August 7, 2025: Best photos from around the world
Credit: Reuters photo
An investigative officer from the Chihuahua State Attorney General's Office works at a crematorium where bodies were previously found piled up in unsanitary conditions, in Ciudad Juarez.
Credit: Reuters photo
Flood gates of Koshi Barrage opened after the water level of the Saptakoshi River rose significantly following heavy rainfall, in Supaul district of Bihar.
Credit: PTI photo
Former tennis player Sania Mirza with shuttler P.V. Sindhu poses for pictures at 'The Sports Women' event, in Mumbai.
Credit: PTI photo
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
From jewellery to shrimp, which sectors will be hit hardest by how Trump's tariffs?
President Donald Trump Wednesday slapped an 'additional 25 per cent ad valorem duty' above the 25 per cent reciprocal tariffs that were announced on August 1 while also hinting at even higher levies could be on the cards. The recent additional levy comes as a penalty for New Delhi's continued purchase of Russian oil and takes the total duties to 50% on goods coming in from India, severely impacting domestic exports. Announced on July 31, the 25 per cent duty will come into effect from August 7 (9.30 am IST). The US will implement the additional 25 per cent tariff from August 27. These will be over and above the already existing standard import duty in the US. According to industry experts, sectors such as leather, chemicals, footwear, gems and jewellery, textiles and shrimp will be hit hard by the decision. The tariffs are expected to make Indian goods far costlier in the US, having the potential to bring the US-bound exports down by 40 to 50 per cent, think tank Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) said. The organic chemicals' exports to the US will attract additional 54 per cent duty. The carpets will get 52.9 per cent costlier while knitted apparel will cost 63.9 per cent and woven apparel 60.3 per cent higher. Textiles, and made ups will also see a 59 per cent hike in tariffs. With the US being India's largest market for textile and apparel exports, the Confederation of Indian Textile Industry (CITI) said it is 'deeply concerned' about the severe impact the 50 per cent US tariff rate for India is about to bring. 'The US tariff announcement of August 6 is a huge setback for India's textile and apparel exporters as it has further complicated the challenging situation we were already grappling with and will significantly weaken our ability to compete effectively vis-à-vis many other countries for a larger share of the US market,' news agency PTI quoted the federation as saying. It also urged the government to take immediate steps to aid the sector during these hugely testing times. Other goods that will be severely hit by the higher tariff rates are diamonds and gold products (52.1 per cent), machinery and mechanical appliances (51.3 per cent), and furniture, bedding and mattresses (52.3 per cent). Kama Jewelry MD Colin Shah said this move is a complete setback for Indian exports as almost 55 per cent of India's shipments to the US market will be directly hit by the decision. The cost burden resulting from the new tariff rate will place Indian exporters at a 30–35 per cent competitive disadvantage compared to their peers from countries with lesser reciprocal tariff, he said. 'Many export orders have already been put on hold as buyers reassess sourcing decisions in light of higher landed costs. For a large number of MSME-led sectors, absorbing this sudden cost escalation is simply not viable. Margins are already thin, and this additional blow could force exporters to lose long-standing clients,' PTI quoted Shah as saying. According to a Kolkata-based seafood exporter and MD of Megaa Moda Yogesh Gupta India's shrimp will now become expensive in the US market. 'We are already facing huge competition from Ecuador as it has only 15 per cent tariff. Indian shrimp already attracts a 2.49 per cent anti-dumping duty and a 5.77 per cent countervailing duty. After this 25 per cent, the duty will be 33.26 per cent from August 7,' PTI quoted Gupta as saying. In 2024-25, the bilateral trade between India and the US stood at USD 131.8 billion (USD 86.5 billion exports and USD 45.3 billion imports). After imposition of 50 per cent tariff, the sectors such as textiles/clothing (10.3 billion), gems and jewellery (12 billion), shrimp (USD 2.24 billion), leather and footwear (USD 1.18 billion), chemicals (2.34 billion), and electrical and mechanical machinery (about USD 9 billion), will bear the brunt. The United States has imposed the additional duties only on India as penalty for Russian imports while other buyers such as China and Turkey, have so far dodged such measures. Exporters hope that early finalisation of the India-US bilateral trade agreement will help in dealing with the tariff challenges. The negotiations between India and the US are still underway for an interim trade deal, aiming to conclude the first phase of the pact by fall (October-November) this year. — With inputs from PTI
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC junks Justice Varma's plea against in-house inquiry, CJI's recommendation
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the petition filed by Justice Yashwant Varma challenging the legality and findings of an in-house judicial inquiry that affirmed 'strong inferential evidence' of his involvement in the discovery of sacks of charred currency at his official residence in Delhi this year. Justice Yashwant Varma. (PTI) Delivering the judgment, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih affirmed the legality and constitutional validity of the inquiry mechanism, holding that it did not violate fundamental rights or constitutional provisions. 