Monday, September 05, 2016
Custodial torture: It’s a shame that so much that is shameful thrives
Can one be proud to be an Indian and ashamed to be an Indian?
One cannot be one without the other.
This reflection has been occasioned by two recent court judgments.
The first of these is the extraordinary judgment of Madras high court’s chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana in the writ petitions pertaining to the right of free thought and expression. Occasioned by the psychological tormenting of the Tamil novelist Perumal Murugan for his story One Part Woman, the order says “Surprisingly, on the issue of a liberal ethos on the relationship of man and woman, sex and religious mores, the ancient scriptures seemed to be more liberal than at times what appears to be the current norm”. And affirming the right to free speech, it says: “The author…should be able to write and advance the canvas of his writings”. In a final sentence that has an ‘all-time and everywhere’ resonance to it, Justice Kaul and Justice Sathyanarayana observe: “Let the author be resurrected to what he is best at: Write.”The judgment recalls the words of Milton in Areopagitica: “Lords and Commons of England, consider what Nation it is whereof ye are, and whereof ye are the governors: a Nation not slow and dull, but of a quick, ingenious, and piercing spirit, acute to invent, suttle and sinewy to discours, not beneath the reach of any point the highest that human capacity can soar to….Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
The second is the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in which Justice Madan Lokur and Justice Uday Lalit have ruled that the armed forces cannot escape investigation for excesses in the discharge of their duties even in “disturbed areas”. Hearing a PIL demanding an inquiry into 1,528 deaths in counter-insurgency operations and related incidents in Manipur, the court said the provisions of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act have to yield to the larger principles of human rights. Responding to the arguments of the government, the judges said: “The submission of the learned attorney general is nothing but a play on words and we reject it and hold that an internal disturbance is not equivalent to or akin to a war-like situation and proceed on the basis that there is no war or war-like situation in Manipur but only an internal disturbance, within the meaning of that expression in the Constitution – nothing more and nothing less.” The 85-page order makes it clear that action against terrorists cannot be indistinguishable with disappearances and extra-judicial killings.The judgment recalls the words of Milton in Areopagitica: “Lords and Commons of England, consider what Nation it is whereof ye are, and whereof ye are the governors: a Nation not slow and dull, but of a quick, ingenious, and piercing spirit, acute to invent, suttle and sinewy to discours, not beneath the reach of any point the highest that human capacity can soar to….Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
It is a matter of pride that our courts can call the shameful to account. It is a shame that so much that is shameful thrives in India.
Our criminal investigative system has some truly remarkable achievements to its credit. The rule of law owes a great deal to our police. Bravehearts among their ranks keep us from personal and collective harm. The martyrdom of Hemant Karkare in Mumbai on November 26, 2008, places him in the world’s annals of duty performed in the face of death. The recent killing of two police officers in Mathura at the hands of a violent cult whose unauthorised headquarters they were sent to break up, is another example of policemen courting death for the security of the State and society. The loss suffered by their bereaved families is no different from that of soldiers killed in war. These instances can and should make us proud of them, honour them.
But India does not permit pride to stay where it is.
We have had earlier this year a masterpiece of a research document placed in our hands by the Centre on the death penalty set up by the National Law University (NLU), Delhi. The product of direct interviews with persons on death row in different states, Death Penalty India Report 2016 gives hard evidence to tell us that India is home to some of the grossest of criminal investigative malpractices. The report tells us: “Of the 270 (Death Row) prisoners who spoke about their experience in police custody, 216 (80%) admitted to have suffered custodial violence”. The report is about convicts on death row but there is no reason to doubt that what is true of them is also true, more or less, of other prisoners as well, many if not most of who will be found later to have been innocent. Custodial torture degrades not just the system within which it operates but all of us. From needles inserted into fingernails, heads crashed against walls/glass, water-boarding, being forced to sit on a slab of ice, have electric current passed through the wet body, we have them all in India, the India that is asking the world to visit India, Incredible India! with its upside down exclamation mark, to Make In India, Trust India, Adore India.
That it is possible in India to investigate shaming truths, as the NLU has done, reassures us. That torture, custodial torture, is rampant in India, shames us.
