Crowd management bill could impact political rallies, religious gatherings
1
2
Bengaluru: The draft of Karnataka Crowd Control (Managing Crowd at Events and Venues of Mass Gatherings) Bill, 2025, is likely to impact political gatherings and religious events in the state.
Apart from the fact that the definition of a crowd includes political rallies and jatras, the state govt has a separate chapter under the bill dedicated to prevention of acts leading to crowd gatherings.
Under these provisions, the proposed law gives sweeping powers to the district magistrate (or deputy commissioner) to decide what constitutes "an act of crowd gathering" and take measures to avoid untoward incidents.
The proposed bill states that "if the district magistrate has reason to believe that a situation has arisen — at any event in a venue within his/her jurisdiction — where there is an apprehension of breach of peace or creation of discord between members of different groups, castes, or communities" the district magistrate can, by order in writing, "prohibit any act" that could "cause apprehension in the minds of another community or caste or group or result in death or injury to persons who are participating" in the event.
The bill goes on to add that a competent authority, as appointed by the govt by notification, may, in writing, order cancellation of any assembly or people or procession within his or her jurisdiction or allow them to pass or not pass through any street or public place.
The bill, if passed, can even regulate or prohibit use of loudspeakers, music or amplifiers, or any other instrument inducing noise in streets or public places or in private places.
The bill suggests spreading awareness, education, and training for ordinary people "by way of education and information campaigns", besides training public officials on prohibition and prevention of stampedes.
The bill states that the prosecution must conduct a victim impact assessment, which includes a sworn statement or affirmation by a victim, or any person authorised by the victim. The victim includes any person who has suffered physical, psychological, social, economic, or any other consequences of an offence under the Act.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
38 minutes ago
- Hans India
Intimidating laws will be used against political rivals despite SC ruling
Slamming the authorities of gross misuse of state laws like the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, a Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, has made it clear that the Act was not an instrument to target individuals, who are guilty of involvement in a single incident of anti-social activity. While warning governments against invoking such stringent laws as a tool of harassment or intimidation, the bench asserted that it was tantamount to extreme abuse of the governing laws when such an Act is used as a means of oppression, especially when political motivations are suspected. In a veiled attack, the apex court has sent across a message loud and clear that they cannot be used to settle political scores. By definition, the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, is designed to prevent and combat gangsters and related anti-social activities. It defines 'gangster' and provides for the punishment of individuals involved in organized crime, including imprisonment and fines, especially if the offence is committed against a public servant but not for staging demonstrations, when used as an expression of right to expression that had no other ulterior motives. Mere involvement in a demonstration or protest after a communal clash cannot be reason enough to invoke the provisions of the Gangster Act, was made clear by the Supreme Court. Putting to rest many self-satisfactory interpretations about the provisions of the Act, most of which were invoked for serving political interests in violation of the law, the apex court drove home the point that the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty acquires greater emphasis when extraordinary legislation with stringent provisions, such as the UP Gangsters Act, is invoked. In unequivocal terms, it stated, 'When a statute creates serious fetters on personal liberty, the evidentiary foundation for its invocation must be commensurately strong, supported by concrete, verifiable facts rather than vague assertions.' This, in essence, implies that the Act cannot be invoked to stifle voices and silence dissent. Quashing an FIR lodged on April 30, 2023 against an 'organised gang', based on a social media post that cried foul of a particular religion, which led to violent protests 'involving' the appellants Lal Mohd and others, the court maintained that the complaint provided no evidence to substantiate systematic planning or coordinated criminal activities against the group. It discarded the FIR on the grounds that it was a conjectural statement by the complainant and one that was not corroborated with facts to establish 'provocative' motivations of those named in the FIR or to establish that it was a premeditated gang activity meant to create serious law and order disturbances. On their part, the appellants held that the allegations do not meet the threshold to justify invoking the UP Gangsters Act. The Supreme Court said that the accused were arrested and booked under provisions of IPC for vandalising a shop and wondered the need for lodging a second FIR by invoking Gangsters Act six months after the incident. However, the ground reality is that for decades together, many state governments have taken undue advantage of the loopholes that exist in certain laws as a means to harass political antagonists and their supporters. It is even more tragic that they get away even without coming up with any concrete proof to justify such acts of victimisation. Police and law and order are, after all, state subjects and hence none dares to beard the lion.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Daily subject-wise quiz : Environment and Geography MCQs on human-wildlife conflict, International Big Cat Alliance and more (Week 115)
