Home Blog Page 14

Which car insurance companies offer instant policy approval and same-day issuance?

0

Several car insurance companies offer instant policy approval and same-day issuance. Some of the providers include ACKO, HDFC ERGO, IFFCO-Tokio, Tata AIG, and ICICI Lombard.

With these insurers, you can buy or renew motor insurance online instantly within minutes. However, the policy document is sent to you through email or a mobile app. For these leading insurers, the policy approval process has become easier and hassle-free. Policyholders can get insured legally without delay.

Top 5 car insurance companies offering instant issuance and policy approval

Many car insurance companies in India now offer instant issuance. You also get a same-day policy approval facility. Here are the top 5 insurers well-known for their quick policy issuance:

ACKO Insurance

ACKO is a completely digital insurance company. It offers a paperless and fast process of buying car insurance. Customers can purchase or renew policies directly on the ACKO mobile app or the website. The entire process takes only a few minutes if you provide the correct details. 

    Once you complete payment, the policy document is generated. With ACKO insurance, you can also avail low premiums, zero commission, and digital claim services. This makes it stand out from other insurers.

    HDFC ERGO Insurance

    HDFC ERGO offers a convenient online service for purchasing and renewing motor insurance. Policyholders can enter their car details, compare available coverage, and pay online.

    Upon payment, the car insurance policy is issued immediately. It is sent via email. Additionally, the insurer offers over 12,000 cashless garages in India. You also get options of various add-on covers for enhanced protection.

    IFFCO-Tokio Insurance

    IFFCO-Tokio enables customers to purchase or renew car insurance online. It requires a minimal documentation process. For a smooth online process, you must enter vehicle details and select coverage. Then complete the payment.

      The company offers services like 24/7 support and minimal documentation. It also provides quick responses to claims.

      Tata AIG Insurance

      Tata AIG offers car insurance online with minimal paperwork. The customers can get an instant quote, cover, and complete payment online with ease. The insurer also offers access to 5,900+ cashless garages. It provides quick claim services for faster coverage.

        ICICI Lombard Insurance

        ICICI Lombard is another leading insurer offering online car insurance policies with the feature of instant issuance. Other benefits include the use of AI to process insurance claims, roadside services, and cashless repair services. This makes the overall process of insurance easier and simpler.

        These insurers ensure instant policy issuance with same-day approval. It enables car owners to stay legally insured without delay.

        Comparison between top-rated providers offering instant services online

        The table below highlights the comparison between top-rated motor insurance companies in 2026 offering instant services:

        Insurance CompanyKey Features
        ACKO InsurancePaperless process, faster claim, and completely online purchase
        HDFC ERGO InsurancePlan customisation, fastest delivery, instant quotes online
        IFFCO-Tokio Insurance24*7 online assistance, quick purchase, instant policy issuance
        Tata AIG InsuranceSimple comparison online, customisation of add-ons, and digital payment
        ICICI Lombard InsuranceRoadside assistance, faster online purchase, and an AI-enabled claim process

        Most leading insurers allow customers to compare plans and make payments online. The policy is issued instantly through email. For this digital process, there is minimal paperwork and policy issuance takes place within minutes. 

        How does instant car insurance policy issuance work?

        The instant car insurance policy issuance is an easy online process, allowing users to get cover in a few minutes. 

        First, the vehicle owner must provide the insurer with vehicle information. It includes the registration number, the model, and the type of fuel on the website or app of the insurer. Next, compare the available plans and select the necessary coverage with add-ons.

        After policy selection, the customer makes payment online through card, UPI or net banking. After successful payment, the insurer verifies the information. The policy is then delivered through email or a mobile application.

        Things to consider before choosing instant car insurance

        Here are the things to consider before choosing the right car insurance offering instant policy approval:

        1. Claim Settlement Ratio: A high claim settlement ratio signifies that the company is capable of processing claims efficiently.
        2. Comparison of Coverage Options: Find out whether the chosen policy offers comprehensive coverage, safeguards against damages, theft, and natural disasters. 
        3. Review Add-ons: Including add-ons such as zero depreciation cover, roadside assistance, and engine protection enhances overall coverage.
        4. Network Garages: Select insurers with a substantial network of cashless garages for quick repairs.
        5. Review Customer Reviews: Customer feedback provides insights into the speed of claim processing and service quality.
        6. Easy Digital Support: Search for insurers offering immediate access to a policy with quick online support. 

        Conclusion

        Instant policy approval and same-day issuance have made purchasing car insurance in India much easier. Many insurance providers allow customers to purchase the insurance online. However, it is advisable to carefully compare coverage options and claim support. Also, review network garages before choosing the insurer that suits your needs.

        US boots on ground in Iran imminent? Read how Washington is fortifying its troop presence in the Gulf as the West Asia war drags on

        America’s ‘Operation Epic Fury’ against Iran may soon witness its troops launching a ground invasion against the West Asian country as Trump’s war of attrition continues. About a month after the joint Israel-US front launched an offensive against Iran, the conflict has shifted primarily from air and naval strikes to preparations for potential limited ground operations, as Iran continues to impose a selective blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, which has disrupted global oil flows.

        US military fortifying forward presence in the Gulf to scare Iran and expand its military buildup to expand options beyond airstrikes

        Amidst stalled talks, the Pentagon is rapidly fortifying its forward presence in the Gulf states, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, and Saudi Arabia, as staging grounds and logistics hubs for contingencies. This marks America’s largest military buildup in the Middle East, the infamous and cataclysmic 2003 Iraq invasion. The fresh US military surge in the region is a buildup on a pre-existing footprint of about 40,000 to 50,000 troops.

        A Washington Post report cites US officials privy to the development, to say that the potential US ground Operation against Iran would most likely involve a mixture of Special Operations forces and conventional infantry troops.

        As per the US Central Command, the USS Tripoli, carrying 3,500 sailors and Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, had arrived in recent weeks. So far, 5,000 United States troops, including 2,500 Marines, have made their way to West Asia, waiting for a go-ahead from the American Commander-in-Chief to launch a ground invasion against Iran.

        A CNN report published last week says that around 2,000 to 4,000 paratroopers from the elite 82nd Airborne Division were being flown in as an “Immediate Response Force” prepared for quick insertion operations, in addition to over 4,000 Marines and sailors onboard USS Tripoli and USS Boxer (2,500 Marines and sailors).

        Notably, USS Boxer’s deployment is significant, given it serves as a carrier for the F-35B stealth fighter, since America’s most advanced carrier, USS Gerald R Ford, is out of commission. Last Friday (27th March), USS Gerald F Ford docked in Croatia for repairs after the US Navy said that there was a ‘laundry fire’, while Trump said that the carrier was successfully hit around 17 times by Iranian forces. This essentially means that around 4,500 sailors on board USS Gerald R Ford are temporarily out of the US-Iran war.

        However, Ford’s exit is compensated by USS George HW Bush, which has departed the US Navy headquarters in Norfolk.

        These reinforcements, which could increase the total ground-force presence to 17,000 if further waves of up to 10,000 troops are approved, would aid the campaign of the American forces to pound Iranian infrastructure in the oil-export hub, particularly in Kharg Island, and sites near the Strait of Hormuz.

        The rapid military buildup becomes all the more significant for the US since Iran’s IRGC is continuously targeting American bases in the Gulf to weaken their presence in the region, undermine logistics, air support, and missile defence leverage, and dent Trump’s pride. As the conflict drags into its fifth week with Iranian missiles and drones targeting US bases and Gulf shipping lanes, the US would use this as a justification for fortifying its troop presence, describing it as deterrence and a force multiplier.

        What is driving Trump’s plans to launch a ground invasion against Iran?

        While Israel attacked Iran, citing what it describes as an “existential threat” the West Asian country would pose to it if its nuclear program achieves success, Trump’s rhetoric suggests that America’s involvement in the war is not just about aiding Israel eliminate this threat but about landing its infamous ‘plane of democracy’ wherever there are oil and other natural resources.

        Donald Trump has expressed interest in occupying Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil export hub, and has said that seizing control of Iran’s oil as a preferred option. “To be honest with you, my favourite thing is to take the oil in Iran, but some stupid people back in the US say: ‘Why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people. Maybe we take Kharg Island, maybe we don’t. We have a lot of options,” the US President said.

        Covering up the embarrassment Iran has inflicted to the US so far, with false bravado, Trump had said that more strikes on Kharg Island are possible, saying the site has already been damaged but may still be targeted again “just for fun”. However, despite Trump’s claims of destroying Iran’s military power and ‘having fun’, the regime continues to target Israel and Middle Eastern countries with missiles and drones.

