Section 319 CrPC SC

Section 319 CrPC Can Be Exercised Before Acquittal Or Sentence: SC

The Supreme Court on Monday held that Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which deals power to summon persons, can be invoked before the pronouncement of the order of either acquittal or before sentence in case of conviction of the case.

“The power under Section 319 of CrPC is to be invoked and exercised before the pronouncement of the order of sentence where there is a judgment of conviction of the accused. In the case of acquittal, the power should be exercised before the order of acquittal is pronounced,” a constitution bench said.
“Hence, the summoning order has to precede the conclusion of trial by the imposition of sentence in the case of conviction. If the order is passed on the same day, it will have to be examined on the facts and circumstances of each case and if such summoning order is passed either after the order of acquittal or imposing sentence in the case of conviction, the same will not be sustainable,” the court said.

The order was passed by the five-judge bench of Justices S Abdul Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian, and BV Nagarathna.

The court was dealing with whether the trial court has the power under Section 319 of CrPC to summon additional accused when the trial with respect to other coaccused has ended and the judgment of conviction rendered on the same date before pronouncing the summoning order.

The Court also dealt with the issue of whether the trial court has the power under Section 319 of the CrPC to summon additional accused when the trial in respect of certain other absconding accused (whose presence is subsequently secured) is ongoing/pending, having been bifurcated from the main trial.

The court held that the trial court has the power to summon additional accused when the trial proceeded in respect of the absconding accused after securing his presence, subject to the evidence recorded in the split-up (bifurcated) trial pointing to the involvement of the accused sought to be summoned. But the evidence recorded in the main concluded trial cannot be the

basis of the summoning order if such power has not been exercised in the main trial till its conclusion.

Section 319 of CrPC gives trial courts the power to summon persons other than the accused if it appears to the trial court that such persons have committed an offence in that case.

The court appreciated for the assistance rendered by all the counsel including Senior Advocate S Nagamuthu, who assisted the Court as an Amicus Curiae. For the petitioner, Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, whereas for the respondents ASG SV Raju, advocate Vinod Ghai, and Ardhendumouli Kumar Prasad appeared while for Intervenor, counsel Ashish Dixit appeared in the matter. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

stay on MCD Elections

SC Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Stay On MCD Elections

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking to stay the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) elections, scheduled to be held on December 4.

A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S Oka said that the petition has become infructuous as it noted the election is in 3 days, i.e., on Sunday.
The petition has challenged the Delhi High Court’s November 9 decision for not staying

the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) elections, scheduled to be held on December 4.

The plea was filed by the National Youth Parth pertaining to the delimitation of the constituency of the civic polls.

Notably, the leaders of political parties will make last ditch effort as campaigning for the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) elections is set to end today.

With a massive number of roadshows, the BJP campaigning was undertaken by several Union ministers and state Chief Ministers including national president JP Nadda for a massive show of strength.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) national President JP Nadda exuded confidence and said that people are eager to vote for BJP as they are fed up with Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) work. He also hit out at the AAP for not cleaning the Yamuna despite thousands of crores disbursed from the Centre to the Kejriwal government.

The BJP has been in power in the MCD since 2007.

On Friday, Aam Admi Party (AAP) leader and Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi Manish Sisodia will hold a roadshow in Patparganj.

While trying to revive its prospects in MCD polls, the Congress, in its election manifesto has promised RO water purifying systems for drinking water, clearing the three landfills in Delhi in 18 months and waiver of outstanding house tax due.

Making ‘Delhi will be Sheila ji’s Delhi’ as party’s poll pitch, Congress makes a mention of two schemes named after former Chief Minister Sheila Dixit – Sheila Dixit Swasthya Sahayatha Yojana for medicines at half the price, and the Sheila Dixit Gharelu Majdoor Kalyan Yojana for financial assistance for domestic workers. Assistance for domestic workers includes admissions for their children to MCD schools and financial help in case of accidents. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

ISRO Spy Case

ISRO Spy Case: SC Cancels Anticipatory Bails Of Ex-Officials

The Supreme Court on Friday set aside the Kerala High Court order granting anticipatory bail to persons in connection with the 1994 ISRO espionage case relating to the framing of alleged scientist Nambi Narayanan.