The government should tell us why India, which signed the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (commonly known as the United Nations Convention against Torture) in October 1997, has yet not ratified it. Why has the Prevention of Torture Bill, which will pave the way for ratification, not yet been passed? Is India afraid that the world will castigate it, call it hypocritical? Or is one part of the State unwilling to shake off this ‘secret weapon’ in its investigative armoury?
We, as a people, are not asking these questions. But do we really care about custodial torture? Do we look upon it as a national shame? In truth, we do not. And there lies the bigger shame.
Gopalkrishna Gandhi is distinguished professor of history and politics, Ashoka University . The views expressed by the author are personal.
Source: The Hindu, 4-09-2016
Rights for abducted children
India’s accession to the Hague Convention would resolve the issue of inter-country parental child removal.
Toay, many Indians live abroad, foreign nationals come to stay in India, and Indians who had earlier moved abroad are now moving back to India. Problems arise when children are caught in this migration, when one parent goes to another country, taking the child along, but without the permission of the other parent. What happens to the child who has been abducted? What are his or her rights?
There are several legal issues confronting the issue of transnational inter-spousal child removal. It is unfortunate that when a child is abducted by his or her own parent to India, while custody issues are pending determination in the courts of his or her habitual permanent residence abroad, there is little that local law enforcement agencies can do to remedy the situation. This is because there are no codified family laws or specific child custody laws under which these children can be returned to their homes in a foreign jurisdiction. An aggrieved parent with a foreign court order requiring return of the child finds no slot in the Indian legal system, wherein a wholesome statutory remedy can be invoked for effective relief. Regardless, the Indian legal system provides succour by invoking the habeas corpus writ. Bitter disputed custody battles requiring conventional evidence to be established fall under the outdated Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. Parents then have to seek resolution of rights of access, custody, guardianship and visitation as a last resort of the proof of their superior parental rights.
Converse reality
This dilemma has now worsened with the converse also taking place, which means that children from India are also being abducted abroad and cannot be traced there or legally directed to be returned. When families get split across countries, conflicting child custody litigations are initiated under the separate legal systems of different nations. Ninety-four states are party to the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which desires “to protect children internationally from the harmful effects of their wrongful removal or retention and to establish procedures to ensure their prompt return to the State of their habitual residence, as well as to secure protection for rights of access”. India is not one of them. The question of India’s accession to the Convention first came about in 2007, but reached no logical end. Meanwhile, in India, the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill, 2007, to secure the prompt return of wrongly removed or returned children, lapsed before reaching Parliament.
Proposed Bill
On June 22, 2016, the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) uploaded on its website a proposal to enact a draft of the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill, 2016. This was considered as it was imperative to have an enabling legislation in India before accession to the Hague Convention. The proposed Bill, to be renamed as the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill, 2016, was placed on the Ministry’s website for comments till July 13. Hopefully now, a final version may find Parliament’s approval to become a codified law.
The proposed Bill considers the removal to or the retention of a child in India to be wrongful if it is in breach of rights of custody attributed to a person, an institution, or any other body, either jointly or alone, at a place where the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention. It further stipulates that the removal to or the retention in India of a child is to be considered wrongful where at the time of removal or retention those rights were actually exercised, either jointly or alone, by a person, an institution or any other body, or would have been so exercised, but for the removal or retention.
The draft Bill was prepared following a reference made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to the Law Commission of India to consider whether recommendations should be made for enacting a suitable law and for signing the Hague Convention. The High Court had made this reference when a minor child remained untraceable after she was removed from the de jure custody of the court and taken abroad by misusing an interim order of 2006. The court had observed in its order that for want of the Indian government acceding to the Hague Convention or enacting a domestic law, children would continue to be spirited away from and to India, with courts and authorities “standing by in despair”.
