice Rohinton Nariman says one feature of his judgment is reliance on Mental Healthcare Act as per which Parliament has recognized that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
9. Bodily autonomy is individualistic. Expression of intimacy is part of a right to privacy.
10. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of freedom of speech and expression.

With these words and many more references, the Supreme Court overruled The judgment in Suresh K. Koushal & Anr. v. Naz Foundation & Ors.[ii] Homosexuality is not a crime in India anymore and it is not a mental disorder. The country must salute the efforts of Sunil Mehra, Ritu Dalmia, Aman Nath, Ayesha Kapur, and Navtej Singh and many unknown activists for their fights and the society should welcome the change which the Supreme Court has intended to bring.

When love comes out of the closet, hate shall too raise its hood.

[i] https://www.britannica.com/topic/homosexuality

[ii] (2014) 1 SCC 1

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

<<<CLICK HERE TO ASK ANY DOUBTS>>>

The post HOMOSEXUALITY: NO LONGER A CRIME IN INDIA! appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

This Quiz is brought to you by Kailasha Foundation- Fun & Learn Portal to help you boost yourself for all kinds of competitive exams with our specially tailored content from the topic of Indian Constitution. With this Quiz, we have delivered you 15 question in an interactive environment.

Click here to start the quiz

All content at Kailasha Foundation is free and will always be. Share with friends, challenge them and have fun while learning. That’s why “Fun & Learn”. If you find any error(s) in this quiz, then do report from the “Contact Us” tab above on our website. Thanks for being a valuable user. Happy Learning!

For other quizzes click here “Quizzes“

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

The post Indian Constitution Quiz 5 appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

This Quiz is brought to you by Kailasha Foundation- Fun & Learn Portal to help you boost yourself for all kinds of competitive exams with our specially tailored content from the topic of Indian Constitution. With this Quiz, we have delivered you 20 question in an interactive environment.

Click here to start the quiz

All content at Kailasha Foundation is free and will always be. Share with friends, challenge them and have fun while learning. That’s why “Fun & Learn”. If you find any error(s) in this quiz, then do report from the “Contact Us” tab above on our website. Thanks for being a valuable user. Happy Learning!

For other quizzes click here “Quizzes“

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

The post Indian Constitution Quiz 2 appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

This Quiz is brought to you by Kailasha Foundation- Fun & Learn Portal to help you boost yourself for all kinds of competitive exams with our specially tailored content from the topic of Indian Constitution. With this Quiz, we have delivered you 15 question in an interactive environment.

Click here to start the quiz

All content at Kailasha Foundation is free and will always be. Share with friends, challenge them and have fun while learning. That’s why “Fun & Learn”. If you find any error(s) in this quiz, then do report from the “Contact Us” tab above on our website. Thanks for being a valuable user. Happy Learning!

For other quizzes click here “Quizzes“

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

The post Indian Constitution Quiz 1 appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

Background:

Maroš Kolpak, born in Czechoslovakia, a Slovak handball player, legally resident and working in Germany, was playing for the German second division handball side TSV Ostringen since 1997. The German Handball Association had a rule (Rule 15) which prohibited its member clubs from fielding more than two non-EU citizens. At that time, Slovakia was not a member of the European Union then (it joined the EU in May 2004), Slovakia did, however, have an Association Agreement with the European Union.

Kolpak was ejected from his club in 2000 as they had filled their quota of two non-EU players. He challenged the ejection on the ground that Rule 15 placed an illegal restriction on his freedom of movement as a worker by treating him differently from German citizens. The Association held that equality of treatment applied only to citizens of European Union countries and not to non-EU citizens. Maros Kolpak approached to the German court which referred it to the European Court of Justice to determine whether the Association Agreement between Slovakia and the European Union provided equal rights for Slovak workers who were living and working legally within the EU. The ECJ gave its landmark judgment on 8th May 2003, in favour of Maros Kolpak. And that is why the judgment is popularly known as Kolpak Rule.

It ruled that citizens of countries which have signed EU Association Agreement have the same right to freedom of work and movement within the EU as EU citizens. Thus, any restrictions placed on their right to work (such as quotas setting maximum numbers of such foreign players in sports teams) are deemed illegal under EU law. The decision put a wide impact with regard to English County Cricket and professional rugby.

The Kolpak Ruling declares that the status that only Citizens of EU countries are allowed to work in any other EU country does not remain the same. Citizens of countries that are part of European Union Association Agreements, which are free trade treaties between the EU and other countries, also get the same right after the judgment.

