Two Indian Long-Distance Runners, One Boxer And One Wrestler Banned By NADA
All these cases along with swimmer Vishal Grewal and 19-year-old athlete Mishthi Kajla have been handed punishments by NADA's Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel in March and April after they failed dope tests last year and were handed provisional suspension. In March and April 2025, their suspensions were confirmed after the hearing by the NADA panel.
The 25-year-old Gujar, who had won a 5000m bronze in the 2023 National Inter-State Championships and gold in the National Cross Country Championships in 2023 and 2024, has been banned for four years. Gujar also represented India in the World Athletics Cross Country Championships last year. Gurjar's suspension came into effect on April 20, the day the verdict was delivered by the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel.
Vishal Grewal has been suspended for four years from December 8, 2023, whereas Mishthi Kajla, who won a bronze in the 2024 Federation Cup U20 Championships, will serve a two-year ineligibility from May 5, 2024, though the decision on her appeal was taken on April 15, 2025.
Anjali's six-year ban period begins on March 31, whereas woman pugilist Thokchom Yaisana Chanu will be out for four years from April 10, 2024. The decision on her appeal was reached on April 20, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Trump Rattles Latin America by Weighing Using Military Force
The US under President Donald Trump is crafting a confrontational approach toward Latin America that signals a willingness to use military force against drug cartels, discarding the Biden administration's preference for carrots over sticks to coax countries into alignment with US interests. The New York Times reported Friday that the president ordered the Defense Department to prepare options to take military action against Latin American drug cartels. A US agreement with Mexico to expand security cooperation, expected to be signed in the coming weeks, would facilitate joint monitoring of criminal organizations by security forces and coordination on the border. But the pending agreement won't provide legal grounds for direct US military action on Mexican territory, officials have said. Any such intervention would risk inflaming anti-US sentiments already whipped up by the Trump administration's wave of tariffs. 'This could call into question the security agreement that was drawn up, which is based on a great deal of trust,' said Victoria Dittmar, a researcher at Insight Crime who specializes in Mexico. Trump, asked about the possibility of using military force Friday at the White House, said he would have 'more to say about that soon.' 'Latin America has got a lot of cartels. They've got a lot of drugs flowing. So, you know, we want to protect our country,' Trump said. A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment. The emerging plans to deal with cartels build on the Trump administration's already more aggressive presence in a region that is deeply integrated into the US economy, from cross-border gas pipelines to maritime logistics. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Central America on his first overseas trip, pushing for concessions on US military use of the Panama Canal. The administration has engaged in a war of words with Colombia's leftist president Gustavo Petro and may be preparing to decertify that country's efforts against narcotics. Officials have also stepped up allegations against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as a drug lord, doubling a reward for information leading to his arrest to $50 million this week. The hardening of US policy toward Latin America has been met with varying responses in the region, from open arms to strident opposition. In Ecuador, the pro-US government is preparing a referendum that would allow foreign military installations in national territory, a move seen as clearning the way for the US to reactivate the use of a base in the violence-torn country. But in Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded defiantly to any suggestion that American soldiers would take a combat role in her country. Any agreement with the Trump administration must respect the nation's sovereignty, she reiterated Friday at her daily news conference. 'The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military,' she said Friday. 'We cooperate, we collaborate, but there will be no invasion. That is out of the question, absolutely out of the question. What has been stated in all the calls is that it is not permitted, nor is it part of any agreement, much less.' The security deal in the works rests on the idea that the US won't intervene in Mexico, said Dittmar of Insight Crime. 'If that were to be broken, it would indeed break the relationship of trust and would require a rethinking of joint security strategies,' she said. The Trump administration's approach risks inviting a broader backlash in a region still scarred by decades of Cold War-era intervention from Guatemala to Chile. 'This will strengthen autocratic regimes like the ones in Venezuela or Nicaragua, and the anti-American sentiment in Mexico, Guatemala and even in Colombia,' said Jorge Restrepo, an economics professor who directs CERAC, a Bogota-based research institution that monitors the nation's civil conflict. 