It is important in this context to look at the watershed verdict of the Supreme Court in Surya Vadanan v. State of Tamil Nadu (2015). The court ruled that: one, the principle of Comity of Courts and nations must be respected and the best interest of the child should apply; two, the principle of “first strike”, namely, whichever court is seized of the matter first, ought to have prerogative of jurisdiction in adjudicating the welfare of the child; three, the rule of Comity of Courts should not be jettisoned except for compelling special reasons to be recorded in writing by a domestic court; four, interlocutory orders of foreign courts of competent jurisdiction regarding child custody must be respected by domestic courts; five, an elaborate or summary enquiry by local courts when there is a pre-existing order of a competent foreign court must be based on reasons and not ordered as routine when a local court is seized of a child custody litigation; six, the nature and effect of a foreign court order, reasons for repatriation, moral, physical, social, cultural or psychological harm to the child, harm to the parent in the foreign country, and alacrity in moving a concerned foreign court must be considered before ordering return of a child to a foreign court.
The above decision set at rest a string of precedents laid down by courts from time to time to evolve a consistent approach in multi-jurisdictional child custody disputes. However, law still needs to be codified. India’s accession to the Hague Convention would resolve the issue since it is based on the principle of reverting the situation to status quo ante. It is also based on the principle that the removed child ought to be promptly returned to his or her country of habitual residence to enable a court of that country to examine the merits of the custody dispute and thereupon award care and control in the child’s best interest. This is because the courts of the country where the child had permanent or habitual residence are considered to best determine the child’s interest.
Anil Malhotra, a practising lawyer, assisted the Punjab and Haryana High Court as Amicus Curiae. Email: anilmalhotra1960@gmail.com
Keywords: Hague Convention, Punjab and Haryana High Court, transnational inter-spousal child, Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill 2016, Ministry of Women and Child Development
Source: The Hindu, 5-09-2016
The gap between rich and poor States
India is the only large country that is experiencing an economic divergence among its States.
“Real freedom lies in economic freedom,” said Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, in her Independence Day speech this year. The subtle reference here was to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Bill, which her party, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, did not endorse, the only political party to do so in Parliament, on the grounds that it impinged on the fiscal autonomy of the States. She had earlier exhorted the Centre to give “adequate powers to the States”. “These should not be seen as centrifugal or fissiparous trends that have to be curbed, but as a manifestation of India’s maturing as a nation with diversity and as a democracy,” she said.
Clearly, Tamil Nadu and its Chief Minister feel very strongly about their sovereign rights and the imposition of policies from New Delhi. It may be tempting to dismiss this as political grandstanding but Ms. Jayalalithaa is right about the economic diversity of India. Our research of per capita net domestic product from 1960 to 2014 of India’s 12 largest States, that accounted for 85 per cent of the total population, shows that economic disparity within India’s States is among the largest in the world, lending credence to Ms. Jayalalithaa’s demand for economic freedom.
Ranking States
In 1960, the average person in West Bengal earned Rs.390 per annum; the average person in Tamil Nadu earned Rs.330. But in 2014, the average Bengali earned Rs.80,000 while the average Tamilian earned Rs.1,36,000. Tamil Nadu went from being the fourth poorest among these 12 States in 1960 to the second richest in 2014. The southern States of Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have climbed up rapidly while West Bengal and Rajasthan have dropped down the order of the richest large States. Most of these States started at roughly the same levels of per capita GDP in 1960. In five decades, some have outperformed the rest, leading to a dramatic reshuffle of their ranking.
In 1960, the average person in West Bengal earned Rs.390 per annum; the average person in Tamil Nadu earned Rs.330. But in 2014, the average Bengali earned Rs.80,000 while the average Tamilian earned Rs.1,36,000. Tamil Nadu went from being the fourth poorest among these 12 States in 1960 to the second richest in 2014. The southern States of Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have climbed up rapidly while West Bengal and Rajasthan have dropped down the order of the richest large States. Most of these States started at roughly the same levels of per capita GDP in 1960. In five decades, some have outperformed the rest, leading to a dramatic reshuffle of their ranking.
The more intriguing aspect is the levels and trends of disparity among them. In 1960, the top three States were 1.7 times richer than the bottom three. By 2014, this gap had almost doubled, with the top three States being 3 times richer than the bottom three. The richest (per capita GDP) State in 1960, Maharashtra, was twice as rich as the then poorest State, Bihar. In 2014, the richest state, Kerala, was four times richer than the still poorest state of Bihar. This gap of four times between the richest and the poorest large State in India is among the highest in the world. A similar ratio in other federal polities such as the U.S., European Union and China is between two and three times. Our convergence analysis shows that this economic disparity among States is only widening and not narrowing. India is the only large country in the world today that is experiencing an economic divergence among its States and not convergence, as economic theory would posit.
