‘Dignity, respect for all': Who is the dist judge co-leading Pune Pride Parade?
District judge Sonal S Patil, who would be the co-grand marshal of Yutak Charitable Trust's Pune Pride on Sunday, has a long career in the judiciary. As the secretary of the Pune District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Patil said the decision to join the march was to proudly support the LBGTQ+ community's quest for equality and inclusivity.
With a career of over 15 years in the judiciary, Patil has worked across Maharashtra in various judicial capacities. She was promoted as the deputy registrar of the Bombay High Court in 2019 and later as an Officer on Special Duty to the Supreme Court of India. She was appointed as the secretary of DLSA in 2023. At present, Patil is pursuing her PhD in Cyber Law from Bharati Vidyapeeth.
Patil had started the Nyay Sanhita Project, which aims to provide legal aid and welfare scheme information to the marginalised community. Patil had organised National Lok Adalats which have resulted in the successful resolution of over 7,26,00 cases, with settlements amounting to Rs 2,698 crore.
DLSA, Patil said, has a host of services for the community, which includes free legal aid and counselling for individuals, support in filing cases related to discrimination and rights violation, awareness programmes on legal rights and entitlements and collaboration with NGOs and community organisations for holistic support. 'Inclusivity is essential for a free and equitable society,' she said.
Inclusivity, Patil saw, allows for the promotion of diversity as well as foster a sense of belonging. 'When individuals feel included, they are more likely to feel a sense of belonging, which can lead to increased confidence, motivation, and productivity,' she said. Patil emphasised that the LGBTQ+ community has the right to protection from discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity as upheld by the Supreme Court of India in the Navtej Singh Johar case.
Patil said DLSA works to empower the marginalised community to assert their rights and access to justice. 'Our work is to uphold the rule of law and ensure all individuals are treated with diginity and respect,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Amar Veerula Stupa to be tourist destination
Khanapur: The government has sanctioned Rs 1 crore to develop the Amar Veerula Stupa as a tourist destination and the work has almost reached the final stage. 'The memorial garden will be opened soon,' said Khanapur constituency MLA Vedma Bojju Patel. On Saturday, he paid homage to the Amar Veerula Stupa in the Indravelli mandal centre. Later, saplings were planted as part of a programme organised under the auspices of Horticulture. The development work being done at the stupa was inspected. Speaking on the occasion, the MLA said, 'As per the promise made by Chief Minister Revanth Reddy, the government is making special efforts to beautify the Martyrs' Stupa.' He said that the families of the martyrs have been provided with house plot documents. He said that he will talk to the CM to further develop the Stupa.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Rs 115000 crore deal, fighter jet better than Rafale, faster than US F-16, speed is..., name is...
Rs 115000 crore deal, fighter jet better than Rafale, faster than US F-16, speed is...., name is.... With major countries like Russia, Israel, and Iran at war, the situation is very critical. India has also had a military confrontation with Pakistan and is in an ongoing cold war with China. In such a situation, India is facing defence challenges on two fronts. Therefore, New Delhi is strengthening its air defence system while simultaneously upgrading its armed forces with the latest weaponry. Keeping in mind the needs of the Army, Air Force, and Navy, the government is constantly taking crucial decisions. China has given fifth-generation fighter jets to Pakistan, creating tension for India. It has now become necessary for New Delhi to equip Air Force with 5th-generation fighter jets so that future challenges can be tackled. As per several media reports, India can buy the US's F-35 or Russian Su-57E fighter jets in the coming years. Some reports suggest that New Delhi can buy fifth-generation aircraft from Russia as it is better in terms of price and technology transfer conditions. However, India is also developing indigenous fighter jets with indigenous technology. DRDO and Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) are developing fifth and sixth-generation fighter jets under the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project. Another news is that HAL is going to deliver the Tejas MK1A fighter jet soon to the Indian Armed Forces. Tejas MK1A Fighter Jet Tejas MK1A is a 4.5 generation fighter aircraft. The Indian Air Force has signed Rs 67000 deal with HAL under which it will get 97 Tejas MK1A fighter jets. As per reports, the flight testing of Tejas MK1A will be done in July, and after that, the jets will be given to the IAF.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Boundaries between intrusive state, inviolable right to privacy
