On 13th March, a woman driving a scooter with a woman pillion rider crashed the vehicle through a house roof at high speed. Reports suggest that the female driver lost control of the brakes and dramatically plunged into the roof. Both women miraculously escaped with minor injuries. The video of the scooter lodged in the roof with the women sitting on it has gone viral on social media. In the video, the woman driving the scooter was seen smiling while the vehicle was lodged in the roof.
An X user ‘MissMaaya244’ shared the video and said, “There is a reason behind being called ‘Papa Ki Pari. It takes a lot of effort to become one. Otherwise there would have been ‘Mummy Ka Para’.”
ऐवे ही थोड़ी हमें पापा की परीयां बोला जाता है बहुत मेहनत लगती हैं नाम बनाने में ….. नहीं तो देखे कोई आपको ही बोल ले मम्मी का परा ????? pic.twitter.com/Yv4hgmRTJm
X user Awinash Kumar urged Union Minister Nitin Gadkari to build roads where the road can halt the vehicle if the female driver puts her foot on the road.
गडकरी जी, आप एक्सप्रेस हाईवे छोड़ो और ऐसी सड़क की जोजना बनाओ जिस पर….
Looking at the video, it appears that the road and the house’s roof are at the same level. The scooter must have been at a high speed when the female driver lost control and sped towards the roof of the house. It then jumped off the road and plunged into the roof.
The Election Commission of India on Thursday released the data of Electoral Bonds bought by various entities from the State Bank of India and the recipients of such bonds. The data was published in two sheets, one gives the detail of purchasers of the Electoral Bonds from 12 April 2019 to 11 January 2024, and the other gives the detail of political parties that encashed Electoral Bonds from 12 April 2019 to 24 January 2024.
As anticipated, BJP is the biggest recipient of Electoral bonds, with over ₹6,060 crore, almost half of all donations received by the parties through bonds. The second largest beneficiary was Trinamool Congress with ₹1,610 crore, followed by Congress (₹1,422 crore) and BRS (₹1,215 crore).
All parties in the now collapsed opposition bloc I.N.D.I. Alliance received donations through Electoral Bonds, despite their strong public oppositions to the scheme.
However, the list of donors, or the list of purchasers have proven many of the allegations regarding the scheme false. While it was anticipated by many that Adani Group and Reliance Group will feature prominently in the list, the two behemoths are not even mentioned. Just a day before the publication of the list, Adani Group shares had plummeted, with analysts saying that this was due to panic selling by investors anticipating that the company made significant donations to political parties using electoral bonds.
As per reports, there was panic selling of Adani group stocks due to rumours going around in the market that they are one of the leading contributors to political parties through the purchase of electoral bonds.
However, in the list published by the Election Commission based on the data submitted by the State Bank of India, none of the Adani Group companies bought any Electoral Bonds. This means, although the group may have donated to political parties, they didn’t use the Electoral Bonds for the same.
Another name that is absent from the list is the Reliance Group. Rahul Gandhi has been alleging that all policies of the Modi government is to benefit select people like Adani and Ambani, but it seems Reliance Group also didn’t purchase any Electoral Bonds to make donations to political parties. While it may be alleged that these companies could have use shell companies of proxy companies to purchase bonds, the fact is that list does not contain many such names, and most of the names are of well-known companies, except a few.
However, the list includes several well-known companies, like the Bajaj group, Bharti Airtel, DLF, Jindal Steel, Vedanta etc. But the names of top purchasers of Electoral Bonds are surprising, as they include several relatively lesser-known names.
The top purchaser of electoral bonds was Future Gaming and Hotel Services Private Limited, the company bought a total of whopping 1,368 bonds totalling ₹1,368 crore. The second largest purchaser was Megha Engineering and Infrastructures Limited with ₹821 crore. The third place was occupied by Qwik Supply Chain Private Limited.
Notably, the lottery company Future Gaming & Hotel Services Private Limited is facing a probe by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case. The agency had attached assets worth ₹409.92 crore of the company and its various sub-distributors in relation to the case originally registered by Kolkata Police. The company is the sole distributor of paper lottery organised by the states of Sikkim and Nagaland that runs the popular ‘Dear Lottery’.