Effects:

Earlier to the Kolpak verdict,  the Englan Cricket Board rules had limited each county to play one overseas (non-EU) professional. But the Kolpak rule allowed Players from countries with such deals with the EU to play cricket in any EU country without being considered an overseas player. This means they can sign contracts with English county sides without having to be fielded as overseas players.

To discourage this practice, ECB brought new rule in payment to counties. Every game a Kolpak player plays instead of an English qualified player, a county gets £1,100 less from the ECB. But, the system did not result in favour of ECB as the number of Kolpak players did not drop, the counties chose to continue to sign foreign players, rather than maximize their handout from the ECB. The numbers kept increasing and it went to its peak when in 2008 during a match between Northants and Leicestershire, 11 players took on the field who were from non-EU countries and exploited the Kolpak rule.[i]

Amendment to Cotonou Agreement:

The number reached to 60 Kolpak players in English cricket, which alarmed the dangers to ECB. It resulted in an amendment to the Cotonou Agreement. ( cricketing nations such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, as well as several Caribbean nations, forms the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States. This group signed the Cotonou Agreement with 15 member nations of the European Union in June 2000 to reduce poverty in ACP nations and to establish trade co-operation between ACP and EU nations). The amendment gave some respite to England Board, which was keen to reduce the number of overseas players. In the amendment, EU stated that the Cotonou Agreement should not be interpreted as an avenue for free movement of labour, but should be treated as an opportunity for free trade of goods and services. United Kingdom’s Home Office later enforced further restrictions on Kolpak players by stating that only those individuals who have held a valid work permit for four years have the right to be treated as EU citizens. The amendment also allowed entry limitations to be decided by visa regulations.

Qualifications of a Kolpak player:

To be a Kolpak player, he has to give up his right to play for his country.  A Kolpak player must not have represented his country in the past 12 months and during the period of his contract with a county, he will not be eligible to represent his country. The Kolpak players will be eligible to play for England after plying their trade in the country for four years.

Consequences of Brexit:

Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, known as Brexit, has its impact on sports as well. As a non-member of the EU, those agreements (Cotonou Agreement, etc.) Britain may prevent players from taking up county contracts. As a result of the uncertainty signing long-term contracts with counties to take advantage of the rules.  The real result of Brexit is still unknown and the future remains discouraging for such players.

Some Key Kolpak Cricketers:

South Africa: Ashwell Prince, Ryan McLaren,  Faf du Plessis, Neil McKenzie, Alviro Petersen, Andre Nel, Colin Ingram, Justin Kemp, Paul Harris, Kyle Abbott, Rilee Rossouw, David Wiese, Lance Klusener.

Zimbabwe: Andy Flower, Grant Flower, Kyle Jarvis, Brendan Taylor, Anthony Ireland

West Indies: Shivnaraine Chanderapaul, Dwayne Smith, Pedro Collins, Brendan Nash, Corey Collymore, Ottis Gibson, Ravi Ranpaul, Tino Best,

New Zealand: Andre Adams

Netherlands: Ryan ten Doeschate

[i] http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/counties/8325975.stm

Other sources :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolpak_ruling#cite_ref-bbc4_5-0

http://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/70926/the-kolpak-deal-frequently-asked-questions

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/18411981/the-kolpak-rule-explained

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

<<<CLICK HERE TO ASK ANY DOUBTS>>>

The post What is Kolpak Rule? appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

Do the Judges make Law?

There are two contrary views on the issue. First theory says that judges only declare the existing law while the other theory is of the opinion that judges do make law. The theories are:

Declaratory Theory, Judges declare law:

The theory suggests that judges while delivering judgments do not make law but declare them. They discover a law and then declare it. Blackstone, the great exponent of this view, says, ‘A judge is sworn to determine, not according to his own private judgment, but according to the known laws and customs of the land; not delegated to pronounce a new law but to maintain and explain the old one jus di cere et non-jus dare.’  Judges are law-finders rather than law-makers.

Dr. Carter, a strong supporter of Blackstone’s view, says ‘the judges were the discoverers and not the lawmakers of the law. If what the judges did was to declare a law not before existing, the subjection by them of one of the parties to liability for an infraction of the law in a transaction occurring before the existence of law would be an indefeasible outrage.’ Carter suggested that decisions merely declare the existing law.

In Rajeshwar Prasad v. The State of West Bengal,[i]  Justice Hidayatullah stated: “No doubt, the law declared by this court (Supreme Court) binds Courts in India but it should always be remembered that this Court does not enact.”

