内容摘要：Although the ONS cautioned that this is an early estimate and could change when more data from HM Revenue & Customs becomes available.

Although the ONS cautioned that this is an early estimate and could change when more data from HM Revenue & Customs becomes available.

Mr Perks, a consultant plastic surgeon who had recently retired, was woken by the break-in and initially mistook the defendant for his son, before Brooks stabbed him in the abdomen.The trial previously heard Mr Perks's injuries were "of the most serious type", and included a bleeding liver, injuries to the pancreas and bowel, and an "extremely life-threatening injury" to the back of the abdomen.

Mr Perks only survived because of "quick action and amazing surgical skill", the court had heard.It has taken years for Brooks to be brought to justice, after his case was littered with delays due to the 61-year-old repeatedly, as well as trying manipulating the court system.

On at least eight occasions, Brooks failed to turn up to hearings without explanation, and a new trial was listed nine times before it finally began in March.Brooks sacked his legal representatives on multiple occasions before electing to represent himself, but he failed to turn up before the jury during the trial, in what the judge described as "highly unusual" circumstances.

Sam Shallow, deputy chief crown prosecutor in the East Midlands for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), said Brooks did whatever he could to prevent court proceedings, and praised the Perks family for their bravery.

"I certainly haven't dealt with a case personally where a defendant has used so many devices in order to try to prevent a case coming to a conclusion," she said.It also handed the federal government sweeping authority to deploy armed forces in states, declare region-specific Emergencies, and extend President's Rule - direct federal rule - from six months to a year. It also put election disputes out of the judiciary's reach.

This was not yet a presidential system, but it carried its genetic imprint - a powerful executive, marginalised judiciary and weakened checks and balances. The Statesman newspaper warned that "by one sure stroke, the amendment tilts the constitutional balance in favour of the parliament."Meanwhile, Gandhi's loyalists were going all in. Defence minister Bansi Lal urged "lifelong power" for her as prime minister, while Congress members in the northern states of Haryana, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh unanimously called for a new constituent assembly in October 1976.

"The prime minister was taken aback. She decided to snub these moves and hasten the passage of the amendment bill in the parliament," writes Prof Raghavan.By December 1976, the bill had been passed by both houses of parliament and ratified by 13 state legislatures and signed into law by the president.