The Supreme Court of Canada found in a recent sexual assault case that it was ‘problematic’ for a lower court judge to refer to the victim as a ‘woman,’ hinting that a more appropriate term would have been ‘person with a vagina.’ In a ruling issued Friday, March 8, Justice Sheilah Martin said that a trial judge’s use of the term ‘a woman’ may ‘have been unfortunate and engendered confusion.’
Martin meanwhile failed to explain why the term ‘woman’ remained ambiguous, yet the paragraph in her judgment referred to the complainant as a ‘person with a vagina.’ Notably, no one in the entire case had been described as transgender, and the complainant was always referred to as a ‘she.’
The case before the Canadian Supreme Court centred around Charles Kruk, who was accused of sexual assault against Maple Ridge, 34, in 2017.
“Kruk found the complainant intoxicated, lost, and distressed one night in downtown Vancouver,” read the case’s history. “He decided to take her to his house, and connected with the complainant’s parents by phone.”
The complainant stated that she awoke to find her pants off and Kruk vaginally penetrating her. Kruk testified that the complainant’s trousers were off because she had removed them herself after spilling water on them earlier in the night and that what she perceived to be a rape was Kruk startled her awake.
At Kruk’s 2020 trial, a British Columbia court rejected his defence in part because the complainant was unlikely to be mistaken about the sensation of vaginal penetration. “She said she felt his penis inside her and she knew what she was feeling. In short, her tactile sense was engaged. It is extremely unlikely that a woman would be mistaken about that feeling,” read the initial decision.
Martin approved of this sentence, with the hint that the paragraph should have been “It is extremely unlikely that a person with a vagina would be mistaken about that feeling.”
Justice Martin believed that instead of using the word ‘woman,’ the complainant, Ridge, was described as a ‘person with a vagina,’ which could have caused doubt about who the word was referring to.
A mob in Tamil Nadu assaulted a migrant worker from Bihar who they suspected of being a kidnapper. The incident occurred on 12th March when the man was on a video call while walking down the street.
According to reports, a few individuals gathered and asked the victim his whereabouts. The individual who was apparently intoxicated was unable to respond to their queries. He also refused to give up his phone when they demanded to examine it and turned it off. The people then started beating him because they assumed he was a kidnapper and handed him over to the authorities.
He was later identified by the police as a migrant labourer from Bihar. After further investigation, it was discovered that the man had shut off his phone while on a video conversation with a relative out of concern that the mob was attempting to take it. Furthermore, the police released him after denying the accusation that he was a kidnapper. The police additionally requested the public to ignore bogus reports that persons from North India are trying to abduct youngsters in the state.
This is the fifth time that a mob has attacked a migrant worker under suspicion of being a kidnapper.
Last year a major controversy broke out after Bihari workers raised the issue of alleged attacks against them in Tamil Nadu. Several Bihar leaders raised this issue in the Bihar Legislative Assembly and slammed the Nitish Kumar-led administration over the issue. The labourers who had returned from Tamil Nadu to Bihar had revealed the on-ground scenario there, though the DGP of Tamil Nadu had termed the torture as untrue.
On Tuesday, March 12, the Delhi High Court instructed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to not take any coercive action against the Pakistani Hindu refugee camp at the city’s Majnu Ka Tilla area until the next date of hearing. The decision came a day after the central government notified implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) rules, creating a pathway for migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, specifically those belonging to the Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Parsi, Buddhist, and Christian communities, to obtain citizenship in India.
Exuberated by the central govt’s decision, over 1,000 Pakistani Hindu refugees, staying in a camp in the Majnu Ka Tilla area in Delhi, celebrated by applying colours on each other’s faces, singing songs and dancing.
Breathing a sigh of relief, Maina a member of one of the 200 destitute Hindu refugee families who has been living here for the past 11 years, recalled the atrocities she and her family endured during her days in Pakistan.
In an interview with Swarajya journalist Swati Goel Sharma, Maina revealed that, despite spending 14 years in Pakistan, she only attended school for one day. “My grandfather got me and my sister Rajkumari admitted to a school in our village in Pakistan,” Maina is heard stating.
