Latest news with #IqbalSingh
Time of India
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
After 17 years, another round of confrontation between Akal Takht & Patna sahib clergy
Jalandhar: It is after around 17 years that the clergy of Takht Patna Sahib is coming into direct conflict with the Akal Takht jathedar and other Punjab-based Sikh high priests. When on Wednesday, the Takht Patna Sahib jathedar and four other granthis suddenly declared the Akal Takht acting jathedar and Takht Damdama Sahib jathedar "tankhaiya" (guilty of religious misconduct), it was reminiscent of Takht Patna Sahib jathedar, in 2008, declaring Akal Takht jathedar and other Sikh high priests "mahan doshi" (big guilty). That was a protracted phase of confrontation that embarrassed the community and history appears repeating itself once again. Then, Takht Patna Sahib jathedar Iqbal Singh, on Jan 26, 2008, issued an edict in which he challenged the supremacy of Akal Takht, a concept widely accepted by the Sikhs, and claimed that Takht Patna Sahib was supreme. He also excommunicated Takht Patna Sahib managing committee president Mohinder Singh Romana, but that edict was nullified by the Akal Takht. The clergy claimed that the right of excommunication was only with the Akal Takht. He was not allowed to participate in the meetings of the Sikh high priests at the Akal Takht after 2007. He came on his own on June 6, 2008, to participate in a meeting but was not allowed. Four days later, on June 10, 2008, he shocked the community by pronouncing four Singh Sahibans (high priests) — then Akal Takht jathedar Joginder Singh Vedanti; then Darbar Sahib head granthi Gurbachan Singh, who later became Akal Takht jathedar; then Kesgarh Sahib jathedar Tarlochan Singh; and then Damdama Sahib jathedar Balwant Singh Nandgarh and Giani Jagtar Singh, who later became head granthi of Darbar Sahib – "mahan doshi". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo These high priests rejected an earlier edict issued by him on May 10, 2008, declaring former Akal Takht jathedar Prof Darshan Singh "pucca tankhaiya" (almost excommunicated). He even equated the rejection of his edict (on which he got signatures of four other priests of Takht Patna Sahib) with turning away from Guru Gobind Singh and claimed that the Singh Sahibans did this under a deep conspiracy. A couple of months later, Vedanti was relieved of his charge in the first week of Aug 2008, which was also a sudden development. Iqbal not only attended the installation of Giani Gurbachan Singh and offered him a turban on Aug 7, 2008. The latter also started inviting him to the meetings of the Singh Sahibans, and this became an affair as if nothing had happened in the past. Neither Gurbachan Singh nor Iqbal Singh ever clarified what happened to the big conceptual contradictions. Iqbal Singh had no qualms about sitting with the same persons he had declared "mahan doshi". Together they rather issued a few controversial edicts, including unilateral pardon to Sirsa dera chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim in Sept 2015. In Aug 2010, Iqbal Singh once again created controversy by issuing two edicts – one of which appeared to challenge the supremacy of Akal Takht. In the edict issued on Aug 18, written and signed in Hindi, it was announced that only the five Singh Sahibans of Patna Sahib were authorised to decide religious and social issues pertaining to Sikhism. Then Akal Takht jathedar Gurbachan Singh said that the issues would be discussed at the Akal Takht in a meeting of the high priests and an explanation would be sought from Iqbal Singh. However, instead of clearing the air or giving any cogent explanations, controversies were given a quiet burial, reflecting that things were happening in a whimsical manner. Iqbal Singh's tenure remained marred by controversies, and he gave a tough time to the management committee of the Takht Patna Sahib and to the Sikh priests later also. Several in the community found his edicts whimsical. On April 8, Akal Takht barred him from participating in any religious function following quite a few complaints about him. MSID:: 121342683 413 |
Express Tribune
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Locations of downed Indian aircrafts disclosed by security sources
