Home Blog Page 119

MK Stalin’s Group Ready to Pursue Legal Fight Against NEET

0
MK Stalin
MK Stalin

An all-party meeting, chaired by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin on Wednesday, resolved to take all necessary legal measures to secure an exemption for the state from the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET). This includes the possibility of initiating fresh legal proceedings in the Supreme Court. The Opposition AIADMK and BJP boycotted the meeting, dismissing it as mere “drama.”

The meeting followed a significant Supreme Court ruling on April 8, which declared that Governor R.N. Ravi’s act of withholding bills re-passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly was “illegal”—a verdict hailed as a major victory for the DMK-led government.

“Yesterday’s Supreme Court judgment regarding the Governor’s conduct has strengthened our resolve. I am confident that if we persist with our legal fight without wavering, we will succeed in securing NEET exemption,” Stalin said during the session.

NEET, a nationwide entrance exam for medical admissions, was made mandatory in Tamil Nadu in 2017 under the then-AIADMK government.

Stalin also criticized the exam, calling it a tool driven by vested interests to benefit the coaching industry by misleading the Union government. He pointed to multiple irregularities in recent years, including paper leaks now under CBI investigation, as evidence of the exam’s flawed implementation.

The DMK government is pressing for Tamil Nadu’s exemption from the centralized exam — a stance backed by all major parties in the state except the BJP.

During the meeting of legislative party leaders, a resolution was unanimously passed urging the state government to persist with its legal campaign against NEET.

“This all-party meeting unanimously resolves that the Tamil Nadu government must continue its legal efforts to obtain NEET exemption,” stated the resolution, which was introduced by Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin.

In 2023, the DMK-led government approached the Supreme Court opposing NEET. The latest meeting comes shortly after CM Stalin informed the Assembly on April 4 that the Union government had rejected the anti-NEET bill passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly and forwarded for Presidential assent.

“The Governor, acting as a puppet of the Union government, obstructed our efforts despite the bill overcoming numerous hurdles. In light of the recent Supreme Court verdict, we will intensify our legal battle for justice,” Stalin wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter) in Tamil.

The meeting concluded with a decision to consult legal experts and pursue all legal avenues, including filing a new petition in the Supreme Court if required. The state government also plans to push forward with the case filed in July 2023 challenging the NEET system.

Among those who attended the meeting were DMK’s allies — the Congress, CPI(M), CPI, Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) — and BJP ally Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK).

Ajay Devgan Comments On the Challenging Times for Bollywood

0
Ajay Devgan
Ajay Devgan reacts to Bollywood.

The Hindi film industry has been navigating a challenging phase, with many recent releases struggling to make a mark at the box office. Apart from exceptions like Chhaava, featuring Vicky Kaushal, 2025 has yet to witness a major commercial success. Amid this climate, Ajay Devgn—currently promoting his upcoming film Raid 2—shared his thoughts on Bollywood’s ongoing slump.

Speaking at the trailer launch of Raid 2, Ajay was reminded that he remains one of the few actors to have delivered successful franchise films post-COVID, with titles like Drishyam 2 and Singham Again. Asked about how he approaches such projects in uncertain times, he remarked, “We’re still in a phase of struggle. There’s no clear understanding yet of what exactly will draw audiences to theatres. However, we do believe we’ve gained some insight into how viewer preferences have evolved.”

He further elaborated, “During the pandemic, audiences were exposed to a wide range of international content through OTT platforms. That shift has influenced tastes, and we’re trying to adapt accordingly. But to be honest, there’s still a lot of uncertainty. We’re all trying to understand and evolve.”

When questioned about whether high ticket prices are contributing to the decline in theatre attendance, Ajay dismissed the idea, citing Chhaava as an example. “Audiences are coming to theatres despite the existing ticket rates. I don’t think pricing is the issue. It’s more about choice—they’re being selective about what they want to watch. If the trailer, teaser, or songs connect with them, they turn up. The problem lies in how we’re promoting films. Content is key. If the audience sees something compelling in the promotional material, they will come.”

SC Criticizes TN Governor for Holding Bills and Sets a Timeline

0
Governor
R.N Ravi Governor

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court set a clear timeline for Governors to act on bills passed by state legislatures, criticizing Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi for reserving 10 bills for the President’s consideration—an action it declared unconstitutional.

A bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan ruled, “The Governor’s decision to reserve the 10 bills for the President was arbitrary and illegal, and is therefore set aside.”

