Sister Abhaya’s murder: Priest, nun sentenced to life imprisonment

A special court of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Wednesday sentenced Father Thomas Kotoor and Sister Sephy to life imprisonment for murdering Sister Abhaya, who was found dead in a well at Pious X Convent of the Knanaya Catholic order in Kottayam in March 1992.Both were sentenced under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code. Main accused Thomas Kotoor will have to undergo double life-term for trespassing into the convent (Section 449) but he can undergo both sentences concurrently, the court said. Besides this, the two convicts will have to undergo seven-year jail for destroying evidence (Section 201) and each will have to pay Rs five lakh fine. They were held guilty by the court on Tuesday. Earlier, main accused Thomas Kotoor informed the court that he was undergoing treatment for cancer and pleaded for lesser punishment. Sister Sephy also sought commutation but the prosecution opposed their contention saying they deserved no sympathy. The murder of 19-year-old Sister Abhaya was initially dismissed as a suicide by the state police and crime branch, but the CBI later concluded that it was murder. In 2009, the CBI charge-sheeted Kottoor and Sefi. But the case witnessed many twists and turns and a flurry of petitions which delayed the trial inordinately.

According to the CBI charge-sheet, on the day of her death, Abhaya got up early to study and went to the kitchen to wash her face. The charge-sheet surmised that she witnessed some sexual activity involving the two priests and nun and was killed because they feared she may disclose what she had witnessed. She was first attacked with an axe and later dumped in the well, the CBI claimed. Although the case created a sensation in Kerala, the church stood by the accused, saying the accused were innocent. “I am the happiest man today. Both got what they deserved. It is time for the church to do an introspection whether they should shield people like them or not,” said activist Jomon Puthanpurackkal, who took up the case and fought a long legal battle. Former CBI deputy superintendent of police Verghese P Thomas, who first investigated the case and later opted for voluntary retirement after he allegedly came under pressure to write off the death as a suicide, expressed his satisfaction at the verdict. Although most witnesses had turned hostile during the trial, the court said a few prosecution witnesses had been convincing.

Interestingly one of the main witnesses in the case was a small-time robber, Raju. He was on the premises of the convent for stealing areca nuts when the incident took place. He reportedly told CBI officers that he saw two priests and a nun at the convent around the time of Abhaya’s death. He later said he was promised many things to own up to the crime and change his statement but he stuck to his testimony. A day after a CBI court in Kerala’s Thiruvananthapuram pronounced a catholic priest and a nun guilty of the murder of Sister Abhaya, first accused Father Thomas Kotoor was sentenced to double life term on Wednesday. Third accused Sister Sephy too has been sentenced to life imprisonment in the case that goes back to 1992. Both accused Thomas Kotoor and Sister Sefi were found guilty of murder (Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code), Section 449 (house trespassing to commit a crime) and Section 201 (destroying evidence) and other sections of the IPC.

In 1992, 19-year-old Sister Abhaya, a plus-two student, was found dead in the well of the Pious X Convent in Kottayam. The case was initially dismissed as a suicide by the state police and crime branch, but the CBI later concluded that it was murder. In 2009, the CBI charge-sheeted Catholic priest Thomas Kottoor and Sister Sephy in the case. In 1993, the case went to the CBI after a human rights activist took the matter to the court. In its first report in 1996, the CBI said it was a suicide case but a year after it said in its second report that it was a homicide. In 2008, the CBI submitted its third report charging two Catholic priests, Father Thomas Kottoor and Father Jose Poothrukayil, and a nun, Sister Sephy with murder, destruction of evidence, criminal conspiracy and other charges. According to the charge sheet, Abhaya was killed because she was witness to some alleged immoral activity involving two priests and a nun. She was attacked with an axe before being dumped in the well, the central agency claimed. In 2009, all three of them were granted bail. The trial of the came began in 2019 after 27 years.

One of the main witnesses in the case was a small-time robber, Raju. He was on the premises of the convent for stealing areca nuts when the incident took place. He reportedly told CBI officers that he saw two priests and a nun at the convent around the time of Abhaya’s death. He later said he was promised many things to own up to the crime and change his statement but he stuck to his testimony.

Kerala local body election results: LDF wins 514 gram panchayats; UDF 375, NDA secures paltry 23

The ruling CPI(M)-led LDF in Kerala emerged victorious in the local body polls, while the Bharatiya Janata Party made some satisfactory gains in Kerala. The Left Democratic Front won more than 500 of the 941 grama panchayats, five of the six city corporations and 11 of the 14 district panchayats. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said that the primary opposition of the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) has become insignificant in the state, while the BJP has suffered a humiliating defeat as the people of Kerala has “rejected communal forces” ahead of the assembly elections in April-May 2021. The UDF trailed behind LSF, winning in more than 400 local bodies. The Kerala local body polls were held in three phases. The first phase saw a turnout of 73.12 per cent, while the second phase saw 76.78 and the third and final phase 78.64 per cent. A total of 21,893 wards in 1,200 local self-governing bodies, including six corporations, 941 village panchayats, 14 district panchayats and 87 municipalities went to the polls in on December 8, 10 and 14.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has been the face of the party and government — this is his personal triumph; especially after the LDF won only one seat in the Lok Sabha elections. These are not the same as Assembly elections, but the victory will be read as a referendum on his government. Scandal vs achievement: Vijayan’s office has been caught in the gold smuggling scandal; CPM state secretary Kodiyeri Balakrishnan was forced to go on leave after his son was jailed in a drug case. While the opposition went after him, the CM kept the focus on the achievements of his government, especially welfare schemes and grassroots interventions, including housing for the poor. Mani in central Kerala: Vijayan masterminded the move of the Kerala Congress (M), the Christian party led by Jose K Mani, from the UDF to the LDF, ignoring protests from the CPI. Thanks to the KC(M), the LDF has gained in traditional UDF strongholds in Kottayam, Idukki and Pathanamthitta.