The seminal year
A striking finding of our research is that 1990 is the seminal year that marked a structural break in the gap between the rich and poor States. In the 30-year period between 1960 and 1990, the economic disparity among India’s twelve largest States remained more or less constant. In 1990, the top three States were twice as rich as the bottom three, nearly the same ratio as in 1960. However, in the subsequent 25-year period from 1990 to 2015, the disparity between the richest and the poorest State doubled. Pre-1990 and post-1990 look like almost two different eras in India’s history of economic diversity among States. Economic theory would suggest that the poorer regions grow faster to catch up with the richer States to cause an eventual convergence, as is happening globally. Contrary to global experiences of narrowing disparity, both across and within nations, India actually shows trends of an exacerbating divergence among its large States, implying the richer States will continue to grow faster. What this means is that a child born in Maharashtra today is still likely to be four times richer upon becoming an adult than a child born in Bihar today.
A striking finding of our research is that 1990 is the seminal year that marked a structural break in the gap between the rich and poor States. In the 30-year period between 1960 and 1990, the economic disparity among India’s twelve largest States remained more or less constant. In 1990, the top three States were twice as rich as the bottom three, nearly the same ratio as in 1960. However, in the subsequent 25-year period from 1990 to 2015, the disparity between the richest and the poorest State doubled. Pre-1990 and post-1990 look like almost two different eras in India’s history of economic diversity among States. Economic theory would suggest that the poorer regions grow faster to catch up with the richer States to cause an eventual convergence, as is happening globally. Contrary to global experiences of narrowing disparity, both across and within nations, India actually shows trends of an exacerbating divergence among its large States, implying the richer States will continue to grow faster. What this means is that a child born in Maharashtra today is still likely to be four times richer upon becoming an adult than a child born in Bihar today.
It is clear that the economic outperformance of some of these States is a function of their politics and policies over decades or the “maturation of democracy”, as Ms. Jayalalithaa put it. While it is tempting to attribute explanations for this outperformance, it is very difficult to prove any. At best, it can be attributed to a complex interplay of politics, leadership, policies, human capital, and some luck. Whatever be the reasons, it is quite evident that the priorities of a more prosperous State will be quite different from those that are still very poor. India’s cultural and political diversity is a well-entrenched fact. It is time to accept its economic diversity too. In fact, cultural diversity is what hinders free labour mobility across States. While average income in Tamil Nadu may be four times higher than in Bihar, it is still not easy for a Hindi-speaking, roti-eating Bihari to move to Tamil-speaking, rice-eating Tamil Nadu for a job. Amid such economic disparity among States with varying future needs and priorities, a Delhi-based one-size-fits-all policy regime for all of India is entirely anachronistic. While Ms. Jayalalithaa may have denied any “fissiparous” intent in her demand for more freedom, the struggles of the European Union in balancing common market policies for economically diverse nations should serve as a gentle reminder for an even more diverse India.
Praveen Chakravarty and Vivek Dehejia are Senior Fellows in Political Economy at IDFC Institute, a Mumbai think tank. This is an excerpt from a research briefing paper titled “India’s curious case of economic divergence” to be published by IDFC Institute.
Keywords: economic freedom, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, Independence Day speech, GST Bill, economic disparity
Source: The Hindu, 5-09-2016
A Teacher on Her Students
CHITRA SRINIVAS
|
Teaching is my passion, and luckily , my experience as a teacher has been beautiful, emotional and fulfilling. Over the years, I've watched the student-teacher equation evolve: from guru as God, guru as allknowing -“Guru Brahma, Guru Vishnu, Guru Devo Maheshwara, Guru sakshat, Param Brahmn tas mai Shri Guru vai namaha“ -to guru as friend and equal, as someone who doesn't always know best.Has teaching changed the way I think? Yes, most certainly. My students have shown me how to manage time. I marvel at how deftly they juggle sports, academics, dance, theatre and pottery , for instance. I have learnt how to accept failure as I see my students taking success and failure with equanimity . I admire their confidence as they can go up on stage and speak extempore. I see them contesting an election, lose it, and yet work with the winner for the common good.