This theory that judges declare the law and not make it has been highly criticized too. Bentham and Austin both rejected it. Bentham pointed out about this theory, “it is a willful falsehood having for its object the stealing of legislative power by and hands which could not or does not openly claim it.” Austin said that the theory is a childish fiction employed by our judges that Common Law is not made by them; but is a miraculous something made by nobody, existing, I suppose, from eternity and merely declared from time to time by the judges.

Original Law Making Theory, Judges make law:

According to this theory, Judges make law in the same sense in which the legislative body of the State does. This theory owes its existence in English Law where Judges have played a significant role in molding the law as Common Law is also known as the Judge-made law. Prof. Dicey says that a large part and as many would add the best part of the law of England is judge-made law, that is to say, consist of rules to be collected from the judgments of the court. Radcliffe states “There was never a more sterile controversy than that upon the question whether a judge makes law. Of course, he does. How can he help it.― Judicial Law is always a reinterpretation of principles in the light of a new combination of facts. Judges do not reverse principles, one well established, they do modify them, extend them, restrict them and even deny their application to the combination in hand.”[ii]

In Keshwanand Bharti v. State of Kerala[iii], the following observations of Justice Homes were approved: “I recognize without hesitation that judges do, must legislate, but they can do so only interestless; they are confined from molar to molecular motions.”

The application of both the theories depends on the legal system of the State. In common law states, the judges play a vital role in lawmaking while in states where the law is codified, they are less relevant and only interpret laws.

Merits of the Doctrine:

1. Shows respect for the opinion of one’s ancestors.
2. Based on custom and that’s why they get the support of the general public.
3. It brings certainty and solidarity in law.
4. Precedents are based on practicality and it fulfills the needs of the law more suitably.
5. Precedents provide ease to judges, lawyers as well as the general public as it saves expense and avoid delay and inconvenience to them.

Demerits of the Doctrine:

1. The increasing number of cases have brought the possibility of overlooking authorities.
2. The conflicting decisions of superior courts did not help lower court and put them in dilemma.
3. The development of law depends on the litigation i.e. if there is no litigation on an important issue, the law will remain unadjudicated.
4. Due to this doctrine, sometimes, erroneous decisions are settled as law for a long time.

Conclusion:

The courts are performing a valuable role in recent times. They are not only deciding cases but also actively participating in social upliftment. The rule of precedent has established its place in Indian judiciary. It brings integrity and uniformity in law and legal system. The only need of the time is to save energy in finding out the law from the rapidly multiplying volumes of reports and avoid the constant danger of overlooking authorities.

[i] AIR 1965 SC 1887, 1891

[ii] Radcliffe quoted in Robert Stevens, Law & Politics, The House of Lords as a Judicial Body (p. 44).

[iii] AIR 1973 SC 1461

Books referred:

1. Aggarwal, Nomita, Jurisprudence (Legal Theory), Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2012.
2. Tripathi, B.N. Mani, Jurisprudence(Legal Theory), Allahabad Law Agency, Faridabad, 2015.
3. Singh, Dr. Avtar, and Kaur, Dr. Harpreet, Introduction to Jurisprudence, Lexis Nexis, Gurgaon, 2013.

Read more here

1. Sources of Law – I
2. Sources of Law II

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

<<<CLICK HERE TO ASK ANY DOUBTS>>>

The post Sources of Law: Precedent IV appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

Ratio Decidendi:

Generally, a judgment in a case has two distinct aspects, as:

1. A concrete decision binding on the parties to the litigation and therefore, having practical consequences, and
2. A judicial principle which is the basis of the concrete and practical decision.

The general principle applied in a particular decision is known as the ratio decidendi of the case. Such principle is not applicable only to that case, but to other cases also which are similar to the decided case in their essential feature.

The literal meaning of the term ratio decidendi is ‘reason of decision’ i.e. the rule of law which is preferred by the judges as the actual basis of his decision, or the rule of law which permits others to interpret the judgment as being of binding authority. According to Professor Keeton, ratio decidendi of a decision is the principle of law formulated by the judge for the purpose of deciding the problems before him. Rupert Cross says ratio decidendi is a rule of law expressly or impliedly treated by the judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion. According to Goodhart, ratio decidendi is to be found by taking into consideration all the facts treated as by the judge who decided the case. Salmond says that a precedent is a judicial decision which contains in itself a principle. The underlying principle which thus forms its authoritative element is often termed the ratio decidendi. The principle of the case must be rationally laid down, it should not be broader than necessary.