The court clarified that the 10 bills in question would be deemed to have received assent from the date they were re-submitted to the Governor.

In an unprecedented move, the apex court established specific timelines for Governors to respond to bills under Article 200 of the Constitution, which previously did not stipulate any deadlines. The court emphasized that this constitutional provision could not be interpreted as granting Governors unlimited time to act, thereby allowing them to stall the legislative process.

According to the court’s directives:

  • If the Governor, with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, chooses to reserve a bill for the President, the decision must be made within one month.
  • If the Governor intends to withhold assent without ministerial advice, the bill must be returned to the Assembly within three months.
  • If a bill is re-submitted after being reconsidered by the Assembly, the Governor must grant assent within one month.

The bench warned that any failure to comply with these timelines would open the Governor’s inaction to judicial scrutiny.

Invoking its plenary powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court declared that the re-submitted bills in Tamil Nadu should be considered as having received assent. It also stressed that a Governor should not create “roadblocks or chokeholds” in the legislative process, thereby obstructing the will of the people.

“Members of the state legislature, elected by the people, are better positioned to safeguard their welfare,” the bench noted.

Reiterating that Article 200 does not grant Governors discretionary power, the court asserted that the Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers. The concept of a “pocket veto,” where the Governor takes no action on a bill, was firmly rejected.

Kunal Kamra Heads to Bombay High Court Over FIR Cancellation

0
Kunal Kamra
Kunal Kamra

Stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra has approached the Bombay High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him for allegedly calling Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde a ‘gaddar’ (traitor) during his comedy special Naya Bharat.

Kamra’s legal counsel argued that in view of the interim protection granted by the Madras High Court, the comedian had offered to provide his statement via video conferencing on multiple occasions due to safety concerns. However, authorities have continued to demand his physical presence.

Filed on April 5, Kamra’s petition challenges the FIR on constitutional grounds, asserting that it violates his fundamental rights under Articles 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. A division bench comprising Justice SV Kotwal and Justice SM Modak is hearing the case.

Following initial proceedings, the court granted Kamra interim protection until April 16 and issued notices to the Maharashtra government and Shiv Sena MLA Murji Patel, who had filed the complaint, directing them to respond. Speaking on behalf of Kamra, his counsel stated  “On no less than three occasions, we have offered to cooperate on video conferencing. This is not some murder case, it’s a comedy show. If at all, they intend to file an affidavit, they must serve notice before April 16.”

Kamra’s legal team emphasized that his satirical act falls under protected speech and should not be criminalized.

BookMyShow Responds After Delisting Concerns

Amid growing controversy, ticketing platform BookMyShow issued a statement on Monday clarifying its neutral role in the ticketing process. The platform stated it operates “in compliance with applicable Indian laws” and only facilitates ticket sales.

This clarification came after Kamra publicly requested the platform not to delist him or, alternatively, to share access to the audience data he had generated through its service.

Earlier, on April 2, Yuva Sena General Secretary Rahool N Kanal had written to BookMyShow urging the platform to halt ticket sales for Kamra’s upcoming shows, citing concerns over his allegedly provocative content and its possible effect on public sentiment.

Continued Protection from Arrest

The Madras High Court has extended interim protection from arrest for Kamra until April 17. He had earlier approached the court for transit anticipatory bail, citing threats following his performance at Mumbai’s Habitat Studio.

During the show, Kamra had sung a parody of the Bollywood hit Bholi Si Surat, allegedly mocking Eknath Shinde. The performance led to several FIRs being lodged against him and prompted members of the Yuva Sena to vandalize the comedy venue.

Despite facing backlash, Kamra has refused to apologise but has expressed willingness to cooperate with authorities.

Chinese Yuan Drops Under US Tariff Threats

0

The Indian rupee is likely to weaken further on Tuesday, mirroring losses in the Chinese yuan after U.S. President Donald Trump issued fresh tariff threats against China.

The 1-month non-deliverable forward suggests the rupee will open between 85.90 and 85.92 per U.S. dollar, compared to 85.8350 in the previous session. On Monday, the rupee fell by 0.7%—its sharpest single-day drop in three months—amid a broader risk-off sentiment fueled by concerns that Trump’s tariff threats could dampen global growth and raise inflation.

A currency trader at a Mumbai-based bank noted that while the overall risk sentiment has improved slightly, the weakening yuan remains a concern for the rupee.