Secular politics focus: The Congress’s deal with the Jamaat-e-Islami’s Welfare Party of India allowed the CPM to claim that the UDF was aligning with communal forces. It brought back some Hindu voters who had turned away from the LDF over the entry of women into Sabarimala. The LDF also signalled to Christians who have been upset over Muslim organisations gaining an upper hand in the UDF. Record of work: During the catastrophic flood of 2018, and in the initial days of the Covid-19 lockdown, LDF-ruled local bodies did a stellar job of crisis management. The government gave local bodies bigger roles in health and education, allowing them to touch people closely A worrying trend: Congress-led UDF, which won 19 seats out of 20 in the Lok Sabha elections, has done well only in municipalities, winning 45 bodies out of 86. In the last civic body elections of 2010 and 2015, the verdict was against the incumbent ruling front; subsequently, in the Assembly elections of 2011 and 2016, the opposition won. With Assembly polls looming, these trends will worry the Congress. KC(M) exit blow: The UDF failed to anticipate the damage Jose K Mani, son of the late K M Mani, would do. Jose’s rival in Kerala Cong (M), P J Joseph, failed to stem the Jose tide in central Kerala.

Wrong company: The UDF’s understanding with Jamaat-e-Islami’s Welfare Party of India — which had won several seats with LDF in 2015 — has been counterproductive.Within the UDF too, some Muslim voters were opposed to the Jamaat-e-Islami — and several Muslim religious heads close to the Indian Union Muslim League warned against the alliance. The Jamaat-e-Islami presence on the UDF platform also triggered unrest among pro-Congress Christians — the Kerala Catholic Bishops Council criticised the Congress’s decision. Gold that didn’t shine: While local issues play a key role in civic body elections, the UDF chose to seek a “vote against corruption”, mainly based on allegations related to the gold smuggling scandal. It did not work, especially in rural areas, and against the LDF’s campaign focus on development and welfare. A divided house: In several seats, the Congress faced rebels. Disputes over seat-sharing led to UDF allies fielding candidates against each other. In the time of Covid-19, the Congress could not match the LDF’s ground-level electoral machinery and social media campaign. Increasing numbers: Till late evening, the BJP was leading in 24 village panchayats — better that the 14 it won in 2015. It was not leading in any block or district panchayat, which are bigger, and where political votes matter more. It had won 10 block panchayat divisions, and was leading in several others; in 2015, it had won 21 block panchayat divisions. In municipalities, BJP has improved its presence from 236 divisions to 320 divisions. In corporations, it has gone from 51 members in 2015 to 55 divisions this time.

Sabarimala boost: The BJP had only Palakkad municipality; this time, it has retained Palakkad and wrested Pandalam municipality from the LDF. Pandalam in Pathanamthitta district was the ground zero of protests against the entry of women into Sabarimala in 2018. The BJP has also won several seats in village panchayats in Pathanamthitta. The BJP has got a majority in only two municipalities, but has made inroads in several others — at Mavelikkara municipality, it is neck and neck with the LDF and UDF; in Varkkala, it is giving the CPM a run for its money. At the LDF citadels of Ottappalam and Shornur municipalities, BJP has made considerable gains. In the Kannur Municipal Corporation, it has defeated the Congress, and in Nilambur municipality in Malappuram and in Ankamali municipality in Ernakulam, the BJP has won a seat each. Capital hope dashed: Winning the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation has been top of the party’s agenda. It has a strong voter base in this urban area. But it could not reach its earlier tally of 34 in the 100-member body. After K Surendran took over as state president, cracks have widened in the party.

FORMER PWD MINISTER IBRAHIM KUNJU ARRESTED

The Kerala vigilance and anti-corruption bureau on Wednesday recorded the arrest of former PWD Minister and Muslim League MLA VK Ibrahim Kunju, who is currently admitted to a hospital, in the Palarivattom flyover graft case. The MLA has been receiving treatment for a health condition for the past one year, and was admitted to a private hospital in Ernakulam on Tuesday night. He is currently continuing his treatment here. Officials reached the hospital and recorded his arrest. The opposition has claimed the move is politically motivated; an attempt by the state government to avert focus from the gold scam case and various corruption allegations against it.

Construction of the Palarivattom flyover bridge commenced during the tenure of previous UDF government in 2014. The project was completed and opened for commuters shortly after the left government took charge in June 2016. The bridge developed problems in its expansion joints a few months after the inauguration. In 2019, the bridge was closed for traffic.

The state government then launched a vigilance probe into the construction of the bridge. The anti-corruption bureau had earlier arrested four people in the case, including former PwD Secretary T O Sooraj and Managing Director of RDS project Ltd - the company which executed the project - on charges of corruption.

"This arrest is politically motivated. We have information that for the past two to three days, meetings were held in Trivandrum on how he could be arrested. The Kerala government has been criticising the Centre for using central agencies against political opponents, but now they are doing the same," said Muslim league MP P K Kunjalikutty. Palarivattom is one of the important and busiest junctions in Kochi, central Kerala. For decades, crossing the junction through the national highway bypass had caused trouble to commuters. The long pending proposal to build a flyover at the junction was approved by the UDF government in June 2014. The project is estimated to have cost Rs 75 crore.

Investigation in Uthra murder case reveals victim was given sedative-laced juice by Sooraj

The prime accused in the case of Uthra's death following a snakebite at her Anchal house made another confession on Thursday. In his statement to the Kerala police, Sooraj said that he had given Uthra juice laced with a sedatice before she went to sleep on the night of May 6.This is why Uthra hadn't reacted to the snakebite - a mystery that had been bugging the police for long. When he was asked earlier about Uthra's reaction to the bite, Sooraj told cops that he was in deep sleep and didn't hear her screams.

As the investigation gained momentum, the police assumed that she could have been sedated. Although, his statement can be confirmed only after receiving the report of the chemical analysis of Uthra's internal organs, said investigation officer and Kollam Crime Branch DySP A Ashokan. Sooraj added that his wife was administered a similar drug even during the first incident of snake bite at his house at Parakode near Adoor on March 2. 'Sooraj following lawyer's script' After Sooraj raised allegations before media persons that the police had fabricated evidence against him and tortured him to trap him in a false case, the investigation team came to the conclusion that he was acting as per a pre-planned script. The team obtained information that he had received legal advice prior to his arrest and was putting on a show in front of the media.

