
Today in Politics: Rahul, Priyanka Gandhi expected to lead Opposition charge on Day 2 of Op Sindoor debate
The speakers from the Opposition have, by and large, focused their attacks on the alleged security lapses and intelligence failure, the alleged role the US government led by Donald Trump played in the ceasefire declaration, and the aircraft the Air Force lost in the May 7-10 military offensive against terror infrastructure in Pakistan.
The government countered by saying that the Opposition was asking the wrong questions — this was the crux of Defence Minister Rajnath Singh's remarks, as Vikas Pathak reported — and clarified there was no link between the trade talks with the US and the halt in military operations against Pakistan.
The Rajya Sabha, meanwhile, will start the debate on Tuesday. What punches the two sides land in the two Houses will be among the top political stories of the day.
The Supreme Court will take up the reference made to it by the President under Article 143 of the Constitution, following the court's April 8 verdict setting a three-month deadline for the President and Governors to act on Bills passed by state Assemblies. Under Article 143(1), the President may refer a 'question of law or fact' to the Supreme Court for its opinion. The opinion, unlike a ruling, is not binding.
On Tuesday, a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai is likely to decide the schedule of the hearings, which are expected to begin sometime in the middle of August. The Tamil Nadu government has moved the court, urging it to declare the Presidential reference as not maintainable and return it as unanswered. It labelled the Presidential reference an 'appeal in disguise'.
As Apurva Vishwanath quite lucidly explained in this article, in its 1991 opinion on the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the court said Article 143 was not a mechanism for the executive to seek review or reversal of its established judicial decisions. The government can, however, file for a review of the April 8 ruling and move a curative petition in an attempt to reverse it.
The Assam government is gearing up to conduct one of the biggest eviction drives of late, in eastern Assam's Golaghat district, reports Sukrita Baruah. Officials estimate that around 15,000 bighas (around 4,900 acres) of land in the Rengma Reserve Forest in the Uriamghat area of Golaghat will be cleared of 'encroachers' over two phases, with the first phase scheduled for Tuesday. Around 2,700 families, mostly Bengali-origin Muslims, live on this land.
The Himanta Biswa Sarma government's eviction drive has been politically contentious, given that it comes at a time when the Mamata Banerjee government and the Trinamool Congress (TMC) have mobilised over the alleged mistreatment of Bengali migrant workers in various BJP-ruled states, including Assam, framing it as 'linguistic terrorism'. Assam's neighbouring states, too, are on guard about the possible influx of undocumented migrants into their territory and have heightened vigil in the border districts, Sukrita reported last week.
To know how these eviction drives play out, affecting people's lives, read Sukrita's ground report from earlier this month: 'Even if you cry, your house won't be spared': Inside Assam's latest mega eviction drive
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


India.com
27 minutes ago
- India.com
Will India buy F-35 fighter jets from US? The government says…
New Delhi: On the question of buying F-35 fighter jets from America, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said in a written reply in the Lok Sabha that there has been no formal discussion with America on this issue yet. Who raised the question over purchase of F-35 fighter jet? Congress MP Balwant Baswant Wankhade from Maharashtra had sought answers to 3 questions from the Ministry of External Affairs in the Lok Sabha. One of which was on the purchase of F-35. The Ministry of External Affairs has written in response, 'After the Prime Minister's meeting with US President Donald Trump on 13 February 2025, the India-US Joint Statement stated that the US will review its policy on issuing fifth-generation fighter aircraft (such as F-35) and undersea systems to India. There has been no formal discussion on this issue yet.' What is India's stand on purchasing F-35 stealth fighter jet and 25% tariff? India's Foreign Ministry has given this information at a time when a day earlier Bloomberg published a report that India has informed the US that it is not interested in buying the F-35 stealth fighter jet. US President Donald Trump has already imposed a 25 percent tariff on India. In such a situation, India is taking cautious and practical steps keeping its economic interests in mind. Bloomberg has published a report quoting people familiar with the matter that India will not engage in retaliatory action against this huge tariff of 25 percent. According to the report, India is considering options to pacify the White House, which also includes promoting American imports. What is the option for India? These sources said that India is considering increasing the purchase of natural gas from the US and increasing the import of communication equipment and gold. They said that promoting these purchases could help reduce India's trade surplus (trade deficit in favour of America) with the US in the next three to four years. They said, no defense purchases are being planned. Will India buy F-35 from America? According to a Bloomberg report, although the Indian government is considering promoting the purchase of American goods, it is unlikely to buy additional defence equipment from the US. This is a major demand put forward by Trump. According to the report, officials familiar with the matter have said this on the condition of anonymity. They said, India has informed the US that it is not interested in buying the F-35 stealth fighter aircraft. During PM Narendra Modi's visit to the White House in February, Trump had offered to sell expensive fighter jets to India. However, officials said that the Modi government is more interested in a partnership to jointly design and manufacture defence equipment domestically.