A bench headed by Justice MR Shah remitted the bail applications back to the Kerala High Court and asked it to decide it as early as possible, within a period of four weeks.

The apex court also granted protection from arrest to the accused for five weeks as an interim arrangement till the High Court finally decides the matter.

The CBI had challenged the Kerala High Court order granting anticipatory bail to five persons. The apex court bench reserved the order on November 28.

The Kerala High Court had granted anticipatory bail to four accused — the former Gujarat Director-General of Police (DGP) RB SreeKumar, former Kerala Director General of Police (DGP) Siby Mathews, two former police officers of Kerala S Vijayan and Thampi S Durga Dutt, and retired intelligence official PS Jayaprakash — in connection with the case.

Seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted them, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had said the grant of anticipatory bail might derail the investigation in the case.

Earlier CBI had told the apex court that it has found in its probe that some scientists were tortured and framed in the matter due to which development of the cryogenic engine was hit and this led to India’s space programme going back by almost one or two decades.

Opposing the bail granted to the accused, CBI had said it is a “very serious matter” and there may be a larger conspiracy at the behest of foreign hands which is being investigated.

The CBI had alleged that there was a clear indication that the accused were part of a team, which had ulterior motives to torpedo the attempts of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) for manufacturing the cryogenic engine.

It had registered a case against 18 persons for various offences, including criminal conspiracy, in connection with the arrest and detention of Narayanan, who was accused of spying in 1994.

The case relates to allegations of transfer of certain confidential documents on India’s space programme to foreign countries by two scientists and four others, including two Maldivian women.

CBI had earlier given a clean chit to Narayanan and said that the Kerala police had “fabricated” the case. The investigating agency stated that the technology ex-scientist was accused to have stolen and sold in the 1994 case did not even exist at that time and then top police officials in Kerala were responsible for his illegal arrest.

On September 14, 2018, the top court had appointed a three-member committee and directed the Kerala government to give Rs 50 lakh compensation to Narayanan for compelling him to undergo immense humiliation.

Terming the police action against Narayanan as a “psycho-pathological treatment”, the top court had also said that his liberty and dignity, basic to his human rights, were jeopardised as he was taken into custody and, eventually, despite all the glory of the past, was compelled to face “cynical abhorrence”. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

DMK to supreme court

Centre Step-Motherly Towards Tamil Refugees; CAA Arbitrary: DMK To SC

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has told the Supreme Court that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act of 2019 is “arbitrary” as it only considers religious minorities from three countries while keeping Sri Lankan Tamils staying in India as refugees.

The Central government has “categorically remained silent to the plight of the Tamil refugees. Step-motherly behaviour of Respondent No.1 (Centre) towards the Tamil refugees has left them living in constant fear of deportation and an uncertain future,” stated the affidavit filed by DMK.
The DMK said that CAA is “arbitrary” as it relates to only three countries — Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh and confines to only six religions — Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian Communities and expressly excludes Muslim religion.

Filing an affidavit before the Supreme Court in its plea challenging the CAA, DMK said that even while considering religious minorities, the Centre keeps such Tamils of Indian origin who are presently staying in India as refugees after fleeing from Sri Lanka due to persecution.

The Act is “against Tamil race” and keeps out the similarly placed Tamils who are residing in Tamil Nadu from the purview of the Act, it said.

“The impugned Act ignores the reality that for several decades Tamil refugees who have settled in Tamil Nadu are deprived of fundamental rights and other rights due to non-citizenship and due to non-naturalisation and the impugned Act does not provide for any reasons to exclude them,” stated the affidavit filed by organising secretary RS Bharati, the governing party of Tamil Nadu.

“Being stateless, they have been denied employment in the government services or in organised private sectors, the right to hold property, right to vote, enjoyment of government benefits received by the citizens and others despite there being an agreement for the same,” it added.

Due to such an ambiguity, they are forced to stay in camps where they are often exploited having no prospects of security in future, said the DMK in its affidavit.

“The lack of jobs, access to basic rights and amenities has left these refugees handicapped and distraught. These refugees who arrived at the country of their origin i.e. India with the hope that the Indo-Sri Lankan agreements will protect them from the ensuing persecution so that they could have brighter futures, discrimination-free environments, and better standards of life are now in a far worse state than before. The requests for citizenship by these Tamil refugees who have spent years in refugee camps have fallen on deaf ears of the Centre,” it added.