People look at a part of an aircraft in Wuyan near Indian Illegally Occupied Kashmir's main city of Srinagar on May 7, 2025. Photo: AFP/ File Listen to article The locations of the Indian Air Force (IAF) jets being shot down in the recent skirmish have been revealed by security forces, delivering a significant blow to the Indian Air Force. During an operation on the night of May 6–7, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) dealt a major blow to the IAF, successfully intercepting and shooting down multiple fighter jets across several locations, resulting in pilots being reported injured or missing. Read more: Pakistan downs five Indian fighter jets in retaliation for India's missile attack One aircraft reportedly crashed in the Anantnag district located in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (IIOJK). The ejection seat of the downed aircraft was recovered from the Gadool Kokernag area, sources added. Sources further revealed that another IAF jet went down in the Pampore or Pulwama region of IIOJK, with both pilots sustaining serious injuries. They were transferred to a hospital in Srinagar for medical treatment. A third fighter jet crashed in the Pantiyal/Ramsu area of Ramban district. The pilot of that aircraft, Flying Officer Iqbal Singh, was injured and shifted to the Army Hospital in Udhampur. Yet another aircraft crashed in the agricultural fields of Bharda Kalan in Akhnoor Tehsil of IIOJK. Both pilots ejected and were injured; they were moved to the Akhnoor Military Hospital for treatment. Security sources also confirmed that another IAF aircraft crashed in Bathinda city, located in India's Punjab province. In a separate incident, an Indian Heron Remote Piloted Vehicle (RPV) was shot down 13 nautical miles east of Jammu city in IIOJK. Read more: Pakistan destroys India's BrahMos stockpile, airbases in 'Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos' Defense analysts describe this series of losses as a major setback for the Indian Air Force, stating that the operation underscores the IAF's complete operational failure. 'The way Indian jets were downed like toys raises serious questions about their military strategy,' noted defence experts. Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated after the April 22 attack in Pahalgam, Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), which killed 26 people. India blamed Pakistan-based elements for the assault but provided no evidence. Islamabad strongly denied the allegations. On April 23, India closed the Wagah border crossing, revoked Pakistani visas, and announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistan condemned the move as an 'act of war' and responded by sealing the Wagah border from its side. The confrontation then erupted on May 6–7 as India launched its attack against Pakistan, which spiraled into the gravest military clash between the neighbors in decades. Read more: 40 civilians, 11 troops martyred in Indian aggression: ISPR Pakistan condemned the attack and in retaliaton, the Pakistan Air Force achieved a historic BVR (Beyond Visual Range) combat victory, downing five Indian fighter jets—three Rafales, one SU-30, and one MiG-29—without incurring any losses. Officials declared the outcome a "100–0" score in Pakistan's favour. Despite repeated warnings from the Pakistani government, India, fueled by its media's war-driven rhetoric, continued provocative actions, including frequent drone incursions, which ultimately prompted Pakistan to retaliate. On the night of 9–10 May, Pakistan initiated retaliatory action in response to Indian aggression in the early hours of Saturday, officially naming the operation 'Bunyaan-un-Marsoos'. In what were described as decisive actions against Indian aggression, Pakistan reportedly targeted 26 military sites inside India and destroyed several Indian brigade and battalion headquarters along the Line of Control (LoC). Following diplomatic intervention led by Washington, both sides agreed to halt military activity across land, air, and sea. However, hours after the truce, fresh skirmishes were reported along both sides of the LoC. Read more: 'Losses are part of combat': Indian Air Marshal responds to Rafale downing Although India never officially acknowledged the downing of its fighter jets, Indian Air Marshal A.K. Bharti admitted the possibility of losses but framed them as an inherent risk in active combat. When asked about the downing of a Rafale fighter jet during the operation at a press briefing by the Directors General of Military Operations on Sunday, the Air Marshal responded by saying, 'This is combat, and losses are part of it. But the real question is whether we achieved our objectives—and the answer is a thumping yes. We dismantled the terrorist infrastructure we set out to neutralise, and the results are evident for the world to see.' Pakistan's Inter-Services Public Relations later on Tuesday May 13, confirmed that at least 51 people, including 40 civilians and 11 military personnel, were martyred during India's cross-border attacks on Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistani territory.