“We did not change our names when we applied for admission; we kept our Hindu identity. Every student at our school harassed us. Some ridiculed our deities, while others pulled our hair. Then, between 12 and 1 pm, during recess, we sat down to have our tiffins. The teacher in charge grabbed our lunch boxes and demanded to know why we weren’t consuming the cow meat that was being provided for all the kids. When we declined to consume the beef and told the teacher that our grandfather had told us to eat from our tiffins, she threw our food in the dustbin. Then, in a furious tone, she declared that we would have to eat beef if we wanted to study there. This led to my older sister receiving a beating as well. When we got back home, we told our grandfather what had happened. We went to school for the first and last time on that day,” Maina remembered.
Met Maina at a slum in Delhi. In Pakistan where she lived for 14 years, she went to school only for a day
That day, she & her sister were forced to eat beef in exchange of ‘privilege’ of a school seat. They dropped out
With the Centre notifying the rules for the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act, other Hindu refugees expressed confidence that the government would protect their homes. “We are sure that the government intends to accommodate us; unemployment was the biggest issue in Pakistan, and with the implementation of CAA, many of our relatives back in Pakistan will also be able to live and work in India… we are sure that the government will not let anything happen to our homes,” Madhumati, a resident, said.
The Delhi High Court ruled on Tuesday (March 12) that until the next hearing date, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) will not use coercive measures against the Pakistani Hindu refugee camp located in the Majnu Ka Tilla area of the city.
In an order dated March 12, Justice Mini Pushkarna’s single-judge bench stated, “Considering the statement made on behalf of the then Additional Solicitor General of India, as recorded in order dated 29th May, 2013 in W.P.(C) No. 3712/2013 that the Union of India shall make endeavor to extend all support to the Hindu community which has entered India from Pakistan, it is directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, till the next date of hearing,” the HC said.
Ravi Ranjan Singh, a refugee, petitioned the High Court to order the authorities to refrain from disturbing or demolishing the Pakistani Hindu refugee camp at Majnu Ka Tilla until they were granted an alternative plot of land, especially when the Union Government had notified the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019, through which the persecuted non-Muslims minorities from Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Pakistan would now be granted the right to officially stay in India.
The decision came a day after the Government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi notified the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said on March 11, the applications will be submitted in a completely online mode for which a web portal has been provided.
The issuance of these rules is expected to create a pathway for migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, specifically those belonging to the Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Parsi, Buddhist, and Christian communities, to obtain citizenship in India.
The Election Commission of India on Thursday released the data of Electoral Bonds bought by various entities from the State Bank of India and the recipients of such bonds The development comes after the SBI submitted the data to the Election Commission on 12th March. The bank had submitted the data after the Supreme Court rejected its plea to extend more time.
ECI has published the elector bond data in sheets. One gives the detail of purchasers of the Electoral Bonds from 12 April 2019 to 11 January 2024, and the other gives the detail of political parties that encashed Electoral Bonds from 12 April 2019 to 24 January 2024.
However, as the Electoral Bond Scheme was meant to be anonymous, the data published by ECI does not show who donated to which party. However, with careful study of body the sheet, it will be possible to make a rough estimate of the same.
Interestingly, as per the data, a total of 18,871 electoral bonds were purchased, but 20,421 bonds were encased by the parties. The total in the purchase sheet is ₹1,21,55,51,32,000.00, while the total in the recipient sheet is ₹1,27,69,08,93,000.00. The reason for this discrepancy is not clear.
At the first glance, it appears that Adani Group didn’t purchase any Electoral Bond. The name Reliance also does not appear in the list. Similarly, Serum Institute, Essar Group and GMR Group, alleged to have donate to BJP through, Prudent Electoral Trust, also do not appear in the list, and Prudent Electoral Trust is also not listed.
On March 11th, the Supreme Court dismissed SBI’s plea seeking an extension to disclose details of each electoral bond encashed by political parties before the scheme was scrapped last month.
The apex court noted that the SBI doesn’t need to complete the matching exercise linking donors with the political parties but rather simply reveal the data of how much different political parties received in donations and who donated through electoral bonds.
The court directed SBI to disclose the details by the close of business hours on March 12. It further instructed the ECI to compile the information and publish the details on its official website no later than March 15, 2024, by 5 PM.
On 14th March (Thursday) the Delhi High Court upheld a lower court order instructing news organization Bloomberg to remove a story claiming that market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had discovered a US $241 million accounting discrepancy in Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited. Bloomberg had moved the High Court challenging the trial court verdict asking it to remove the article, and the High Court rejected the plea and directed the media house to comply with the court order.