The police arrested him on May 24. Hours before the arrest, he had met an advocate near his house in Adoor. "It is learnt that all allegations made by the accused on Wednesday after the evidence collection at his house were as advised by his lawyer," said Ashokan. The investigation team discovered that he had retrieved Uthra's gold ornaments from the bank locker on March 2, therefore, the officials visited the bank with the accused but they weren't permitted to open the locker for not following procedure. Meanwhile, Sooraj's family is trying to get him released on bail. As the bail plea filed in the magistrate court is likely to be rejected, they are planning to move the High Court. He is currently in police custody after the court remanded him in connection with the Uthra murder case.

The accused in the snakebite death of a Keralite woman began to plot his wife’s murder after she sought a divorce from him.The fear of having to return the dowry money had reportedly prompted Sooraj to kill his wife 25-year old Uthra at her home at Anchal in Kollam district on May 7. During questioning, 27-year-old Sooraj reportedly conceded that he was trying to avoid getting a divorce from his wife .They got married on March 26, 2018. Sooraj began to physically and mentally harass his wife about 3.5 months after their wedding. Sooraj and Uthra got into a domestic feud at their house at Adoor last January. Uthra's father Vijaysenan and her cousin Shyam had then gone to their house. They said they were taking Uthra back to her home and sought a divorce. However, Sooraj was not ready to grant her a divorce as he feared he would have to return the 96 sovereigns of gold, Rs 5 lakh, and a car gifted to him during the wedding. Uthra's family had also given a Rs 3.25-lakh pick-up van to his father. He then started plotting for Uthra's murder.

Sooraj had bought the snake from an acquaintance and plotted to kill Uthra in her sleep on May 2. However, the first attempt failed. He planted another snake at Uthra’s room while she was recuperating at her house on May 7 after the first attack. She did not survive the second attack. Meanwhile, the police said that Uthra's family had given Sooraj money to settle a financial fraud at his former workplace. Sooraj had reportedly committed fraud at the financial firm and the management threatened to approach the police. Then Uthra's father gave Rs 50,000 to settle the issue. Sooraj currently worked at a firm that gave home appliances on instalments. As he constantly complained that the salary was not enough for his family, Uthra's father deposited Rs 8,000 in her account every month.

The police have found more evidence in the case. The cops had dug out the remains of a snake from Uthra's house premises. A post-mortem confirmed that it was a cobra. The fangs and the venomous snake’s remains were collected for more tests. The 1.5-metre-long snake was in a decayed state. The wound on Uthra's left hand and the size of the fangs would be compared . The bottle used to store the snake was found earlier. This bottle would also be examined to find any secretions of the snake. Assistant veterinary surgeon Dr K J Kishore conducted the post-mortem at a temporary arrangement set up near Uthra's house. As there are no eyewitnesses in the case, the probe team is trying to collect maximum scientific evidence. The remains of the snake were buried near the spot where Uthra's body was cremated.

The Crime Branch will question Sooraj from Wednesday. Due to the post-mortem of the snake on Tuesday Sooraj's statements could not be taken. Suresh Kumar, who had given snakes to Sooraj, will also be questioned. The court had sent the duo to police custody for five days. The cops have also seized the bike in which Sooraj had taken the snake to Uthra's house. Sooraj confessed that he had twice tried to kill Uthra through snakebite. However, he said that he had no role in the instance in which a viper was found on top of the staircase. But questions remain on how the snake managed to slither across the smooth tiled floor.

Coronavirus outbreak live updates: 6 new confirmed cases in Kerala, 3 in Karnataka; global virus toll crosses 4,000

The global death toll from the coronavirus spread breached the 4,000-mark on Tuesday and the outbreak has spread to over 100 countries with more than 110,000 cases of infection. In India, the number of confirmed virus cases rose to more than 50. However, there has been no case of death reported so far. Israel's confirmed Covid-19 toll reaches 50 Eleven new cases of the novel coronavirus have been reported in Israel which raised the total number of confirmed cases in the country to 50, according to the Israeli Ministry of Health.

Due to coronavirus, cinema theatres will remain closed from tomorrow till March 31 in the state. The decision was taken at a meeting of various Malayalam cinema organizations in Kochi.Chicken sales decline by 35% as govt battles speculation on coronavirus Poultry industry experts say chicken sales have declined by nearly 35 per cent in recent weeks even as the government mounts efforts to counter rumours that deadly coronavirus can be transmitted by consuming it.Kerala government has come out with massive restrictions and regulations to check the spread of Covid-19 in the state. In all 15 cases have been reported from the state and the affected persons have been put under isolation wards of different hospitals. Three Wuhan returned students, who were tested positive for the virus were discharged earlier.