It said that the reasons for their fleeing from Sri Lanka have not changed as many displaced persons escaped their country due to the large-scale violence and unsafe circumstances and came to India hoping for a better future.

The party has also said that the Act introduces a completely new basis for the grant/non-grant of citizenship on the grounds of religion, which “destroys the basic fabric of secularism”.

The Act deliberately keeps away Muslims who had suffered persecution in the six countries and therefore it is highly discriminatory and manifestly arbitrary, said DMK.

At least 220 petitions against the CAA were filed before the top court.

The CAA was passed by Parliament on December 11, 2019, and it was met with protests all across the country. It came into effect on 10 January 2020.

A Kerala-based political party Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), DMK, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Congress leader and former Union minister Jairam Ramesh, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader Asaduddin Owaisi, Congress leader Debabrata Saikia, NGOs Rihai Manch and Citizens Against Hate, Assam Advocates Association, and law students, among others, had filed pleas before the top court challenging the Act.

In 2020 Kerala government had also filed a suit in the apex court becoming the first state to challenge the CAA.

The law fast-tracks the process of granting citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians who fled religious persecution in Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan and took refuge in India on or before December 31, 2014.

The top court had earlier issued notice to the Centre and refused to pass an interim order staying the law without hearing the Centre.

The Centre had filed its affidavit before the apex court saying that the CAA Act is a “benign piece of legislation” which does not affect the “legal, democratic or secular rights” of any of the Indian Citizens.

The CAA does not violate any fundamental right, the Centre had said while terming the legislation legal and asserted that there was no question of it violating constitutional morality.

The petitions contended that the Act, which liberalises and fast-tracks the grant of citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, promotes religion-based discrimination.

The amendments have also been challenged on several other grounds, including violation of secularism, Articles 21 (right to life), 15 (prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth) and 19 (right to freedom), as well as provisions on citizenship and constitutional morality.

The 2019 Act amended the Citizenship Act, 1955, which makes illegal migrants eligible for citizenship if they (a) belong to the Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian communities, and (b) are from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan. It only applies to migrants who entered India on or before December 31, 2014. As per the amendment, certain areas in the Northeast are exempted from the provision. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

stay on MCD Elections

Freedom Of Religion Doesn’t Include Fundamental Right To Convert Others To A Particular Religion: Centre To SC

The Central government on Monday told the Supreme Court that the right to freedom of religion does not include a fundamental right to convert other people to a particular religion.

It is “cognizant of the gravity and the seriousness” of the issue, said the Centre in its affidavit filed on a PIL claiming that fraudulent and deceitful religious conversion is rampant across the country.
Such issue of conversion shall be “taken up in all seriousness by the Union of India and appropriate steps shall be taken as the Central government is cognizant of the menace”, the Centre said in its affidavit.

“The right to freedom of religion certainly does not include the right to convert an individual through fraud, deception, coercion, allurement or other such means,” it said.

The central government further said that nine States over the course of the years passed enactments seeking to curb this practice. Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, and Haryana are the States which already have legislation in place on conversion, the affidavit added.

The affidavit stated that “such enactments are necessary for protecting cherished rights of vulnerable sections of the society including women and economically and socially backward classes.”

The right to freedom of religion, and more importantly, the right to the consciousness of all citizens of the country is an extremely cherished and valuable right that ought to be protected by the executive and the legislature, it said.

As the matter came up for hearing, a bench headed by Justice MR Shah said the issue of forced religious conversion is “very serious” and asked the Centre to file a detailed affidavit to make its stand clear.

It asked the Centre to file an affidavit with instructions from the State governments.

The bench has now posted the matter for hearing on December 5.

Earlier, the top court had remarked that forced religious conversion is a “very serious issue” and may affect the “security of the country” along with the freedom of conscience of citizens as far as religion is concerned.

It had said, “It is a very dangerous thing. Everyone has freedom of religion. What is this forceful conversion?”

The apex court was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay claiming that fraudulent and deceitful religious conversion is rampant across the country, and that the Central government has failed to control its menace.

The plea sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report and a Bill to control “deceitful religious conversion”.

