{"id":3879,"date":"2025-05-09T11:36:18","date_gmt":"2025-05-09T11:36:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lawentranceindia.com\/blogs\/?p=3879"},"modified":"2025-05-09T11:48:59","modified_gmt":"2025-05-09T11:48:59","slug":"mlc-daily-current-affairs-09-may-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawentranceindia.com\/blogs\/mlc-daily-current-affairs-09-may-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"MLC Daily Current Affairs – 09 May 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today in History (May 9th<\/sup>,1540)<\/h1>\n

Maharana Pratap Jayanti<\/strong>\u00a0(\u092e\u0939\u093e\u0930\u093e\u0923\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u093e\u092a \u091c\u092f\u0902\u0924\u0940), also known as\u00a0Maharana Pratap Jayanti,<\/strong>\u00a0is a festival and a public holiday in\u00a0Rajasthan, marking the birth anniversary of the Indian ruler\u00a0Maharana Pratap. It is usually celebrated on 9 May, Maharana Pratap was born on 9 May in 1540.<\/p>\n

Summary of Today’s News<\/strong><\/h2>\n

India hits back after intercepting Pak. Strikes<\/span><\/h3>\n

\"India-hits-back-after-intercepting-Pakistan-Strikes\"<\/p>\n

Pakistan launched drone and missile strikes on Thursday targeting civilian and military areas in northern and western India.<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Targeted Indian locations included Jammu, Pathankot, Udhampur, Awantipura, Srinagar, Amritsar, and others.<\/li>\n
  • Indian air defence systems intercepted a substantial number of incoming threats, preventing losses.<\/li>\n
  • Attacks were part of escalating tensions following Indian strikes on terror facilities under Operation Sindoor<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Indian Response<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
      \n
    • India retaliated with targeted strikes using loitering munitions on Pakistani air defence systems.<\/li>\n
    • An air defence system in Lahore was reportedly neutralized.<\/li>\n
    • Indian military targets included air defence sites in Karachi, Lahore, and Rawalpindi.<\/li>\n
    • Indian actions were described by the Defence Ministry as \u201cfocused, measured and non-escalatory.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Statements and Warnings<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
        \n
      • Defence Minister Rajnath Singh emphasized India\u2019s restraint but warned of \u201cquality action\u201d if provoked.<\/li>\n
      • The Indian government reiterated its commitment to non-escalation unless further provoked.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Air Defence Activation<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
          \n
        • Indian systems like the S-400 Triumf<\/strong> and Akash SAM<\/strong> were used to counter threats.<\/li>\n
        • The Integrated Counter-UAS Grid played a role in intercepting drones and missiles.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          Casualties and Damages<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
            \n
          • No Indian military losses reported from the attacks.<\/li>\n
          • Sixteen civilians, including women and children, were killed due to Pakistani firing across the Line of Control (LoC).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            LoC Situation<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
              \n
            • Pakistan intensified firing across the LoC using mortars and heavy artillery in several Jammu & Kashmir sectors.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              Security Measures<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                \n
              • Blackouts were enforced in parts of Punjab, Gujarat, and Rajasthan.<\/li>\n
              • Over 100 companies (10,000+ personnel) of the CRPF<\/strong> were deployed to the Jammu region for reinforcement.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                OTTs asked to remove content from Pakistan<\/span><\/h3>\n

                \"OTTs-asked-to-remove-content-from-Pakistan\"<\/p>\n

                  \n
                • The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued an advisory to OTT and media streaming platforms<\/strong> in India to remove all content of Pakistani origin<\/strong> with immediate effect.<\/li>\n
                • The advisory cites national security concerns<\/strong> as the reason for the directive.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                  Scope of Ban<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                    \n
                  • Affects web series, films, songs, podcasts<\/strong>, and any other streaming content from Pakistan.<\/li>\n
                  • Applies to both subscription-based and free content<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
                  • Platforms covered include OTT services and intermediaries<\/strong> operating in India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                    Legal Basis<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                      \n
                    • Advisory refers to Part III of the IT Rules, 2021<\/strong>, which outlines a Code of Ethics<\/strong> for online curated content.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      Platform Responses<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                        \n
                      • Spotify<\/strong> acknowledged the advisory and stated it is working to comply.<\/li>\n
                      • Google and Netflix<\/strong> did not comment immediately.<\/li>\n
                      • ZEE5<\/strong> appears to have already removed Pakistani content from its catalog.<\/li>\n
                      • Many Pakistani YouTube channels<\/strong> have previously been blocked by government orders.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        If Rohingya are foreign, Central govt. can deport them, says SC<\/span><\/h3>\n
                          \n
                        • The Supreme Court<\/strong> stated that if Rohingya<\/strong> are classified as “foreigners” under the Foreigners Act<\/strong>, the Central Government can deport them<\/strong> in accordance with the law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          Hearing Details<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                            \n
                          • A three-judge Bench<\/strong> led by Justice Surya Kant<\/strong> was hearing petitions challenging the Centre\u2019s authority to deport Rohingya refugees.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                            Petitioners’ Arguments<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                              \n
                            • Lawyers argued that as UNHCR-recognized refugees<\/strong>, Rohingya should be protected from deportation under the principle of non-refoulement<\/strong>, citing risk of torture or death in Myanmar.<\/li>\n
                            • They claimed some refugees<\/strong>, including women and children<\/strong>, were deported on Wednesday night<\/strong> despite holding UNHCR cards.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                              Centre’s Stand<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                                \n
                              • Solicitor General Tushar Mehta<\/strong> argued that India is not a signatory<\/strong> to the UN Refugee Convention.<\/li>\n
                              • He cited an earlier interim order<\/strong> granting the Centre absolute power under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act<\/strong>, especially in matters of national security<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                Judicial Remarks<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n
                                  \n
                                • Justice Dipankar Datta<\/strong> clarified that Article 19(1)(e)<\/strong> (right to reside and settle) applies only to Indian citizens<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
                                • Justice Kant<\/strong> stated that if the refugees have no legal right to remain, they will be deported according to law<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                  Result of the hearing: <\/strong><\/h4>\n
                                    \n
                                  • The Supreme Court will hear the case in detail in July<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                    CJI Forwards Inquiry Report on Justice Yashwant Varma to President and PM, Paving Way for Possible Removal<\/span><\/h3>\n