        Pertinently, Kharg Island lies about 30 kilometres off Iran’s southern coast and handles nearly 90% of the country’s crude oil exports. The island is located close to the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important sea routes through which around one-fifth of global oil supply moves. Any long disruption in this region could push energy prices higher and affect supply chains worldwide.

         It is, however, possible that the American President, besides the genuine interest in seizing control of Iranian oil after Venezuelan oil, and the imperative of breaking the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, would deliberately be diverting attention to Kharg Island while the real motive could be to seize control of Iran’s 400kg of enriched uranium, which is sufficient to make nuclear bombs.

        The US President has a penchant for aggrandising himself by issuing threats while also posing as a peacemaker. This vacillation is reflected in his decisions in the raging war against Iran. Just a few days back, Trump hinted that America might wind up its offensive against Tehran soon, only to pivot to expressing interest in Kharg Island and Iran’s oil, threatening to “unleash hell”, as well as ensuring that the Pentagon provides the Commander in Chief with “maximum optionality” by expanding troop presence in the region, as described by White House spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt.

        While Trump maintains an obvious silence on the specifics of the number of US military troops to be deployed for a potential invasion against the Iranian territory, several legacy media reports, like the one by The Wall Street Journal, say that the Trump administration is considering the deployment of over 10,000 troops in West Asia.

        Meanwhile, Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, has strongly criticised the reported US preparations. He accused Washington of secretly plotting a ground attack while publicly engaging in diplomatic efforts aimed at ending the conflict. “Iran’s armed forces are fully prepared to confront any land assault by American troops,” Ghalibaf said, warning that any attempt at occupation would be met with a “ruthless” response.

        The speaker’s remarks echo earlier statements in which he called for US forces to leave the region entirely, arguing that security in the Middle East should be handled by regional countries without American involvement.

        While it remains to be seen whether the US forces go full throttle and launch a ground invasion against Iran, such an adventure could deliver short-term tactical gains in degrading Iran’s nuclear ambitions, giving Israel a reprieve, and oil leverage; however, this would come at a cost of massive American casualties from asymmetric threats like drones and missiles. Moreover, the ballooning expenses that strain budgets would be in direct contrast to Trump’s earlier promises of not dragging America into distant and prolonged wars, fuelling domestic anger over him landing the US in the Iraq and Afghanistan-like quagmires.

        For Iran, particularly, the Mullah regime, an American ground incursion could prove to be an unintended unifying factor and fuel nationalist fervour. However, Iran, already facing sanctions and attacks, would further grapple with economic collapse, military attrition, and perhaps weaken its oil leverage, leaving Tehran with fewer cards to play in any eventual peace deal.

        Who is Bilal Bin Saqib? The mysterious rise of the “crypto bro” who leveraged digital finance to reset Pakistan-US ties

        The relationship between the United States and Pakistan has astonishingly emerged from obscurity following President Donald Trump’s re-election in 2024. He earlier consistently called out the country for misappropriating billions of dollars under the guise of the “War on Terror” while providing refuge to terrorists, thereby making a fool out of Washington. However, there has been a seismic shift in the ties between the two sides during his second term.

        From designating Asim Munir as his “favourite field marshal” and inviting him to a luncheon at the White House to praising him and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif as exceptional leaders, Trump has indeed made significant strides from his previous sharp criticism.

        Pakistan likewise has been actively catering to his ego by nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize and recognising his assertion of mediating a ceasefire with India, a statement that the Modi government has repeatedly refuted. While the former responded like a de facto vassal state, there is an intriguing factor guiding Trump’s revised opinion.

        The “crypto bro” shaping the US-Pakistan ties reset

        The reason behind the unexpected change of heart seems to revolve around 35-year-old Bilal Bin Saqib, who describes himself as a “crypto bro,” and is Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Pakistan Crypto Council. He has played an important part in improving the US-Pakistan link over the past year, reported Bloomberg.

        Saqib, a native of Lahore, revealed that his interest in cryptocurrency began during the historic 2017 Bitcoin bull run, which saw the price rise from less than $1,000 in January to $14,000 by the end of the year. He lived in both Pakistan and the United Kingdom. He is a graduate in social innovation and entrepreneurship from the London School of Economics and an alumnus of Queen Mary University. He has given TED talks and launched a non-profit organisation, “Tayaba,” with his brother.

        Saqib was honoured as a “Member of the Order of the British Empire” after co-founding the “One Million Meals” initiative while he was in the UK during COVID-19. According to his LinkedIn profile, he worked for “The Coin Master,” a company with 2 to 10 workers and the tagline “Helping Tokens Develop Routes to Web3 Markets,” for four years before he was hired in Pakistan.

        Saqib enters the picture

        Pakistan has been dependent on assistance from the International Monetary Fund, which it had found difficult to repay, as it grappled with high inflation, enormous debt and declining foreign reserves. It had little interest in cryptocurrency due to multiple concerns, including Ponzi schemes, fraud and money laundering.

        However, the attitude had altered by 2024, and the military establishment, the true authority in Pakistan, decided that cryptocurrency would be a helpful negotiating tool in international diplomacy. The country then created a dedicated regulator, enacted legislation covering virtual assets and encouraged international exchanges to submit licence applications. It designated 2,000 megawatts or around 5% of its power grid, for cryptocurrency mining and recommended a national cryptocurrency reserve.

        Now, it needed a person to supervise everything and chose Saqib, who was quickly handed over multiple positions beginning in March of last year. He was declared as the top executive officer of the Pakistan Crypto Council, special assistant to the prime minister on blockchain and cryptocurrency, alongside chief adviser to the finance minister on crypto. He was ultimately named as the chairman of the Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority.

        Moving from anonymity and into the spotlight

        Saqib, who was relatively unknown until last year, suddenly turned into one of the terror nation’s most influential figures. He has formed alliances with notable individuals in the cryptocurrency space, including Changpeng Zhao, popularly known as CZ, the controversial billionaire heading Binance Holdings Limited.

        It is the biggest cryptocurrency exchange in the world and has gained notoriety for sending funds to terror outfits, such as Hamas. Zhao was found guilty of money laundering and served time in jail. However, Trump pardoned him in October.

        Additionally, Saqib interacted with fund manager Cathie Wood, Bitcoin billionaire Michael Saylor and Nayib Bukele, the president of El Salvador, who created a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund and issued a Bitcoin legal tender in 2021. Meanwhile, he was appointed as an advisor at World Liberty Financial in April 2025. It granted him greater diplomatic and commercial advantages than any other collaboration.


        Saqib shared a selfie taken at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida last month with Witkoff and other executives. It took place simultaneously as Witkoff facilitated a deal between Pakistan and the United States for the renovation of Manhattan’s Roosevelt Hotel.

        Saqib expressed, “Because of crypto, doors have opened. New conversations have opened, and trust has been built. We have gotten an opportunity to rebrand,” in an interview. These events have been regarded as a respite for Pakistan, which has been on the verge of bankruptcy and diplomatic isolation.

        This could also account for Trump’s regular commendation of Munir, who was dubbed a “great general,” “great guy,, and “serious fighter” by him during a “Board of Peace” meeting last month. On the other hand, the terror state has strengthened its connection with the White House by using cryptocurrency and flattery.

        “For a country starved of global investor interest, aligning with Washington’s crypto pivot isn’t just about tech. It’s about signalling relevance in a shifting global order,” insisted Uzair Younus of The Asia Group, which is an advisory company in Washington DC.

        Curious case of Saqib’s appointment

        It’s unclear exactly how Saqib transformed into Pakistan’s most powerful face in such a short period of time. He has also been ambiguous in his answers concerning who contacted him, solely identifying the finance ministry. He has been similarly vague in relation to his area of expertise, announcing that he is “essentially turning an idea into execution.” He insisted, “I am not a trader. I’m a builder. I am the artist, not the scientist.”

        Saqib soon found his footing after officially joining Pakistan’s government. The next month, he convinced Zhao to join the Pakistan Crypto Council as a strategic advisor following the completion of his prison sentence in the US.

        Three weeks later, Saqib hosted Zachary Witkoff, CEO of World Liberty Financial, which he co-founded with Trump. He was accompanied by other personnel of the cryptocurrency firm in Islamabad, and they signed a “letter of intent” with the government to boost cooperation on the adoption of stablecoins.

        The meeting was publicised by Pakistan, which conveyed that World Liberty Financial is “backed by the Trump family, including President Donald Trump and his sons,” and Trump has “personally endorsed WLF,” in a formal release.

