Woman detained for trespassing at Aditya Roy Kapur's house in Mumbai
A 47-year-old woman was detained by the Khar police on Monday evening for trespassing at the residence of Bollywood actor Aditya Roy Kapur while he was away.According to police officials, the woman, identified as Ghazala Siddique, arrived at Kapur's residence and told his domestic help that she had come to meet the actor and had brought gifts for him. She was allowed entry into the premises in his absence.advertisementUpon returning home, Kapur was informed by his staff about Siddique. The actor promptly contacted society officials, who in turn notified the Khar police. Authorities arrived at the scene and detained Siddique. She has since been booked for trespassing and housebreaking under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Further investigation revealed that this is not Siddique's first such incident. Last week, she reportedly attempted to gain access to superstar Salman Khan's residence, after which she was detained by the Bandra police.Siddique, who claims to be a resident of Dubai, said that she came to Mumbai to meet Aditya Roy Kapur. Police are currently verifying her background and the motives behind her repeated attempts to approach Bollywood celebrities.The case is under investigation at Khar Police Station.On the work front, Aditya Roy Kapur will be seen next in Anurag Basu's Metro In Dino. The film is slated for release on July 4.
IN THIS STORY#Aditya Roy Kapur
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Metro in Dino trailer explores modern love across generations — From Gen Z to elderly romance, here what Anurag Basu wants to showcase
Anurag Basu's upcoming film Metro in Dino has stirred conversation with its trailer, not just for its ensemble cast and soulful music but for its sensitive portrayal of love in different stages of Life. Lauded as a spiritual successor to Life in a Metro (2007), the film reflects how relationship dynamics have evolved—from Gen Z's complex dating lives to millennial dilemmas and even elderly love stories that still seek connection and companionship. Love in the times of modern India: A generational breakdown The trailer gives a glimpse into six stories—each representing a unique kind of relationship set in the hustle and isolation of city life. Gen Z romance: digital-age complications In Metro in Dino, Sara Ali Khan and Aditya Roy Kapur portray a young couple navigating the complexities of modern relationships. Their story reflects how younger generations often wrestle with commitment, identity, and the impact of social media on emotional bonding. Quick love, faster heartbreak, and self-discovery define their arc. In a candid moment from the trailer, Sara's character confronts Aditya, saying, "You're a commitment-phobic man-child," highlighting the emotional challenges faced by Gen Z in the realm of love. Millennials: Career Vs. connection Fatima Sana Shaikh and Ali Fazal bring forward the complexities faced by urban millennials—balancing career, emotional baggage, and long-term compatibility. Their narrative hints at a generation that is constantly trying to "fix" relationships while chasing stability. Elderly love: a second chance Veteran actors Pankaj Tripathi and Neena Gupta portray a tender, late-life connection. Their story is heartwarming and nostalgic, touching upon the loneliness that often follows retirement or personal loss and how love can bloom even after decades. Actors like Anupam Kher and Konkona Sen Sharma also feature in similar emotionally rich arcs that highlight love beyond youth. A callback to Life in a Metro The style, tone, and interlinked storytelling of Metro in Dino instantly remind viewers of Basu's Life in a Metro, which explored urban loneliness and complicated relationships in a rapidly growing city. While that film reflected the early 2000s mindset, Metro in Dino updates the narrative to reflect today's social shifts: Anurag Basu's storytelling remains emotionally grounded, but now it also mirrors how love has become more individualistic, nuanced, and sometimes fragile. Why this film matters now? In a world of fast swipes and fleeting connections, Metro… in Dino seems to ask a fundamental question: Do we still believe in lasting love? By showing various types of love—messy, slow, intense, and rediscovered—the film becomes a mirror for our times. It's not just about falling in love anymore. It's about healing, understanding, and growing through it—all across generations.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Allahabad High Court denies relief to Rahul Gandhi over remarks on Indian Army
Observing that freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions, the Allahabad High Court last week denied relief to the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, in a defamation case filed against him over his alleged remarks against the Indian Army. Rejecting Mr. Gandhi's plea challenging the defamation case as well as the summoning order passed in February 2025 by an MP-MLA court in Lucknow, a Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi on May 29 said the trial court was right to summon the Congress leader to face trial for the offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, as it had taken into consideration all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. 