आप किस न्याय की बात कर रहे हैं? आप मिठाई और DJ के साथ पार्टी कर सकते हैं, यह खुशी की बात है; जब तक यह मेरे घर, आपके घर या हम सबके घरों में नहीं होता, तब तक किसी को कोई फ़र्क नहीं पड़ता, भाड़ में जाए सब। न्याय भाड़ में जाए, मैं भारत के ऐसे संविधान को नहीं मानता। वह बलात्कारी कुछ दिनों या महीनों के लिए जेल जाएगा और फिर ज़मानत पर छूटकर किसी और के साथ बलात्कार करेगा। भले ही उसे उम्रकैद की सज़ा हो जाए, फिर भी वह जेल में अपनी पूरी ज़िंदगी मज़े से बिताएगा। पूरा सिस्टम खोखला और बेकार हो चुका है।

It's frustrating to see the same issues being ignored again and again while people continue supporting leaders and systems that don't deliver real progress. Instead of focusing on development, jobs, education, healthcare, and infrastructure, many seem distracted by politics, promises, and propaganda.

Madhya Pradesh has huge potential, but meaningful change will only happen when people start asking tough questions, demanding accountability, and voting based on performance rather than emotions or loyalty.

It's time to look beyond slogans and think about what is actually improving people's lives the future of the state depends on informed and aware citizens.

Credits : Mrunal Patel

Source: TheWire.in https://share.google/LpplbGkVnGwlu2saM

While hearing a case related to senior advocate designation, the CJI had compared some unemployed youngsters to “cockroaches” and called them “parasites” who turn into social media activists, RTI activists, and critics of institutions.

The comments had received widespread criticism from lawyers, opposition parties, and social media users who termed the language harsh and insensitive amid rising youth unemployment concerns in the country.

Today CJI Surya Kant clarified that his “cockroach” remark was misrepresented by sections of the media.
According to the clarification, the observation was aimed at individuals allegedly misusing legal processes and fake degree holders — not unemployed youth. The CJI also stated that he has full respect for the youth of the country.
The controversy has sparked a nationwide debate on media reporting, courtroom observations, and responsible interpretation of judicial remarks.

The comments have received widespread criticism from lawyers, opposition parties, and social media users who termed the language harsh and insensitive amid rising youth unemployment concerns in the country.

The incident has sparked discussions on judicial language, youth unemployment, and the role of activism in society.

The change follows 14 years of global research and consultation with doctors, researchers and women living with the condition. Experts say the term “PCOS” wrongly focused on ovarian “cysts,” even though the disorder is deeply linked to hormonal, metabolic and reproductive health. The new terminology aims to improve awareness, diagnosis and long-term care for millions of women worldwide.

In a landmark global effort led by Monash University, one of the world’s most common women’s health conditions has been renamed to better reflect its complex, multisystem nature.

The condition, previously known as Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS), will now be called Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome (PMOS), a change experts say corrects decades of misunderstanding that reduced the disorder to just “ovarian cysts.”

The renaming, published in The Lancet, follows 14 years of global collaboration involving clinicians, researchers, patient groups and women living with the condition.

Experts say the new name reflects the condition’s broader impact across the endocrine, metabolic and reproductive systems, and could improve how it is diagnosed, explained and treated.

Source : Indian Express

r/IdiotsNearTrain

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is examining seven important legal questions concerning religious rights and freedoms in India.

The reference is connected to the top court's September 2018 verdict in which a 5-judge Constitution Bench, by a majority of 4:1, allowed women of all ages to enter the hilltop shrine in Kerala. That decision overturned the tradition that restricted the entry of women of menstruating age.

Dozens of review petitions were filed questioning the correctness of this ruling. In November 2019, the Supreme Court pronounced its judgment on the review petitions.

It held that larger issues pertaining to the Essential Religious Practices Test, interplay between Articles 25 and 26 on one hand and Article 14 on the other.

The reference verdict may also have an impact on pending cases regarding the entry of Muslim Women in Dargahs /Mosques, excommunication of Parsi Women married to non-Parsis, the practice of female genital mutilation and excommunication practices in the Dawoodi Bohra community.

Senior Advocate Darius Khambata representing a Parsi Zoroastrian woman who married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, yet fears exclusion from her own faith.

At the heart of her case lies a controversial ruling of the Gujarat High Court, which held that a woman, upon marriage, is deemed to have converted to her husband’s religion, even without any act of conversion, belief or choice.