        Witkoff also voiced similar objectives in footage posted by Saqib in which he also talked about the tokenisation of “trillions of dollars” worth of rare-earth minerals. Munir and Sharif displayed these minerals, sourced from Pakistan-occupied Balochistan, to Trump last year, which led to warnings from the indigenous population of the area and the Baloch rebels.

        Saqib, in May, showcased Pakistan’s progress in the cryptocurrency space at a Bitcoin conference in Las Vegas. US Vice President JD Vance, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Junior, who are all co-founders of World Liberty Financial, were among the attendees there. A few days later, Saqib met with Bo Hines, the director of the President’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets at the time, in the White House.

        The former was a last-minute addition to a group that landed in the US for trade negotiations. He was directed to participate in an urgent call from an official. He had no prior experience with tariffs and no understanding of the agenda, but contributed to the drafting of a trade accord by the time he left Washington.

        Trump’s policies are influenced by crypto diplomacy and personal relationships.

        Witkoff arrived in Islamabad along with other executives and prominent people for a meeting attended by Munir, Sharif and several high-level officials in January. Saqib, who was also present there, praised the visit for assisting in “putting Pakistan on the map.”

        The growing affinity between Trump and Munir appears to be a product of Pakistan’s crypto diplomacy, or “biplomacy,” as he refers to it. The delegation enjoyed special treatment, which highlighted how the rapport between the two parties had developed recently.

        Witkoff, who is also the special US envoy to the Middle East, stated that Pakistan has provided a 15-point action plan, and its national capital has been suggested as a possible location for any negotiations before Trump’s deadline for Iran to reach an agreement or risk attacks on energy infrastructure.

        “Given how important personal connections are in the Trump White House’s policy process, Pakistan may well have bought itself some influence in the White House that advantaged it when it pitched itself to Washington as a mediator. With this unconventional US administration, unconventional factors can help your cause, and that’s certainly the case with crypto,” mentioned Michael Kugelman. He is a resident senior fellow for South Asia at the Atlantic Council in Washington.

        Tehran has been preventing the majority of vessels from crossing the “Strait of Hormuz” and even returned a Karachi-bound containership from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Hence, a cash-strapped Pakistan also wants to seek a resolution, as the situation could lead to a severe energy shortage in the nation, which is already in great distress.

        A mutual exploitative connection that could deteriorate at any moment

        Pakistan benefited from the Trump administration in many ways, including reduced duties on its goods to 19% and the classification of the Balochistan Liberation Army as a terrorist entity. Pakistan could assist the US in diversifying vital resource supply lines in addition to becoming a strategically located nuclear power. It is already infamous for carrying out the “dirty work of the West” in the region.

        Furthermore, US Strategic Metals, a Missouri-based business and a military-owned firm, signed a memorandum of understanding in September to develop rare-earth resources. Trump is also looking into a business opportunity in the realm of virtual assets in Pakistan.

        According to the Finance Ministry, there are 40 million cryptocurrency users there with an estimated trade volume of over $300 billion. This is one of the highest adoption rates in the world as citizens search for investment options in an economy plagued by persistent inflation.

        However, a lot can always move downward, especially when the price of oil soars. Pakistan has to repay the International Monetary Fund, which communicated disapproval of independent cryptocurrency ventures. El Salvador learnt the hard way that the adoption of Bitcoin damaged ties with the body and caused funding negotiations to halt.

        Most importantly, Trump has illustrated that his actions are exclusively motivated by his interests. He can readily convert adversaries into friends and vice versa if his needs dictate, with Islamabad being no exception. Thus, Munir would be in a difficult situation if he demanded that Pakistan, which last year inked a defence deal with Saudi Arabia, participate in the war against Iran in any manner. Last year’s reports disclosed that Trump was placing substantial pressure on his beloved military man to contribute his troops to Gaza as a part of a new stabilisation force.

        Influencer levelling allegations on Nitin Gadkari gets a defamation notice, but not Caravan magazine: Read how a thin line between caution and assertion played a role


        The left-wing section of influencers and commentators has been quick to cry foul after Nitin Gadkari filed a ₹50 crore defamation case against an Ambedkarite influencer, Mukesh Mohan. Social media has since been flooded with claims of “threat to democracy” and “silencing of voices.” But before jumping to any conclusions, it is essential to examine a basic question: what exactly was said in the original report, and how far did the viral video stretch those claims? 

        What the viral video claimed 

        An Instagram influencer named Mukesh Mohan claimed in his reel that Nitin Gadkari sells cow meat. In his reel, he stated that “Maharashtra police have arrested a truck belonging to the Rembal Agro and Foods company, which was transporting beef (cow meat). The company is owned by BJP leader Nitin Gadkari, as reported by Caravan magazine.”

        The viral video did not merely analyse or question the report’s findings; it went significantly further. It presented the issue as a settled fact, asserting that Union Minister Nitin Gadkari was linked to a company engaged in the sale of “beef,” which Mohan stated was ‘cow meat’. These kinds of claims were made with such certainty that there was little room for nuance or qualification. The distinction between an accusation and a proven fact was effectively erased because the story was told in clear terms rather than as something under investigation. But this is exactly where the problem starts. The strength of a claim does not depend on how strongly it is made, but on whether it is backed up by evidence that can be checked. The video seems to have gone from interpretation to assertion by turning a complicated web of business links and disputed facts into a direct accusation of something that was not proven.

        What the Caravan report actually says 

        At its core, the issue isn’t whether the report could be discussed, criticised, or even questioned. It’s about how people understood that report and, more importantly, how it was shown to the public. A careful reading of the original report presents a far more layered and cautious picture than what the viral claims suggest. It reveals a consistent pattern of financial connections, overlapping business interests, and operational proximity, while being careful with its conclusions. Crucially, the report stops short of making any direct claim of ownership or operational control by Gadkari himself. 

        In fact, it explicitly notes the absence of any official disclosure establishing such a relationship, even while suggesting that the entities may be closely linked in practice. The report stated that “Despite all this evidence to suggest that Rembal and Cian Agro are far more than just client and customer, there is no official disclosure about the relationship between the two entities.” Basically, the Caravan never claimed that Nitin Gadkari ‘owns’ a beef sale company. 

        The issue of the meat trade, which forms the core of the controversy, is presented with similar caution. The company in question maintains that it deals in buffalo meat, which is legally permitted. At the same time, the report points out inconsistencies in how products are described sometimes as “buffalo meat” and at other times as “beef” thereby highlighting a degree of ambiguity in labelling.

        Importantly, even in the specific case of the seized truck, the court did not conclusively determine whether the meat was cow or buffalo meat, noting gaps and uncertainties in the documentation provided. Taken together, the report raises questions, inconsistencies, and possible linkages. But it does not arrive at a definitive conclusion that Gadkari owns the company, runs the business, or is directly engaged in any illegal activity.

        So, the issue is not whether the report raised uncomfortable questions. It did. The issue is whether those questions can be turned into definitive claims without solid proof. The critical point is where inference becomes assertion, and ambiguity becomes certainty. Here, that line was arguably crossed. 

        Where the claim crossed the line: Caravan playing it safe vs the influencer levelling explicit allegations

        Therefore, the controversy does not arise merely from discussing the report, but it arises from how the report was interpreted and presented. At its core, the original report outlines linkages, overlaps, and inconsistencies, but stops short of drawing definitive conclusions. It operates within the space of investigation, raising questions rather than delivering verdicts. Even where connections appear extensive, the report acknowledges the absence of any formally disclosed relationship establishing direct ownership or control by Union Minister Nitin Gadkari.

        This caution is deliberate, reflecting the nature of investigative reporting, which often relies on inference and pattern rather than conclusive proof. However, the viral video appears to depart from this framework. Instead of presenting the issue as one involving complex business linkages, it frames it as a matter of direct involvement. Instead of addressing ambiguity, especially in the nature of meat, which the report itself describes as inconsistently labelled between “buffalo meat” and “beef”- the video presents a clear and unqualified conclusion. What the report describes as disputed, ambiguous, and not conclusively established is presented in the video as definitive and settled.

        This is not merely a matter of emphasis but a fundamental transformation of meaning. In both law and journalism, there exists a clear distinction between suggesting a possibility and asserting a fact. The former invites scrutiny; the latter demands proof. By collapsing this distinction, the video effectively converts a layered investigative narrative into a categorical allegation. What was originally framed as a network of associations and unanswered questions is presented as a conclusion involving personal culpability. It is precisely at this intersection between inference and assertion that the line arguably was crossed. 

