‘I did it my way': Vijay Mallya, Lalit Modi's karaoke at London party fails to impress internet
'I did it #myway - a few memories from my annual summer party past Sunday at my house in London,' Lalit Modi wrote. He continued that he invited 310 people for the 'amazing night', and the guest list consisted of his 'friends and family'. In addition to Vijay Mallya, Chris Gayle was also spotted at the event.
Modi also wrote a few words for Mallya. After thanking his guests, he shared, 'And to Vijay Mallya for his everlasting spirit of being there for me. Hope this video does not break the internet. Controversial for sure. But that what I do best.'
Take a look at the video:
What did social media say?
While many reacted with hilarity, a few slammed and labelled them 'fugitives.'
An individual posted, 'Sad reality that all fugitives are enjoying lavish lives after looting money from the Indian public.' Another added, 'I was waiting for the invitation. Hope I get it next summer.'
A third commented, 'All, Please visit India.' A fourth wrote, 'Nazar na lage app dono ko.'
In another post, Lalit Modi wrote about meeting Chris Gayle at his home in London. 'With the man himself the one and only #universeboss Chris Gayle at my home in London for my summer party. Presented me with his bat with which he scored the highest ever total by an individual person in an T20 match in 2013 for the Royal Challengers Bengaluru of 175 runs in just 66 balls. What an inning that was. And he was not out. The greatest entertainer in cricket of all times. I salute him (sic).'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
30 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Maharashtra politics has let down Marathi-speaking people
It all began in February 1956 when the States Reorganisation Commission led by Justice Fazal Ali, with K M Panikkar and H N Kunzru as members, recommended a bilingual Bombay State, including Maharashtra and Gujarat, with Bombay its capital, thereby denying Maharashtra's exclusive claim over the city. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel were against the restructuring of states on a linguistic basis, but the death of Potti Sreeramulu, the Telugu activist who went on a fast to press for the demand to create Andhra Pradesh, compelled them to alter their stand. But they were unwilling to concede Maharashtra's right over the city of Mumbai. The apparently adamant stand of Nehru and Patel triggered independent India's first all-party coalition against the mighty Congress party, which was accused, rightly so, of being anti-federal. It necessitated the formation of the Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti, which came into being in February 1956, the first all-party anti-Congress front of independent India that had the likes of communist Sripad Amrut Dange, aka Bhai Dange, socialist S M Joshi and activists such as Keshav Sitaram 'Prabodhankar' Thackeray and other well-known Maharashtrians. With the 70th anniversary of the formation of the Samiti, which successfully led the agitation demanding an independent state for Marathi-speaking people with Mumbai as its capital, a few months away, Maharashtra is witnessing another all-party mobilisation against the allegedly anti-federal Centre. The difference between now and then, however, is that the once-strong omnipresent Congress at the Centre has been replaced by the BJP. There are two striking similarities between the situations then and now. Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, or Guruji, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief then, had extended open support to Nehru and Patel in their initial stand that was against states' reorganisation on the basis of language. The RSS and Nehru-Patel, strange as it may sound, were on the same page — both believed that linguistic divisions could lead to fragmentation and instability and become a threat to the integration of the newly independent nation. This explains the BJP's insistence on Hindi. Spoken predominantly in the north Indian states, Hindi remains central to the saffron camp's grand design of 'nation building', which envisages Oneness — one nation, one religion and one language (and one political party, one leader, BJP critics might add). It also explains Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis's recent political experiment to bring in Hindi as the third language in school education from the primary level. The move backfired but, on the way, it galvanised the Opposition, which wasted no time in forming an all-party front, à la 1956, to oppose the BJP. Maharashtra is crucial as the only state south of the Vindhyas for the RSS's long-envisaged plan of Hindi-isation of India. Had Fadnavis, a true