3 new cases in Karnataka; 6 in Kerala In Kerala, four positive cases have been reported in Kottayam and two in Pathanmathiita. In total, 12 cases have been reported in the state so far. Parents of the Italy returned person who a re-admitted at Kottayam medical college who are 90 and 85 years old have been tested positive. The two people who had gone to pick the people from airport who had come from Italy have also been tested positive. In Karnataka, three new cases have been reported. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus a virus closely related to the SARS virus.[10][11][12] The disease was discovered and named during the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak.[13][14] Those affected may develop a fever, dry cough, fatigue, and shortness of breath.[7][15][16] A sore throat, runny nose or sneezing is less common.[17] While the majority of cases result in mild symptoms,[18] some can progress to pneumonia and multi-organ failure. The infection is spread from one person to others via respiratory droplets produced from the airways, often during coughing or sneezing.[19][20] Time from exposure to onset of symptoms is generally between 2 and 14 days, with an average of 5 days.[21][22][23] The standard method of diagnosis is by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) from a nasopharyngeal swab or sputum sample, with results within a few hours to 2 days. Antibody assays can also be used, using a blood serum sample, with results within a few days. The infection can also be diagnosed from a combination of symptoms, risk factors and a chest CT scan showing features of pneumonia. Correct handwashing technique, maintaining distance from people who are coughing and not touching one's face with unwashed hands are measures recommended to prevent the disease. It is also recommended to cover one's nose and mouth with a tissue or a bent elbow when coughing.[27] Masks are recommended in those who suspect they have the virus and for those who are taking care of someone with a suspected infection but not for the general public. There is no vaccine or specific antiviral treatment, with management involving treatment of symptoms, supportive care and experimental measures.[30] The case fatality rate is estimated at between 1% and 3%. The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). As of 7 March 2020, evidence of local transmission of the disease has been found in multiple countries across all six WHO regions. Signs and symptoms Those infected may either be asymptomatic or develop symptoms including fever, cough, and shortness of breath. Diarrhea or upper respiratory symptoms (e.g. sneezing, runny nose, sore throat) are less frequent. Cases can progress to pneumonia, multi-organ failure, and death in the most vulnerable. The incubation period ranges from 1 to 14 days with an estimated median incubation period of 5 to 6 days according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Another study of 1,099 Chinese patients found that CT scans showed ground-glass opacities in 56% of patients, but 18% had no radiological findings. 5% of patients were admitted to intensive care units, 2.3% needed mechanical support of ventilation, and 1.4% died.[39] Bilateral and peripheral ground glass opacities are the most typical CT findings, according to researcher Bernheim et al. Consolidation, linear opacities, reverse halo sign are other radiological findings. Initially the lesions are located to one lung, but as the disease progress, indications manifest to both lungs in 88% of patients.[40] Children seem to handle the disease better than adults as the symptoms are usually milder, but sufficient evidence is still lacking. Cause The disease is caused by the virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), previously referred to as the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).[11] It is primarily spread between people via respiratory droplets from coughs and sneezes. The virus accesses host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). ACE2 is found in various organs of the body, but it is most abundant in the type II alveolar cells of the lungs. This explains why lungs are the most affected organs. The density of ACE2 in each patient is a determent of the severity of the disease.[43][44] As the disease at the alveolare progresses, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) develops, which might lead to respiratory failure and death might ensue.[44] ACE2 might also be the path for the virus to assault he heart causing acute cardiac injury. Patients with existing cardiovascular conditions have worst prognosis. The virus is thought to have an animal origin.[46] Τhere has been a "continuous common source" of the outbreak in December 2019, which would imply that several animal-to-human zoonotic events occurred at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The primary source of infection became human-to-human transmission in early January 2020. Diagnosis The WHO has published several testing protocols for the disease.[51][52] The standard method of testing is real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR).[53] The test can be done on respiratory samples obtained by various methods, including nasopharyngeal swab or sputum sample.[54] Results are generally available within a few hours to 2 days. Blood tests can be used, but these require two blood samples taken two weeks apart and the results have little immediate value.[57] Chinese scientists were able to isolate a strain of the coronavirus and publish the genetic sequence so that laboratories across the world could independently develop polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests to detect infection by the virus. COVID-19 testing can also be done with antibody test kits.[64] Antibody assays use a blood serum sample and can provide a positive result even if the person has recovered and the virus is no longer present.[24] The first antibody test was demonstrated by a team at the Wuhan Institute of Virology on 17 February 2020.[65][24] On 25 February, a team from Duke–NUS Medical School in Singapore announced another antibody test for COVID-19 that can provide a result within a few days. Diagnostic guidelines released by Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University suggested methods for detecting infections based upon clinical features and epidemiological risk. These involved identifying patients who had at least two of the following symptoms in addition to a history of travel to Wuhan or contact with other infected patients: fever, imaging features of pneumonia, normal or reduced white blood cell count, or reduced lymphocyte count.[25] A study published by a team at the Tongji Hospital in Wuhan on 26 February 2020 showed that a chest CT scan for COVID-19 has more sensitivity (98%) than the polymerase chain reaction (71%).[26] False negative results maybe the outcome of PRC-Kit failure or because of problems of the tissue sample. False positive results have also been reported. Prevention Global health organisations have published preventive measures to reduce the chances of infection in locations with an outbreak of the disease. Recommendations are similar to those published for other coronaviruses: stay home, avoid travel and public activities, wash hands with soap and hot water often, practice good respiratory hygiene, and avoid touching the eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.[69][70] According to the WHO, the use of masks is recommended if a person is coughing or sneezing or when one is taking care of someone with a suspected infection.[71] To prevent transmission of the virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that infected individuals stay at home except to get medical care, call ahead before visiting a healthcare provider, wear a face mask (especially in public), cover coughs and sneezes with a tissue, regularly wash hands with soap and water, and avoid sharing personal household items.[72] The CDC recommended that individuals wash hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, especially after going to the toilet or when hands are visibly dirty, before eating, and after blowing one's nose, coughing, or sneezing. It further recommended using an alcohol-based hand sanitiser with at least 60% alcohol, but only when soap and water are not readily available.[69] The WHO advises individuals to avoid touching the eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.[70] In early 2020, the WHO said it did not expect a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 to become available in less than 18 months. Several are under development using a variety of approaches, with at least one expected to begin Phase I safety trials in March, 2020. Management There are no specific antiviral medications. Symptoms are managed with supportive care.[75] The WHO and Chinese National Health Commission have published treatment recommendations for taking care of people who are hospitalized with COVID19.[76][77] Steroids such as methylprednisolone are not recommended unless the disease is complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome.[78][79] The CDC recommends that those who suspect they carry the virus should wear a facemask.[28] Management of patients infected by the virus includes taking precautions while applying therapeutic maneuvers, especially those who entail generating aerosols like intubation or hand ventilation.

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019.What does it do and why is it seen as a problem and the constitutional question

The Minister of Home Affairs introduced the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 December in Lok Sabha. It is scheduled to be taken up for discussion and passing by the House The Bill amends the Citizenship Act, 1955, and seeks to make foreign illegal migrants of certain religious communities coming from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan eligible for Indian citizenship. In this blog, we look at the criteria for determining citizenship in India, discuss how the Bill proposes to change the criteria, and highlight other key changes proposed by the Bill. How is citizenship acquired in India?

