Rahul Gandhi demands clean, pure voter list
He said the Election Commission is silent as the truth is before the entire nation, after his charge that over one lakh votes in an assembly constituency in Karnataka were found to be fake in a research conducted by his party.
Gandhi participated in the protest march by Opposition MPs from Parliament House to the EC office, but was prevented midway by the police and detained.
They (EC) cannot talk as the truth is before the entire nation," he said as he was being taken away in a bus by the police.
"This fight is not political, but for saving the Constitution," he asserted.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
17 minutes ago
- India.com
Why is Trump not imposing extra tariffs on China just like India for importing Russian oil? Is he scared? VP Vance admits...
New Delhi: US President Donald Trump imposed 25 percent tariff on India for buying Russian oil. On being asked why he isn't imposing same tariff on China for buying Russian oil, there is no straight answer. Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance has admitted that imposing tariffs on China is a very difficult decision. JD Vance has said that after imposing a huge tariff hike on Russian oil imports from India, US President Donald Trump is now considering similar measures against China. But he stressed that deciding to impose tariffs against China would be much more difficult and politically sensitive. Why did Trump not impose tariff on China for importing Russian oil? It is clear from the statement of Vice President JD Vance that Donald Trump is afraid of China's retaliation. In fact, when Trump imposed tariffs on China for the first time, China immediately retaliated and reduced the supply of those rare minerals to America, which are most needed by America's defense industry. The current situation is that American defense companies are struggling to make weapons, and many companies have been forced to extend the delivery date of weapons by two to three months. What did VP Vance say on the issue? That is why JD Vance has admitted that 'the relations between the two countries also affect many other issues.' That is, America is looking after its own interests and is avoiding imposing tariffs on China due to fear. Speaking on Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures, Vice President JD Vance said, 'imposing tariffs on China is being considered, but no decision has been taken yet.' Vance said, 'The President (Donald Trump) has said that he is thinking about it, but he has not taken any concrete decision. The China issue is a little more complicated because our relationship affects many other things that have nothing to do with the Russian situation.' How much oil did China purchase from Russia in July? China's imports of Russian crude oil crossed $ 10 billion in July, the highest monthly level since March. However, the figures so far in 2025 are 7.7% lower than in 2024. Vance said that the President is 'reviewing his options' and 'a decision will be taken at the right time.' At the same time, senior advisor Peter Navarro warned that such tariffs 'can also harm America.' This statement of JD Vance comes after the recent 25 percent additional tariff imposed by the US against India. Due to which the total tariff rate on Indian goods has increased to 50%. This additional duty will come into effect from August 27.
Hindustan Times
17 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC strikes down Army's quota policy for JAG corps
The Supreme Court on Monday struck down the Indian Army's policy of reserving six out of nine Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch vacancies for men and only three for women, calling it 'arbitrary', unconstitutional and contrary to the principle of gender neutrality. Tariffs won't hit defence deals with US, says MEA In an important ruling reinforcing gender equality in the armed forces, a bench of justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan held that the Army and the Union government could not impose a ceiling on the number of women in the JAG cadre once they had been permitted entry under Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950. 'No nation can be secure when half of its population (i.e., its women force) is held back,' emphasised the bench, adding that the 'true meaning' of gender neutrality is that all meritorious candidates, irrespective of gender, must be selected. The ruling came on petitions filed by two women candidates who had ranked fourth and fifth overall but were denied selection because of the gender-based allocation of seats in the 2023 JAG recruitment. The bench pointed out that in this case, one petitioner , Arshnoor Kaur, had secured 447 marks, higher than the 433 scored by a male candidate ranked third in the men's list, yet she was excluded. The court directed her induction in the next available training course, noting that her exclusion amounted to 'indirect discrimination' in violation of Articles 14 (equality), 15 (no discrimination), and 16 (equality of opportunity) of the Constitution. While the other candidate, Astha Tyagi had secured 477 markes, no order was passed in her case since she joined the Indian Navy during the pendency of the matter. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan represented the petitioners. Rejecting the Army's reliance on 'extent of induction' policies dating back to 2011 and 2012, the court held these administrative instructions had no statutory backing and could not override the Section 12 notification allowing women into the JAG branch. The bench further declared that the 2023 recruitment policy, which envisaged at least 50% of JAG vacancies for women to 'compensate for their previous non-enrolment' but capped their share at that figure, was neutral on the face of it, but discriminatory in effect. 'Though neutral in form, it is anything but gender-neutral in application and practice…The evidence of the disparate treatment is writ large in the form of the merit list… female candidates have overwhelmingly outscored their male counterparts,' the judgment noted. It cited the example from the present case where a male candidate ranked sixth in the men's merit list had scored fewer marks than a woman ranked tenth in the women's list, yet was selected while she was not. 