'No doubt over the fact that Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression but this freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions and it does not include the freedom to make statements which are defamatory to any person or defamatory to the Indian Army. Therefore, the ratio laid down in Javed Ahmad Hajam (Supra) and Kaushal Kishore (Supra) would not apply to the facts of the present case,' the Court noted. The matter pertains to a case filed against Mr. Gandhi by a former Border Roads Organisation (BRO) Director, Uday Shankar Srivastava, who alleged that his statements, given after a clash between the Indian and Chinese armies on December 9, 2022, had defamed the Indian Army. The remarks were made by Mr. Gandhi during the Congress's Bharat Jodo Yatra on December 16, 2022. Also read: Rahul Gandhi's surrender barb insult of armed forces, says BJP The plea quoted Mr. Gandhi as allegedly saying, 'People will ask about Bharat Jodo Yatra, here and there, Ashok Gahlot and Sachin Pilot and whatnot. But they will not ask a single question about China capturing 2000 square kilometers of Indian territory, killing 20 Indian soldiers and thrashing our soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh. But the Indian press doesn't ask a question to them about this. Isn't it true? The nation is watching all this. Don't pretend that people don't know.' The lower court in Lucknow had in February summoned Mr. Gandhi in the case, following which the Congress leader approached the High Court. In his plea, Mr. Gandhi said the complainant was not an officer of the Indian Army and hence the defamation case did not hold water. While rejecting the contention of the Congress leader, the High Court noted that under Section 199(1) the Cr.P.C., a person other than the direct victim of an offence can also be considered an 'aggrieved person' if they are impacted by the offence.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
HC junks Rahul's plea, says free speech doesn't extend to remarks against Army
Lucknow: Observing that freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions and it does not include freedom to make statements which are defamatory to any person or to the Indian Army, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on May 29 dismissed Congress MP Rahul Gandhi's plea challenging a lower court summon in a defamation case over alleged derogatory remarks about the Indian Army during his . Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The single-judge bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed that the material on record made a prima facie case against Gandhi for making defamatory statement against Indian Army and hence the summoning order of lower court could not be set aside, and he would have to stand on trial. The case stems from a complaint filed by Udai Shanker Srivastava, retired director of the Border Roads Organization (a position equivalent to a Colonel in the Indian Army), in which he alleged that on Dec 16, 2022, during his 'Bharat Jodo Yatra' in Lucknow, Gandhi made disparaging comments about a face-off between the Indian and Chinese armies in Arunachal Pradesh on Dec 9, 2022. According to the complaint, Gandhi had said, "People will ask about Bharat Jodo Yatra, here and there, Ashok Gahlot and Sachin Pilot and whatnot. But they will not ask a single question about China capturing 2000 sq kms of Indian territory, killing 20 Indian soldiers and thrashing our soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh. But the Indian press doesn't ask a question to them about this. Isn't it true? The nation is watching all this. Don't pretend that people don't know." Srivastava contended that Gandhi's statement was "false and baseless" and made with "evil intention of demoralizing the Indian Army and to damage the faith of the Indian population in the Indian Army". He highlighted that the official statement from the Indian Army on Dec 12, 2022, confirmed that "PLA troops contacted the LAC in Tawang Sector which was contested by our troops in a firm and resolute manner. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now This faceoff led to minor injuries to a few personnel from both sides." The complainant said that Gandhi's "baseless and derogatory statement" deeply hurt him and other nationalists. The additional chief judicial magistrate, court no. 27, Lucknow, had on Feb 11, 2025, summoned Gandhi to face trial for the offence under Section 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code. The lower court observed that prima facie, Gandhi's statement appeared to demoralize the Indian Army and its personnel and was not made in the performance of his official duties. Gandhi's counsel, Pranshu Agarwal, argued that the complaint was politically motivated and lacked merit. He contended that the complainant was not an "aggrieved person" under Section 199 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the alleged defamation was against the Indian Army as an institution, not Srivastava directly. However, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, rejected these arguments in his ruling and observed: "No doubt, Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression, this freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions, and it does not include the freedom to make statements which are defamatory to any person or defamatory to the Indian Army." The court clarified that the complainant as an "aggrieved person" could file the complaint under Section 199 of CrPC. While dismissing Gandhi's plea challenging the lower court summons, Justice Vidyarthi also noted that the trial court's decision to summon Gandhi was based on a "judicious application of mind" after considering the complaint and witness statements, and was not mechanical.