        Legal perspective: What constitutes defamation 

        At its core, defamation concerns statements that harm a person’s reputation by presenting unverified or false claims as facts. The key issue is not whether a topic is controversial or politically sensitive, but whether the statement made is supported by credible evidence. In this case, the legal question is straightforward: can an indirect linkage, coupled with ambiguity and lack of conclusive proof, be presented as a direct and definitive claim? When interpretation is framed as fact without substantiation, it risks falling within the ambit of defamation. It is also important to note that the law does not prevent criticism or investigation. What it seeks to regulate is the presentation of unproven allegations as established truth, especially when such claims can damage reputation.

        Why the case targets the influencer, not the publication

        A key argument being raised online is why legal action has been initiated against the creator rather than the original publisher. This is where the distinction between reporting and reinterpretation becomes crucial. Despite its critical tone, the original report remains carefully worded. It consistently uses language that reflects uncertainty, highlighting linkages, raising questions, and explicitly noting the absence of formal proof. It does not make a direct claim that Nitin Gadkari owns or operates a beef-selling company.

        However, the video appears to take that next step. It transforms a layered and cautious narrative into a direct allegation. In doing so, it assumes responsibility for the claim it presents. Therefore, Legal liability does not arise merely from discussing the report. It arises when an individual reframes that information into a definitive assertion without sufficient evidence. In that sense, the issue is not about the size of the platform, but the nature of the statement being made.

        Free speech vs responsibility: The Wikimedia–ANI context

        The broader debate around this controversy has also invoked concerns about free speech and alleged suppression. However, legal precedent suggests a more nuanced position. In the case involving Asian News International and Wikimedia Foundation, the Supreme Court upheld the principle of “open justice,” affirming that matters of public interest and court proceedings can be discussed and scrutinised by the public.

        At the same time, this protection is not absolute. It applies to fair reporting and discussion of facts, not to distorting those facts or presenting unverified claims as established truth. The judgment underscores a balance; while public discourse must remain free, it must also remain responsible.

        If we view it through this lens, the present case is not about restricting discussion, but about the manner in which that discussion is conducted. There is a difference between questioning a report and converting its inferences into definitive accusations.

        Conclusion 

        The episode ultimately underscores a significant distinction that frequently becomes obscured in the era of viral content. Investigative reports are not meant to give final answers; they are meant to make people think. While the whole left wing portrays this as a threat to democracy, they support him by adding emotional sentiments. When those questions are turned into categorical claims without any proof, the conversation itself changes.

        So, the problem is not between free speech and censorship. It is a matter of interpretation versus accusation. The right to question, criticise, and analyse is still very important. So is the duty to make sure that what is said is true. 

        If that distinction isn’t made, the line between commentary and defamation becomes not just thin, but also important.

        Inside India’s final push against Naxalism: How roads and security ops are bringing Chhattisgarh’s Maoist strongholds into the mainstream

        With the Central government’s deadline of 31st March, 2026, to make India Naxal-Free fast approaching, the final phase of India’s long battle against Naxalism is underway. Over the past two years, security forces have intensified operations across key strongholds, especially in Chhattisgarh, which has remained the epicentre of Maoist activity for decades.

        At the same time, an equally significant process has also been going on in the background, which is the rapid development of road and bridge infrastructure in some of the most remote areas of Chhattisgarh that was once the state with the highest number of Maoists. This process is not only about infrastructure development but also about establishing peace in those areas which were once dominated by the Maoists.

        Recent developments signal a major shift 

        The recent developments have indicated that there is a major shift in the situation on the ground. The security forces have stepped up their operations in areas which were once dominated by the Maoists, whereas the infrastructure development projects, which were stalled for years, are now going on in full swing.

        Union Home Minister Amit Shah had earlier set the 31st March deadline for wiping out Naxalism. Since then, the Centre has been aggressively pursuing a two-pronged strategy, strong military action combined with development initiatives. This approach is now beginning to show results, with many previously inaccessible areas slowly opening up.

        CM Vishnu Deo Sai says ‘Naxalism has ended’

        Adding to the sense of momentum, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai made a strong statement on 18th March, stating that Naxalism in the state is effectively over.

        “Naxalism has ended. Only a formal declaration awaits,” he said while speaking to reporters. He added, “It is indeed welcome that due to the strong leadership of our Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Home Minister, and the courage of our security forces, the government’s commitment to eliminate Naxalism across the country by March 31, 2026, is being fulfilled…”

        His remarks came during an interaction with 140 surrendered Maoists at the state Assembly. Many of them shared how their lives had changed after leaving the insurgency. According to Sai, some of them said they were now living “safe and dignified lives with their families,” and even celebrated festivals like Holi peacefully for the first time.

        BRO steps in: Roads and bridges in Maoist strongholds

        One of the biggest game-changers in this transformation has been the work done by the Border Roads Organisation (BRO). According to a report by The Indian Express, over the last 15 months, the BRO has built 20 Bailey bridges and completed 75 km of road construction in extremely difficult terrain across Maoist-affected districts like Bijapur and Sukma.

        In November 2024, the BRO was assigned the task of developing a 130-km road network in these districts, areas that had seen some of the worst Maoist violence. The project includes over 10 separate road works that had remained incomplete for years due to constant threats from Naxals.

        A BRO official highlighted the challenges, saying, “80% of the road projects were lying dormant for over half a decade on account of poor response from local contractors due to constant threat from Naxals.”

        In the past, Maoists frequently targeted road construction. Equipment was destroyed, contractors were killed, and even security personnel deployed for protection were attacked. As recently as last year, a contractor was killed in Bijapur’s Pamed area.

        The threat continues even today. Officials revealed that Maoists had planted a 50-kg improvised explosive device (IED) in Basaguda, which was later defused by the CRPF.

        Tough terrain, faster work 

        Despite these risks, several key projects have been completed in record time. One such project is the Tadapala hill road in Bijapur district. Assigned to the BRO in January 2026, the 13-km road, with nearly 8 km passing through hilly terrain, was completed within just two months.

        Officials said the road holds strategic importance as it lies along a key route used by Maoists moving between Chhattisgarh and Telangana. The area’s dense forests and steep hills had long provided cover to insurgents.

        “Given the great difficulty level and the BRO’s expertise in hill road construction, it was the natural choice for the project,” an official said.

        Construction here was extremely challenging, with landmines, IED threats, and hard rock formations. Yet, the BRO managed to complete the work well ahead of schedule. “Despite this, BRO personnel achieved connectivity to the Tadapala hilltop within two months,” the official added.

        Another major achievement was the rerouting of a road connecting Kondapalli village in Bijapur to Puvarti in Sukma, the native village of slain Maoist leader Hidma. This reduced the distance from 38 km to just 9 km.

        All-weather connectivity is changing lives

        The construction of roads and Bailey bridges has improved connectivity in these regions. Over 20 such bridges have been installed in just eight months.

        Explaining their importance, a BRO official said, “A Bailey bridge is a portable truss bridge developed by the British during World War II… it can be quickly assembled and moved.”

        These bridges have ensured year-round connectivity, especially during the monsoon when many villages used to get cut off.

        Officials say more than 25 villages in Bijapur and Sukma now have all-weather access. This has not only helped security forces but also improved daily life for residents.

        Inspector General of Police (Bastar Range) P Sundarraj said, “These regions, which were once extremely remote and difficult to access due to dense forests and poor connectivity, are now gradually becoming more reachable for security forces. The improved road infrastructure has enabled faster movement of troops, better logistical support, and more effective coordination during anti-Naxal operations. As a result, security forces have been able to sustain pressure on Maoist groups, establish a stronger presence in previously inaccessible areas, and respond swiftly to operational requirements.”

        Another key stretch, the 20-km road from Kondapalli to Dharmaram, is now operational, with buses already running. This route has reduced travel distance to Telangana’s Bhadrachalam from 270 km to 180 km.

        Karegutta hills: Breaking the last stronghold 

        One of the most crucial developments has taken place in the Karegutta Hills region, considered one of the last Maoist strongholds near the Telangana border.

        The BRO has completed around 70% of a key road project connecting the Tadapala hills in this area. The work involved cutting through hard rock for over a kilometre and conducting blasting operations for nearly 25 days.

        This road has transformed logistics for security forces. Earlier, essential supplies had to be delivered by helicopters.

        “The road project is almost complete, and CRPF troops no longer depend on Air Force helicopters,” an official said. Now, troops can move more easily, maintain a stronger presence, and carry out operations more effectively in the region.

        Looking ahead, the BRO has lined up several more projects. Plans are in place to construct eight major bridges across districts like Narayanpur, Sukma, Kondagaon, and Kanker.

        “These state-of-the-art modular bridges will be constructed in a short timeframe,” officials said, adding that proposals have already been sent to the Centre.

        Additionally, over 10 detailed project reports (DPRs) have been prepared for new infrastructure projects in Maoist-affected regions.