swayamsevak, succeeded in making Hindi mandatory from school level, Maharashtra would have been the first big state outside the cow belt to embrace the north Indian language. United in thwarting his efforts were the Thackeray brothers, Uddhav and Raj, who buried their hatchet, if only for the time being, to challenge the ever-so-strong Centre, taking a cue perhaps from their grandfather Prabodhankar, who had played a significant role in spoiling the Nehru-Patel design 70 years ago. So, like in 1956, there is a Thackeray involved in the current politics of language as well. The 70-year gap between then and now illustrates how Maharashtra politics has let down the Marathi-speaking people. Following the formation of the state of Maharashtra, with Nehru later conceding the state's demand for Mumbai as its capital, the Samiti that spearheaded the agitation against Nehru-Patel was dissolved, and then the Shiv Sena rose. Led by maverick Bal Thackeray, the son of Prabodhankar, it espoused the cause of the Marathi manoos, but it didn't go much further than ensuring lowly jobs for locals in state-run PSUs. Unlike the DMK in Tamil Nadu, the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal or even the Assam Gana Parishad in the Northeast, the Shiv Sena was far from being a pan-Maharashtra party. It was, till a few years ago, confined to Mumbai and the Konkan. It lost its mojo after aggressive Hindutva became the mainstay of politics. The Thackerays, having strayed from the Marathi cause, jumped onto the Hindutva bandwagon. It didn't take much effort for the BJP to first overshadow the Sena and then split it into two. Meanwhile, Raj Thackeray, the Shiv Sena founder's successor in charisma, tried his hand at exploiting Marathi sentiments. Like Thackeray Sr, he, too, lost steam on the way and settled for playing second fiddle to the BJP. Led now by Narendra Modi and Amit Shah, it was much easier for the BJP to neutralise the younger Thackeray and make his political outfit, the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, redundant. In its zeal to run the state on its own, the BJP's aggressive leadership tried to politically weaken the two Thackerays. The Fadnavis government's ill-timed decision — now rolled back — to introduce (read: Impose) Hindi at school level came in this fraught context. It was nothing short of bowling a full-toss in the death overs for a team battling to stay afloat. The BJP government's move not only rejuvenated the two Thackerays and their two Senas, in the bargain it also sullied the saffron party's anti-federal image further. The BJP now is being compared with the old Delhi-centric, all-powerful Congress. It is certainly not a comparison the BJP would be happy about. Now, like in the Sixties, the issue of Hindi has crossed political boundaries and has taken a Maharashtra vs Might of Delhi turn. In the Sixties, the fall-out of the Samyukta Maharashtra movement was the Congress's defeat in subsequent elections. Will history repeat itself with the BJP, which has replaced Congress now? Only time will answer this question. But meanwhile, like the play Six Characters in Search of an Author by Italian dramatist Luigi Pirandello, Maharashtrians' search for a genuine and honest regional political party that can go beyond hooliganism and thuggery in the name of Marathi manoos continues. The writer is editor, Loksatta
Hans India
32 minutes ago
- Hans India
Embracing New Experiences
Gleeden, the world's largest extramarital dating app, made by women for women, recently achieved the milestone of acquiring 3 million users in India. Launched in India in 2017, Gleeden has been highly popularized in the Indian market to become the go-to platform for individuals looking for discreet extramarital affairs. To celebrate this achievement, Gleeden conducted a nationwide survey, to understand the continuously changing status of relationships, focusing on how GenZ, Millennials and GenX individuals feel about love and marriage. This is the third survey of its kind that has been conducted by one of the leading global market research organizations, IPSOS, on behalf of Gleeden and focuses on love, marriage, and infidelity trends among three generations who have deeply embedded India's socio-cultural thinking in themselves. The survey was conducted among 1,510 individuals, both men and women, who are aged between 18-60 years and living in 12 tier-1 Indian cities (Delhi, Jaipur, Ludhiana, Kolkata, Patna, Guwahati, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Indore, Bangalore, Hyderabad & Kochi), and tier-2 cities (Jaipur, Lucknow, Chandigarh, Gurugram, Indore, Noida, Surat, Nagpur, Bhubaneswar, Bhopal) The focus of the study was to understand the changing perception of infidelity among GenZ, Millennials and GenX, and the emerging trends that are changing their understanding of love & marriages. 