Martyred at the altar of 80s-style rally
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Case against Malviya for Mamata post
Kolkata: A case was registered against BJP IT cell chief Amit Malviya by Bidhannagar Cyber Crime Police, following a complaint by a Salt Lake resident that he posted a derogatory and defamatory comment about CM Mamata Banerjee . According to the FIR, Malviya, in a post on X, described Banerjee as the "Queen of thieves" and claimed that she addressed a rally of "illegal Rohingya infiltrators and known criminals". The complainant said the post was false, defamatory and aimed at misleading the public, provoking disorder and disturbing communal harmony. Police registered a case under multiple sections of BNS, including 196 (spreading false information), 352 (insult to provoke breach of peace), 353(1)(6) (statements conducing to public mischief) and 79 (gesture and act intended to insult the modesty of a woman). You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Look at your own country: Bombay High Court raps CPI(M) over Gaza protest petition
The Bombay High Court on Friday (July 25, 2025) dismissed a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the CPI challenging the Mumbai Police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that the Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. A Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad pulled up the petitioners for focusing on matters outside the country and said, 'Our country has enough issues to deal with. We do not want anything like this. I am sorry to say that you are short-sighted. You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what's happening here. Why don't you do something for your own country? Look at your own country. Be patriots. People say they are patriots, but this is not patriotism. Show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first,' the Bench remarked sharply during the hearing. Senior advocate Mihir Desai representing CPI(M), informed the Bench that on June 13, 2025, his clients submitted an application seeking permission from the Azad Maidan police station to hold a peaceful protest and gathering in Azad Maidan to show solidarity with the people of Gaza, who are currently in the midst of a genocide, by calling for a ceasefire. On June 17, denying permission to the All India Peace and Solidarity Foundation (AIPSF) that police informed them that the permission to protest was being denied in exercise of their powers under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 68 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Mr. Desai informed the Bench that the political parties have time and again taken up several causes that has concerned India and have been conducting health and education camps. The Court noted that the CPI(M), being a registered as Indian political party, should ideally be engaging with local civic concerns. 'You are a registered party in India. Your party could have taken up issues like garbage dumping, pollution, drainage, or flooding. Why are you not protesting on these issues? We are only giving examples. Instead, you want to protest over something happening thousands of miles away and showing concern for Palestine and Gaza,' the Bench observed. The petitioners stated that the Indian government's stance and support of Palestine as a State, has been an integral part of the nation's foreign policy. In 1974, India became the first Non-Arab State to recognize Palestine Liberation Organisation as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. In 1988, India was also one of the first countries to recognize Palestine as a State. In April 2024, India voted in favour of the Human Rights Council Resolution on the Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Moreover, India is a State signatory to the Genocide Convention, 1948, and the protest which was held to condemn violence and genocide in Gaza, can in no way termed to be the foreign policy of the India State. Mr. Desai further argued that citizens have a fundamental right to protest at designated places and that disagreements with the government's foreign policy cannot be grounds to stifle dissent. He also contended that mere apprehensions of law-and-order issues, without concrete evidence, should not override constitutional freedoms. He also clarified that the protest has nothing to do with Operation Sindoor or India's border relations with neighbouring countries. CPI(M) issues statement Rejecting the petition, the court observed, 'You don't know the dust it could kick up. Whether to take a side for Palestine or Israel is their (Govt of India) work, why do you want to create such a situation that the country has to take sides on this? Why do you want to do this? It's obvious, going by the party you represent, that you don't understand what this could do to the foreign affairs of the country.' The CPI(M) has strongly condemned the Bombay High Court's remarks while dismissing its petition challenging the denial of permission to protest against the Gaza conflict. Calling the Court's comments unconstitutional and politically biased, the CPI(M) criticised the bench for questioning its patriotism and aligning with the Central government's foreign policy stance. 'It is regrettable to say that the Bench appears to be completely unaware of the constitutional provisions that empower political parties or the history of our country and the support and brotherly feelings of the Indian people towards the Palestinian people for their right to a homeland. The statement made by the High Court bench regarding the CPI(M) smacks of the bench aligning itself with the position of the Central Government,' the party said in a statement. The party invoked India's historical support for Palestine and urged citizens to reject what it termed a troubling judicial trend undermining democratic rights. 'We appeal to the freedom and democracy-loving people of the country to stand shoulder to shoulder with us in unequivocally rejecting this objectionable view,' the statement read.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
'Tarrif, not negotiation': Trump says he doesn't expect Canada trade deal; August 1 deadline set for 35% duty
Donald Trump (AP file photo) US president Donald Trump has said he does not expect a trade deal with Canada before his 1 August deadline, warning of heavy tariffs if talks fail. Speaking before flying to Scotland on Friday, Trump said, "We haven't really had a lot of luck with Canada. I think Canada could be one where there's just a tariff, not really a negotiation. " Canadian prime minister Mark Carney, however, made it clear this week that Ottawa won't be rushed. 'Canada will not accept a bad deal,' he said, pushing back against US pressure. — Tablesalt13 (@Tablesalt13) Trump has threatened a 35% tax on Canadian goods if no agreement is reached. But the tariff won't apply to products that fall under the existing North American trade pact between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Washington has already imposed a 25% blanket tariff on certain Canadian goods, a 50% tariff on aluminium and steel, and a 25% duty on all non-US-built cars and trucks. Trump claims these steps will protect American jobs and industry. Canada, which sends about 75% of its exports to the US, could take a major hit — especially its auto sector, which is closely tied to the American market. Talks between the two sides have been ongoing since Carney took office in May, but progress has been slow. Meanwhile, Trump has announced trade deals with other countries, including Japan, which agreed to a 15% tariff in exchange for a $550 billion investment in the US.