In India, citizenship is regulated by the Citizenship Act, 1955. The Act specifies that citizenship may be acquired in India through five methods – by birth in India, by descent, through registration, by naturalisation (extended residence in India), and by incorporation of territory into India. Can illegal migrants acquire citizenship?

An illegal migrant is prohibited from acquiring Indian citizenship. An illegal immigrant is a foreigner who either enters India illegally, i.e., without valid travel documents, like a visa and passport, or enters India legally, but stays beyond the time period permitted in their travel documents. An illegal migrant can be prosecuted in India, and deported or imprisoned. In September 2015 and July 2016, the central government exempted certain groups of illegal migrants from being imprisoned or deported. [2] These are illegal migrants who came into India from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, or Pakistan on or before December 31, 2014, and belong to the Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, or Christian religious communities. How does the Bill seek to change the criteria for determining citizenship?

The Bill proposes that the specified class of illegal migrants from the three countries will not be treated as illegal migrants, making them eligible for citizenship. On acquiring citizenship, such migrants shall be deemed to be Indian citizens from the date of their entry into India and all legal proceedings regarding their status as illegal migrants or their citizenship will be closed. The Act allows a person to apply for citizenship by naturalisation, if the person meets certain qualifications. One of the qualifications is that the person must have resided in India or been in central government service for the last 12 months and at least 11 years of the preceding 14 years. For the specified class of illegal migrants, the number of years of residency has been relaxed from 11 years to five years. Are the provisions of the Bill applicable across the country?

The Bill clarifies that the proposed amendments on citizenship to the specified class of illegal migrants will not apply to certain areas. These are: (i) the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura, as included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, and (ii) the states regulated by the “Inner Line” permit under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulations 1873. These Sixth Schedule tribal areas include Karbi Anglong (in Assam), Garo Hills (in Meghalaya), Chakma District (in Mizoram), and Tripura Tribal Areas District. Further, the Inner Line Permit regulates visit of all persons, including Indian citizens, to Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland. Is the differentiation among the specified class of illegal migrants and all other illegal migrants reasonable?

The Bill makes only certain illegal migrants eligible for citizenship. These are persons belonging to the six specified religious communities, from the three specified countries, who entered India on or before December 31, 2014, and do not reside in the Sixth Schedule areas or in the states regulated by the Inner Line Permit states. This implies that all other illegal migrants will not be able to claim the benefit of citizenship conferred by the Bill, and may continue to be prosecuted as illegal migrants. Any provision which distinguishes between two groups may violate the standard of equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution, unless one can show a reasonable rationale for doing so. [3] The Bill provides differential treatment to illegal migrants on the basis of (a) their country of origin, (b) religion, (c) date of entry into India, and (d) place of residence in India. The question is whether these factors serve a reasonable purpose to justify the differential treatment. We examine this below.

The Bill classifies migrants based on their country of origin to include only Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. While the Statement of Objects and Reasons (SoR) in the Bill reasons that millions of citizens of undivided India were living in Pakistan and Bangladesh, no reason has been provided to explain the inclusion of Afghanistan. The SoR also states that these countries have a state religion, which has resulted in religious persecution of minority groups. However, there are other countries which may fit this qualification. For instance, two of India’s neighboring countries, Sri Lanka (Buddhist state religion) [4] and Myanmar (primacy to Buddhism) [5], have had a history of persecution of Tamil Eelams (a linguistic minority in Sri Lanka), and the Rohingya Muslims, respectively. [6], [7], [8] Further, there are other religious minorities from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh, such as the Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan (considered non-Muslims in that country) [9], and atheists in Bangladesh [10] who have faced religious persecution and may have illegally migrated to India. Given that the objective of the Bill is to provide citizenship to migrants escaping from religious persecution, it is not clear why illegal migrants belonging to other neighbouring countries, or belonging to religious minorities from these three specified countries, have been excluded from the Bill.

The Bill also creates further differentiation between the specified class of illegal migrants based on when they entered India (before or after December 31, 2014), and where they live in India (provisions not applicable to Sixth Schedule and Inner Line Permit areas). However, the reasons provided to explain the distinction is unclear. Note that certain restrictions apply to persons (both citizens and foreigners) in the Sixth Schedule areas and in the states regulated by the Inner Line Permit. Once an illegal migrant residing in these areas acquires citizenship, he would be subject to the same restrictions in these areas, as are applicable to other Indian citizens. Therefore, it is unclear why the Bill excludes illegal migrants residing in these areas. How does the Bill change the regulations for Overseas Citizens of India?

The Bill also amends the provisions on registration of Overseas Citizens of India (OCI). OCI cardholders are foreigners who are persons of Indian origin. For example, they may have been former Indian citizens, or children of current Indian citizens. An OCI enjoys benefits such as the right to travel to India without a visa, or to work and study here. At present, the government may cancel a person’s OCI registration on various grounds specified in the Act. In case of a cancellation, an OCI residing in India may be required to leave the country. The Bill adds another ground for cancelling OCI registration — violation of any law notified by the central government. However, the Bill does not provide any guidance on the nature of laws which the central government may notify. The Supreme Court has noted that this guidance is necessary to set limits on the authority’s powers and to avoid any arbitrariness in exercise of powers. [11] Therefore, the powers given to the government under the Bill may go beyond the permissible limits of valid delegation.

The Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 has triggered widespread protests across India. The Act seeks to amend the definition of illegal immigrant for Hindu, Sikh, Parsi, Buddhist and Christian immigrants from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh, who have lived in India without documentation. They will be granted fast track Indian citizenship in six years. So far 12 years of residence has been the standard eligibility requirement for naturalisation. The anger over the CAA led to street protests, first in Assam that later spread to Delhi and other parts of the country. At the first hearing on petitions challenging the CAA, the Supreme Court declined to stay the contentious law but asked the Centre to file its reply against the petitions that say it violates the Constitution. The petitioners say the Bill discriminates against Muslims and violates the right to equality enshrined in the Constitution. Here's a primer on why some believe it questions the idea of India Who makes the cut?