Furthermore, Justice Shalinder Kaur stated that Bloomberg has three days to abide by the directive and take down the report, refusing to grant them more time to file an appeal with the Supreme Court. The order read, “It is clarified that the appellants shall comply with the trial court order within three days.”
Notably, Zee argued in the court that there were no SEBI observations against it as alleged by Bloomberg. On the other hand, Bloomberg alleged that the court order was issued without hearing them, and argued that it is an internationally renowned media house.
The court was subsequently informed by Zee’s attorney Vijay Aggarwal that his client would not file a contempt plea against Bloomberg until Tuesday. Additionally, the court turned down a plea from Bloomberg’s attorney to postpone the ruling for a week. After the verdict, Bloomberg counsel argued, “Parties who need to sign for me to avail the remedy (of further appeal) are not in Delhi. They are abroad,” to which the court answered, “We have given you sufficient time.”
Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar who represented Bloomberg, claimed before the High Court that the lower court’s order lacked both a prima facie finding and a rationale. He charged, “This is the most amazing order. No prima facie case made, balance of convenience, irreparable loss or hardship.” He said that Bloomberg is a well-known media outlet, adding that the trial court judge did not even hear arguments from the news platform before issuing the judgement.
He alleged in his submission that the contested ruling was utterly irrational and offered no explanation for why Zee would have a prima facie case. “Where is the reasoning? And he grants a final relief by saying that takedown. I am an internationally reputed news agency. The ex parte order of taking down is passed without any reasoning. I am amazed,” he complained while reading the impugned order.
Bloomberg had filed the plea in the Delhi High Court to overturn a trial court ruling requiring them to take down a story claiming that SEBI had flagged accounting mismatches about US $240 million in Zee Entertainment’s books. Additional District Judge (ADJ) Harjyot Singh Bhalla of the Saket Courts issued the order ex parte. The court further stated that the parties would be free to request an early hearing before the ADJ in an emergency.
Justice Shalinder Kaur of the High Court noted that the ADJ used his judgment to consider the case’s facts and determined that, on the face of it, there was sufficient evidence to support the decision to grant an ex-parte ad interim injunction, otherwise, the application’s whole purpose would have been rendered moot. The court highlighted, “Being conscious of the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, the learned ADJ has fixed the next date of hearing as 26.03.2024 for deciding the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. I, thus, do not find any ground to interfere with the order impugned herein. Consequently, the appeal along with pending applications, stands dismissed.”
The appeal was made in opposition to a decision made on 1st March by ADJ Harjyot Singh Bhalla. The order was rendered in a defamation lawsuit brought by Zee Entertainment against the online news platform’s management business, Bloomberg Television Production Services India Private Limited, as well as the publication’s writers and researchers. Bloomberg released a report on 21st February 2024 headlined “India Regulator Finds $ 241 Million Accounting Issue at Zee.”
According to the report, the market regulator discovered that Zee Entertainment’s accounts were missing about $241 million, with no appropriate transaction history displayed for the amount. Zee subsequently sued Bloomberg and its writers Anto Antony, Saikat Das, and Preeti Singh for defamation in a Delhi district court.
Zee informed the district court that Zee had not been found guilty by SEBI and that the article was slanderous. It was pointed out that although no such conclusion was provided, the article purports that SEBI had discovered significant financial mismanagement.
Advocate Vijay Aggarwal maintained that Bloomberg cannot disparage an Indian enterprise simply because it is a globally recognized media outlet. He further argued that the trial court’s direction was appropriate since Zee was experiencing irreversible injury as a result of the contested publication. The trial judge noted that Zee had established a strong case for ad interim ex-parte injunction orders and that the balance of convenience supported Zee’s position against Bloomberg. It added that Zee might suffer irreversible harm and loss in the event that the injunction was denied.
It was alleged that the article’s speculations were accurate and that they directly related to Zee’s corporate governance and business operations. Zee’s Lawyer Vijay Aggarwal argued that there was no evidence in the file to support Bloomberg’s claims. He pointed out, “They don’t have a case on facts. If there is any in the public record, dismiss my suit right now. Just because they are a company of international repute does not mean they can defame an Indian company.”
The online news site was additionally prohibited from sharing, disseminating or printing the story on any digital or physical platform until 26th March. Zee asserted that the piece was malicious and defamatory and that it was published with the deliberate and dishonest goal to tarnish and disparage it. It was also contended that Zee and its investors suffered financially as a result of the article’s publication, with the company’s stock price falling by over 15%.
