PM Modi to go on metro ride to Electronic City on Sunday
Bengaluru-Belagavi Vande Bharat
express physically and Amritsar-Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Katra and Nagpur-Pune virtually.
He will later visit RV Road (Ragigudda) metro station and travel by the
Yellow Line metro
to
Electronic City
. He will then arrive at IIIT auditorium where he will lay the foundation stone for Bangalore Metro phase-3 and inaugurate the Yellow Line.
Productivity Tool
Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide
By Metla Sudha Sekhar
View Program
Finance
Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory
By Dinesh Nagpal
View Program
Finance
Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code
By CA Rahul Gupta
View Program
Digital Marketing
Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel
By Neil Patel
View Program
Finance
Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading
By Kunal Patel
View Program
Productivity Tool
Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide
By Study at home
View Program
Artificial Intelligence
AI For Business Professionals Batch 2
By Ansh Mehra
View Program
He will leave for Delhi at 2.20 pm.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Play War Thunder now for free
War Thunder
Play Now
Undo
At the metro event, the PM will be joined by Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot, chief minister Siddaramaiah, Union Ministers Manohar Lal, Ashwini Vaishnaw and HD Kumaraswamy, Dy CM DK Shivakumar, MoS V Somanna & Shobha Karandlaje and BJP state president BY Vijayendra and Bangalore South MP Tejasvi Surya.
The 19-km Yellow Line will initially operate at 25-minute intervals before improving to 20-minute frequency later this month with the addition of another train set. The line connects key tech and industrial hubs along congested Hosur Road, including Electronic City and Bommasandra and is expected to benefit about eight lakh commuters daily while easing traffic congestion at critical junctions like Silk Board.
Live Events
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
7 minutes ago
- Mint
India hails US-Russian talks on 15 August, says they hold ‘promise' of ending Ukraine war: ‘As PM Modi has…'
India on Friday hailed the upcoming meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska to discuss the Russia-Ukraine war, saying that it promises to end the conflict. In a statement, the Ministry of External Affairs said the Trump-Putin meet in Alaska on August 15 could bring prospects of peace. 'India welcomes the understanding reached between the United States and the Russian Federation for a meeting in Alaska on 15th August 2025. This meeting holds the promise of bringing to an end the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and opening up the prospects for peace,' it said. The MEA further cited Prime Minister Narendra Modi's opinion on wars. "As Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said on several occasions, 'This is not an era of war'. India, therefore, endorses the upcoming Summit meeting and stands ready to support these efforts,' it said. (This is a developing story. Check back for updates)
Hindustan Times
7 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Hits and misses in the one nation, one election idea
Over the past decade, the Narendra Modi government has embraced a series of 'One Nation' policies aimed at replacing India's diverse patchwork of state-specific policies with uniform, national schemes. From the Goods and Services Tax ('One Nation, One Tax') to the portability of subsidised rations ('One Nation, One Ration Card'), the impulse has been toward centralisation and standardisation. Now, the government is pursuing one of the most controversial of these projects: One nation, one election. This proposal seeks to replace India's staggered electoral calendar with simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies. The idea has featured in Modi's speeches for years but was given a boost in March 2024, when a high-level committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind endorsed the idea. In December, the government introduced the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill to give the Election Commission of India (ECI) the authority to implement such a system. The Bill is currently being reviewed by a joint parliamentary committee. Modi and his BJP colleagues have long argued that frequent polls disrupt governance, drain resources, and induce short-term populism. India's current electoral calendar ensures that some part of the country is almost always in campaign mode. Proponents argue that constant elections constitute an undue burden on the State's coffers. And the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) — an informal set of norms to ensure a level-playing field during the campaign period — is cited as a source of 'policy paralysis'. There is obvious appeal to aligning India's staggered election calendar, but there are less disruptive, less dramatic solutions to the underlying problems the government wishes to solve. The case for simultaneity: The proposed Constitutional amendment would overhaul India's electoral framework. It introduces a one-time transitory provision to dissolve all state assemblies, so their elections coincide with the next Lok Sabha polls, thereafter locking both into a single five-year cycle. If a government — state or national — dissolves mid-term, fresh elections would be held only to complete the remainder of the original term. Supporters of this far-reaching reform advance three main arguments. First, simultaneous elections will yield savings in time, money, and bureaucratic resources. Political leaders and government machinery, freed from perpetual campaigning, could spend more time on governance. Voters, especially migrants and students, would require less travel. Proponents also point to reduced campaign costs and a lighter administrative burden. Second, fewer elections — they argue — would mean less voter fatigue and greater turnout. Third, they contend that aligned elections would enhance governance efficiency. With the MCC in force less frequently, governments could avoid frequent halts to new projects, and coordination between state and national administrations might improve, particularly if concurrent elections produced aligned political outcomes. The problems with one-size-fits-all: These arguments have merit, but each is weaker — or more complicated — than advertised. On time savings, the real issue is less about the electoral calendar than about campaign strategy. The BJP, like other parties before it, has deliberately 'nationalised' even the most local contests by deploying its top leaders in subnational campaigns. This is a political choice, not a structural necessity. Staggered elections need not mean the constant diversion of national leadership if parties invested in strong state-level leaders. In terms of costs, India's election administration is remarkably efficient given the scale of the exercise. The 2014 general election cost the central government around 0.03% of GDP. Even including state polls, the share over a five-year period is tiny compared to other budgetary items. If the problem is excessive campaign spending, the answer lies in genuine political finance reform. Instead, the government has gone in the opposite