Kirti Chakra for Naik Dilwar Khan: Martyred fighting terror in Kupwara
Naik Dilwar Khan launched a fearless close-range attack on a terrorist in Kupwara's Lolab Valley. Despite being critically injured, he kept fighting till his last breath. He is now posthumously honoured with the Kirti Chakra.
#KirtiChakra #DilwarKhan #Kupwara #LolabValley #IndianArmy #TerrorEncounter #Martyr #GallantryAward
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Punjab Bjp president Sunil Jakhar criticises CM Bhagwant Mann for remarks on Operation Sindoor.
Ludhiana: Punjab BJP president Sunil Jakhar on Wednesday launched a sharp attack on Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann for allegedly mocking Operation Sindoor , an Indian Army mission launched in response to a terrorist attack targeting Hindu civilians. Jakhar, speaking at a press conference ahead of inaugurating the campaign office of BJP's Ludhiana West candidate Jiwan Gupta, said Mann's remarks were not only disrespectful to the armed forces but also hurtful to Hindu women. He demanded an apology from the chief minister and questioned the silence of Aam Aadmi Party national convenor Arvind Kejriwal on the issue. "Mann shamelessly joked, 'Will you apply sindoor in the name of Modi? Is this one nation, one husband?' He mocked the sacrifices of widows of Pahalgam terror victims," Jakhar said. "This is not just an insult to the Army, but to every symbol that holds emotional and cultural value." Operation Sindoor, launched in response to the killings in Pahalgam where terrorists reportedly targeted Hindus, takes its name from sindoor, a red vermillion mark worn by many Hindu women. Jakhar said the symbolism reflects the nature of the attack — identifying victims by their religious identity. The senior BJP leader further said he would urge Prime Minister Narendra Modi to send those questioning the military's actions to Pakistan "to witness the reality on the ground." When asked whether BJP was politicising a military operation, Jakhar responded, "The Indian Army belongs to the nation, not any one party. Why are other parties silent? They should also speak up in support of the Army's courage." Also present at the event were Union minister Ravneet Singh Bittu, BJP state general secretary Anil Sareen, Dayal Singh Sodhi, Parminder Brar, Arvind Khanna, and Dr Satish Kumar. MSID:: 121626098 413 |
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Time of India
Freedom of speech does not include freedom to make defamatory statements against Army: HC to Rahul Gandhi
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions and it does not include the freedom to make defamatory statements against any person or the Indian Army, the Allahabad High Court has said, rejecting Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's plea to quash summons against him for alleged derogatory remarks during his Bharat Jodo Yatra in Subhash Vidyathi of the Lucknow bench, in his May 29 verdict, observed that there was a prima facie case against Gandhi for making defamatory statements against the Indian Army and upheld the lower court order issued in February summoning the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha to face trial."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 judge said in the detailed order released case stems from a complaint filed by Udai Shanker Srivastava, a retired Director from the Border Roads Organisation (a position equivalent to a Colonel in the Indian Army).Srivastava alleged that on December 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 December 9, contended that Gandhi's statement was "false and baseless" and made with "evil intention of demoralising 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 December 12, 2022, confirmed that "PLA troops contacted the LAC in Tawang Sector which was contested by our troops in a firm and resolute manner. 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 27, Lucknow, had on February 11, 2025, summoned Gandhi to face trial for the offence under Section 500 of the Penal Code (defamation).The lower court observed that prima facie, Gandhi's statement appeared to demoralise the Indian Army and its personnel, and was not made in the performance of his official the High Court, Gandhi's counsel Pranshu Agarwal argued that the complaint was politically motivated and lacked 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 High Court, however, clarified that the complainant as an "aggrieved person" is capable of filing the complaint under Section 199 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, while dismissing Gandhi's plea challenging the summons. PTI
The Hindu
13 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.