My students have often shown me how to keep cool during a crisis, with a “Don't worry , Ma'am, it can be done!“ I am often amazed at their openness, at their ability to think critically , accept reasoned answers. What has struck me most is their daring: to chart unknown territories, to be constantly redefining rules, unafraid to be original.
I have taken so many things for granted. Students remind me that my learning is not complete and never will be. Above all, my students have taught me to be young, to never grow old. I have to be up-todate in everything, in order to keep up with them.
My students have often shown me how to keep cool during a crisis, with a “Don't worry , Ma'am, it can be done!“ I am often amazed at their openness, at their ability to think critically , accept reasoned answers. What has struck me most is their daring: to chart unknown territories, to be constantly redefining rules, unafraid to be original.
I have taken so many things for granted. Students remind me that my learning is not complete and never will be. Above all, my students have taught me to be young, to never grow old. I have to be up-todate in everything, in order to keep up with them.
Ganesha, The God Who Rides Rats
Devdutt Pattanaik
|
Rats evoke the feeling of disgust. There is something inherently dark, unclean and sinister about them. Think rats and you think garbage, gutter, plague and other diseases. Rats mean destruction of property . Pilferage.Filth. There is nothing adorable or desirable about a rat. So why is Ganesha always associated with a rat, lovingly called Mooshika?
Aha, but it is not a rat; it is a mouse.Rats are nasty . Mice are much gentler.Cute Ganesha rides a cute mouse, my nephew insists. The fact is, nobody is sure what Mooshika is, exactly . Scholars and the general public can argue about it endlessly referring to obscure Sanskrit texts: Rat. Mouse. Maybe even a bandicoot. Whatever! Basically a rodent, pest, the bane of the storehouse, farmer's enemy , a denizen of the sewer.Rats are inauspicious. You definitely don't want them in your house. Ganesha is Mangala-Murti, the embodiment of auspiciousness.Why then does he have as his mount something so inauspicious as a rodent?
What is the message there?
Mooshika embodies the pest that plagues our lives, a problem so small that it eludes detection, and exasperates us. It is that bill that will never be cleared by the boss; that pimple that refuses to go away .It is that neighbour who always parks his garbage right in front of your door. It is that dripping water tap that no plumber can fix. It is that set of keys which you cannot find just when you have to leave the house; that case in court which is not moving for years. These are the rodents in our lives, the insatiable thieves who are gnawing into our sense o who are gnawing into our sense of well being.Imagine someone who gets rid of all those irritating rat-like problems of your life. That someone, for Hindus, is Ganesha. Around Ganesha's giant belly is a serpent that friend of the farmer who eats the rats, controls pilferage and thus protects the harvest. With the grace of Ganesha, problems disappear and prosperity and power appear. You can imagine Ganesha catching hold of a problem (rat mouse bandicoot) by its tail, dragging it away , sitting on it, so that it troubles you no more. No wonder Ganesha is such a popular god. Remover of rats that plague our existence.Remover of obstacles, remover of hurdles. Vighna-harta.
Rats are also symbols of fertility as they are fast breeders. Ganesha is always associated with fertility symbols.va grass for example, which The Dhurva grass for example, which keeps growing even when uprooted. If Dhurva is the plant-symbol of fertility , rat is the animal-symbol of fertility. In China and Japan, rats are associated with fertility , children, prosperity .Rats are also unstoppable, relentless, breaking through any obstacle to get to the grain. They are also symbols of avarice and greed. They are relentless hoarders. Thus, rats have a positive aspect (fertility unstoppability) and a negative aspect (pilferage plague).With Ganesha sitting atop Mooshika, only the positive aspects reach devotees while the negative aspects stay away .
Ganesha's image may evoke a sense of prosperity and power and auspiciousness for which fertility is important but his Mooshika reminds us not to be complacent: the rat may be fertile and unstoppable a contributor to our wealth but it is also capable of silently and secretly gnawing into our ethics, our morals, our values, the very foundation of our apparently fulfilled lives.