        Operation Kagar and the Modi govt’s push for a Naxal-free India

        These developments are part of a larger national strategy. In January 2024, the Centre launched Operation Kagar to eliminate Naxalism across states like Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Telangana.

        As part of the operation, about 1 lakh para-military forces, including the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), its elite forces CoBRA (Commando Units of CRPF), District Reserve Guards (DRG), and state police forces, armed with modern technology, have been deployed in the areas affected by left-wing terrorism to completely root out the naxal terrorism from its last remaining strongholds.

        The success of the centre’s anti-Naxal operation can be judged by the fact that, from 2015 to 2025, the number of Naxal-affected districts reduced from 106 to 18. Of these districts, 12 were considered the worst-affected by Naxalism. However, this number was further reduced to only 6 worst Naxal-affected districts, including Bijapur, Kanker, Narayanpur, and Sukma in Chhattisgarh, West Singhbhum in Jharkhand, and Gadhchiroli in Maharashtra.

        On 19th February, Bihar authorities announced that the state is now “Naxal-free” after the surrender of prominent Maoist Suresh Koda, also known as Mustakim, who had a reward of Rs 3 lakh. He surrendered himself to the Special Task Force (STF) of the Munger district police a day ago. It is pertinent to note that the number of districts affected by left-wing extremists (LWE) has also decreased to seven, as per a recent analysis of the affected region. 

        In January this year, the Centre released a detailed 10-point plan to ensure that areas cleared of Left-Wing Extremism remain peaceful. The plan is meant for the post-Left-Wing Extremism phase and focuses on stabilising districts that have lived through years of violence. It aligns with the development-oriented part of the Cen.

        A region in transition

        The impact of the security operations and infrastructure development is now visible in the region. Areas which were previously totally inaccessible are slowly becoming part of the mainstream.

        The increased connectivity is not only helping the security forces but is also bringing about positive changes in the region. With the development of roads, there is now easier access to schools, hospitals, markets, and government schemes.

        Currently, the roads that are being constructed through the forests and hills of Bastar are not just connecting the places; they are also symbolising the transition from conflict to development.

        India pulls the plug on Chinese CCTV makers with new norms from 1st April: Read how ‘connected’ cameras are a national security issue now, after what Israel did in Iran

        The surveillance system in India is getting a sweeping reset. Chinese CCTV makers including TP Link, Hikvision and Dahua are effectively being pushed out of the internet connected camera market as stricter certification norms are all set to kick in on 1st April. Companies that have failed to secure mandatory security certification under the government’s STQC regime will no longer be allowed to sell such products in the Indian market. This change will mark a decisive shift driven by national security concerns, trusted supply chains and data sovereignty.

        What is happening in the market

        The immediate impact of the new certification regime is visible in the CCTV market in India. Chinese brands that until recently held around one third of the market are now either exiting or drastically altering their business models.

        According to industry data published in media reports, Indian manufacturers such as CP Plus, Qubo, Prama, Matrix and Sparsh have already taken over 80% of the CCTV market. Global firms such as Bosch and Honeywell have consolidated their position in the premium segment. On the other hand, Chinese and smaller players have disappeared due to non compliance.

        Companies that heavily relied on Chinese chipsets and firmware have struggled to meet certification requirements. Major industry players including Hikvision have been forced to explore joint ventures with Indian firms and move away from Chinese supply chains due to regulations imposed by the Government of India. Dahua’s presence has also shrunk by almost 80% in the Indian market.

        Household names from the Chinese ecosystem including Xiaomi and Realme, who rule the smart home camera segment, have also withdrawn from the market due to compliance challenges. Reports suggest that the shift has increased costs by 15% to 20% due to localisation and alternative sourcing. However, dominant players have managed to stabilise prices in the lower end of the market.

        The transition stems from the Essential Requirements norms introduced by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) in April 2024. With the norms, the government mandated security testing, declaration of component origin, and vulnerability assessment before the products can be sold in the Indian market.

        The policy architecture explained

        As recent as 4th February 2026, the Government of India issued a circular that clarified the policy architecture behind the market shift. The circular made it clear that security certification for CCTV cameras will now be uniformly governed through STQC testing under the Essential Requirements framework.

        The government has aligned two regulatory mechanisms, the Compulsory Registration Order and the Public Procurement Preference to Make in India framework, by ensuring that a single STQC security test report will suffice for compliance under both. This effectively removes ambiguity and tightens enforcement.

        It is important to note that the circular has clarified that security certification is independent of value addition requirements under Make in India norms. In other words, even if the product meets localisation criteria, it cannot bypass security testing.

        The IoT System Certification Scheme plays a crucial role here. CCTV cameras fall under IoT devices, meaning they are subject to cybersecurity scrutiny that goes beyond basic hardware compliance. Under this framework, devices must meet stringent requirements such as secure communication protocols, encryption, tamper resistance, and controlled access to hardware interfaces.

        The IoT section further clarifies that STQC certification applies to all such devices uniformly, ensuring that no manufacturer can escape scrutiny by exploiting regulatory overlaps. It also enables government authorities to standardise testing procedures and certification outputs across sectors.

        The government has also publicly published names of companies that have secured the clearance certificate along with a PDF of the certificate on the website which can be accessed here.

        Government refused to extend certification deadline in 2025

        The groundwork for the current market disruption was laid in 2025 when the government expanded the scope of CCTV scrutiny to include hardware, software and even source code level inspection.

        As reported earlier by OpIndia in May 2025, manufacturers were mandated to submit their devices for deep security assessment in government labs. This included analysis of firmware, encryption mechanisms and potential vulnerabilities that could allow remote access or data exfiltration.

        The move was driven by concerns that internet connected cameras could act as surveillance tools if compromised. Experts had warned that such devices could be accessed remotely from adversarial locations, posing espionage risks.

        Manufacturers had raised objections at the time, citing delays, inspection burdens and risks to proprietary source code. Industry bodies warned of financial losses and disruption to infrastructure projects. However, the government refused to dilute the policy, maintaining that it addressed a genuine national security concern.

        The rules also empowered authorities to inspect manufacturing facilities, even outside India, and mandated robust cybersecurity features such as encryption, malware detection and secure communication protocols.

        Government flagged vulnerabilities in CCTV ecosystem

        Concerns around CCTV related data security are not new. Back in 2021, while responding to a Lok Sabha query, the government had already flagged vulnerabilities associated with foreign made surveillance systems. It shows that the Narendra Modi led government has been trying to weed out possible data leaks via the CCTV ecosystem for a long time.

        The government stated that around 10 lakh CCTV cameras installed in government institutions were sourced from Chinese companies. It acknowledged that video data captured through such devices could be transferred to servers located abroad, raising serious security concerns.

        The government had pointed to systemic vulnerabilities and said measures such as filtering of URLs and IP addresses had been implemented to mitigate risks. It also highlighted steps taken under existing laws to regulate imports and ensure compliance with Indian safety standards.

        These early warnings laid the foundation for the current regulatory tightening and signalled a long-term policy trajectory that is focused on securing surveillance infrastructure.

        The Gazette notification that changed the CCTV ecosystem for good

        The legal backbone of the current regulatory regime lies in the Gazette notification issued on 9th April 2024. With the notification, the government formally brought CCTV cameras under the Compulsory Registration framework.

        The notification amended the Electronics and IT Goods Order to include CCTV cameras as a regulated category requiring mandatory certification before sale. It made compliance with Indian safety standards and newly introduced Essential Security Requirements compulsory.

        At its core, the notification mandates that CCTV systems must be secure at multiple levels, hardware, firmware, network and supply chain. The requirements go far beyond basic quality checks and focus on cybersecurity resilience.

        Manufacturers must ensure physical security through tamper resistant enclosures, preventing unauthorised access to device internals. At the software level, devices must implement strong authentication systems, role-based access controls and regular updates.

        One of the most critical aspects is encryption. Data transmission from cameras must be encrypted, ensuring that video feeds cannot be intercepted or manipulated. Devices must also be capable of resisting cyberattacks through penetration testing and vulnerability assessments.

        The certification process requires vendors to submit detailed technical documentation, including system architecture, firmware details, and security protocols. They must also provide evidence of secure boot processes, protection against firmware tampering, and safeguards against backdoor access.

        Another key requirement is the supply chain integrity. Manufacturers must disclose the origin of critical components such as chipsets and demonstrate that they come from trusted sources. This is particularly significant given concerns over Chinese components.

        The notification also emphasises lifecycle security. Devices must support secure firmware updates, prevent rollback to older vulnerable versions, and maintain logs of software components and vulnerabilities.