Principles to find Ratio Decidendi:

The whole judgment of a case is not binding only a part of the judgment is binding and that part is the ratio decidendi. To ascertain the ratio of a case, certain methods are as follows:

1. Classical or abstraction method: The higher the abstraction, the wider the ratio decidendi. The ratio depends upon a process of abstraction from the totality of facts that occurred in it.
2. Reversal test: Professor Wambaugh says that we should take the proposition of law put forward by the judge, reverse or negate it and see if its reversal would alter the actual decision also. If yes, the proposition is the ratio part of it, otherwise not. This rule does not help when a court gives several reasons for its decision.
3. Material facts theory: Prof. Goodhart opines that ratio decidendi is nothing more than the decision based on the material facts of the case. If in a subsequent case material facts coincide with or are identical with those of the earlier one, then the earlier case is precedent in point.
4. Simpson says that the ratio or precedent is not set and known just by one decision or case but by a series of them. Thus, for knowing the precedent we cannot rely only on one judgment but will have to go through a series of them to clearly understand the direction of law have to go through a series of them to clearly understand the direction of law towards which it is moving.

Obiter Dicta:

The term obiter dicta mean ‘statement by the way’. According to Keeton, obiter dictum are observations made by the judge but which are essential for the decision reached. In Jaiwant Rao and others v. State of Rajasthan,[i] the Court observed dicta which do not form the integral part of the chain of reasoning to the question decided may be regarded as ‘obiter’.  According to Talbot, J., an obiter dictum is an opinion on some point which is not necessary for the decision of the case. The emphasis is not only on the opinion but also on the point. It is not merely an expression of opinion unconnected with the cases for determination.

Obiter dicta merely possess persuasive efficacy because they are the dicta said just by the way, and they do not have any binding authority.

In Municipal committee, Amritsar v. Hazara Singh[ii] it was observed that ‘Even obiter dictum of the Supreme Court should be accepted as a binding force. But statements on matters other than law have no binding force. Supreme Court’s decisions which are essentially on the question of fact cannot be relied upon as precedents for the decision of other cases.

Distinction between Ratio Decidendi and Obiter Dicta:

Ratio decidendi means reason of the decision while obiter dicta mean something said by the judge, by the way, having no binding authority. The difference between the two can be understood better by the case R v. Franklin[iii]. As In this case, in the month of July the deceased was bathing in the sea at Brighton sea-beach. The accused stole a big box from a hotel at the sea-beach and threw that into the sea which struck him and caused his death. The accused Franklin was produced on the charge of manslaughter before the court of Justice Field. The court gave him a sentence of two months imprisonment. According to Justice Field, the ratio decidendi of this case was-

• That, if a person while committing a wrong or as a consequence of the wrong causes death of a person, he cannot be held guilty for manslaughter because of the reason that a death has been caused due to his act.
• A person who causes the death of another person due to his gross negligence shall be guilty of manslaughter.

In this case, Justice Field expressed a view by way of obiter dicta that even if the prosecution succeeds in proving that the alleged tort was committed by the accused, he shall not be guilty of manslaughter until the jury finds him guilty for this offense.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

[i] AIR 1961 Raj 250

[ii] AIR 1975 SC 1087

[iii] (1883) 15 Cox 163

Books referred:

1. Aggarwal, Nomita, Jurisprudence (Legal Theory), Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2012.
2. Mahajan, V.D., Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 2016.
3. Tripathi, B.N. Mani, Jurisprudence(Legal Theory), Allahabad Law Agency, Faridabad, 2015.
4. Singh, Dr Avtar and Kaur, Dr Harpreet, Introduction to Jurisprudence, Lexis Nexis, Gurgaon, 2013.

The post Ratio Decidendi and Obiter Dicta appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.

The position of Precedent in India:

Before Independence:

India has followed the doctrine of precedent since inception. The earliest of texts suggest that there was a practice of precedents when so required. Manu, the foremost law-giver in India favored the theory of precedent to settle the disputed and doubtful points of law. “If it be asked how it should be with respect to (points of) law the law which has not been (especially) mentioned, (the answer is), that which Brahmans (who are) Sishtas propound shall doubtlessly have legal (force), Manu said.

In Mahabharat, it has also been suggested that “that path is the right one which has been followed by a virtuous man, since the texts might conflict with each other and purport of law is difficult to arrive at.” [i]However, it must be noted here that the modern meaning of the term ‘precedent’ was not accepted in ancient India as a decision originated from a court.