Aha, but it is not a rat; it is a mouse.Rats are nasty . Mice are much gentler.Cute Ganesha rides a cute mouse, my nephew insists. The fact is, nobody is sure what Mooshika is, exactly . Scholars and the general public can argue about it endlessly referring to obscure Sanskrit texts: Rat. Mouse. Maybe even a bandicoot. Whatever! Basically a rodent, pest, the bane of the storehouse, farmer's enemy , a denizen of the sewer.Rats are inauspicious. You definitely don't want them in your house. Ganesha is Mangala-Murti, the embodiment of auspiciousness.Why then does he have as his mount something so inauspicious as a rodent?
What is the message there?
Mooshika embodies the pest that plagues our lives, a problem so small that it eludes detection, and exasperates us. It is that bill that will never be cleared by the boss; that pimple that refuses to go away .It is that neighbour who always parks his garbage right in front of your door. It is that dripping water tap that no plumber can fix. It is that set of keys which you cannot find just when you have to leave the house; that case in court which is not moving for years. These are the rodents in our lives, the insatiable thieves who are gnawing into our sense o who are gnawing into our sense of well being.Imagine someone who gets rid of all those irritating rat-like problems of your life. That someone, for Hindus, is Ganesha. Around Ganesha's giant belly is a serpent that friend of the farmer who eats the rats, controls pilferage and thus protects the harvest. With the grace of Ganesha, problems disappear and prosperity and power appear. You can imagine Ganesha catching hold of a problem (rat mouse bandicoot) by its tail, dragging it away , sitting on it, so that it troubles you no more. No wonder Ganesha is such a popular god. Remover of rats that plague our existence.Remover of obstacles, remover of hurdles. Vighna-harta.
Rats are also symbols of fertility as they are fast breeders. Ganesha is always associated with fertility symbols.va grass for example, which The Dhurva grass for example, which keeps growing even when uprooted. If Dhurva is the plant-symbol of fertility , rat is the animal-symbol of fertility. In China and Japan, rats are associated with fertility , children, prosperity .Rats are also unstoppable, relentless, breaking through any obstacle to get to the grain. They are also symbols of avarice and greed. They are relentless hoarders. Thus, rats have a positive aspect (fertility unstoppability) and a negative aspect (pilferage plague).With Ganesha sitting atop Mooshika, only the positive aspects reach devotees while the negative aspects stay away .
Ganesha's image may evoke a sense of prosperity and power and auspiciousness for which fertility is important but his Mooshika reminds us not to be complacent: the rat may be fertile and unstoppable a contributor to our wealth but it is also capable of silently and secretly gnawing into our ethics, our morals, our values, the very foundation of our apparently fulfilled lives.
Poor health stressing out coaching students in Kota
shoebkhan
|
Jaipur:
|
In August, 17-yearold meritorious student Rishabh Sharma (name changed) from Mau district in Madhya Pradesh quit his medical coaching within two months of joining a centre.A clinical psychologist, studying the causes of stress among students, interviewed him to conclude that prolonged illness (viral fever and diarrhea) had forced him to be absent for 23 days in two months. Further investigations revealed that due to irregular eating habits and unhygienic consumption of fast food, the immune system of the boy had weakened.
This is turning out to be the one of the major reasons for stress, say clinical psycho logists, who submitted their preliminary report to the district administration of Kota.
The report was sought by district collector Ravi Kumar Surpur after he held a meeting with clinical psychologists this week to find out reasons for stress among students, which in extreme cases lead to suicides.
A high-level meeting, pre sided by chief minister Vasundhara Raje, was earlier held in Jaipur to contain suicides in Kota. The meeting was attended by 21 psychologists with experience of handling students at coaching centres.
The collector will hold a second round of meeting with psychologists before submitting the report.
This is turning out to be the one of the major reasons for stress, say clinical psycho logists, who submitted their preliminary report to the district administration of Kota.
The report was sought by district collector Ravi Kumar Surpur after he held a meeting with clinical psychologists this week to find out reasons for stress among students, which in extreme cases lead to suicides.
A high-level meeting, pre sided by chief minister Vasundhara Raje, was earlier held in Jaipur to contain suicides in Kota. The meeting was attended by 21 psychologists with experience of handling students at coaching centres.
The collector will hold a second round of meeting with psychologists before submitting the report.
Source: Times Of India, 5-09-2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)