Indian Express
08-05-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
Amid rising border tensions, panic buying peaks in Punjab; authorities caution against hoarding essentials
As border tensions between India and Pakistan rise after Operation Sindoor, panic buying of dry ration has surged across Punjab, particularly in Ludhiana, Amritsar, Patiala and Bathinda. Grocery stores are witnessing overwhelming crowds as customers stock up on supplies for up to three months. Iqbal Singh, owner of Aao G store in Ludhiana's Sarabha Nagar, said, 'I have personally sent messages to all my customers assuring them there is no shortage of ration and there is no need to panic. Still, people are rushing to the stores to stock up.' He added that essential items such as pulses, salt, sugar, tea leaves, rice, wheat flour, oil, and ghee are being purchased in bulk. 'Most people are stocking up for up to three months,' he said. Iqbal further mentioned that dry milk has already gone out of stock and orders have been placed for replenishment. 'In the meantime, we are supplying liquid milk cartons with a 60-day shelf life. Orders for desi ghee have also been placed as it went out of stock.' Balwant Rai, owner of Mani Ram Balwant Rai departmental store in Civil Lines, Ludhiana, said the panic buying trend began Monday after the first blackout rehearsal conducted by the Ferozepur administration. Tensions escalated after the Indian armed forces conducted Operation Sindoor, the strikes on nine terrorist targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) early Wednesday. The strikes were carried out in retaliation for the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Kashmir, in which 26 civilians were killed. 'After Operation Sindoor, the customer rush increased sharply. On May 7, we could barely manage the crowd. Stocks from many shelves were exhausted. However, we still have sufficient stock in store and in the wholesale market, so people should not panic,' he said. Consumers, however, cited continuous developments, including large-scale blackout rehearsals, as the reason for stockpiling. 'From our store, customers typically buy up to two months of supplies. Even otherwise, it is common for households to keep a month's ration,' Balwant added. 'Can't take a chance' Maninder Kaur, a resident of Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar of Ludhiana, said,' We have ordered ration online for two months… We live with old parents, so we can't take a chance. Dry ration's shelf life is long, so stocking double is a normal reaction by people.' Kulwinder Kaur, a domestic help in the Model gram area of Ludhiana, said, 'I buy groceries daily only, as and when need arises. But now, I have stocked some basic items as per my budget for one month.' So was the case with Meenakshi, a homemaker from the same area, who said that she stocked rations for up to two months. 'I focused only on essentials and have cut down all other products like frozen snacks.' In border villages, several families are relocating to safer places, carrying supplies. In Amritsar, long queues were seen at D-Mart, with customers rushing to purchase groceries. Sources revealed that under the pretext of panic buying, several stores have quietly withdrawn promotional offers that were earlier in place. A similar situation was observed in Tarn Taran, where nearly every second grocery store saw panic buying. Meanwhile, Tarn Taran Deputy Commissioner Rahul, in a public message, assured, 'The district administration is fully prepared to handle any emergency. There is no shortage of essential items like fuel, cooking gas, medicines, or ration in Tarn Taran.' He appealed to residents not to indulge in panic buying or hoarding, warning that such actions could lead to black marketing. 'Strict action will be taken against anyone found hoarding essential items for profiteering,' he added.
The Hindu
26-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Storm beneath the waters
On November 30 1960, the Lok Sabha witnessed an extraordinary debate. The debate was initiated by Congress MP Iqbal Singh from Punjab as Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru looked on. Within seconds, the exchange took a curious turn as several members from the ruling Congress party, who were present in the hall to debate the newly signed Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), began to criticise the Nehru government. Most surprisingly, during the 150-minutes long discussion, the strongest criticism to the treaty came from the Congress MPs from Punjab and Rajasthan — the two States that were part of the Indus-waters network. H.C. Mathur of the Congress took to the floor and gave out the bitterest criticism, saying the treaty would adversely affect Rajasthan. Iqbal Singh, who started the debate, argued that the treaty would affect food production in Indian Punjab. As Prime Minister Nehru waited for his chance to rise to the defence of the treaty that was signed by him and Gen. Ayub Khan of Pakistan on September 19, 1960, members termed the Indus Waters Treaty 'appeasement and surrender to Pakistan'. Asoka Mehta of the Congress argued that the country had been betrayed by those who were supposed to defend its interests. The members of the ruling party that had been overseeing nearly 12-year long river water dispute that began soon after Partition of British India, were upset about the fact that Pakistan would get ₹83 crore in foreign exchange (to be financed by the World Bank) as part of the execution of the treaty. Rising to the defence of the treaty, Nehru described the critics as 'narrow-minded' and said, the agreement was arrived at after 'long and bitter negotiation' between the two sides mediated by the World Bank. Three weeks later, the Indian Parliament ratified the IWT. The IWT did not