The medieval period brought no improvement to the theory. The Muslim rulers established various courts but there was no organized system for the judiciary. The present Indian system was developed by the British. The development can be traced down by going through the various legislation passed by them for the smooth functioning of the judiciary. There were Presidency Courts for presidency towns and Mofussil Courts in districts subjected to High Court. The Privy Council was the highest appellate tribunal. The decision of the superior court was made binding upon the lower courts. However, the Privy Council was not bound by its own decision. By the Act of 1935, a Federal Court was established in India and the Act provided that the decisions of the superior courts will have the binding effect on the courts below.

After Independence:

The Privy Council ceased to be the appellate court of India and Federal Court was abolished. The Constitution of India established a Supreme Court as the final appellate tribunal. High courts in each state and under them, civil and criminal courts in districts were established. The hierarchy of the courts is as follows:

In Supreme Courts:

Article 141 of the Constitution of India says that ‘the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.’ Here the term ‘all courts’ came into controversy as there was some confusion whether the Supreme Court is bound by its own decision or not. In Dwarkadas v. Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Co.[ii], Chief Justice Das expressed his view, “Accepting that the Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions and may reverse a previous decision especially on constitutional questions the Court will surely be slow to do so unless such previous decision appears to be obviously erroneous.”

In Bengal Immunity Co. v. State of Bihar[iii], the Supreme Court observed, “There is nothing in Indian Constitution which prevents the Supreme Court from departing from its previous decision if it is convinced of its error and its baneful effect on the general interest of the public.”

Thus, the Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions, except to the extent that a smaller Bench is bound by the decision of a larger Bench and that of a co-equal Bench. The Supreme Court is not bound by the decisions of the Privy Council or the Federal Court[iv], they are more of persuasive nature having great value and the Supreme Court may overrule them if necessary. The position of precedent in the Supreme Court may be summed up as follows:

“The law declared by the Supreme Court under Article 141 shall be binding on all courts. The term ‘all courts’ does not include the Supreme Court itself. The trend is that the overrules those cases which cause hardship or have been decided erroneously, the Supreme Court does not listen to the decisions where their effects are baneful.”

In High Courts:

By virtue of Article 141, High Courts in India are bound by the law declared by the Supreme Court.[v] The decision of a High Court is not binding on other High Courts as they are courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction. The decision of a High Court, therefore, holds a persuasive value for other High Courts. All the District Courts, Magistrate Courts and Munsif Courts are bound by the decisions of Supreme Court and High Courts (within its jurisdiction). Likewise, Musnif’s Court and Magistrate’s Court are bound by the decisions of District Court (within its Jurisdiction). The question as to which extent a High Court is bound by its own decision has been controversial. The general rule is that the decisions of a larger Bench are binding on a smaller Bench or co-ordinate Bench.[vi]

 “A single judge constitutes the smallest Bench. A bench of two judges is called a Division Bench. Three or more judges constitute a Full-Bench.

The statement made by Justice Krishna Iyer in K.C. Dora v. G. Annamanaidu, AIR 1974, SC 1069, sums up the practice of the doctrine of precedent in Indian Courts:

“Precedent should not be petrified nor judicial dicta divorced from the socio-economic mores of the age. Judges are not prophets and only interpret laws in the light of the contemporary ethos. To regard them otherwise is unscientific.

My thesis is that while applying the policy of statutory construction we should not forget the conditions and concepts which moved the judge whose rulings are cited, nor be obsessed by respect at the expense of reason.”

To be continued…

[i] The Mahabharat, Vanaparva Ch. 313, Verse 117.

[ii] AIR 1954 SC 119

[iii] AIR 1955 SC 661

[iv] Delhi Judicial Services Association, Tis Hazari Court v. State of Gujrat, AIR 1991 SC 2176

[v] Behram Khurshid Resikak v. State of Bombay, AIR 1955 SC 123

[vi] V.R.G. & G.O.M.C. Co. v. State if A.P., AIR 1972 SC 51

Books referred:

1. Aggarwal, Nomita, Jurisprudence (Legal Theory), Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2012.
2. Mahajan, V.D., Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 2016.
3. Tripathi, B.N. Mani, Jurisprudence(Legal Theory), Allahabad Law Agency, Faridabad, 2015.
4. Singh, Dr Avtar and Kaur, Dr Harpreet, Introduction to Jurisprudence, Lexis Nexis, Gurgaon, 2013.

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

<<<CLICK HERE TO ASK ANY DOUBTS>>>

The post Sources of Law: Precedent III appeared first on Kailasha Foundation.