        Testing is conducted in accredited laboratories recognised by the Bureau of Indian Standards. Only after successful evaluation can a product receive certification and be allowed for sale in the Indian market.

        In essence, the Gazette notification transforms CCTV cameras from simple surveillance devices into tightly regulated digital infrastructure components, where security, transparency and traceability are non-negotiable.

        Why unmonitored CCTV networks pose a national security risk

        The seriousness of the threat is evident from the fact that central agencies have recently ordered a pan India audit of CCTV networks across major cities. The directions came after a Pakistan linked spy ring was busted. According to a News18 report, the directive is not a routine administrative exercise. It follows the discovery that the espionage network had not merely exploited existing cameras but had installed its own covert surveillance systems at sensitive sites, including Delhi Cantonment Railway Station and Sonipat Railway Station.

        Some of these cameras were fitted with solar power systems to ensure uninterrupted live footage, which, according to investigators, was relayed to ISI linked handlers across the border. Central agencies have therefore asked police forces and law enforcement units to physically verify installations, identify unauthorised cameras, and examine if the existing systems have adequate access controls.

        Surveillance cameras are not just passive crime prevention tools. Once compromised, they can become hostile intelligence assets. A fragmented network of cameras installed by different agencies, contractors and local bodies, without a unified oversight protocol, creates blind spots that can be exploited by enemy states, terror groups or espionage handlers.

        The danger of compromised surveillance infrastructure is not theoretical. It has already been demonstrated globally in the most chilling way. According to earlier reports by OpIndia, Israel spent years penetrating Iran’s traffic camera network and mobile phone systems to track the movements of the now-deceased Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and his security detail before the strike that killed him.

        The surveillance effort reportedly allowed Israeli intelligence to monitor the movements of bodyguards, drivers and senior officials, study parking patterns inside a heavily guarded compound, map commuting routes, and build algorithm driven dossiers on the routines of those tasked with protecting the Iranian leadership. Traffic camera feeds were allegedly encrypted and transmitted to Israeli servers, while mobile networks around the target zone were interfered with to delay or block possible alerts.

        It shows how cameras, if infiltrated, can become instruments of battlefield grade intelligence. They reveal patterns, routines, vulnerabilities and timing. Combined with signal interception, data analytics and human intelligence, a compromised CCTV grid can help an adversary identify targets, monitor strategic locations and support precision attacks.

        Therefore, for India, it is not merely a question of cyber hygiene or bureaucratic compliance. It is a question of sovereignty, counter espionage and national defence. An unsecured or unaudited surveillance network is not just a technical lapse, it is a tactical opening.

        A structural shift, not just a market change

        The combined effect of policy decisions taken by the government over the years has resulted in a structural shift in India’s surveillance ecosystem.

        What began as a concern over data security has now evolved into a comprehensive regulatory framework that reshapes supply chains, promotes domestic manufacturing, and restricts unverified foreign technology.

        While the transition has led to higher costs and short term disruptions, it has also opened opportunities for Indian manufacturers to dominate a market expected to grow significantly in the coming years.

        ‘Trump’s ‘kissing my a**’ remark on Saudi Crown Prince sparks outrage: Here’s how Muslims in Indian subcontinent reacted and why it triggered an ‘Ummah vs nation’ debate

        The complex world of the Middle East took another sharp turn, following some highly unfiltered remarks from President Donald Trump. Speaking at the Future Investment Initiative conference in Florida, Trump didn’t hold back when describing his relationship with Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, widely known as MBS. In a statement that has since gone viral, Trump claimed that the Saudi leader was effectively “kissing my a**” while describing the current power dynamics between Washington and Riyadh.

        According to media reports, Trump recounted a conversation regarding the US resurgence under his presidency. He claimed that MBS hadn’t expected such a strong American comeback. “He didn’t think this was going to happen… he didn’t think he’d be kissing my a**… he thought it’d be just another American president that was a loser… but now he has to be nice to me,” Trump said. While these words were biting, Trump did balance them with praise, calling the Crown Prince a “fantastic man” and a “warrior,” suggesting that Saudi Arabia should be proud of his leadership.

        These comments didn’t happen in a vacuum. They come at a time when the US and Israel are engaged in a significant military campaign against Iran, which began on 28th February. Reports from the New York Times suggest that behind closed doors, MBS has been encouraging Trump to stay the course, calling the war a “historic opportunity” to weaken the Iranian government. However, publicly, Saudi Arabia has maintained a more cautious stance, calling for a peaceful resolution while focusing on defending its own borders. Despite this official neutrality, Trump’s public mockery has struck a sensitive nerve across the globe, particularly within the Muslim community of the Indian subcontinent.

        The outrage of the Indian Subcontinent Muslims

        The reaction from the muslims of the Indian subcontinent was swift and deeply rooted in the concept of the “Ummah.” One of the most prominent voices to react was journalist Saba Naqvi. On Saturday, 28th March, she shared a lengthy and provocative post on X. In her post, Naqvi invoked the name of Al-Qaeda terrorist Osama bin Laden and referred to the Saudi monarchs by their religious title, the “custodians of the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina.”

        She wrote, “Osama bin Laden emerged from Saudi Arabia, first for Jihad against the Soviets and then raging against his own country’s proximity to the US. The 9/11 operation had many Saudis involved.” By referring to the horrific 9/11 terrorist attacks as an “operation” and a sharp attempt to legitimise it, she seemed to be drawing a parallel between past Saudi-US tensions and the current perceived insult.

        Naqvi didn’t stop there. She touched upon the Saudi royal family’s visits to India, noting that they rarely visit the Gandhi Samadhi or Sufi shrines due to their specific interpretation of Islam. 

        However, her main objective was clear: to provoke a religious reaction. “The main point is, can the custodians of the 2 Holy Mosques ignore this grave insult…” she questioned. Her choice of words appears to be a calculated attempt to stir the “Ummah” into not accepting Trump’s remarks, essentially suggesting that as an Indian Muslim, her loyalty lies with the dignity of Islamic leadership over diplomatic nuances.

        The outrage spread quickly beyond Naqvi’s circles. Saniya Sayed, another vocal user on X, expressed her disgust quite clearly. She wrote, “Shameful and Disgusting! Trump using extremely derogatory language against Saudi Crown Prince MBS. Is this how you talk about the head of a state, one of your greatest allies?” Her reaction mirrors a sentiment of deep-seated hurt, where an insult to a Saudi leader is viewed as a personal affront to Muslims everywhere.

        The sentiment was equally strong in Pakistan. A prominent Pakistani journalist shared the video of Trump’s comments, highlighting the specific part where Trump said, “He didn’t think he would be kissing my ass, he really didn’t. And now he has to be nice to me. He better be nice to me.” This sharing of the video wasn’t just for news; it was to highlight the perceived humiliation of a leader who represents the heart of the Islamic world.

        Another Pakistani voice, Faisal Ranjha, took a more direct stance by bringing up the economic angle. He noted that Trump was mocking MBS despite Saudi Arabia investing over a trillion dollars into the US economy. He wrote, “Hope Ummah learn their lesson and move on from this bullying and stupidity.” By using the word “Ummah” and suggesting they “learn their lesson,” Ranjha was effectively calling for a collective religious and economic pushback against what he perceives as American bullying. This reinforces the idea that for these individuals, the religious identity of the “Ummah” comes before any national or diplomatic pragmatism.

        Crying for Khamenei: Loyalty beyond borders

        This trend of showing extreme loyalty to global Islamic leaders, not national interests, can be seen in an even stronger form after the death of the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei was a figure who frequently criticised India, yet the news of his death saw massive outpourings of grief from Indian Shia Muslims. From Jammu and Kashmir to Uttar Pradesh, Mumbai, the roads saw people mourning the death, protesting against the killing of the Supreme Leader. 

        In Kashmir’s Lal Chowk, protesters described him as “a lion” and claimed many more like him would be born. Black flags were waved at imambaras, which is usually done only during the highest form of religious mourning, like the tragedy at Karbala. 

        Even in Aligarh Muslim University, students held funeral prayers in absentia. Activist SM Tahir Husain noted that for many, the Ayatollah was not just a leader for Shias but a symbol for all Muslims. This reaction highlights a significant trend: when a figure associated with the global “Ummah” is affected, the emotional and physical response from certain sections of the Indian Muslim community is overwhelming, often overshadowing domestic concerns.