                                    \"Removal-of-Justice-Yashwant-Varma\"<\/p>\n

                                    On March 14<\/strong>, partially burnt sacks of currency notes<\/strong> were found in the gutted storeroom<\/strong> of High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma\u2019s<\/strong> former official residence in Delhi.<\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    • \n
                                        \n
                                      • This prompted a preliminary inquiry by Delhi High Court Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya<\/strong>, who recommended a deeper investigation<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                      • Constitution of Inquiry Panel<\/strong>:\n
                                          \n
                                        • On March 22<\/strong>, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna<\/strong> constituted a three-judge in-house inquiry committee<\/strong> comprising Justices Sheel Nagu, G.S. Sandhawalia, and Anu Sivaraman<\/strong> to investigate the incident thoroughly.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                        • Panel Findings and Judge\u2019s Response<\/strong>:\n
                                            \n
                                          • The inquiry committee reportedly found sufficient material<\/strong> to justify the initiation of removal proceedings<\/strong> against Justice Varma.<\/li>\n
                                          • Justice Varma, who was transferred to the Allahabad High Court<\/strong>, submitted his response to the panel\u2019s report on May 6<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                          • CJI\u2019s Action<\/strong>:\n
                                              \n
                                            • CJI Khanna forwarded the panel report<\/strong>, along with the judge\u2019s response, to the President and the Prime Minister<\/strong>, a step required when a judge refuses to resign or take voluntary retirement<\/strong> after serious findings.<\/li>\n
                                            • This move signals the initiation of removal proceedings<\/strong> under the constitutional framework.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                            • Legal and Constitutional Context<\/strong>:\n
                                                \n
                                              • The process follows the 2014 Supreme Court judgment<\/strong> in Additional District and Sessions Judge vs. Registrar General<\/em>, which guides in-house procedures for judicial misconduct.<\/li>\n
                                              • According to the Constitution (Articles 217 and 124)<\/strong>, a judge can only be removed for proved misbehaviour or incapacity<\/strong>, and the motion must pass both Houses of Parliament by a special majority<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                              • Next Steps<\/strong>:\n
                                                  \n
                                                • The matter now lies with the President and Parliament<\/strong>, where a formal removal motion<\/strong> can be initiated if deemed necessary.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                  India Slams Pakistan for State Honours to Terrorists, Exposes Deep Ties with LeT, JeM, TRF<\/span><\/h3>\n

                                                  In the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack<\/strong> and Operation Sindoor<\/strong>, India has highlighted Pakistan\u2019s deep-rooted ties to UN-designated terror groups<\/strong> such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)<\/strong>, Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM)<\/strong>, and The Resistance Front (TRF)<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

                                                    \n
                                                  • Photographic Evidence of Terror Support<\/strong>:\n
                                                      \n
                                                    • Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri<\/strong> presented images of Abdur Rauf<\/strong>, a U.S.-designated terrorist<\/strong>, leading funeral prayers<\/strong> in Muridke<\/strong>, Pakistan, for those killed in Indian strikes on LeT\u2019s headquarters.<\/li>\n
                                                    • The deceased were buried with state honours<\/strong>, wrapped in Pakistan\u2019s national flag, suggesting official support and glorification<\/strong> of terrorists.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                                    • Key Terror Leaders Affected<\/strong>:\n
                                                        \n
                                                      • Masood Azhar\u2019s family<\/strong>, including his brother Abdul Rauf Azhar<\/strong> (JeM commander and 1999 IC-814 hijacking mastermind), were reportedly killed in the strikes.<\/li>\n
                                                      • Rauf Azhar played a central role in securing the release of top terrorists during the Kandahar hijacking, including Masood Azhar and Omar Sheikh Saeed.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                                      • U.S. and UN Designations<\/strong>:\n
                                                          \n
                                                        • Abdur Rauf and the Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF)<\/strong>, an LeT-linked front, were designated as global terrorists<\/strong> by the U.S. in 2010<\/strong>, following Indian lobbying post the Mumbai attacks<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                                        • India Targets TRF in Global Forums<\/strong>:\n
                                                            \n
                                                          • TRF, which initially claimed responsibility for the Pahalgam attack<\/strong> that killed 26, then backtracked.<\/li>\n
                                                          • India has reported TRF to the UN 1267 Monitoring Team<\/strong> and criticized Pakistan for pushing to exclude TRF\u2019s name<\/strong> from a recent UNSC resolution<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
                                                          • India plans to pursue UNSC terrorist designation<\/strong> and U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO)<\/strong> status for TRF.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                                                          • Domestic Political Consensus<\/strong>:\n
                                                              \n
                                                            • At an all-party meeting<\/strong>, Opposition leaders urged the government to lobby for U.S. sanctions on TRF<\/strong> and push for Pakistan\u2019s re-listing on the FATF grey list<\/strong> due to its overt support for terror groups.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n