The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship is December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under present law, is given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years. The Bill also proposes to incorporate a sub-section (d) to Section 7, providing for cancellation of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) registration where the OCI card-holder has violated any provision of the Citizenship Act or any other law in force. What is Centre's logic behind the bill? Centre says these minority groups have come escaping persecution in Muslim-majority nations. However, the logic is not consistent – the bill does not protect all religious minorities, nor does it apply to all neighbours. The Ahmedia Muslim sect and even Shias face discrimination in Pakistan. Rohingya Muslims and Hindus face persecution in neighbouring Burma, and Hindu and Christian Tamils in neighbouring Sri Lanka. The government responds that Muslims can seek refuge in Islamic nations, but has not answered the other questions.

Some say it is like Partition, is that true? Amit Shah says that the Bill would not have been necessary if the Congress did not agree to Partition on the basis of religion. However, India was not created on the basis of religion, Pakistan was. Only the Muslim League and the Hindu Right advocated the two nation theory of Hindu and Muslim nations, which led to Partition. All the founders of India were committed to a secular state, where all citizens irrespective of religion enjoyed full membership. Either way, this logic for the CAB also collapses because Afghanistan was not part of pre-Partition India. ntention to discriminate against Muslims and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution are the two major criticisms that the Narendra Modi government faces over the Citizenship Amendment Bill that aims to recognise non-Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan who are treated as illegal immigrants under the existing laws.

Intention of discrimination is a subjective perception. The BJP has always faced the charge that it discriminates against Muslims. The party has thrived with this perception but has always insisted, at least officially, that it follows Hindutva with non-appeasement and without discrimination against Muslims or other minorities. The major challenge to the Citizenship Amendment Bill is passing the Article 14 test. Article 14 of the Constitution is one touchstone that does not allow discrimination within one class of persons. That is, though a convict cannot claim the same rights as an innocent civilian but a particular class of people such as those belonging to Scheduled Caste can be given certain privileges over other castes on account of having faced historical social backwardness but there can be no discrimination within the caste-group. WHAT CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT BILL SAYS The Citizenship Amendment Bill lists six religious minority groups Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis and Christians of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan for granting them eligibility to apply for Indian citizenship if they have lived in the country for six years. The Citizenship Amendment Bill leaves out Muslim immigrants who entered India the same way as non-Muslims. Both are illegal immigrants and hence qualify for equality before law and equal protection of law under Article 14 of the Constitution.

However, presenting the Citizenship Amendment Bill, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said the legislation satisfies all conditions mentioned in Article 14 and does not violate any provision of the Constitution. The bedrock of this argument, and hence confidence of Amit Shah, lies in the statement of objects and r.easons of the Citizenship Amendment Bill. The statement of objects and reasons offer the boundaries for legal explanations and interpretations of a law if and when it faces judicial scrutiny. Given the vociferous opposition by the Opposition parties and activists, the Citizenship Amendment Bill is likely to be challenged in courts. TOUCHSTONE TEST FOR CAB The defence of the Citizenship Amendment Bill rests on three main arguments: The parent countries of the illegal immigrants have a state religion The illegal immigrants to be benefited were persecuted for their religious belief Article 14 allows a classification that is founded on an intelligible differentia provided differentia has a direct nexus to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question. This simply means a separate class of people can be created (non-Muslim immigrants in this case) by an enabling law. The statement of objects and reasons of the Citizenship Amendment Bill mentions: A historical fact that trans-border migration of population has been happening continuously between the territories of India and the areas presently comprised in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Millions of citizens of undivided India belonging to various faiths were staying in the said areas of Pakistan and Bangladesh when India was partitioned in 1947.

This means the law recognises the presence of illegal immigrants from the three countries Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan in India. Now the question arises how to deal with them. The existing laws provide for identifying and deporting all illegal immigrants. There is no law in India that identifies illegal immigrants as refugees. Identification of refugee, granting refugee status to immigrants and offering them asylum are done on case-by-case basis in India by the government of the day. The Tibetans and the Sri Lankan Tamils were recognised as refugees in the same manner. The identification and deportation of illegal immigrants presents a humanitarian problem before the government. One of the problems is the possibility of religious prosecution of a group of illegal immigrants. The Citizenship Amendment Bill addresses that limited concern of the illegal immigrants. IN DEFENCE OF CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT BILL In the statement of objects and reasons, the Bill says, The constitutions of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh provide for a specific state religion. As a result, many persons belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian communities have faced persecution on grounds of religion in those countries. This means the Citizenship Amendment Bill prepares the ground that the fear of religious persecution exists only for those who do not profess a religion as adopted by the countries as their state religion. In this case, all three countries declare Islam as their state religion. This statement forms the basis of intelligible differentia for non-Muslim immigrants and creates the legal and constitutional basis for leaving out Muslim immigrants who entered India or stayed in India without valid documents. However, it would be difficult to prove who among the illegal immigrants entered India out of religious persecution or for the lure of better economy. The government cannot conduct investigation into a few million cases in some other country to verify the claim of religious persecution. The government may easily deny the claim of religious persecution of a Muslim immigrant but how will it differentiate between those coming for the lure of economy and those forced to flee for professing belief other than that of the State? These questions will require answer if and when the Citizenship Amendment Bill comes up for constitutionality test in the courts. The amendment has been widely criticised as discriminating on the basis of religion. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights called it "fundamentally discriminatory", adding that while India's "goal of protecting persecuted groups is welcome", this should be done through a non-discriminatory "robust national asylum system".[10][11][12] Critics express concerns that the bill would be used, along with the National Register of Citizens, to render 1.9 million Muslim immigrants stateless.[13] Commentators also question the exclusion of persecuted religious minorities from other regions such as Tibet, Sri Lanka and Myanmar.[13][14] The Indian government says that Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh are "Muslim-majority countries" where Islam has been declared as the official state religion through constitutional amendments in recent decades, and therefore Muslims in these Islamic countries are "unlikely to face religious persecution" and cannot be "treated as persecuted minorities".[15][16][17] Other scholars state that widespread religious persecution of minorities such as Hindus, Sikhs and Christians has been a serious problem in Pakistan.[18][19][20] The passage of the legislation caused large scale protests in India.[21] Assam and other northeastern states have seen violent demonstrations against the bill over fears of non-Muslim illegal immigrants being naturalized under these provisions, thus impacting the local culture and society.[22][23][24][25] Universities across the country saw huge protests by students and the police were subsequently accused of resorting to brutal suppression.[26] As of 12 December, the protests had resulted in more than a thousand arrests and six deaths; civil liberties and communication facilities were frequently suspended by the police in response

RECENT POLITICAL ISSUES IN KERALA: Telangana police shoot dead four men suspected of ...