Zee asserted that the article’s writers and researchers had written other pieces criticizing it earlier but the contested article went so far as to make baseless accusations of unlawful fund diversion. Zee was granted relief by the judge, who stated that ex parte and interim injunctions have been granted in comparable circumstances since the content of the contested information was inherently defamatory.
Toxic work culture can take a heavy toll on a person’s physical and mental health. In the media industry, toxic newsrooms are causing serious distress to even seasoned journalists. On 28th February 2024, Satish Nandgaonkar, a Senior Editor at Hindustan Times, Mumbai passed away after suffering cardiac arrest outside HT’s office at Lower Parel in Mumbai. Now it has been alleged that he was suffering from a toxic work culture and was being regularly bullied by Editor Meenal Baghel.
On the fateful day, Nandgaonkar complained of pain in his back that afternoon, walked to a pharmacy near the office, and collapsed. He was rushed to Global Hospital and proclaimed dead upon arrival. He was cremated at Thane on 29th February.
On 29th February, Hindustan Times published an article in remembrance of the 52-year-old journalist. The media house said that Satish Nandgaonkar was a “beloved figure in Mumbai’s journalism” world and that his “large presence will be deeply missed in the HT newsroom.”
Hindustan Times’s article on Satish Nandgaonkar
However, in a shocking turn of events, it has come to the fore that Satish Nandgaonkar was allegedly subjected to workplace harassment, humiliation and bullying by Hindustan Times Mumbai’s Editor Meenal Baghel.
An investigation by the Mumbai Press Club (MPC) revealed disturbing details concerning the sudden demise of Satish Nandgaonkar. The Mumbai Press Club has forwarded its findings to the Editors’ Guild of India and HT’s chairperson Shobhana Bhartiya.
Harassment, humiliation and manipulation: MPC findings reveal alleged dark truth of HT Mumbai’s toxic newsroom
In its letter to Anant Nath, the President of the Editors’ Guild of India, Mumbai Press Club wrote that these incidents of harassment just days before Nandgaonkar’s death may have precipitated the event.
“With respect to the death of Satish Nandgaonkar, it is not known whether there is a direct relation between the incidents of harassment meted out to him on the 21st and 28th of February by Baghel and his death due to cardiac arrest. What is known, though, is that he had been put under severe stress by continuous bludgeoning and insults by the Executive Editor, which might have triggered a cardiac episode. It is, therefore, necessary for the Editors Guild of India to intervene and investigate the matter before we see more casualties at the Hindustan Times,” the Mumbai Press Club wrote, adding that it will provide necessary assistance for the probe.
Detailing on the sequence of events on 28th February, the day Satish Nandgaonkar died, the Mumbai Press Club said that an editorial meeting chaired by Meenal Baghel was held at around 12:30 pm wherein Satish Nandgaonkar was rebuked over a delayed story filed by his team member. During the meeting, Baghel allegedly threw epithets like “Brainless” at Nandgaonkar. The incident left the journalist distressed.
“Nandgaonkar defended himself, pointing out that the lady reporter was in a no-internet area and, therefore, there was a delay in sending the story. He further mentioned that the desk instructed him to send the story directly without editing to avoid any delay. However, the harangue continued with accusations that ‘You are not doing your job’ and with Baghel throwing epithets like ‘brainless’ at Nandgaonkar. A colleague said she found him sitting glassy-eyed at his workstation after the meeting. Since there was another ‘special stories’ meeting scheduled at 3.30 PM, she requested him to come for lunch, but Nandgaonkar did not respond. He was also heard by other colleagues complaining about ‘upper back’ and ‘shoulder’ pain and said he would go to a pharmacy and get some painkillers,” the MPC letter reads.
The letter further mentions accounts of several ex-HT employees who alleged to have faced humiliation and bullying at the Hindustan Times newsroom at the hands of Hindustan Times Mumbai Editor Meenal Baghel. The experiences of several journalists who faced harassment while working at the Hindustan Times Mumbai office suggest that Meenal Baghel allegedly bore grudges against some journalists dismissing their pitched stories as “trash”. Moreover, she is also alleged to have used manipulation tactics to spread fear among the journalists to assert control and make the employees accept the toxic work environment in the newsroom. For this, she used the argument that “there are no jobs outside, so you have to accept the situation here.”