        Gold for Iran, silence for Pahalgam

        The most striking evidence of this “Ummah-first” loyalty can be seen in the financial contributions made by Kashmiri Muslims toward Iran following the outbreak of the recent conflict. Reports have emerged of youth in the Kashmir valley going door-to-door to collect donations. People have been pledging gold, cash, and even livestock to support Iran. One woman reportedly donated gold she had kept for 30 years in memory of her late husband, while a young man in Ganderbal sold his Royal Enfield bike to contribute to the Iranian relief efforts.

        “There is huge devastation caused by this illegal war imposed on Iran. The least the civilised world can do is send aid,” said one resident of Rainawari. While this humanitarian impulse is notable, it stands in stark contrast to the local response to domestic tragedies. For instance, when the Pahalgam terror attack occurred on 22nd April last year, where the victims were all Hindus, there was no such door-to-door collection, no selling of personal vehicles, and no mass outpouring of “hard-earned money” to support the victims’ families, not even the basic donations to the families of the victims.

        A question of allegiance

        The overall reaction to Trump’s comments on MBS, the mourning of Khamenei, and the large donations to Iran shows a common theme. For people such as Saba Naqvi and almost all Muslims, their true allegiance appears to be to their global Muslim community, or “Ummah,” rather than to their country of residence.

        When a Saudi Arabian leader is disrespected, or an Iranian leader is assassinated, it elicits a personal, religious outrage. However, when their countrymen are murdered in a terror attack such as the one in Pahalgam, there is a deafening silence. This suggests a hierarchy of loyalty where religious identity and the concept of a borderless “Ummah” take precedence over national solidarity. By provoking MBS and the wider Muslim world over Trump’s remarks, these individuals are not just commenting on a news story; they are reinforcing a religious divide that places global sectarian ties above the unity of their own country.

        Mamata Banerjee claims fish is not eaten in BJP-ruled states: Read how TMC’s claims of BJP banning non-vegetarian food are completely baseless and blatant lies

        In a rally in Purulia on March 29, 2026, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee claimed that “fish is not eaten in BJP-ruled states” and warned that if the BJP comes to power in Bengal, people “won’t be able to eat meat or eggs,” saying that a BJP government in Bengal will ban non-vegetarian food.

        The CM’s comments are part of a larger TMC campaign against the BJP, focusing on fish. Facing massive anti-incumbency after 15 years in power, the Trinamool Congress has been alleging in election rallies that the BJP is “anti-Bengali” and if it comes to power in the state, it will ban fish. TMC leaders have made it part of their election campaign, attempting to instil fear over the issue.

        Mamata Banerjee’s claim that “fish is not eaten in BJP-ruled states” is completely baseless and false. It is a clear distortion of facts and amounts to political fear-mongering designed to stoke anxiety over cultural and dietary habits in the poll-bound state.

        Data from BJP-ruled states debunks the claim

        India has 14 states currently under BJP governance or BJP-led alliances, including Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Odisha, Rajasthan, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand. Fish consumption and non-vegetarian diets remain widespread and unaffected by the ruling party in these states.

        BJP is in power in several states in the eastern parts of the country, where the majority of people consume meat and fish, and it has not changed after the BJP came to power in those states. In fact, in terms of the share of the non-vegetarian population, several BJP-ruled states rank among the highest in the country.

        BJP-ruled Tripura tops the list with 99.35% of the population consuming fish, which is the highest proportion nationally. Manipur, Assam, and Arunachal Pradesh, three BJP-ruled states, also feature among the top fish-consuming states, with the northeastern and Eastern regions showing over 90% fish consumption in many areas. Daily fish consumption rates are notably high in states like Manipur and Assam. Every year during Bohag Bihu, Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma posts images of people gifting him fish as part of the tradition.

        On the Western side, Goa, with a BJP government, has over 90% fish consumers, ranking second in daily fish intake nationally.

        Even in states with relatively lower overall fish consumption due to cultural or geographical factors, like Rajasthan or parts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, fish is freely available, consumed, and not banned. Gujarat, for instance, is a major exporter of Hilsa fish, a Bengali staple, supplying significant quantities to West Bengal and other markets. Maharashtra and Odisha, both BJP-led, are major fish-producing and consuming states with thriving seafood industries and no restrictions on consumption.⁠

        National surveys, including NFHS data, confirm that non-vegetarian consumption (including fish, chicken, and eggs) exceeds 50-70% in many BJP-ruled states like Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, with no statewide bans on fish or everyday non-veg items. Temporary, location-specific restrictions on meat sales near sensitive areas during festivals have occurred in isolated cases, but there are no statewide bans on any non-vegetarian food in any state.

        West Bengal BJP’s Clarification

        The West Bengal unit of the BJP has repeatedly and categorically rejected any notion of a non-veg ban. State BJP president Samik Bhattacharya stated, “People in Bengal will eat whatever they want to eat. Bengal will have its fish and meat.” He emphasised that the party opposes only the open sale of beef in certain contexts but fully supports Bengali food culture.

        He maintained that the BJP’s stand was limited to opposing the open sale of beef. “Only that stuff you sell in the open will not be allowed by the BJP,” he said.

        In a direct counter to TMC propaganda, BJP candidate Dr. Sharadwat Mukherjee from Bidhannagar campaigned door-to-door holding a large fish, declaring, “Lies are being spread against us. We will eat both fish and meat.” Senior leaders have publicly eaten fish in media appearances to underscore the point and to counter TMC’s baseless fearmongering.

        Food habits are cultural – They do not change with ruling parties

        The notion that if the BJP comes to power in a state, the state becomes vegetarian is completely baseless. Dietary preferences in India are deeply rooted in regional culture, availability of resources, and personal choices, they are not dictated by the party in power. West Bengal itself has seen multiple governments over decades, yet fish remains a daily staple for the vast majority, with over 98% of Bengalis identifying as non-vegetarian.

        The same holds true across BJP-ruled states and states ruled by non-NDA parties. Northeastern BJP governments have not altered the fish-heavy diets of local communities, coastal states like Goa continue their seafood traditions, and other states similarly maintain their existing patterns. Claims that a change in ruling party would suddenly prohibit fish or eggs ignore decades of evidence and are designed purely for electoral polarisation.

        TMC and Mamata Banerjee’s repeated assertions, linking BJP rule to a ban on fish, meat, and eggs, are therefore nothing but classic fear-mongering. With West Bengal heading into assembly elections, such rhetoric distracts from governance issues while attempting to portray the BJP as culturally alien.

        The facts show otherwise, fish is very much eaten, and thriving, in BJP-ruled states, and West Bengal’s food habits will remain unchanged regardless of who forms the next government.

        Planning attacks on India, seeking annexation of Jammu and Kashmir: US Congress report exposes the nefarious agenda of Pakistan-based terror ecosystem

        On 25th March (local time), a report was tabled by the United States Congress, which once again underlined Pakistan’s role as a hub of terrorist activity. The report identified multiple terrorist organisations operating from Pakistan’s soil that continued to target India and sought annexation of Jammu and Kashmir. The report, titled “Terrorist and other Militant Groups in Pakistan”, presented a structured assessment of terror ecosystems functioning within Pakistan and categorised them based on operational focus and ideological orientation.

        The Congressional Research Service report stated that Pakistan was both a base and a target for numerous non-state militant groups, several of which had been active since the 1980s. It further noted that despite sustained military campaigns and counter-terror operations, these terror outfits continued to function with significant capability.

        Five categories of terror groups operating from Pakistan

        The report classified terror organisations linked to Pakistan into five broad categories, that are globally oriented groups, Afghanistan-oriented militants, India and Kashmir-focused organisations, domestically oriented groups, and sectarian outfits targeting Shia communities.

        The report examined 15 groups, out of which 12 had been designated as Foreign Terrorist Organisations under US law. This classification showed the scale and diversity of terrorist organisations operating from Pakistan. The report also noted that Pakistan itself had suffered significantly from terrorism since 2003, with fatalities peaking in 2009. However, after a brief decline, terrorism-related deaths had risen again and reached 4,001 in 2025, the highest in over a decade.

        Failure of military offensives to eliminate terror networks

        One of the key observations made in the report was the limited effectiveness of Pakistan’s military operations against terrorist organisations. It claimed that major offensives, including airstrikes and large-scale intelligence-based operations, had failed to dismantle these networks.

        The report further noted that hundreds of thousands of such operations had been conducted. However, US and UN-designated terrorist organisations continued to operate from Pakistani territory. This finding raised serious questions about both the intent and the effectiveness of counterterror measures undertaken by Islamabad.

        Notably, in May 2025, when India destroyed numerous hubs of terrorist organisations in response to the Pahalgam terrorist attack as part of Operation Sindoor, the Pakistani military not only attempted to strike Indian cities but also participated in funeral processions of the terrorists killed in Indian operations.