According to the trader, the rupee’s short-term direction—as well as that of other Asian currencies—now hinges entirely on how the tariff situation unfolds. If China allows the yuan to weaken further in order to offset the effects of U.S. tariffs, the Reserve Bank of India may also permit a steeper decline in the rupee.

Following Trump’s statement on Monday that he would impose an additional 50% tariff on U.S. imports from China by Wednesday unless Beijing rolls back the 34% duties it implemented last week, the offshore yuan slid past 7.36 per dollar—its lowest point in two months. China’s recent tariffs were a direct response to the reciprocal duties earlier announced by Trump.

As the trade war intensifies, investors are navigating a volatile environment. Risk assets are being sold off, safe-haven assets are in demand, and emerging market currencies—including the rupee—are under pressure.

Trump’s latest rhetoric indicates that market instability is likely to persist. “It remains to be seen how China will react to Trump’s remarks. However, signs—including a piece published in the People’s Daily—suggest that China is ready to weather the storm,” MUFG Bank said in a note.

Donald Trump Changes Retaliatory Tariffs on India to 26%

0
Donald Trump
Trump reduces Indian tariffs

On Thursday, the Trump administration revised the retaliatory tariffs for 16 out of 57 countries, including India, lowering the additional “reciprocal tariff” from 27% to 26%, as per a comparative analysis of updated tariff tables. This revision follows the earlier announcement made on Wednesday in an official White House document.

India was included among the nations targeted for allegedly maintaining some of the most restrictive trade barriers against American goods. The reciprocal tariff will be levied in addition to existing import duties on most items.

Although President Donald Trump had mentioned a 26% additional tariff on Indian imports during Wednesday’s announcement in Washington DC, Annexure 1 of the White House’s document—titled “Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Practices that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits”—listed the tariff as 27%.

Indian government officials also initially confirmed on Thursday morning that the U.S. had imposed a 27% retaliatory tariff. However, Annexure 1 was subsequently updated, reducing India’s tariff by 100 basis points, along with similar revisions for 15 other countries.

As of Friday morning (India time), the updated White House document reflected the following tariff reductions: Bosnia and Herzegovina from 36% to 35%, Botswana 38% to 37%, Cameroon 12% to 11%, Falkland Islands 42% to 41%, Malawi 18% to 17%, Myanmar 45% to 44%, Nicaragua 19% to 18%, Norway 16% to 15%, Pakistan 30% to 29%, Philippines 18% to 17%, Serbia 38% to 37%, South Africa 31% to 30%, South Korea 26% to 25%, Switzerland 32% to 31%, Thailand 37% to 36%, and Vanuatu 23% to 22%.

Vladimir Putin Bets Big on Donald Trump to End Ukraine War

0
vladimir putin
Vladimir Putin believes in Trump.

Russia continues to count on U.S. President Donald Trump to broker an acceptable peace deal in Ukraine, though it remains prepared to prolong the war if negotiations falter, according to sources in Moscow familiar with the situation.

The Kremlin is unfazed by Trump’s threat to impose punitive secondary sanctions on Russian oil due to stalled ceasefire talks, the sources said. However, President Vladimir Putin sees Trump as his best chance to bring the war to an end and is committed to maintaining diplomatic engagement, they added, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Despite pledging a swift resolution to Europe’s most significant conflict since World War II, Trump recently expressed frustration over the slow progress of talks, stating he was “pissed off” with Putin. However, he later softened his stance, saying he believes the Russian leader will “fulfill his part of the deal.”

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, when asked for comment, stated that Russia would “prefer to continue mutual efforts to find a settlement,” acknowledging that diplomacy requires both time and effort. “Everyone would rather talk than fight—not just talk, but be heard. This is the reality with the current U.S. administration,” he said.

Meanwhile, Putin’s economic envoy, Kirill Dmitriev—who is sanctioned by the U.S.—revealed that he has been holding meetings in Washington with government officials. “Opponents of rapprochement fear that Russia and the U.S. might find common ground, leading to better mutual understanding and cooperation in both international affairs and the economy,” Dmitriev said on Thursday.

Moscow is holding out for additional concessions from Washington, including partial sanctions relief and a halt to arms deliveries to Ukraine. During last month’s U.S.-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia, a deal was struck to pause attacks on Black Sea shipping. However, Russia later made the agreement contingent on reconnecting one of its major state banks to the SWIFT global messaging system.

Trump aides, including his special envoy Steve Witkoff, had expressed optimism about progress in negotiations with Russia. The White House had originally aimed for a truce agreement by April 20, though that now appears unlikely. Additionally, discussions of a potential Trump-Putin summit have recently quieted.