have an exit clause. Article XII (3) and (4) provide for modification of treaty provisions through a 'duly ratified treaty', which will replace the present one with the condition that it cannot be abrogated unilaterally. The main treaty provisions were that India has the exclusive rights over the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej) with a combined average annual discharge of 33.8 million Acre Feet (MAF) and Pakistan has exclusive rights over the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) with annual discharge of 135.6 MAF. As per the treaty, India has the right to store a volume of 3.6 MAF of water. The 'long and bitter negotiation' that Nehru referred to began soon after the Partition of India that led to several lasting problems between the two countries. The problem first flared up in 1947-48 in the backdrop of the first India-Pakistan conflict over Kashmir. While the war over Kashmir was the main focus in the first year of the existence of two newly separated entities, the sub-text of this conflict was visible in the clashing narrative over sharing of the waters of the Indus through the canal system built in Punjab during the British colonial period. Water historians say when India halted water of the Indus, Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan arrived in New Delhi, leading to the 1948 agreement. The water dispute, however, did not disappear, and played out as part of the larger network of issues that defined the India-Pakistan relationship ever since. While starting from 1951-52 India became a parliamentary democracy with a stable political leadership, Pakistan began a tentative journey towards the future plagued by language problem, rivalry between the West and the East Pakistan and lack of participatory democracy at home. These power rivalries exploded on the surface in the late 1950s when East Pakistan-origin Gen. Isqander Mirza became the President of the struggling country. World Bank mediation Mirza scrapped the constitutional dream of Pakistan and prohibited political parties only to be deposed weeks later by Gen. Ayub Khan. The Pakistan that came to the table to conclude the Indus Waters Agreement under the mediation of World Bank chief Eugene Black was therefore a military-ruled state that was in a hurry to prove its domestic critics wrong by resolving certain congenital problems that its political leaders had failed to solve in the previous decade. A settlement of the Indus dispute suited the Nehru government politically as that would remove one of the major festering problems with Pakistan and prove Nehru's critics wrong. A solution suited the Pakistani general as well as the scholarly Indian PM. Ayub Khan threw a grand welcome for the Indian team and put up a show of internal normalcy at the time of the signing ceremony in Karachi. Nehru travelled across Pakistan and visited Murree, Nathiagali, Rawalpindi and Lahore and both leaders agreed that eradication of poverty was the common goal of both sides. Yet, within weeks of signing the IWT, Gen. Ayub Khan delivered a provocative speech in Muzaffarabad saying, Indo-Pakistan relation would not stabilise 'till the Kashmir issue is resolved'. The second test of the IWT came during 1965 Indo-Pak. war when the focus was on Kashmir. Following the Tashkent Accord, Ayub Khan sprang a surprise with the construction of the Mangla dam, the world's largest earthen dam that was inaugurated in 1967 promising to supply water to more than 3 million acres of land and generate 600,000 KW of electricity. It was obvious that the poverty eradication scheme that Ayub Khan had discussed during the signing of the Indus Waters Treaty was the idea that powered his plans for the massive Mangla project. One problem with the Mangla dam was that the major part of the project fell in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. In effect, the dam would not violate the sovereignty of India as envisioned in the IWT but in reality it trampled on India's sovereignty in Kashmir. The Parliament in India took up the construction of Mangla dam and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi responded that India's sovereign rights over Pakistan-occupied Kashmir were not diminished by the construction of the Mangla dam. On the other hand, the dam and its perceived benefits for west Pakistan fuelled the allegations of bias towards West Pakistan further alienating East Pakistan that ultimately led to the 1971 war and creation of Bangladesh. Water a weapon In the twenty-first century, China's move to build mega dams in the Himalayas, which revived the prospects of use of water as a weapon among riparian states and the spike in cross-border terrorism from Pakistan, triggered talks of a review of the treaty. In the backdrop of the 2016 arrest of former Indian navy official Kulbhushan Jadhav on charges of supporting terrorism in Balochistan and the cross-border terror attacks in Pathankot and Uri in January and September 2016, India completed the Kishanganga dam in Kashmir and pushed ahead with the Ratle hydel power project on the Chenab despite Pakistan's displeasure. The matter could not be resolved by the World Bank. In 2023, India invoked the relevant treaty provisions to request a bilateral modification of the treaty that Pakistan declined. Before putting the Indus Waters Treaty 'in abeyance' on April 23, 2025, India in 2024 had indicated that its patience over the IWT was fast running out when it called off all meetings of the Permanent Indus Commission demanding that teams from both sides should meet and discuss the 2023 proposal for modification of the treaty. Post-Pahalgam attack, Indian declaration on holding the treaty 'in abeyance', however, has turned the clock back to where it began — a broken India-Pakistan relation as it was in the late 1940s.