“The Mumbai Mirror newsroom was famous for the Editor’s terror, abusive language, screaming and humiliation of reporters for not doing the “right” kind of journalism. Reporters were labelled as “stupid”, “immature”, and “idiot” in front of the newsroom. Abusive words such as “f. k” were repeatedly used,” a former employee at Hindustan Times Mumbai told the Mumbai Press Club.
Furthermore, the MPC investigation found that several HT reporters had to take therapy to cope with the constant pressure. It said that the perpetual doubting and questioning of their journalistic skills lowered their confidence to a point where many of them lost the confidence to pitch a story. The journalists were also under pressure to attend editorial meetings and also be present on the field. In another shocking revelation, the MPC said that reporters were sometimes made to write “wrong”, “factually incorrect”, and “false” stories because the Editor had received inputs.”
Mumbai Press Club also released an Open Letter to editors and media houses regarding the development, urging them to address the issue and create a better and more professional work culture. “Free and responsible news media requires an encouraging environment where journalists can bring out their best and perform their duties without fear or favour,” they wrote in the open letter.
— Mumbai Press Club (@mumbaipressclub) March 1, 2024
As the letters sparked debate around toxic newsrooms and workplace harassment, Meenal Baghel spoke to MPC chairperson Gurbir Singh and allegedly played the victim card. She also denied having any animosity with Satish Nandgaonkar.
Based on its investigation and interviews of several former employees of Hindustan Times Mumbai and Nandgaonkar’s immediate colleagues, the MPC demanded that the Editors’ Guild intervene and investigate the matter.
Taking to X, on Wednesday (13th March), the Mumbai Press Club shared some pictures from a condolence meeting held in memory of Satish Nandgaonkar.
Condolence meeting in memory of Satish Nandgaonkar
The Mumbai Press Club's investigation reveals that Satish Nandgaonkar, a journalist with HT who passed away on 28th February, experienced significant stress due to bullying and insults inflicted upon him by the HT Mumbai Editor. pic.twitter.com/E1fI84ZhaZ
The Club said “The Mumbai Press Club’s investigation reveals that Satish Nandgaonkar, a journalist with HT who passed away on 28th February, experienced significant stress due to bullying and insults inflicted upon him by the HT Mumbai Editor. These findings have been forwarded to HT’s chairperson, Shobhna Bhartiya, as well as to the Editors Guild for further action. It is imperative that a Code of Newsroom Conduct for Editors be established without delay.”
Ambekar has highlighted numerous instances of abuse by the HT Mumbai Editor and has referenced emails and WhatsApp messages as prima facie evidence.
“We have also received a copy of the complaint dated 10th March, addressed to HT Media by Anjali Ambekar, the wife of Nandgaonkar. In the complaint, she has requested an investigation into her husband’s death. Ambekar has highlighted numerous instances of abuse by the HT Mumbai Editor and has referenced emails and WhatsApp messages as prima facie evidence,” the MPC wrote on X.
Anjali Ambekar’s “Appeal for Justice”
Meanwhile, Nandgaonkar’s wife Anjali Ambekar penned an emotional open letter titled “Appeal for Justice” describing the alleged abuse and harassment her husband faced while working at HT Mumbai. In her letter, she cited evidence from emails and WhatsApp messages.
“After his untimely death, I made it point to go through his Whatsapp chats and his emails and was horrified to note that he faced constant harassment at HT at the hands of Mumbai resident editor Meenal Baghel. I have been told that unable to cope with the harassment they faced at the hands of Meenal Bahgel, a few journalists resigned from the newspaper. Now I hear that one person has resigned from the newspaper after Satish’s death because of her, for the same reasons that had made my husband feel humiliated,” Ambekar wrote.
“Meenal Baghel has anger issues. There were a few occasions even when I had witnessed or heard Meenal shout at Satish and use foul language. She would underrate him, rubbish him and humiliate him in front of his colleagues, a thing that would affect morale of sensitive journalist like Satish. It pains me to hear from his colleagues that at an editorial meeting held on February 28, Satish was sweating profusely in a fully air-conditioned office and seething with anger during and after the meeting, where he was badly humiliated by Ms Meenal Baghel,” Ambekar added.