On Monday, Russia announced the conscription of 160,000 men in its largest spring draft in 14 years, though the Defense Ministry claimed they would not be sent to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Moscow and Kyiv have traded accusations over violations of an agreed-upon pause in attacks on energy infrastructure, brokered by Trump.

Although Putin has voiced interest in striking a deal with Trump, he has remained firm on his key conditions. He insists that Ukraine must abandon its NATO membership aspirations, limit the size of its military, and recognize Russia’s control over occupied territories in eastern and southern Ukraine following the February 2022 invasion.

Ukraine and its European allies—as well as the Biden administration—view Russia’s demands as an attempt to subjugate its neighbor.

While Trump has already made several concessions to Moscow, fully accepting Putin’s terms could expose him to accusations of weakness. Still, ending the war remains one of his signature campaign promises.

Russia has attempted to entice Washington with economic cooperation, particularly in the Arctic and rare earth mining, as part of a broader strategy to rebuild relations. Additionally, Trump has been pressuring Ukraine to accept an economic partnership that would grant the U.S. control over future investments in the country’s infrastructure and natural resources.

Notably, Russia was one of the few nations excluded from Trump’s tariff announcement on Wednesday. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent later clarified to Fox News that this was due to existing sanctions having already cut trade ties, though the U.S. did impose a 10% tariff on Ukraine.

“The Kremlin is seeking a direct meeting between Putin and Trump to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine—on Trump’s terms—while securing provisions that would leave Ukraine permanently weakened,” wrote Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, in an analysis with colleagues from the organization. However, he added that Moscow “was prepared to continue fighting before Trump took office and remains ready to do so today.”

Despite Russia’s incremental territorial gains and superior manpower and firepower, Western analysts estimate that Moscow is suffering significant losses, exceeding 1,000 soldiers per day.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of 50 U.S. senators has introduced a new sanctions package proposing a 500% tariff on any nation purchasing Russian oil, natural gas, petroleum products, or uranium—should Putin refuse to engage in meaningful ceasefire negotiations or violate any future agreement.

Yet, the Kremlin remains defiant, believing that after three years of sanctions, it can withstand further economic pressure. “These new sanctions won’t be any more effective than the previous ones,” insisted sources familiar with Kremlin strategy.

“These measures will hurt other nations more than they will affect Russia, particularly those that rely on our oil and gas,” Anatoly Aksakov, head of the State Duma’s financial market committee, said in a phone interview. “That includes China, East Asia, and other developing economies.”

Rahul Gandhi Reveals Congress’ Position on Waqf Bill

0
Waqf bill
Waqf Bill

Congress leader and Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition (LoP) Rahul Gandhi held discussions on Wednesday with the party’s Lok Sabha MPs regarding the Congress Party’s position on the upcoming Waqf Amendment Bill.

The meeting was attended by Congress Deputy Leader in the Lok Sabha Gaurav Gogoi, Congress General Secretary KC Venugopal, and senior Congress MPs such as Shashi Tharoor, Manish Tewari, and K Suresh, among others. The primary focus was on formulating a strategy to strongly articulate the party’s stance on the bill.

Congress MP Karti Chidambaram emphasized the religious and voluntary nature of waqf properties, urging the government to respect sensitivities rather than push the bill solely based on its parliamentary majority. He criticized the ruling party’s approach, stating, “The government should be aware of and respect religious sensitivities. They should not pass the law just because they have the numbers or to send a signal to their core vote bank, which may not fully grasp the nuances of waqf land. The misconception that waqf can claim any land is incorrect… They will likely succeed because of their majority.”

Earlier in the day, Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi staged a protest against the Waqf Amendment Bill at Makar Dwar. Wearing a black kurta and holding a placard that read, “Reject Waqf Bill,” he expressed his opposition ahead of the bill’s scheduled tabling in Parliament.

Congress MP K Suresh reaffirmed the INDIA bloc’s collective opposition to the bill, stating, “The entire opposition stands against this bill. Our representatives in the Joint Parliamentary Committee have also decided to oppose it. Yesterday, INDIA bloc leaders unanimously resolved to reject the Waqf Amendment Bill.”

Congress’ Khaleequr Rahman accused the Union government of handling the matter in an unconstitutional manner. Meanwhile, Samajwadi Party MP Ram Gopal Yadav reiterated his party’s firm opposition to the proposed amendments, calling them “dictatorial and unconstitutional.”