        Furthermore, reports suggested that Pakistan was supporting terror outfits to rebuild the destroyed infrastructure in Indian strikes. While the US Congress report did not explicitly detail Pakistan’s role in sponsoring terrorist organisations, what happened in the past year made it clearer than ever that Pakistani authorities were themselves responsible for the growing terrorist problem in the country.

        India and Kashmir focused terror groups

        The report placed significant emphasis on terrorist organisations targeting India. Among the most prominent groups named in the report were Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Hizbul Mujahideen, Harakat-ul-Mujahidin, and Harakat-ul Jihad Islami.

        Lashkar-e-Taiba, led by Hafiz Saeed, was described as a large and well-structured organisation with several thousand terrorists. It was based in Pakistan’s Punjab province and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir and had reportedly changed its name to Jamaat-ud-Dawa to evade sanctions. The report recalled its role in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, along with several other high-profile incidents.

        Jaish-e-Mohammed, founded in 2000 by Masood Azhar, was identified as another key group seeking the annexation of Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan. With approximately 500 armed terrorists, the group operated across India, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. It was also noted for its role in the 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament.

        Harakat-ul-Mujahidin, which operated from Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir and urban centres in Pakistan, was linked to the 1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines flight IC 814. This incident ultimately led to the release of Masood Azhar, who later founded Jaish-e-Mohammed.

        Hizbul Mujahideen was described as one of the oldest militant groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir, with a cadre strength of up to 1,500. The report claimed that its members were primarily “ethnic Kashmiris” seeking either independence or accession to Pakistan.

        However, Indian security analysts had repeatedly contested such characterisations, noting that a significant number of terrorists neutralised in Jammu and Kashmir operations had origins in mainland Pakistan, particularly from Punjab.

        Mischaracterisations and factual inconsistencies

        While the report presented a detailed overview, certain descriptions raised questions regarding accuracy. For instance, Jaish-e-Mohammed founder Masood Azhar was described as a “Kashmiri militant leader”, whereas he was widely known to be of Punjabi origin from Pakistan.

        Similarly, the depiction of Hizbul Mujahideen cadres as predominantly “ethnic Kashmiris” did not fully align with ground realities observed in counterterror operations in Kashmir. Such inconsistencies highlighted the limitations of external assessments that may rely on outdated or incomplete datasets.

        Globally oriented terror groups and regional linkages

        The report also examined globally oriented militant organisations operating from Pakistan, including Al Qaeda and its affiliates. Al Qaeda, founded in 1988, continued to maintain linkages with several Pakistan-based groups despite being significantly degraded over the years.

        Its regional affiliate, Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, established in 2014, had been implicated in attacks within Pakistan and attempted operations against military assets.

        Another major entity highlighted was the Islamic State Khorasan Province, which operated primarily in Afghanistan but maintained a presence in Pakistan through former members of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and other militant factions.

        Afghanistan oriented networks and safe haven concerns

        The report outlined the long-standing presence of Afghanistan-focused militant groups operating from Pakistani territory. The Afghan Taliban, which regained power in Afghanistan in 2021, was noted to have historically operated from cities such as Quetta, Karachi, and Peshawar.

        The Haqqani Network, another key group, was described as having operational linkages near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and was reportedly associated with Pakistan’s intelligence apparatus, a claim denied by Islamabad.

        Domestic and sectarian terror ecosystem

        The report also highlighted domestically oriented terrorist groups such as Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, which was described as the deadliest militant organisation operating within Pakistan. With an estimated strength of 2,500 to 5,000 fighters, the group sought to overthrow the Pakistani state and impose Sharia law.

        Additionally, ethnic separatist groups like the Balochistan Liberation Army and Jaysh al-Adl were identified, along with sectarian outfits such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, which had historically targeted Shia communities.

        Continued global scrutiny and policy implications

        The report noted that Pakistan remained under international scrutiny for its counter-terror record. It noted that the country was designated as a “Country of Particular Concern” under the International Religious Freedom Act in 2018 and had retained this designation annually since.

        It also referenced findings from the US State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2023, which stated that while Pakistan had taken some steps to curb terrorist activities, concerns remained regarding radicalisation through certain madrassas that promoted extremist ideologies.

        Conclusion

        The report tabled by the US Congress reinforced a long-standing global assessment that Pakistan hosted and enabled a wide range of terrorist organisations, many of which directly targeted India and sought territorial changes in Jammu and Kashmir.

        Threats of shooting PM Modi, destroying Israel ignored, but the girl who gave a toy to CM Yogi branded ‘Hindu terrorist’: Why Yashaswini became a target of Islamoleftists

        A heartwarming video from the Gorakhnath Temple in Gorakhpur has gone viral, showing an interaction between Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and a 5-year-old girl named Yashaswini from Kanpur. The young girl had come with her family to meet the Chief Minister and brought along a small toy bulldozer as a gift.

        Beyond the Bulldozer: CM Yogi Encourages 5-Year-Old to Study Hard

        In the video, CM Yogi is seen warmly greeting the child, offering her a chocolate, and accepting the toy with a smile. However, what stood out was his simple message to the girl. After holding the toy, he returned it to her and said, “Keep it with you, play with it, and study hard.”

        The moment was widely shared online, with many people appreciating the Chief Minister’s calm and encouraging approach. His message was seen as clear and direct, while symbols like a bulldozer may have their own meaning in public life, a child’s focus should be on education and building a better future. Instead of encouraging anything else, he advised her to study and grow into a responsible citizen.

        Arfa Khanum’s agenda: Seeing ‘Hindu Terrorism’ in a child’s toy

        While many viewers saw the video as innocent and positive, journalist Arfa Khanum Sherwani reacted strongly to it.

        Sharing the clip on social media, she wrote, “This is how they are radicalising an entire generation of Hindu children. And that, too, innocent little girls. Heartbreaking and extremely dangerous.”

        Her post quickly drew responses from others who shared similar concerns. A user named Yasir Kalam commented, “They are brainwashing children and trying to make them future Hindu terrorists; this is the policy of this government. Amazing.”

        Another user, Javed Bhat, wrote sarcastically, “Sanatanists are being brainwashed from a very young age.”

        Farhan Khan also joined in, criticizing the parents and saying, “What has happened to these children, the parents should be ashamed.”

        These reactions turned what many saw as a simple and kind interaction into a larger debate on social media, with strong opinions from both sides.

        Why Arfa ignores real radicalism while targeting a Child

        At the same time, discussions also picked up around how different situations are viewed and highlighted.

        A report by the Organiser has pointed out that in some places, children are exposed to ideas that divide people into “us versus them” and limit their exposure to modern education.

        The report claims that when such thinking is introduced at a young age, it can shape how individuals see the world later in life. It also suggests that this kind of upbringing may lead to a mindset focused more on religious identity than on broader social responsibility.

        According to the report, such trends have also contributed to unrest in countries like Spain, France, and Germany, where incidents of violence and clashes have been reported in recent years.

        Fundamentalism vs. Innocence: The Poison of Double Standards

        The debate further intensified as people pointed to other viral videos where young children were seen using aggressive or provocative language. In some clips circulating online, children were heard making threats, raising slogans like “Pakistan Zindabad,” or speaking about demolishing temples.

        These incidents led to questions about how such views develop at a young age and whether similar reactions are seen across all such cases. Critics argued that while some situations are strongly condemned, others do not receive the same level of attention.

        They also questioned whether there is consistency in calling out what is seen as harmful or divisive messaging among children, regardless of the context or community involved.

        Bareilly Incident: Silence on desecrating Gandhi’s statue

        Another incident that was widely discussed took place during Eid celebrations in Bareilly. A video surfaced showing a group of youths and children behaving inappropriately with a statue of Mahatma Gandhi.

        The visuals showed them touching and handling the statue in ways many people found disrespectful and offensive. The incident sparked anger online, with several users calling it an insult to a national figure.

        Author Ratan Sharda also reacted, describing the act as a disturbing reflection of what some children are being exposed to. The incident added fuel to the ongoing debate about how different events are discussed and highlighted in public conversations.

        Arfa Khanum, get your frustration treated

        As the discussions continued, strong opinions emerged about the role of media voices and public commentary. Supporters of the Chief Minister argued that his message to the young girl was about education and growth, not anything negative.

        They also claimed that focusing on a child’s toy while ignoring other serious issues reflects a one-sided narrative. According to them, encouraging children to study and build their future should be seen as a positive step.

        On the other hand, critics maintained their concerns about symbolism and messaging, showing how divided opinions remain on such matters.

        The incident, which began as a simple interaction between a leader and a child, has now turned into a larger conversation about perception, media narratives, and how society interprets such moments.