In her letter, she demanded that a dedicated team conduct a thorough investigation into the events surrounding Satish’s sudden demise. She insisted on gathering testimonies from all colleagues who were present in the office before his death or had worked with him.
Ambekar suggested that if the inquiry committee finds any misconduct, decisive and severe action be taken against those involved. She also requested that appropriate compensation be announced for the family, as well as comprehensive guidelines for effectively handling workplace harassment of journalists.
On 14th March (local time), Canada’s government-funded broadcaster CBC said that YouTube has blocked access to a 45-minute documentary on Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s murder. The documentary was banned from viewers in India after the government of India issued orders. The documentary focused on the murder of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, British Columbia, on 18th June 2023.
Notably, in September 2023, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused Indian agents of being involved in the murder of Najjar. Indian government categorically denied the accusations. Interestingly, Canada has failed to provide any credible evidence to India to prove Indian agents were involved in the murder.
The documentary has been published as part of the Fifth Estate program of the CBC. It contained an interview with Khalistani terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun who is the founder of the Khalistani terrorist organisation Sikhs For Justice. It also contained alleged footage showing the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in a coordinated attack. In the video, it was seen that a white sedan blocked Nijjar’s truck, two men ran up and shot him, and escaped in a silver Toyota Camry. The Canadian police are yet to identify or nab the killers, and their alleged link to the Indian govt remains unproven.
On 14th March, CBC reported that YouTube informed it that the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued an order to ban the documentary for Indian audiences. However, the documentary remained accessible to viewers elsewhere in the world.
X also blocked CBC documentary
Furthermore, X informed CBC that the GoI issued an order to the platform to ban access to the documentary, to which X complied. In a message to CBC, X said, “Indian law obligates X to withhold access to this content in India; however, the content remains available elsewhere.” CBC said, “We disagree with this action and maintain that freedom of expression should extend to these posts. Following the Indian legal process, we communicate with the Indian authorities.”
In its documentary, CBC claimed that it contacted the High Commission of India in Ottawa to participate in their investigation but did not receive any response. Notably, the High Commissioner to Ottawa, Sanjay Kumar, has appeared on several Canadian networks and gave interviews to several outlets where he was asked about the matter related to Nijjar’s murder. However, he did not appear on CBC.
In a statement, a CBC spokesperson said, “As is the case with all stories on The Fifth Estate, ‘Contract To Kill’ was thoroughly researched, vetted by senior editorial leaders and meets our journalistic standards.”
Notably, the Indo-Canadian community has criticised CBC over the documentary. MD of the Surrey-based Radio India, Maninder Singh Gill, said in a letter to CBC president Catherine Tait that the documentary produced by the media house was biased and propaganda (against India). He said, “Terming the Khalistan movement as a legacy of the 1947 Partition of the subcontinent has exposed the CBC’s superficial understanding of the Indian subcontinent’s history.”
Interestingly, the documentary was released by CBC just weeks ahead of the upcoming 2024 Lok Sabha Elections.
Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s murder and Canada’s accusations against India
On 18th September 2023, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dug a deep grave for the India-Canada relationship as he accused Indian agents of being involved in the murder of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil.
In the Canadian Parliament, he said, “Over the past number of weeks, Canadian Security Agencies have been actively pursuing credible allegations of a potential link between the agents of the Government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar.”
“In the strongest possible terms, I continue to urge the government of India to cooperate with Canada to get to the bottom of this matter,” Trudeau added in his statement.
His allegations led to a diplomatic standoff between India and Canada. Hitting back at the Trudeau government, the Indian government denounced Canada’s allegations as “absurd” and “motivated” and asked Ottawa to furnish solid proof.
The Indian government also pointed out that for internal political compulsions, Trudeau was pandering to the Khalistani extremists. Nearly six months after he aired the allegations in the Canadian Parliament and nine months after Nijjar’s killing, Trudeau’s government has not yet shared any “credible” evidence in this matter.
Nijjar, who was designated a terrorist by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2020, was shot and killed as he came out of a Gurdwara in Surrey, British Columbia, on the evening of June 18, 2023. Video footage of Nijjar’s killing recently surfaced online which Canadian media described as “contract killing”.
Amid Canada’s failure to indict Indian involvement, “credible” reports had indicated that it could have been a case of “gang violence”.