'The practice of fixing a ceiling limit to recruitment of female candidates has the effect of perpetuating the status quo, which has been historically discriminatory to women candidates. The result of such practice is confinement of women candidates, irrespective of their performance or merit, in their gendered category, thereby being destructive of not just the constitutional scheme but also of the concept of gender-neutrality and merit,' it held. Observing that male and female JAG officers form part of the same cadre, face identical conditions of service, and are evaluated by the same selection criteria, the bench said there was no justification for separate merit lists. It directed that future recruitment be conducted through a common merit list for all candidates, with the list and individual marks made public. 'The primary job of this branch is to give legal advice and conduct cases… there is no explanation why gender-based vacancy allocation is necessary for a legal branch where the duties, training, and performance expectations are identical for all officers regardless of gender,' the court said, adding that a merit-based process would only improve the branch's efficiency. It directed the Union of India and the Army to conduct future JAG recruitments without bifurcating vacancies by gender, making it clear that if all deserving candidates happen to be women, all of them must be selected. 'To restrict the women candidates to 50% of the seats, as argued by the respondents despite they being more meritorious than the male candidates is violative of the right to equality,' declared the bench. The Army's contention that JAG officers constitute a combatant reserve and that women are not deployed in counter-insurgency or counter-terrorism roles was dismissed as misconceived. The bench pointed to existing policy changes that have brought women's field attachment and operational training 'at par' with men, as well as examples of women officers commanding convoys in militant-prone areas, serving in elite airborne and parachute units, and operating in UN peacekeeping missions in combat zones. The judgment noted that under the 2023 policy, at least 50% of the vacancies must be reserved for women to 'compensate' for their earlier non-enrolment and to raise their strength in the JAG branch to 142 officers. However, it added that women candidates figuring in the merit list beyond this 50% quota must also be accommodated, and their intake cannot be capped at that limit. 'If women can pilot Rafale jets, operate behind enemy lines, and command convoys in high-risk zones, there exists no legal or operational bar to their deployment at peace locations in the JAG branch,' the judgment said. It added; 'This court clarifies that it is not imposing its own views or predilection on the Army but is implementing the Constitution and the mandate of law. But this court agrees with the view held by many that 'no nation can be secure, when half of its population (i.e. its women force) is held back.' Quoting Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates -- 'People feared electricity when it was invented, the court observed that resistance to change cannot justify discrimination. It stressed that women were not seeking special treatment or relaxed standards, only that merit be given a chance. 'If women officers do not conform to discipline or match the standards prescribed or expected of them, the Army shall be at liberty to act as it would with regard to any errant or unfit male officer,' it said.
The Hindu
17 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Sacking of Rajanna exposes Congress' ‘anti-Dalit' face, says BJP
The BJP has maintained that the sacking of Scheduled Tribes leader K.N. Rajanna from the Cabinet over his views on 'voter theft' had revealed the 'true anti-Dalit face' of the Congress, besides exposing the hollowness of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's claims of championing the cause of Ahinda (Kannada acronym for minorities, OBCs, and Dalits). In a social media post, BJP State president B.Y. Vijayendra said: 'This is the true face of Congress — anti-Dalit, anti-democratic and anti-truth. It also exposes the hollowness of Mr. Siddaramaiah's claims of championing the Ahinda cause. When leaders from these communities are targeted, he does not defend them. Instead, he bows to the diktats of the Delhi high command to safeguard his own position as Chief Minister.' He said that Mr. Rajanna, a senior Dalit leader, was removed from the State Cabinet 'for merely speaking the truth.' 'Clear pattern' Mr. Vijayendra further claimed: 'The pattern is clear. In the case of erstwhile ST Welfare Minister Nagendra, funds earmarked for the development of the community were siphoned off to finance Congress's election expenses. Instead of holding the CM and Deputy CM accountable, the blame was placed entirely on Mr. Nagendra, and the matter was quietly closed.' Meanwhile in the Legislative Assembly, the BJP members led by Leader of the Opposition R. Ashok raised the issue as soon as speculations about Mr. Rajanna either quitting or being sacked started doing the rounds. Mr. Ashok urged the government and Mr. Rajanna to clarify on the issue. He even argued that Mr. Rajanna should not be sitting in the place earmarked for Ministers if he is no longer a part of the ministry. While Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H.K. Patil said that Chief Minister Siddaramaiah would respond to them later, Mr. Rajanna said he was told by the Law Minister not to speak. 'Whether I have resigned or not will be told by the Chief Minister,' he said. But the Chief Minister stayed away from the session, while Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, who was in the session, chose not to comment on the floor of the House. Taking exception to Mr. Rajanna and the government remaining mum, Mr. Ashok sought to remind them that it was during the protest over the honey-trap allegations made by Mr. Rajanna that 18 of the BJP MLAs had been suspended. Meanwhile, Deputy Leader of the Opposition Arvind Bellad maintained that the sacking of Mr. Rajanna, a close aide of Mr. Siddaramaiah, was 'a big blow' delivered to the Chief Minister by his deputy.