The Print
27 minutes ago
- The Print
Flow like water, don't explode like a bomb: BJP's dig at Rahul Gandhi on his ‘atom bomb' remarks
'If they explode a bomb, we will save the Constitution,' it said. The ruling party also slammed Gandhi for using 'undemocratic and undignified' language to target the poll panel. New Delhi, Aug 1 (PTI) Responding to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's claim that his party has an 'atom bomb' of evidence against the Election Commission on poll irregularities, the BJP on Friday asked him to 'flow like water' instead of 'exploding like a bomb'. The response comes after the Congress leader claimed that his party has 'open and shut' evidence of alleged poll irregularities by the Election Commission. Likening the proof to an atom bomb, Gandhi said that the poll panel will have no place to hide when it explodes. Replying to a query from reporters on the Congress leader's remarks, BJP leader Sambit Patra said, 'Will Rahul Gandhi explode like a bomb? What do you think? Their job is to explode. They have no other work to do.' He said the Opposition party speaks of such things because they have no faith in democracy. 'Think what kind of language this is: I (Gandhi) will explode on the Election Commission!' Patra told reporters at the BJP headquarters. 'You say 'I will go to Supreme Court against the Election Commission' or 'I will protest against it in a democratic manner', but 'exploding like a bomb'? The language (of Gandhi) itself is undemocratic and undignified,' Patra said. The BJP leader said the language Gandhi used shows that 'these people want to explode like bombs'. 'We have faith in democracy. If they detonate an atom bomb, we will save the Constitution,' Patra added. The BJP leader alleged that Gandhi, who is also the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, has been speaking in a 'threatening tone since the beginning' and has not 'spared anybody'. 'With one hand in pocket, he always speaks in a threatening tone. Just like in Hindi movies, where the villain always keeps one hand in pocket and says things like 'I will explode, I will hit you', he also keeps doing the same,' the BJP leader charged. 'This is not right. This doesn't suit a leader in a democracy, especially when you are the Leader of Opposition,' he said, adding, 'It does not suit Rahul Gandhi to explode like a bomb. You should flow like cool water. Don't explode like a bomb.' PTI PK PK RUK RUK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.


Hans India
27 minutes ago
- Hans India
SC clears way for landfill in Mumbai's Kanjurmarg, stays Bombay HC order
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a Bombay High Court decision, which had restored nearly 120 hectares of land in Mumbai's Kanjurmarg area as a "protected forest". The interim relief, granted by a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, comes as a temporary reprieve to the Brihannumbai Municipal Corporation, allowing the civic body to continue developing the site as a landfill for garbage disposal. Appearing before the apex court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the land in question had historically been used as a landfill and was mistakenly notified as a "protected forest". He added that the notification of the disputed land as a 'protected forest' was inadvertent, prompting the Maharashtra government to issue a de-notification to allow its continued use for waste management. After hearing the submissions, the apex court remarked: "We will stay the order." In its judgement passed on May 2, the Bombay High Court quashed the state government's notification de-notifying 119.91 hectares of protected forest land at Kanjurmarg, which had originally been classified as "protected forest" under a 2008 notification. A Bench of Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Somasekhar Sundaresan had rejected the state government's contention that the original notification was issued in error and a 2003 Supreme Court order permitted the usage of the site as a landfill. The Justice Kulkarni-led Bench observed that the original classification notifying the land in question as a 'protected forest' was based on satellite imaging, ground-truthing, and earlier judicial orders related to mangrove protection. Quashing the subsequent notification, it ruled that the de-notification violated Section 2(1) of the Forest Conservation Act (FCA), which mandates prior approval from the Union government before diverting forest land for non-forest use. "The subject land, i.e. 119.91 hectares, is consequently restored to the status of being a protected forest. Any proposal to de-notify the same would need to be compliant with the due process stipulated in Section 2(1) of the FCA," the Bombay High Court had said, granting the civic body three months to comply with its judgment.