On Thursday, March 14, a three-member committee led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi chose former IAS officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu as election commissioners (ECs) to the Election Commission of India.
The two positions fell vacant after the retirement of Anup Chandra Pandey on February 14 and Arun Goel’s abrupt resignation last week. With Goel’s resignation, the Election Commission was left only with Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar.
The selection committee consisting of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Law Minister Arjun Meghwal and Leader of Opposition met this morning to consider names for the vacant positions of election commissioner.
After the selection committee meeting, Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury started crying foul that the government side had two members and from the opposition side, there was only one member in the team. He claimed that there were several flaws in the process adopted to select the Election Commissioners.
“They (government) have the majority (in the committee that appoints election commissioner). Earlier, they had given me 212 names, but 10 minutes before the appointment they again gave me just six names. I know that the CJI isn’t there, government has made such a law that the CJI doesn’t interfere and the Central govt can choose a favourable name. I am not saying that it’s arbitrary but the procedure that is being followed has some lacunae.”Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury said.
#WATCH | After the meeting of selection committee to pick the Election Commissioner, the Leader of Congress in Lok Sabha, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury says, "In this committee, govt has the majority….One Mr Kumar from Kerala and one Mr B. Sandhu from Punjab have been selected as… pic.twitter.com/lZrZwFGhyz
Who is former bureaucrat Gyanesh Kumar who served at the Ministry of Defence during UPA regime
Gyanesh Kumar is a retired IAS officer. He is a 1988-batch Kerala cadre IAS officer (retd), superannuated as Cooperation Secretary on January 31 2024. As a member of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), he was instrumental in establishing the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra Trust. When Article 370 was repealed in Jammu and Kashmir in 2019, he headed the Jammu and Kashmir desk at the MHA.
The Multi-State Cooperative Societies (MSCS) (Amendment) Act, 2023, and the establishment of three new national cooperative bodies—Bharatiya Beej Sahakari Samiti Limited (BBSSL), National Cooperative Organics Limited (NCOL), and National Cooperative Export Limited (NCEL)—were enacted by the Cooperation Ministry during his tenure.
He was instrumental in the timely launch of the CRCS-Sahara refund portal, which allowed legitimate depositors of the four Multi-State Cooperative Societies of the Sahara Group to submit claims.
From 2007 to 2012, during the UPA government, Gyanesh Kumar served at the Ministry of Defence as Joint Secretary (Defence Production).
He retired as Secretary, of the Ministry of Cooperation, a portfolio held by senior BJP leader Amit Shah.
Who is Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, picked as an election commissioner by Modi Govt
Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, a retired IAS officer from the 1998 batch, was born in 1963. He was the 17th Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand. He was accorded the position after the BJP came to power and Pushkar Singh Dhami was appointed as chief minister in 2021. Previous positions held by Sandhu included that of chairman of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), additional secretary, and minister of human resource development. The retired bureaucrat also worked as Commissioner, of Ludhiana Municipal Corporation.
In addition to receiving his MBBS from Government Medical College in Amritsar, Sandhu also holds a master’s degree in history from Guru Nanak Dev University in Amritsar. He reportedly has a law degree as well.
The former bureaucrat received the President Medal in recognition of his work as the Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana, Punjab, Commissioner. Furthermore, he was awarded the 2001 President of India Medal in recognition of services rendered during the Census of India.
Besides the Prime Minister and the Congress leader, Union Home Minister Amit Shah attended the meeting. The selection committee finally closed on retired IAS officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, who will join Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar on the commission.
Fake news about appointment of Dr Rajesh Kumar Gupta and Priyansh Sharma as Election Commissioners busted by PIB
On 13th March, a notification by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs surfaced on social media claiming that two Election Commissioners to the Election Commission of India have been appointed. As per the notification, the High-Powered Committee (HPC) comprising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, appointed Dr Rajesh Kumar Gupta (retd IAS) and Priyansh Sharma (retd IAS) as Election Commissioners. Furthermore, the notification suggested both would assume office from 31st March 2024.
The said notification was shared by several social media users.
The Press Information Bureau’s Fact Check unit, however, dismissed the notification as fake. In a post on X, PIB Fact Check wrote, “A notification regarding the appointment of two Election Commissioners to the Election Commission of India is circulating on social media. This notification is #fake. No such Gazette notification has been issued.”