'Just the announcement will have the unintended effect of strengthening governments which are not cooperating as much as they could with the United States,' Restrepo said. US interests in the region could become soft targets for criminal organizations, said James Bosworth, founder of political risk firm Hxagon, in a phone interview. The cartels have the ability to take the fight to US territory in a way that al-Qaeda 'could only dream of,' according to Bosworth. While Venezuela, Colombia and Honduras are all potential targets, Mexico is the country that is most vulnerable, especially since Trump officials are much more worried about fentanyl then they are about cocaine, Bosworth said. Trump made a promise to fight trafficking of fentanyl, originating in China and responsible for tens of thousands of US deaths, a key point of his 2024 campaign. Despite stepped-up rhetoric from Washington, Venezuela could be shielded from intervention by US oil interests and concerns about disrupting a steady flow of reverse migration, said Geoff Ramsey, who tracks Venezuela at the Atlantic Council. 'This is an instance in which Trump is seeking to project strength but ultimately understands that any kind of military action in Venezuela would run completely contrary to US interests,' said Ramsey. 'Unfortunately, Maduro knows that this is a bluff. But the opposition doesn't. And I think this is going to fuel a lot of counterproductive daydreaming from the opposition. And my fear is that this is only going to lead them down the path of magical thinking.' The US posturing also risks playing into Venezuela's siege narrative. The country's armed forces on Friday vowed 'to confront, combat, and neutralize any action that threatens the stability and peace of our citizens, as well as the safeguarding of our national territory.' And on state television, Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez reiterated denials that Venezuela hosts organized crime groups. 'There are no criminal gangs operating here, they have taken the story of the Tren de Aragua, they have been completely dismantled, they do not exist, nor do cartels or bosses exist,' Padrino said. Ramsey said US military action in Venezuela 'would risk destabilizing the entire country, and potentially the region itself.' With assistance from Scott Squires. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Trump Rattles Latin America by Exploring Use of Military Force
The US under President Donald Trump is crafting a confrontational approach toward Latin America that signals a willingness to use military force against drug cartels, discarding the Biden administration's preference for carrots over sticks to coax countries into alignment with US interests. The New York Times reported Friday that the president ordered the Defense Department to prepare options to take military action against Latin American drug cartels. A US agreement with Mexico to expand security cooperation, expected to be signed in the coming weeks, would facilitate joint monitoring of criminal organizations by security forces and coordination on the border. But the pending agreement won't provide legal grounds for direct US military action on Mexican territory, officials have said. Any such intervention would risk inflaming anti-US sentiments already whipped up by the Trump administration's wave of tariffs. 'This could call into question the security agreement that was drawn up, which is based on a great deal of trust,' said Victoria Dittmar, a researcher at Insight Crime who specializes in Mexico. Spokespeople at the White House and Pentagon declined to comment. The emerging plans to deal with cartels build on the Trump administration's already more aggressive presence in a region that is deeply integrated into the US economy, from cross-border gas pipelines to maritime logistics. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Central America on his first overseas trip, pushing for concessions on US military use of the Panama Canal. The administration has engaged in a war of words with Colombia's leftist president Gustavo Petro and may be preparing to decertify that country's efforts against narcotics. Officials have also stepped up allegations against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as a drug lord, doubling a reward for information leading to his arrest to $50 million this week. The hardening of US policy toward Latin America has been met with varying responses in the region, from open arms to strident opposition. In Ecuador, the pro-US government is preparing a referendum that would allow foreign military installations in national territory, a move seen as clearning the way for the US to reactivate the use of a base in the violence-torn country. But in Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded defiantly to any suggestion that American soldiers would take a combat role in her country. Any agreement with the Trump administration must respect the nation's sovereignty, she reiterated Friday at her daily news conference. 'The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military,' she said Friday. 