Finally, it's India versus Pakistan!

The ongoing tirade over CAA-NRC by fringe pseudo-secular elements has ultimately culminated into proxy war by Pakistan against India. And it is no surprise, rather it is on the expected lines.

The all-out war on all fronts, viz. legislature, judiciary and streets by the communal-extremists combine has fiercely erupted in the last ditch battle to disintegrate, divide and push India into the fire of communal frenzy which, if successful, would be nothing but a repeat of 1947 partition scenario.

The rogue State, called Pakistan with its likeminded henchmen in India has now come out in open to support such anti-national elements in all possible ways, including the much-needed finance and breast beating globally.

Despite the conspirators' ganging up against nationalist forces, happily the nation stands united like a rock. The CAA-NRC cries have created more hatred against these gangs than sympathy.

The authorities, both in public administration and judiciary are rightly acting in sync to set right these anti-national, terrorist and communal forces.

Indeed, the present volatile situation in the country is nothing but the rehearsal of the gory days ahead when the imminent war against Pakistan becomes a reality. As Prof Balraj Madhok, the co-founder of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh had predicted, " the country will face war from within the country as well as from Pakistan." Therefore, he had favoured one last decisive war with Pakistan.

Unfortunately, the stage has been set now. The war is certainly not a good word, but like a bitter pill, it has to be accepted to cure the country from the cancer of anti-national elements and the external enemy. And India is capable to teach a fitting lesson to both these enemies. The need of the hour is to expedite this cleansing process.

The Constitution of India, too, clearly mandates that we shall strive to protect sovereignty, integrity and unity of our democratic nation at any cost.

On our part, the nationalist and patriotic forces should be vigilant and spare no efforts to inform and awaken the people in their circles to identify such divisive forces wearing the mask of 'patriotism' and further that they should not be carried away by the sham Tiranga rallies and cunning swearers of Constitution.

Remember, even Ravan had adored the clothes of Sanyasi when he had gone to abduct Sita to her Asram.

SC on time-limit for written statement

The Supreme Court in a recent judgement has held that the time-limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of summons by the defendant for filing the written statement (W/S) fixed under Order VIII, Rule 1 in the Civil Procedure Code is just 'directory' in nature and not 'mandatory' and as such, the courts have discretion to extend the same in appropriate cases.

However, in case of the commercial cases, the time-limit of 120 days for filing the W/S is 'mandatory' and the same cannot be extended by the courts, as has been held in Oku Tech Pvt. Ltd vs Sangeet Agarwal and Others.

A three-Judge bench comprising the Chief Justice of India S A Bobde and Justices Surya Kant and B R Gavai in Desh Raj vs Balkishan (D) through LRs considered a catena of earlier judgements on the subject and concluded as herein above.

Child's welfare paramount: SC

In a path-breaking judgement, the Supreme Court on January 20 has held that whatever be the differences between a wife and husband, the courts should show utmost concern for the welfare of their child.

In Yashita Sahu vs State of Rajasthan, a division bench of Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose also held that the habeas corpus writ petition to secure production of the child in the court was maintainable.

The court also recognised the contact right in addition to the visiting right of a parent, who was denied custody of the child. Elaborating the concept of 'Contact Right,' the court observed that considering the availability of new technology such as internet, WhatsApp etc; the child should be allowed to contact the other parent via these mediums at least for five to ten minutes on daily basis.

Court on loudspeakers once again

There have been loud and clear verdicts by several High Courts and even the apex court that installation of loudspeakers on mosques cannot be allowed and refusing permission to do so does not violate any constitutional right.

Recently, stating that no religion prescribes the use of loudspeakers for worshipping, the Allahabad High Court declined the permission sought by two mosques to install loudspeakers for the purposes of Azaan.

The court in Marsoor Ahmed and Another vs State of U.P and Others observed: "No religion prescribes or preaches that prayers are required to be performed through voice amplifiers or by beating of drums and if there is such practice, it should not adversely affect the rights of the others including that of not being disturbed."

The division bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit placed reliance on Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association & Ors., 2000 (7) SCC 282, whereby the Supreme Court held that the rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution are subject to public order, morality and health.

The petitioners had argued that it is an essential part of their religious practice and it has become necessary with the increasing population to give call to the people on amplifiers and loudspeakers to come and pray.

Rejecting that argument, the court held:

"It is true that one can practice, profess and propagate religion as guaranteed under Article 25 (1) of the Constitution of India but the said right is not an absolute right. The right under Article 25 is a subject to the wider Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution and thus both of them have to be read together and construed harmoniously."

Reliance was also placed on Acharaya Maharajshri Narandraprasadji Anandprasadji Maharaj vs State of Gujarat, 1975 (1) SCC 11. The court went on to address the problem of noise pollution and the unwarranted inconvenience it causes to public health and tranquillity.

The court also cited the ruling in Noise Pollution (V), IN RE, 2005 (8) SCC 796, wherein the Apex Court expressed opinion that the fundamental right of a person under Article 19 (1) of the Constitution of India of freedom of speech and expression are not absolute and no one can claim fundamental right to create noise by amplifying sound of his speech with the help of loudspeakers as every citizen has a fundamental right to live in peace, comfort and quietness of his house.

"It is universally acceptable today that noise adversely affects human health.

It causes hearing loss or deafness, high blood pressure, depression, fatigue and even annoyance. Excessive noise has resulted in cardiac ailments, neurosis and nerves breakdown." Hope, the authorities would wake up at least now and enforce the court orders immediately and effectively.