RECENT POLITICAL ISSUES IN KERALA: Telangana police shoot dead four men suspected of ...: Telangana police have shot dead the four men accused of the brutal gang rape of a young vet in Hyderabad in circumstances that have been ...

Telangana police shoot dead four men suspected of Hyderabad rape

Telangana police have shot dead the four men accused of the brutal gang rape of a young vet in Hyderabad in circumstances that have been described as “suspicious”. The four had become high-profile objects of hatred within the country, following their alleged premeditated attack on a 27-year-old veterinary doctor last Wednesday. According to the police, the accused – Mohammad Areef, Jollu Shiva, Jollu Naveen, and Chintakunta Chennakeshavulu – were taking part in a reconstruction of the crime in the early hours of Friday morning when they tried to escape and were shot by officers.

However, the lack of clarity around the incident is indicative of an extrajudicial police killing – something not uncommon in India. The rape and murder case prompted a wave of public vitriol across the country, with thousands taking to the streets in protest and calls from politicians and the public for the men to be lynched. They were accused of deflating the victim’s scooter tyres and lying in wait for her at an isolated spot by a motorway toll road. Her attackers approached her offering help, then dragged her to some bushes where they gang-raped her, asphyxiated her until she died and then drove her body to an underpass where they set it alight. N Prakash Reddy, a deputy commissioner of police in Shamshabad, said: “In the morning, at around 6-6.30, our persons have come to reconstruct the scene of crime and the accused have tried to snatch their weapons, and there was a cross-fire. In this, all the four accused have died. Two policemen have been injured.”

Reddy’s account contradicted an earlier police version of events stating the attempted escape and shootings happened at 3.30am. The rape victim’s family welcomed the news. “It has been 10 days to the day my daughter died. I express my gratitude towards the police and government for this. My daughter’s soul must be at peace now,” the woman’s father told the Indian news agency ANI. The victim’s name cannot be reported under Indian law. The killing of the suspects drew widespread support in India, where faith in the criminal justice system is low.

Crimes against women have continued unabated despite tough laws enacted after the 2012 gang-rape and murder of a woman in a bus in Delhi. Fast-track courts have been set up but cases have moved slowly, for lack of witnesses and the inability of many families to go through the long legal process. Some victims and their families have ended up being attacked for pursuing cases against powerful men, often local politicians. Get Society Weekly: our newsletter for public service professionals Read more However, there was also strong criticism of the police for appearing to take the law into their own hands. Indian police have frequently been accused of extra-judicial killings, called “encounters”, especially in gangland wars in Mumbai and insurrections in the state of Punjab and in disputed Kashmir. Police officers involved in such killings were called “encounter specialists” and were the subject of several movies.

The All India Progressive Women’s Association condemned the manner in which the accused men died. “We, as a country, will now be told that ‘justice’ has been done, the victim avenged … But this justice is counterfeit,” the association said in a statement. The group said deaths of the four men at the hands of the police was telling women “we can’t ensure the streets are safe, can’t investigate crimes against women to ensure there’s enough evidence to prove guilt, can’t protect rape survivors , can’t ensure that survivors get dignity in court.” Amnesty International India agreed, saying extrajudicial killings “are not a solution to preventing rape”. The Delhi chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, said the killings set a worrying precedent. “Together all the governments will have to take action on how to strengthen the criminal justice system,” he said.

On social media, many Indians expressed satisfaction with the actions of the police and in Hyderabad locals showered rose petals on the officers who shot the suspects. Asha Devi, the mother of the woman known as Nirbhaya who died in the notorious 2012 gang-rape on a bus in Delhi told Indian media she was “extremely happy with this punishment. The police have done a great job and I demand that no action should be taken against the police personnel.” “The brutes deserved it for the inhuman horrific crime they committed,” wrote the actor Nikhil Sihhhartha. The police claim the accused started attacking them with sticks, stones and sharp objects and snatched their weapons, which were already unlocked. "All four accused got together and started attacking the police party. Officers maintained restraint and asked them to surrender but without listening to us they kept firing. Our officers retaliated," VC Sajjanar, Cyberabad police chief, told reporters.

Moments later, four bodies lay scattered on the ground. Two of them held guns - Mohammed Arif and Chennakeshavulu. Two policemen in the 10-member team suffered head injuries (not bullet wounds), said Mr Sajjanar. "The law has done its duty. That's all I can say," the officer said, responding to skepticism. The four, he said, had confessed and were hardcore criminals. Also, "scientific evidence" proved their role, said the police chief. The bodies were moved after six hours. A huge crowd gathered on a bridge overlooking the spot and cheered the police. Many showered rose petals. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) will send a team to investigate the shooting. The four, arrested a day after the crime, had been in custody of the police since Wednesday.

On November 27, the men, all truck-drivers and cleaners, saw the 27-year-old woman park her scooter near a toll-booth on a busy highway. They allegedly deflated her scooter tyre and took her to a truck yard with the promise of fixing her scooter, gang-raped her, strangled her and burnt her body to destroy evidence. The woman's father told news agency ANI: "It has been 10 days to the day my daughter died. I express my gratitude towards the police and the government for this. My daughter's soul must be at peace now." The controversial shooting has divided opinion on an incident has been passionately debated for days and drew people out to the streets in anger. Several celebrities and even politicians praised the police though there were many voices of caution.