'At Gleeden, we have always felt that emotional fulfillment and the freedom to make a choice is central to any connection that matters. This survey reinforces what we have seen on our platform - Indians of all ages are beginning to challenge tradition and seek relationships that fit their changing emotional realities. As the conversations around love, intimacy, and loyalty are changing, Gleeden is slowly becoming the go-to safe & non-judgmental space for individuals to understand and embrace societal changes in an authentic way, and on their own terms.' says Sybil Shiddell, Country Manager, Gleeden India The survey paints a detailed description of how Indians perceive relationships and the challenges these have to face in order stay healthy and happy, including infidelity, and how the different generations have been shifting opinion and mindsets over the past few years. It revealed that 33% of the total respondents feel that work-life balance and lack of quality time with family is a major challenge that leads them towards infidelity. The millennials (42%) make up the major part of these respondents, who are interestingly also part of the current workforce, whereas GenX (27%) and GenZ (31%) respondents also provide major backing in this aspect. Despite affirming to feel very happy and sexually satisfied in their current relationships, over half of the total respondents (51%), say that they lack any emotional connection with their partners, whereas 42% and 38% respectively highlight that lack of excitement & thrill, and physical intimacy is why they are indulging in infidelity. The GenX (55%) are the major voices who do not have any emotional connection with their partners, whereas 49% of GenZ say that they are not satisfied with the physical intimacy that they have currently. 54% of GenX respondents say that they frequently have thoughts of exploring connections beyond their relationships, with 44% of GenZ and 39% of millennials having the same opinion. Furthermore, the survey also reveals that both men (43%) and women (42%) have not stopped there, and therefore engaged in either physical and emotional infidelity Out of them, GenX (52%) leads the charts in having been part of both emotional and physical infidelity, followed by GenZ (41%) and Millennials (36%). The studies also reveal that 62% of millennials are more receptive to understanding the reason behind infidelity before making any decisions, followed by GenZ (50%), instead of looking to end the relationship abruptly. Additionally, the study shows that Indians today are more receptive towards using infidelity as a tool to stay emotionally fulfilled in a relationship. 58% of the respondents say that they are open to infidelity if it helped them stay emotionally fulfilled, whereas 45% are of the opinion that it could also reignite passion in stagnant marriages. Overall, a staggering 45% believe that infidelity can sometimes save a relationship, out of which 47% are married individuals. 50% of GenX respondents also reveal that humankind is not made for monogamy, with 41% of the GenZ and 37% of Millennials sharing the same opinion. 63% of GenX and Millennials also reiterated that societal pressure forces people to stay monogamous, while 59% of the GenZ share the same opinion. But the most striking finding from this part of the research is that men and women share virtually identical views on the subject: 62% of women and 61% of men believe that humans are not wired for monogamy — a model ultimately imposed by centuries of ossified social norms.' Overall, 61% of the respondents agree on this aspect, highlighting societal pressure as a major decision-maker in Indians' relationships. Finally, 41% of the respondents revealed that they are receptive to their partners suggesting an open relationship, while 35% admitted that they are already part of one. 68% of the respondents also pointed towards social media as the major enabler of infidelity, citing that it offers more opportunities. 64% of the respondents also admitted that they flirt on social media platforms despite being in a relationship, out of which 49% of the GenX respondents say that they do it frequently. The survey was conducted in May 2025 by IPSOS on behalf of Gleeden, with the objective of understanding how love and relationships are changing among GenX, Millennials and GenZ Indians, and how their opinions have shifted over the last years. The results have since indicated that more Indians are opening up towards the notion of infidelity as an enabler for emotional availability and happiness and are more receptive towards meeting new people.