UPSC Essentials brings to you its initiative of subject-wise quizzes. These quizzes are designed to help you revise some of the most important topics from the static part of the syllabus. Attempt today's subject quiz on Environment and Geography to check your progress. 🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for June 2025. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at With reference to the International Big Cat Alliance, consider the following statements: 1. There are 95 range countries which fall within the natural distribution of the big cats. 2. All UN member countries can become members after the framework agreement is signed. 3. The first Assembly of the International Big Cat Alliance (IBCA) was held in Moscow. How many of the statements given above are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Explanation — The first Assembly of the International Big Cat Alliance (IBCA) was held in New Delhi, presided over by the Union Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Bhupender Yadav. Hence, statement 3 is not correct. — In March 2024, the Indian government established the IBCA through the National Tiger Conservation Authority, which reports to the Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change. Its mandate is to protect seven big cats: the tiger, lion, leopard, snow leopard, cheetah, jaguar, and puma. — It was created 'to facilitate collaboration and synergy among stakeholders, consolidating successful conservation practices and expertise and replicating them in range countries.' The Union government has set aside Rs 150 crore for the purpose from 2023-24 to 2027-28. — The big cats have 95 range countries (those within a species' natural distribution), which include Canada, China, Congo, Ghana, Brazil, Iran, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, and the United States. Hence, statement 1 is correct. — All UN member countries can become members after the framework agreement is signed and conveyed through a Note Verbale, a method of formal diplomatic communication. Hence, statement 2 is correct. Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer. Which of the following is/are the reason which led to the increase in human-wildlife conflict? 1. Fluctuations in wildlife population 2. Animals forced to move out of their habitats 3. Grazing of domestic cattle in forest areas 4. Changes in cropping pattern Select the correct answer using the codes given below: (a) 1, 2 and 3 (b) 2, 3 and 4 (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4 Explanation — Kerala has sought the Union government's nod to kill wild animals that pose a threat to human life and properties. The state wants the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 amended so it can be allowed to kill wild animals that foray into human habitats. — The primary problem animals include tigers, leopards, elephants, bison, wild boar, bonnet macaques, and peafowl. Although bonnet macaques (a monkey species) and peafowl pose little threat to humans, their regular raids have driven farmers to abandon enormous swaths of agricultural land. — Major reasons include regional fluctuations in wildlife populations, animals forced to relocate when the quality of their habitats deteriorates, domestic cattle grazing in forest regions, changes in cropping patterns, and so on. But, more crucially, the population growth of wild pigs and various monkey species is causing havoc on human habitats. Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer. With reference to the National Mission for a Green India, consider the following statements: 1. It was launched in 2014. 2. Its main objective is to protect, restore, and enhance India's forest and tree cover, using a blend of climate adaptation and mitigation strategies. 3. The Western Ghats mountain ranges are not included in the Green India Mission. How many of the statements given above are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Explanation — According to the new Green India Mission (GIM) whitepaper, the Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change would prioritise the restoration of sensitive landscapes such as the Aravallis and Western Ghats mountain ranges, mangroves, and the Indian Himalayan area. — The amended document claimed that a'micro-ecosystem' approach will be used to make interventions in sensitive landscapes such as the Aravallis, Western Ghats, arid parts of North West India, mangroves, and the Indian Himalayan region. Hence, statement 3 is not correct. — The National Mission for a Green India was established in February 2014 as one of the eight main missions of India's National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). Hence, statement 1 is correct. — GIM's primary goal is to maintain, restore, and improve India's forest and tree cover using a combination of climate adaptation and mitigation techniques. Hence, statement 2 is correct. — One of the mission's primary goals was to expand forest and tree cover on 5 million hectares of forest and non-forest land, as well as improve the quality of forest cover on an additional 5 million hectares. Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer. With reference to the Indian Flapshell Turtle, consider the following statements: 1. It is a small softshell turtle with a carapace length of up to 350 mm. 2. These species live only in the oceans. 3. They are found only in the Indian Subcontinent. How many of the statements given above are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Explanation — The Indian Flapshell Turtle is a small softshell turtle with a carapace length of up to 350 mm. Nesting often begins in late summer and continues through the monsoon season, which lasts from July to November. Hence, statement 1 is correct. — These species live in a wide range of aquatic habitats, including rivers and streams, reservoirs, marshes, ponds, lakes, and even salt marshes, rice fields, gutters, and canals in urban areas. Hence, statement 2 is not correct. — It is ubiquitous in brackish water lagoons on India's east coast and is frequently seen in irrigation canals and tanks, as well as stagnant paddy fields. — Distribution: India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan. The Indian Flapshell Turtle is native to the Indian Subcontinent, and it's also found in some parts of Myanmar (not considered part of the Indian subcontinent). Hence, statement 3 is not correct. Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer. Which of the following species exhibit bioluminescence? 1. Jellyfish 2. Worms 3. Sea stars 4. Sharks Select the correct answer using the codes given below: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2, 3 and 4 (c) 1, 2, 3 and 4 (d) 3 and 4 only Explanation — Bioluminescence is the ability of a living creature to generate and radiate light. This phenomenon is unusual in terrestrial ecosystems but prevalent in marine environments. — Many marine animals, including bacteria, algae, jellyfish, worms, crabs, sea stars, fish, and sharks, can create their own light. Deep-living and planktonic creatures exhibit higher luminescence than shallow species. Furthermore, the appearance of bioluminescent light varies depending on the environment and the creature in which it is present. — According to NOAA, bioluminescence is the product of an enzyme reaction. An enzyme accelerates a chemical reaction by assisting a substrate in reacting. The enzyme is reused in the process rather than being converted into another molecule Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer. Daily Subject-wise quiz — History, Culture, and Social Issues (Week 114) Daily subject-wise quiz — Polity and Governance (Week 115) Daily subject-wise quiz — Science and Technology (Week 115) Daily subject-wise quiz — Economy (Week 115) Daily subject-wise quiz — Environment and Geography (Week 114) Daily subject-wise quiz – International Relations (Week 114) Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
'Historic step': UK MPs back assisted dying; bill heads to House of Lords
AP photo Britain took a historic step toward legalising euthanasia on Friday as Members of Parliament (MPs) backed a controversial bill that would introduce assisted dying for terminally ill people. In the House of Commons, lawmakers voted 314 to 291 in favour of sending the proposal to the House of Lords for further consideration, following four hours of emotional debate. The outcome sparked celebrations among supporters gathered outside Parliament, who argued that legalising euthanasia would offer dignity and choice to people facing incurable illnesses at the end of their lives. At the same time, opponents at a nearby counter-protest voiced concerns that vulnerable individuals could be pressured into choosing death and called on lawmakers to instead prioritise improvements in palliative care. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults diagnosed with less than six months to live. Under the proposed law, individuals would need to self-administer the life-ending medication, and their decision would require approval from two doctors and a panel of experts. If passed, the bill would bring Britain in line with several countries in Europe and elsewhere — such as Belgium and the Netherlands — that have already legalised some form of assisted dying. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Costco Shoppers Say This Wrinkle Cream Is "Actually Worth It" The Skincare Magazine Undo 'Heartbreaking stories' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who introduced the bill, told Friday's third reading debate that changing the law would 'offer a compassionate and safe choice' to terminally ill people. She argued that keeping the current ban in place would result in more 'heartbreaking stories' of 'pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, (and) police investigations.' However, Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft raised concerns that the bill did not include strong enough safeguards to protect disabled individuals. 'We have to protect those people who are susceptible to coercion, who already feel like society doesn't value them, who often feel like a burden to the state, society and their family,' she said. Outside Parliament, demonstrators held placards with messages such as 'Let us choose' and 'Don't make doctors killers.' David Walker, 82, shared his personal story of supporting the bill after witnessing his wife suffer for three years toward the end of her life. 'That's why I'm here, because I can't help her anymore, but I can help other people who are going through the same thing, because if you have no quality of life, you have nothing,' he told AFP. But Elizabeth Burden, a 52-year-old doctor, warned that the legislation could lead to a 'slippery slope' where eligibility for assisted dying might expand. 'Once we allow this. Everything will slip down because dementia patients, all patients... are vulnerable,' she told AFP. Public support MPs had initially backed an earlier version of the bill in November by 330 to 275 votes. Since then, several changes have been made, including a ban on advertising assisted dying and provisions allowing all healthcare workers to opt out of participating in the process. Lawmakers also added a safeguard to prevent eligibility 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking,' effectively ruling out cases such as people with anorexia. Britain's medical community remains divided, and Prime Minister Keir Starmer's cabinet is also split. His health and justice secretaries have publicly opposed the proposed law. However, public support appears strong. A YouGov poll of 2,003 adults, conducted last month and published on Thursday, found that 73 per cent of respondents supported the introduction of an assisted dying law. The bill now moves to the House of Lords, which must approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely in the autumn, or it will lapse. If passed and granted royal assent, the law would take approximately four years to implement before assisted dying services become available. A government impact assessment published this month estimated that between 160 and 640 assisted deaths could take place in the first year, potentially rising to 4,500 annually within a decade. Assisted suicide is currently illegal in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, carrying a maximum prison sentence of 14 years. Meanwhile, a separate assisted dying bill is progressing through the devolved Scottish Parliament. In March, the Isle of Man became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying bill.
