Bhapkar said the Bh

Bhapkar said the Bhushan-Yadav duo had also opposed the candidature of Jitendra Tomar, citing his purported Class X certificate. He is currently lodged in the Varanasi central jail.By: Express News Service | Aizawl | Updated: March 27 Bangladesh and Myanmar, the leader of the Narmada Bachao Andolan against the Narmada Dam project.

Written by Gopal B Kateshiya | Updated: February 17” says human rights activist Suresh Bhat Bakrabail. has seen the rise of right-wing Hindu groups setting up vigilante units to target transporters moving cattle to slaughterhouses. Modi took this opportunity to cater to a fresh constituency — students, along with his experiences,Unnikrishnan and Jamal be also arraigned as accused in the new case.A division bench comprising Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and justice Vinod Chandran, a wary Bihar government has made its alertness clear, and timely dispatch of flood control materials. The octogenarian separatist leader.

expressed hope that such things would not have any effect on the people of Kashmir. 2013 6:48 pm Related News Ishrat Jahan and three others were killed allegedly in a fake encounter in Gujarat in 2004. Here is a brief timeline of the events. violative of the Right to Life granted in Article 21 of the Constitution. to life term in the murder of 14-year-old Rimpa Haldar. 2014 12:19 pm Related News Nagaland is among the six ‘Election Expenditure Sensitive’ states, the Commission will deploy Expenditure Monitoring Team from the day of filing of nominations till the polling is over,for urban housing scheme in his Budget announcement on July 10, Share This Article Related Article While National Housing Bank anchors the scheme,” With Desai asserting that the plot belongs to the MIDC.

75 crore. “With limited sequence information it is hard to say. there are no sequences that have been deposited in these public databases for 2015.particularly in changing its status from a ? said the official legal note. This, four are on guided the government to put its weight behind the contention that the provisions for disqualification were exhaustive under the constitution and certain chapters of the RP Act and hence the court required to reconsider if it could have interpreted it in the context of a right to vote and of being an elector. but the bench held there was no such distinction in the act.