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
India faced 3 adversaries inOp Sindoor: Top general
NEW DELHI: India faced not one but three adversaries during the four-day military confrontation with Pakistan under Operation Sindoor two months ago, a top general said on Friday, putting the spotlight on the crucial battle support provided to Islamabad by allies Beijing and Ankara, and the lessons learnt from the May 7-10 clash. Deputy chief of Army Staff Lt General Rahul R. Singh speaks during a conference-cum-exhibition on 'New Age Military Technologies: Industry Capabilities & Way Forward' organised by FICCI, in New Delhi, on Friday. (PTI) Beijing saw the confrontation as a 'live lab' to test the performance of the weapons and systems supplied by it to Pakistan, and the Chinese actions reflected its strategy against India of 'killing with a borrowed knife' (using Pakistan for its own gains), said Lieutenant General Rahul R Singh, deputy chief of army staff (capability development and sustenance). China also gave real-time inputs to Pakistan about India's weapon deployments, he said. Singh also explained why Pakistan asked for a ceasefire. 'Because there was a punch that was ready, and they realised that the hidden punch, in case it comes through, Pakistan would be in a very, very bad condition.' He was likely referring to the current leadership's muscular response to terror strikes. Previously, the understanding was that Pakistan sued for peace after Indian strikes on several of its military and air bases on the morning of May 10, but it was always suspected that New Delhi had a larger strike in the works, perhaps with the Indian Navy also getting involved. Singh's comment is the first official acknowledgement of that. 'So few lessons that I thought I must flag as far as Operation Sindoor is concerned --- firstly, one border, two adversaries. So we saw Pakistan on one side, but adversaries were two. And I would say actually three. Pakistan was the front face. We had China providing all possible support… Turkey also played a very important role in providing the type of support that was there,' said Singh at a conference on New Age Military Technologies organised by industry grouping FICCI. This is the first time that top levels of the Indian military have detailed the role of China and Turkey during the four-day military clash, the most intense conflict between the two nuclear-armed neighbours in decades. India launched Operation Sindoor in the early hours of May 7 and struck nine terror and military installations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) as a response to the Pahalgam terror strike in which 26 people were shot dead by terrorists. It sparked a four-day military confrontation with Pakistan involving fighter jets, missiles, drones, long-range weapons and heavy artillery before the two sides reached an understanding on stopping all military action on May 10. 'And it's (Chinese support) is no surprise because if you were to look at statistics in the last five years, 81% of the military hardware that Pakistan is getting is all Chinese. And China, of course, (used) the good old dictum 'kill by a borrowed knife'…So he would rather use the neighbour to cause pain, rather than getting involved in the mud-slinging match on the northern borders,' Singh said, referring to the long-standing issue of an undefined border between India and China . Indian air defence systems and radars gathered considerable information on Chinese-origin equipment, particularly the J-10 and JF-17 fighter jets, PL-15 beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile and HQ-9 long-range air defence system. This was the first known use in combat for most of this equipment. Singh highlighted how China evaluated the performance of the weaponry supplied by it to Pakistan. 'China, perhaps, has seen that he is able to test his weapons against, say, various other weapon systems that are like a live lab, which is available. That is something we have to be cognisant about,' he said. Pakistan was getting real-time inputs from China about the positioning of Indian weapons during the clash, Singh said. 'When the DGMO level talks were going on, Pakistan was actually mentioning that 'we know that your such and such important vector is primed and ready for action and I would request you to perhaps pull it back.' So he was getting live inputs from China.' This is the first time that India has confirmed details of real-time coordination between Beijing and Islamabad. The Congress was quick to cite Singh's comments and demand a discussion on India-China relations in the Parliament. 'Lt Gen Singh has revealed some details of the extraordinary ways by which China helped the Pakistan Air Force. This is the same China which completely destroyed the status quo in Ladakh five years ago but to which Prime Minister Modi gave a public clean chit on June 19, 2020. For five years, the INC has been demanding a discussion on the full gamut of India-China relations in the Parliament. The Modi government has consistently refused to have such a debate,' said Congress MP Jairam Ramesh, who is also the party's general secretary in-charge communications. The Congress will continue to make this demand in the forthcoming monsoon session of Parliament, and the government must agree so that a consensus can be built for a collective response to the geopolitical and economic challenges that China poses to India --- directly and through Pakistan, Ramesh said. In his lecture, the army's deputy chief touched upon Turkey's role too, especially the drones supplied by it to Pakistan. 'Bayraktar (drones), of course, he (Turkey) has been giving (to Pakistan) from before. We saw numerous other drones also coming in, landing in the face of war, during the war, along with trained sort of individuals who were there.' India's population centres were not quite targeted by Pakistan during the skirmish but, in the next round, the country must be prepared for that, Singh said. 'For that, more and more air defence, more and more counter rocket artillery, drone sort of a system has to be prepared for which we have to move very fast,' he said. The defining thing about Operation Sindoor was that the strategic messaging by the country's leadership was unambiguous, he said. 'You cross the redlines and there will be action. There would be punitive action if required. There is no scope of absorbing the pain the way we did a few years ago,' he said, likely a reference to terror strikes in the past to which India did not respond militarily. India has now made it explicit that any sub-conventional attack (such as a terror strike) will be responded through conventionally (a military strike). He said stopping the war at the appropriate time was a masterstroke by India. 'An important consideration was that we should always be on top of the escalation ladder. When we reach a political military objective, we should try and put a stop to it. So a lot of naysayers say, why did we stop now? So war is easy to initiate, but it's very difficult to control. I would say that was a masterstroke to stop the war.'