It further sought a declaration from the Court that fraudulent religious conversion and conversion by intimidation, threatening and through gifts and monetary benefits offends Articles 14, 21 and 25 of the Indian Constitution.

The PIL said, “There is not even one district which is free of religious conversion by hook and cook and the carrot and the stick.”

“If such conversions were not checked, Hindus would soon become a minority in India. Thus, the Centre was obligated to enact a country-wide law for the same,” it added.

Earlier, the apex court had dismissed a similar petition filed by Upadhyay. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

Gyanvapi carbon dating

Gyanpavi: HC Seeks ASI Affidavit On Conducting Carbon Dating Of Shivling

Allahabad High Court on Monday asked the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to file an affidavit on whether the ‘carbon dating of the purported ‘Shivling’ found inside the premises of the Gyanvapi Mosque, can be conducted without defacing its shape.

The High Court directed the ASI to file its affidavit on the next date of hearing — November 30.
The HC was hearing a review petition filed by Lakshmi Devi and three others, challenging the Varanasi district court’s order of a ‘scientific survey’ of the purported Shivling, which is claimed to be a part of the fountain of the wazu khana by the mosque management.

In its order on Monday, the single bench of Justice JJ Muneer asked the ASI to confirm if ‘carbon dating’, a method to determine an object’s age, can be conducted without defacing the purported Shivling.

“The subordinate court has rejected the application for conducting a scientific survey in view of the status quo order issued by the Supreme Court. Apprehension has been expressed that carbon dating may damage the alleged Shivling,” the bench stated, adding that it was necessary to determine the age of the ‘Shivling’ without deforming its shape.

The counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, said only a scientific survey (carbon dating) can bring forth correct information on the ‘Shivling’ found in the Gyanvapi mosque complex, along with other religious items.

It will also establish beyond any reasonable doubt how old the ‘Shivling’ and other idols found there are, the counsel for the petition further submitted.

Earlier, the petitioners had filed an application in the district court, Varanasi seeking a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi Masjid complex.

The court, however, rejected the plea on October 14 saying that doing so could damage the structure.

The single-bench of the Allahabad HC on Monday also directed the principal secretary of the Department of Religious Affairs, Uttar Pradesh, to file an affidavit on the government’s position or stand in the matter on the next date of hearing — November 30.

The chief standing counsel of the state government, Pancham Bipin Bihari Pandey, was directed to clarify the government’s stand by filing an affidavit on behalf of the principal secretary, Department of Religious Affairs, UP.

Advocate Manoj Singh, appearing for the Union government, had sought three months’ time to clarify its position on the matter. However, the court directed that an affidavit is to be filed by November 30. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

Morbi Bride collapse tragedy

SC: Morbi Bride Collapse Incident Was An Enormous Tragedy

The Supreme Court on Monday said that the Morbi Bride collapse incident which claimed over 140 lives was an “enormous tragedy” and asked the Gujarat High Court which is already hearing a suo motu case on the same issue, to hold periodical hearings.

“It is an enormous tragedy and this will require weekly monitoring to see the award of contract, credential of the party awarded the contract, attribution of responsibility for those guilty,” observed a bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli.
The apex court noted that a division bench headed by the Gujarat High Court Chief Justice has already taken a suo motu note of the incident and has passed three orders, it will not hear the petitions as of now.

It asked petitioners to approach the High Court with their pleas seeking an independent probe and award of dignified compensation to those who lost their family members.

The British-era bridge on the Machchhu river in Morbi collapsed on October 30 leaving over 140 dead including 47 children.

The top court was hearing a plea filed by the person who lost his two relatives in the incident, seeking a CBI probe, award of dignified compensation to those who lost their family members, the need to fix responsibility against officials of the Nagar Palika and that the agency entrusted to maintain the bridge is held accountable.

It was also hearing a PIL seeking direction to appoint a judicial commission under the supervision of a retired top court judge to initiate a probe on the Morbi Bridge collapse incident.

During the hearing, the bench said the Gujarat High Court had already taken suo motu cognisance of the Morbi bridge collapse on October 30 hence it wouldn’t hear the case. It said the High Court would “undoubtedly be seized of ensuring a regulatory mechanism so that such incidents do not recur.”