In the times that we live in, a seminal issue before us is to define the boundaries between an intrusive state and the inviolable rights to privacy of individuals. In many cases the lines between these two polarities are being blurred or even demolished. The state now believes that it has the right to determine individual behaviour in all kinds of personal matters, including what people eat and drink, wear or don't wear, and the kind of relationships they choose to have. The recent Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill, which mandates that live-in couples must register their relationship with the state, is a significant case in point (Pixabay/Representative photo) In some areas, the state does have the powers to play a regulatory role even if it impinges on personal freedom of choice. The minimum age at which people can marry, or the declaration of some days of national importance as dry days, or imposing punitive action under the law on adulterous relationships, are examples where people have largely accepted that their absolute rights to privacy can be curbed. The problem arises when the state believes it has the power to intrude indiscriminately, and believes that it has the prerogative to dictate individual choices in matters where it is clearly and illegally trespassing. The recent Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill, which mandates that live-in couples must register their relationship with the state, is a significant case in point. While ostensibly presented as a move towards legal transparency and social stability, the provision raises fundamental questions about the extent to which the government can —or should—extend its reach into the legitimate privacy of consenting adults. India, for all its ancient civilizational wisdom, often reveals a schizophrenic approach to modernity. On one hand, we celebrate our ascent into the digital age, global commerce, and cosmopolitan values. On the other, we are discomfited by changes in personal norms that challenge inherited notions of morality. The live-in relationship, while still taboo in many quarters, is a legal and voluntary association between adults. The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly affirmed that such relationships fall within the realm of individual liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. Yet, by compelling registration under the UCC bill, the state appears to be imposing a moralistic imprimatur on a private arrangement — an act that is not just paternalistic but also legally suspect. Proponents argue that registration is necessary to prevent exploitation, particularly of women, and to bring such relationships within a legal framework. While the protection of vulnerable partners is indeed a legitimate state concern, the method chosen betrays a deeper impulse — that of surveillance. The requirement to report such a relationship to a district officer, with possible legal consequences for non-compliance, transforms a personal choice into a potentially intimidatory proposition. Is the state to be a protector, or is it to become a social arbiter that polices who lives with whom and under what terms? There is an ominous echo here of an earlier era, one where conformity to socially sanctioned norms was the price of civic respectability. India's founding principles, of liberty, equality, and fraternity, were not just rhetorical flourishes in the Constituent Assembly. They reflected a solemn compact between the citizen and the state: that autonomy over one's body, belief, and personal choices shall be inviolate, except in circumstances of demonstrable harm to others. The registration of live-in relationships does not prevent crime or ensure social justice; rather, it opens the door to harassment, stigma, and selective enforcement. In a society already stratified by caste, religion, and gender, such laws risk becoming tools of moral policing rather than instruments of justice. The legitimacy of the state does not lie in its ability to penetrate the lives of its citizens, but in its wisdom to know where to draw the line. Government interference in personal matters must pass the test of necessity, proportionality, and constitutionality. The Uttarakhand provision, by that standard, sets a dangerous precedent. So does the total Prohibition imposed in Bihar. The state, in the name of 'social reform', to reduce the consumption of alcohol—a laudable goal—has decided that nobody can consume any alcohol at all. The reaction to this unimplementable and impractical diktat on individual choices has been the rise of a vast illegal alcohol mafia. Liquor is available everywhere, lakhs of the poor are languishing in jail with not enough money to even apply for bail, there is rampant corruption in the police and enforcement authorities, and the ominous growth of consumption of drugs. As we navigate the complexities of a rapidly evolving society, we must remember that the true strength of a nation lies not in its ability to control its citizens, but in its willingness to trust them. In matters of love, choice, and companionship, the state must learn the art of restraint, for in that restraint lies the true essence of democracy.