'We cooperate, we collaborate, but there will be no invasion. That is out of the question, absolutely out of the question. What has been stated in all the calls is that it is not permitted, nor is it part of any agreement, much less.' The security deal in the works rests on the idea that the US won't intervene in Mexico, said Dittmar of Insight Crime. 'If that were to be broken, it would indeed break the relationship of trust and would require a rethinking of joint security strategies,' she said. The Trump administration's approach risks inviting a broader backlash in a region still scarred by decades of Cold War-era intervention from Guatemala to Chile. 'This will strengthen autocratic regimes like the ones in Venezuela or Nicaragua, and the anti-American sentiment in Mexico, Guatemala and even in Colombia,' said Jorge Restrepo, an economics professor who directs CERAC, a Bogota-based research institution that monitors the nation's civil conflict. 'Just the announcement will have the unintended effect of strengthening governments which are not cooperating as much as they could with the United States,' Restrepo said. US interests in the region could become soft targets for criminal organizations, said James Bosworth, founder of political risk firm Hxagon, in a phone interview. The cartels have the ability to take the fight to US territory in a way that al-Qaeda 'could only dream of,' according to Bosworth. While Venezuela, Colombia and Honduras are all potential targets, Mexico is the country that is most vulnerable, especially since Trump officials are much more worried about fentanyl then they are about cocaine, Bosworth said. Trump made a promise to fight trafficking of fentanyl, originating in China and responsible for tens of thousands of US deaths, a key point of his 2024 campaign. Despite stepped-up rhetoric from Washington, Venezuela could be shielded from intervention by US oil interests and concerns about disrupting a steady flow of reverse migration, said Geoff Ramsey, who tracks Venezuela at the Atlantic Council. 'This is an instance in which Trump is seeking to project strength but ultimately understands that any kind of military action in Venezuela would run completely contrary to US interests,' said Ramsey. 'Unfortunately, Maduro knows that this is a bluff. But the opposition doesn't. And I think this is going to fuel a lot of counterproductive daydreaming from the opposition. And my fear is that this is only going to lead them down the path of magical thinking.' The US posturing also risks playing into Venezuela's siege narrative. The country's armed forces on Friday vowed 'to confront, combat, and neutralize any action that threatens the stability and peace of our citizens, as well as the safeguarding of our national territory.' And on state television, Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez reiterated denials that Venezuela hosts organized crime groups. 'There are no criminal gangs operating here, they have taken the story of the Tren de Aragua, they have been completely dismantled, they do not exist, nor do cartels or bosses exist,' Padrino said. Ramsey said US military action in Venezuela 'would risk destabilizing the entire country, and potentially the region itself.' With assistance from Scott Squires. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
VHP Demands Careful SIT Probe to Protect Dharmasthala
Bengaluru: The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) has issued a strong call to the Karnataka state government, urging utmost caution to protect the sanctity of Sri Kshetra Dharmasthala and the religious sentiments of Hindus during the ongoing Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into matters concerning the revered Sri Manjunatha Swamy Temple in Beltangadi taluk, Dakshina Kannada. Emphasising the need for a thorough and transparent investigation, the VHP demands stringent punishment for those found guilty, while stressing that the government must ensure no disrespect is shown to the sacred site. Dharmasthala, a globally renowned spiritual center, attracts millions of devotees annually from across the world, especially from Bengaluru to seek blessings of Sri Manjunatha Swamy. For decades, it has contributed to society through religious programs, education, and free meals. The VHP has condemned what it describes as deliberate misinformation campaigns by vested interests and anti-Hindu forces aiming to tarnish the shrine's dignity. Specifically, the organization referenced the 2012 brutal murder of Sowjanya in the Beltangadi police station limits, reiterating its demand for a comprehensive investigation and expressing support for all unbiased efforts in this regard. The VHP expressed outrage over recent claims by an anonymous individual alleging that hundreds of bodies were buried in Dharmasthala's forests 10-20 years ago, labelling such statements as part of a calculated conspiracy to defame the temple. The organisation warned that certain groups, unaffiliated with Hindu dharma, are spreading false narratives on social media and orchestrating international plots to target Dharmasthala. The VHP insists that the government take immediate legal action against those conspiring against the temple, ensuring that the SIT investigation does not compromise the site's reverence or Hindu beliefs.