“We are of the view that the High Court would also bring to bear its time and attention on other aspects of the matter which have been highlighted above while recording the submissions of the learned counsel of the petitioner,” the bench stated in its order.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Gujarat government, submitted that the High Court has already taken note of the issue and that the petitioner can raise the issues there.

More than 140 people died and over 100 people were injured due to the collapse of the suspension bridge over the Morbi Macchu river.

As per reports, the bridge was closed for about 8 months for maintenance and the repair work was being completed by a private agency.

The Gujarat Police has filed a First Information Report under IPC sections 304 and 308 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) in the bridge collapse tragedy.

The Gujarat government has constituted a five-member committee headed to probe the bridge collapse incident. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

DMK to supreme court

SC To Hear Plea For Lifetime Ban On Convicted MPs, MLAs From Contesting Elections

The Supreme Court on Tuesday posted for next week hearing in a plea seeking to debar convicted Members of Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies from contesting elections for life.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli and JB Pardiwala said that it will hear the matter next week as it was hearing other matters.
Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, who was appointed amicus curiae to assist the top court in the matter, told the bench, “I am requesting, some urgent orders are required.”

The bench said it will hear the matter next week.

A recent status report submitted before the Enforcement Directorate (ED) stated that there are 51 MPs and 71 MLAs, sitting and former, who stand accused by the agency of offense under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The report does not specify exactly how many of those are sitting MPs/MLAs and how many are former MPs/ MLAs.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has also submitted a similar report stating that a total of 121 cases are pending trial against sitting and former MPs and MLAs.

The number of MPs involved in those cases is 51 out of which 14 are sitting, 37 are former and 5 are deceased. The report further stated that 112 MLAs are involved in CBI cases out of which 34 are sitting, 78 are former and 9 are deceased.

The number of cases pending investigation against MPs and MLAs by the CBI is 37, the report of the CBI submitted.

Hansaria also filed a report pursuant to an order passed by the court seeking a status report relating to the pendency and grant of sanctions for prosecution, the expected time for completion of the investigation, and reasons for the delay in the same.

In his report Hansaria highlighted a “glaring case of inordinate delay” in the trial of cases against lawmakers, submitting that many cases were pending for over five years.

He sought directions to ensure that courts dealing with case against lawmakers should exclusively try such issues.

The plea filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay sought direction that convicted parliamentarians and State legislators, former and sitting, should be disqualified and banned for life from contesting elections to Parliament or Assemblies.

The plea also sought speedy disposal of cases against them and pointed out that while judges and babus were suspended for such activities, politicians were condoned by the law.

As of now, convicted politicians are banned from polls for six years.

The Central government in an affidavit filed in 2020 had rejected the idea of a lifetime ban on convicted persons contesting elections or forming or becoming an office-bearer of a political party.

It had said that disqualification under the Representation of the People Act of 1951 for the period of six years was enough for legislators.

Hansaria had earlier filed the report in the apex court and informed that a total of 4,984 criminal cases against former and sitting MPs and MLAs are pending before various sessions and magistrate courts across the country, an increase of 862 such cases in the last three years.

In August 2021 the top court directed that no prosecution against sitting former MPs and MLAs will be withdrawn without the permission of the High Court of the concerned state.

It had further directed that judges hearing the criminal cases against MPs and MLAs in Special Courts should continue in their current posts until further orders of the Supreme Court. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

Chhawala Case

Unless Guilt Established, Circumstantial Evidence Theory Not Accepted: Chhawala Case

Amid the public outrage over the acquittal of three accused in the Chhawala rape and murder case, former Chief Justice of India UU Lalit on Sunday said unless and until that guilt is completely established, circumstantial evidence case theory is not to be accepted.

Speaking to ANI, Justice Lalit said, “The element was purely based on circumstantial evidence. Law is clear that facts must point only in direction of the guilt of that man, unless and until that guilt is completely established, circumstantial evidence case theory is not to be accepted.”
On the public outcry on his judgment in the Chhawala rape case, Justice Lalit said the law is that the chain must get completed.

“There were actually no circumstances that could point in their direction conclusively. The law is that the chain must get complete, it is on account that the benefit of the doubt must flow in that direction,” added the former CJI.

The Supreme Court on Monday set aside the Delhi High Court order and acquitted three men who were awarded the death penalty by a lower court after being held guilty of raping and killing a 19-year-old woman in Delhi’s Chhawala area in 2012.

A bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat, and Bela M Trivedi set aside the judgments and orders of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and the High Court in the case.

The court gave the accused a benefit of the doubt and directed to set free the accused forthwith if not required in any other case.

However, the court also directed that the parents of the victim would be entitled to the compensation, if not awarded so far by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, as may be permissible in accordance with the law.

“Every case has to be decided by the Courts strictly on merits and in accordance with the law without being influenced by any kind of outside moral pressures or otherwise,” the top court remarked.

Three men had moved the top court against capital punishment for the rape and murder of a 19-year-old girl in Delhi’s Chhawala.

The three convicts were awarded the death penalty after being held guilty of raping and killing a 19-year-old woman in 2012. The victim’s mutilated body was found in a field with multiple injuries due to assault with objects ranging from car tools to earthen pots.

A Delhi court in February 2014 convicted them. The capital punishment was confirmed by the Delhi High Court on August 26, 2014, saying they were “predators” moving on the streets and “were looking for prey”.

Three men, Ravi Kumar, Rahul, and Vinod were convicted under various charges dealing with kidnapping, rape, and murder.

The three convicts have challenged the Delhi High Court order in the Supreme Court.

A case was registered regarding this at outer Delhi’s Chhawala (Najafgarh) police station.

According to the prosecution, the offense was barbaric in nature as they first kidnapped the woman, raped her, killed her, and dumped her body in a field in Rodhai village in Haryana’s Rewari district.

“The woman was kidnapped by the three men in a car from near her house in the Qutub Vihar area on the night of February 9, 2012, while she was returning from office,” the prosecution had said.

The prosecution had also revealed multiple injuries on the woman’s head and other parts of her body and said that the three men had assaulted the woman with a car jack and an earthen pot. The crime was committed by Ravi Kumar with the help of the other two accused as the girl has refused the friendship proposal of Ravi Kumar, the prosecution had alleged. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

US Midterm Polls

US Midterm Polls: Democrats To Retain Senate

Democrats will keep their narrow Senate majority for the next two years, CNN projects, after victories in close contests in Nevada and Arizona. Democrats now have 50 Senate seats to Republicans’ 49 seats.

The Democrats need to win just one more seat to retain majority control – with Nevada and Georgia the two states outstanding paving the way for Joe Biden to spend two more years filling the federal courts with his nominees and staffing his administration largely the way he sees fit.
Retaining Senate control is a huge boost to President Biden over the remaining two years of his first term in the White House.

It means Democrats will have the ability to confirm Biden’s judicial nominees — avoiding scenarios such as the one former President Barack Obama faced in 2016 when then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to hold a vote on his Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland. It also means that Senate Democrats can reject bills passed by the House and can set their own agenda, reported CNN.

Meanwhile, Republicans appear to be inching closer to a majority in the House of Representatives – with big implications for the next two years of Joe Biden’s presidency.

Republicans appear to be slowly inching closer to the 218 seats that would deliver them a House majority, but several congressional races — including in California and Colorado — remain uncalled.

Georgia will hold a run-off election on December 6, after neither Senate candidate won an outright majority.

Georgia’s race between Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock and Republican challenger Herschel Walker is headed to a December runoff after neither candidate cleared the 50 percent threshold on Tuesday.

Even if Republicans win the Georgia runoff, though, Vice President Kamala Harris would continue to cast the tie-breaking vote in an evenly divided Senate to guarantee the Democratic majority.

Only one Senate seat has changed hands so far in the 2022 midterm elections: Pennsylvania, where Democratic Lt Gov John Fetterman, who campaigned as he recovered from a May stroke, defeated Republican Mehmet Oz, the celebrity doctor who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump.

Republicans successfully defended seats in hard-fought races in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin, while Democrats retained their seats in competitive contests in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

In Nevada, CNN projects that Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a former prosecutor, and state attorney general, will defeat Republican Adam Laxalt, her successor in the attorney general’s office and the son and grandson of former senators.

In Arizona, CNN projects that Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, a former astronaut and the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, will defeat Republican Blake Masters, a venture capitalist who was endorsed by Trump and supported by tech mogul and emerging GOP megadonor Peter Thiel. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/