direction, creating opaque mechanisms for political giving such as the unconstitutional electoral bonds scheme. There are legitimate arguments to be made about the diversion of government officials and security forces to conduct, supervise, and secure elections on a staggered basis. But central paramilitary forces have doubled in size since the 1990s, easing concerns about overstretch. Simultaneous elections would require a larger, one-time deployment — creating its own risks. In terms of voter fatigue, the evidence from India is mixed. State election turnout has risen since the decline of simultaneous polls in the late 1960s, often exceeding turnout in national elections. And in states where assembly polls closely follow general elections, turnout has often increased (albeit by a smaller margin than in non-proximate elections). On government efficiency, the MCC is more limited than often claimed: It applies only to states holding elections, not nationwide (except during general elections), and does not halt ongoing programmes. Ironically, simultaneous elections could also result in more — not fewer — elections. According to the proposed amendment, if a government loses a vote of no-confidence and a fresh election is called, the newly elected government will only serve the remainder of the unexpired term. In that case, the efficiency argument for aligned polls no longer holds water. Risks to democracy and federalism: Beyond these weaknesses lie deeper concerns about democratic design. First, the essence of parliamentary government is that the executive is continuously accountable to the legislature and, by extension, the public. A shift toward a system resembling fixed terms upends this. Second, standardising state and national elections on a single cycle creates fewer opportunities for public participation and debate. The current staggered system of elections allows voters to act as a check on a dominant national party. Finally, the amendment gives the ECI broad discretion to delay polls with few limits and without specifying who governs in the interim. This opens the door to greater central control through President's Rule. A better way forward: India's current electoral calendar has costs, but there are less intrusive ways to address them. One option is to reform the MCC. The ECI could convene an all-party meeting to shorten the period it is in force or exempt certain categories of government action from its ambit. A second is to tackle opaque political finance. Parliament could align the ₹2,000 cash cap with the ₹20,000 disclosure threshold — or better yet, ban cash contributions altogether and require Aadhaar verification for all donations. A third is to streamline election scheduling. The 2024 general election stretched over 43 days — the longest voting period in seven decades. Reducing the number of phases would cut the MCC's duration and decrease disruption without changing the staggered nature of elections. If the government insists on consolidation, compromise models exist. One possibility is one nation, two elections, whereby state polls would be clustered at the mid-point of Parliament's term, reducing frequency while retaining separate state and national verdicts. Another option is aligning national and local body elections — saving costs without undermining the role of state assemblies. Proceed with caution: One nation, one election is a bold idea. But it risks centralising power, weakening federalism, and paradoxically increasing the frequency of elections. The better path is to fix the specific problems the proposal seeks to solve through targeted reforms that preserve the strengths of India's vibrant, multi-level democracy. These ideas — less flashy but more practical — have received little airtime in the current debate. They would be a promising place to start. Milan Vaishnav is senior fellow and director of the South Asia program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This column draws on a new co-authored paper, with Caroline Mallory and Annabel Richter, 'Does 'One Nation, One Election' Make Sense for India?' The views expressed are personal.
Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Not an era of war': India welcomes US-Russia meet in Alaska; calls it step toward ending Ukraine conflict
NEW DELHI: India on Saturday welcomed the agreement between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to hold a summit in Alaska on August 15, 2025, describing it as a possible breakthrough in ending the war in Ukraine. In a statement, the ministry of external affairs (MEA) said, 'India welcomes the understanding reached between the United States and the Russian Federation for a meeting in Alaska on 15th August 2025. This meeting holds the promise of bringing to an end the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and opening up the prospects for peace.' "India, therefore, endorses the upcoming Summit meeting and stands ready to support these efforts," it further added. Washington has long accused India of supporting Moscow's 'war machine' against Ukraine by buying Russian oil. US had earlier announced 25% additional duties on Indian imports in the country, on the top of an already 25% tariff, taking the total to 50%. The order specified that "The ad valorem duty be in addition to any other duties, fees, taxes, exactions, and charges applicable to such imports..." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Women 60+ Are Ditching Pads For A Better Alternative DryGuard Underwear Learn More Undo The implementation timeline shows the base duty taking effect from August 7, whilst the additional charge begins from August 27, following a 21-day period. The order said, "I find that the Government of India is currently directly or indirectly importing Russian Federation oil. Accordingly, and as consistent with applicable law, articles of India imported into the customs territory of the United States shall be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 25%." US President Donald Trump will be meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15, in an effort to negotiate a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine, which began with Russia's invasion in February 2022 and has seen numerous failed rounds of talks. It will be Putin's first visit to the United States in a decade, his last being in 2015 for the UN General Assembly in New York. For Trump, the meeting marks his most direct attempt yet to fulfil his campaign pledge to end the war 'within 24 hours,' a promise that has faced repeated setbacks despite phone calls, peace talks and diplomatic visits. The choice of Alaska is has symbolic importance as Russia sold the territory to the US in 1867, and its western tip sits just across the Bering Strait from Russia's easternmost point. The Kremlin confirmed the meeting after US envoy Steve Witkoff met Putin in Moscow. During his visit, Witkoff proposed a trilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but Russia did not respond to the idea. 'The Russian side left this option completely without comment,' Kremlin spokesperson Ushkov said. Earlier, Trump had told reporters he would likely meet Putin face-to-face 'very soon.' His efforts to halt Russia's military offensive have so far yielded little progress, with three rounds of direct talks between Moscow and Kyiv ending without a breakthrough.