'With these observations, we have dismissed the petition,' Justice Datta said in court. The ruling came days after the court had reserved its verdict, having heard extensive arguments from senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi for Justice Varma. In its ruling, the apex court framed six legal and constitutional questions and answered all against Justice Varma. While noting that his conduct 'did not inspire confidence,' the bench said, even as it proceeded to examine the matter due to the important legal issues raised. The court held that the in-house inquiry mechanism has legal backing and has been consistently upheld in earlier Supreme Court judgments. It also rejected Justice Varma's contention that such inquiries create a parallel mechanism outside Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution, which lay down the procedure for the removal of judges. The bench ruled that the process followed did not infringe on Justice Varma's constitutional or fundamental rights. Except for the release of a video showing the charred cash, which the court noted did not impact the outcome, the then Chief Justice of India (CJI), Sanjiv Khanna, and the committee 'scrupulously' followed the laid-down procedure. The court rejected the argument that the CJI's May 8 recommendation to the President and the Prime Minister for Justice Varma's removal was unconstitutional or made without affording him a hearing. 'The in-house procedure does not contemplate a hearing before the CJI or the collegium,' the bench said. The court also dismissed a related plea filed by advocate Mathews Nedumpara seeking registration of an FIR into the matter, saying he had placed incorrect facts before the court. Earlier, while reserving its verdict on July 30, the court defended the role of the CJI in safeguarding institutional integrity, saying the top judge of the country is 'not a mere post office' but a constitutional functionary empowered to take proactive measures. It rejected Justice Varma's contention that the in-house committee's recommendation for removal overstepped its constitutional mandate. 'The recommendation for removal has to go. It is more than persuasive. When the CJI recommends removal, it virtually amounts to a death knell for a judge,' Sibal argued. But the court had then said the ultimate decision rests with Parliament, which is not bound by the CJI's recommendation. The bench, during the July 30 hearing, also pointed out that the Judges' Protection Act allows for non-punitive steps to be taken by judicial authorities in the interest of the institution, adding that the term 'otherwise' in the law gave the court and the CJI a broad mandate to preserve judicial integrity. Justice Varma, a former judge of the Delhi high court, came under scrutiny in March this year after sacks of charred currency were recovered from his official residence following a fire. He was stripped of judicial work and repatriated to his parent high court at Allahabad soon after. The CJI initiated an in-house inquiry, which concluded with a finding of 'strong inferential evidence' linking Varma to the incident. The May 3 report was forwarded by then CJI Khanna to the President and Prime Minister, triggering Varma's legal challenge. While Justice Varma's legal team argued that principles of natural justice were violated, including denial of cross-examination and personal hearing before the CJI, the court maintained that the in-house mechanism is limited in scope and not a full-fledged trial, with the final decision on removal resting with Parliament. The judgment now clears the way for potential parliamentary proceedings, which began with 145 Lok Sabha MPs and 63 Rajya Sabha MPs submitting notices in Parliament for his removal on July 21, the opening day of the monsoon session. Earlier, the three-member in-house panel, comprising then high court chief justices Sheel Nagu, GS Sandhawalia, and Justice Anu Sivaraman, concluded its findings on May 3. Though it found no direct evidence linking Justice Varma to the charred currency, the report stated that his conduct 'belied the trust' reposed in a constitutional judge and warranted impeachment proceedings. Varma has denied all wrongdoing, terming the case a conspiracy, and in a letter to CJI Khanna on May 6, rejected the latter's suggestion to resign or opt for voluntary retirement.
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Cong president Kharge blames Modi's ‘foreign policy disaster' for Trump's massive tariffs
Mallukarjun Kharge posts on X: New Delhi: Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge during a press conference by INDIA bloc leaders, in New Delhi, Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2025. (PTI Photo/Salman Ali)(PTI08_06_2025_000146B)(PTI) "India's national interest is supreme. Any nation that arbitrarily penalises India for our time-tested policy of strategic autonomy, which is embedded in the ideology of Non-alignment, doesn't understand the steel frame India is made of. From the threats of 7th fleet to the sanctions of Nuclear tests, we have navigated our relationship with the US with self-respect and dignity. Trump's 50% Tariffs comes at a time, when our own diplomacy is disastrously dithering. .@narendramodi ji, 1. You kept mum when Trump claimed that he BROKERED the CEASEFIRE. He has claimed at least 30 times and counting. 2. On November 30, 2024, Trump had threatened to impose a 100% tariff on BRICS nations. PM Modi was sitting there, visibly smirking, while Trump declared 'BRICS dead'! 3. Trump has been planning "RECIPROCAL TARIFFS" since months now. We all knew about it. You did nothing in the Union Budget to soften the blow on our key sectors such as Agriculture, MSMEs and various industries. 4. Your ministers have been talking about negotiating a trade deal with America for months. Some of them even camped in Washington for several days. 5. You failed to negotiate a TRADE DEAL with the US. You had more than 6th months. Now Mr. Trump is intimidating and coercing us - but you keep quiet. India's exports to the US amounts to about ₹7.51 lakh crore (2024). A blanket 50% tariff means an economic burden of ₹3.75 lakh crore. Our sectors like — MSMEs, Agriculture, Dairy Engineering Goods, Electronic Goods, Gems & Jewellery, Drug Formulations & Biologicals, Petroleum Products and Cotton made clothes shall be hurt the most. Your Govt is CLUELESS how to deal with it. You can't even blame this FOREIGN POLICY DISASTER on the 70 years of Congress!!"