"All women in this country will have a sense of relief after this encounter. They did the crime and later tried to flee from police custody. The police had no option. My question to people who are questioning the encounter is what would be their reaction if the accused had fled," said BJP MP Meenakshi Lekhi in parliament. Social media was flooded with vastly contrasting reactions. "The most important thing is the justice should be done through judicial process. In this particular incident we don't know the full details. If the cops were harmed or they were trying to take a gun from the police then police may have been justified," said Congress MP Shashi Tharoor. In parliament, several MPs had called for quick trial and hanging of the accused. In some emotional statements, MPs even backed lynching of the men for the crime.

KERALA GOVT LDF 1000 DAY's ACHIEVEMENTS

The Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has completed its 1000 days in power, marking significant advancements in the social and economic spectrum of the state. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan inaugurated the celebrations marking the 1,000th day of the LDF government on the Kozhikode beach on February 20 at 5 pm. SC, ST Welfare and Culture Minister A K Balan said the government has taken the state forward despite several challenges. The celebrations will be on till February 27.Several development projects could be completed during the period. Kerala topped in the Niti Aayog index. The government now focuses on the New Kerala building. Chief Minister will also launch the Safe Kerala project at the inaugural function. Revenue Minister E Chandrasekharan will preside over. Labour Minister TP Ramakrishnan will welcome the gathering. The CM will inaugurate valedictory of the celebrations at the Central Stadium on February 27.

The Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has completed its 1000 days in power, marking significant advancements in the social and economic spectrum of the state. Though this time span has witnessed a series of natural disasters including Ockhi, Nipah and Floods 2018, the government had succeeded in building a collective conscience among the masses to overcome the tough times in the history of state. Timely disbursal of the social security pensions, revival of the public sector undertakings (PSUs), elevation in the quality of services in health sector and in the education sector, infrastructure development, steps to improve the life of the working class, special focus on marginalised classes and castes etc have been highlights of the LDF rule.

While inaugurating the celebrations, on February 20, CM Pinarayi Vijayan said that the mood of the state had changed from negative to positive during the LDF rule. He also added that the corruption has come down, development works have been completed on time, the state has become more investor-friendly, and the agricultural sector has been witnessing a boom. The inclusive policy of the government has brought all the sections together, and has ensured social security for the marginalised. More than 51 lakh people in the state receive social security pensions, at present. When the government had taken over the power from the United Democratic Front government, the pension amount was Rs 600 per month. It has now been increased to Rs 1,200 a month. Also, 11 lakh new beneficiaries have been added during this time.

Minimum wages have been made applicable in 26 various sectors including one of the most exploitative sectors – the nursing sector. Apart from this, a number of special schemes have been implemented for the migrated labourers who have come to the state in search of work. The government has successfully ensured minimum wages and social security measures for the migrant workers. Apna Ghar housing project for migrant workers, education schemes for the children of the migrant workers, Awaz health insurance for the workers etc have also become milestones of the LDF rule.

Unlike the previous government, the LDF government focuses on strengthening of the public educational institutions in the state. The fresh enrolment of 3.42 lakh students in the state schools in the last two years shows how effective the efforts have been. The Education Department has also ensured free textbooks and uniforms for all the students. About 45,000 classrooms across the state have been upgraded to ‘high-tech’. The government had also taken over four schools which were scheduled to close down. The state has been witnessing the excellence and effectiveness of the health sector, especially seen at the time of Nipah. During the Nipah outbreak, the Health Department, under the leadership of Health Minister KK Shailaja, had safeguarded the state which could have witnessed much worse damage. As was decided during the post-Nipah outbreak, an Institute of Advanced Virology (IAV) has been established in the state, eight months after Nipah. IAV would be the first institute in the country that is to be linked with the Global Virus Network. So far, 170 primary health centres have been upgraded to family health centres. Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act has also been passed. Arogya Jagratha project to prevent epidemic, Amrutham Arogyam project to control lifestyle diseases etc have also been implemented in the health sector. The vigilance of the Health Department in the post-flood phase in the state has helped to prevent the fatal diseases like leptospirosis and cholera etc. Though the floods 2018 had rattled the economy of the state, the immediate action of the state government in form of the rescue operations gave a boost to the rebuilding phase. Even the Kerala Budget 2019 proposed 25 new projects to build a post-flood, new Kerala. The floods 2018 had affected 1,269 villages of the total 1,664, and had claimed the lives of 433. A total of more than 14.5 lakh people had been rehabilitated at the time. Though the BJP-led Centre had delayed help to the state, the state government had led the rescue, rehabilitation and rebuild operations with the help of various mass organisations. So far, Rs 5,000 crore have been spent for the rebuilding process. As per the updated data, the floods had completely damaged 13,362 houses. Out of these, 9,431 families have received the first part of the financial assistance from the government, and the construction work has also started. Rs 101 crore have been disbursed to reconstruct these houses. Houses that were partially damaged have been allotted Rs 770 crore, so far. Rs 195 crore have been distributed in the form of agricultural insurances. To revive the agricultural sector, Rs 198 crore have been spent. During the inauguration, the chief mister narrated the achievements of his government, pointing out various projects including GAIL pipeline, widening of the national highway, national waterway, the proposed coastal highway and the hill highway, growth in the number of start-ups and investment of the multinational companies like Nissan in the state. Along with the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) in the state, traditional industries like coir, cashew etc are being revived with the active support of the government. It is important to note that the state government is taking efforts to revive the PSUs when the BJP-led Centre is dismantling them. Though the government invited criticism over certain attacks against the transgender community in the state, the government framed and implemented policies to improve the social and financial status of the community. The state that has always spearheaded social reforms; it has launched a co-operative society exclusively for the transgender community, along with special health schemes and educational schemes etc for the transgender community in the state. As Finance Minister Thomas Isaac observed during the budget speech, “[W]e are far behind like any other states in the case of gender status, though we have attained certain progress.” Another flagship programme, Life Mission, which is trying to transform Kerala into a state with housing for all, has achieved about 93 per cent of its initial target. A total of 1,84,255 beneficiaries, who own land, but are homeless, are enlisted for housing assistance in the second phase of the Life Mission. With inclusive policies, the government’s 1000 days in power clearly show a way to “a new Kerala, Secular, Corruption-Free and Developed”, as promised in LDF’s 2016 election manifesto.