“We have opposed this bill from the start. The amendments are dictatorial and unconstitutional. While the government may use its majority to push it through, we want discussions so that the country understands what is happening,” Yadav told ANI.

Vietnam Preparing to Host EU and China amid US Threat

0

China’s President Xi Jinping and European Union leaders are set to visit Vietnam in the coming weeks amid intensified diplomatic engagements, as concerns grow over U.S. trade tariffs, officials said.

China, the EU, and Vietnam all maintain substantial trade surpluses with the United States and have faced tariffs imposed by Donald Trump’s administration, with additional measures expected to be announced on Wednesday.

Xi Jinping is scheduled to meet Vietnamese leaders in Hanoi on April 14, according to two Vietnamese officials familiar with the plans. This would mark his second visit to Vietnam in under 18 months. His multi-day trip to Vietnam is part of a broader Southeast Asian tour, including stops in Cambodia and Malaysia, two diplomats confirmed.

When asked about the visit, China’s foreign ministry stated it had no information to share, while Vietnam’s foreign affairs ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Among the key topics on the agenda will be railway projects connecting northern Vietnam with China, which both countries have agreed to develop to enhance trade and connectivity, according to both Vietnamese sources.

One source noted that Xi’s visit comes amid “strategic adjustments by major countries,” highlighting shifts in U.S. policy under Trump as a significant factor. Additionally, Vietnam is in the process of approving the use of China’s COMAC aircraft, with an industry source suggesting that formal approval could coincide with Xi’s visit. This could open the door for Vietnamese airlines to lease or purchase Chinese commercial jets.

Just ahead of Xi’s visit, Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is set to meet Vietnamese leaders on April 9, followed by EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, as per official schedules. Furthermore, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are also expected to visit Hanoi in the coming weeks, according to European officials and diplomats.

“The tide of tariffs and export controls is rising… We want to create new opportunities to trade and invest with trusted partners,” von der Leyen said in a video message to ASEAN leaders when they convened in Hanoi last month.

Govt Bashes X for Labelling ‘Sahyog’ Censorship Tool

0

In a detailed response to the Karnataka High Court, the Centre refuted the claims made by X Corp in its petition challenging India’s information-blocking framework.

The government argued that X Corp had misinterpreted the provisions of the Information Technology Act, particularly Sections 69A and 79.

X Corp contended that Section 79 does not grant the government the authority to issue content-blocking orders in a manner that circumvents the safeguards established under Section 69A, its associated blocking rules, and the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Shreya Singhal case.

However, the government maintained that Section 69A explicitly empowers the Centre to issue blocking orders under specific conditions while incorporating multiple safeguards for online content regulation. It further clarified that Section 69A differs significantly from Section 79, which merely mandates that intermediaries exercise due diligence upon receiving notices from authorised agencies.

“The framework under Section 79 does not authorize ‘blocking orders.’ Instead, it informs intermediaries of their obligations, and failure to comply could result in the loss of safe harbor protections and potential action under Rule 7 of the IT Rules, 2021,” the government stated.

Additionally, the Centre asserted that while Section 69A provides the legal basis for blocking access to content with enforceable consequences for non-compliance, Section 79 outlines the conditions under which intermediaries can claim safe harbor protection.

According to the government, X Corp wrongly equated the “blocking orders” issued under Section 69A with the “notices” under Section 79, despite the Supreme Court having previously distinguished between the two in the Shreya Singhal ruling.

Addressing concerns raised by X Corp, the government defended the Sahyog portal, describing it as a facilitative tool designed to streamline coordination between intermediaries and law enforcement agencies. The Centre emphasized that the portal ensures a structured mechanism for swift action against unlawful online content, benefiting both intermediaries and investigative authorities.

“It is misleading to portray Sahyog as a censorship tool. By doing so, the petitioner misrepresents itself as a content creator rather than an intermediary. Such a stance from a global platform like X is both regrettable and unacceptable,” the government asserted.

The Centre also highlighted that as a foreign commercial entity, X Corp has no inherent right to host or defend third-party content on its platform. It pointed out that in a previous case involving Twitter, the Karnataka High Court had explicitly ruled that Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution do not apply to the company.

With this submission, the government reinforced its position that the legal framework governing information blocking is well-defined and distinct, rejecting allegations of overreach.

According to its website, Sahyog was developed to automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries by the appropriate government or its agencies under the IT Act, 2000, facilitating the removal or restriction of access to information used for unlawful activities.