Home Blog Page 14

As Elon Musk whines about Starlink clearance in India, read about the billionaire’s connection to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein

In a dramatic escalation of his push to enter the Indian telecom market, tech billionaire Elon Musk stepped up his personal and political attacks against Reliance Industries Chairman Mukesh Ambani and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Musk turned to his social media platform, X, to launch a series of blistering posts aimed at Ambani and the political establishment.

Musk’s latest barrage featured screenshots of media reports alleging a close nexus between Reliance and the ruling party. He shared a 2022 Al Jazeera report titled “How a Reliance-funded firm boosts BJP’s campaigns on Facebook” alongside an archived 2024 Indian Express article about Qwik Supply Chain Private Limited. Sharing these articles was part of Musk’s attempt to portray Indian telecom regulations as an insider’s game rigged to protect domestic giants.

This post followed an even more direct jab earlier the same day, where Musk openly mocked Mukesh Ambani’s influence in Indian politics. “Dear Prime Minister Ambani, Please accept my humble apologies for not realising that you are the real boss of India. Naturally, you would prefer to maintain your monopolistic exploitation of the great people of India, but would you nonetheless consider allowing Starlink to compete?” Musk wrote. He further alleged that certain “oligarchs” were seeking to block Starlink in order to “maintain their monopolistic chokehold on the Indian people.”

Reliance has chosen not to publicly respond to Musk’s provocative comments.

Unearthing the Epstein Files: Released documents show Musk’s interest in Epstein’s parties

As Elon Musk poses as a champion of open competition and play against corporate powerhouses in India, he is struggling to defend own reputation back home in the United States. The released Justice Department documents in January this year revealed that Musk had far more extensive and friendly communications with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein than he had previously admitted.

The Department of Justice made public a massive tranche of 3 million documents, shedding light on Epstein’s networks with world leaders, politicians, and business titans. Among these files were email threads showing Musk and Epstein cordially messaging each other between 2012 and 2013 to schedule a trip for Musk to Epstein’s private Caribbean island, Little St. James.

In November 2012, Epstein emailed Musk asking, “How many people will you be for the heli to island”. Musk replied, “Probably just Talulah and me. What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?” referring to his former wife, Talulah Riley. On Christmas Day in 2012, Musk wrote back to another invitation from Epstein: “Do you have any parties planned? I’ve been working to the edge of sanity this year and so, once my kids head home after Christmas, I really want to hit the party scene in St Barts or elsewhere and let loose. The invitation is much appreciated, but a peaceful island experience is the opposite of what I’m looking for.” Epstein responded, “Understood , I will see you on st Barth, the ratio on my island might make Talilah uncomfortable,” to which Musk quipped, “Ratio is not a problem for Talulah.”

Logistical issues ultimately prevented the trip from taking place. On 13th December 2013, Musk checked in again: “Will be in the BVI/St Bart’s area over the holidays. Is there a good time to visit?” Epstein answered, “any day 1st – 8th . play it by ear if you want. always space for you.” The two settled on 2 January, but Epstein had to cancel because he was held up in New York, writing to Musk, “Bad news- Unfortunately , my schedule will keep me in New York . I was really looking forward to finally spending some time together with just fun as the agenda. so i am very disappointed.”

These revelations starkly contradict Musk’s previous statements, shortly after Epstein’s arrest in July 2019. The Tesla CEO told Vanity Fair in 2019 that Epstein was “obviously a creep” and claimed that Epstein “tried repeatedly to get me to visit his island. I declined.” While Musk previously admitted to visiting Epstein’s Manhattan apartment for 30 minutes with Talulah Riley for book research, he always maintained he turned down island invitations. He also claimed that a widely circulated photograph showing him with Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, was merely a case of her “photobombing” him at a party.

The DOJ files also include records from Epstein’s assistant, Lesley Groff, making plans for Epstein to have lunch at SpaceX headquarters on 25th February 2013, as well as friendly congratulatory notes sent by Epstein after SpaceX rocket launches. 

Earlier, in September 2025, documents released by Congressial Democrats on the US House Oversight Committee also mentioned Musk’s name. One entry in Epstein’s schedule, dated 6th December, 2014, read: “Reminder: Elon Musk to island Dec. 6 (is this still happening?)”

In response to the document release, Musk took to X and attempted to clarify his position, insisting he had nothing to hide. “No one pushed harder than me to have the Epstein files released and I’m glad that has finally happened. I had very little correspondence with Epstein and declined repeated invitations to go to his island or fly on his ‘Lolita Express’, but was well aware that some email correspondence with him could be misinterpreted and used by detractors to smear my name. I don’t care about that, but what I do care about is that we at least attempt to prosecute those who committed serious crimes with Epstein, especially regarding heinous exploitation of underage girls,” Musk posted. 

Image via X

SpaceX paid $250,000 to settle sexual Misconduct case against Elon Musk

Compounding the intense scrutiny surrounding Musk’s sexual misconduct, revelations surfaced regarding a $250,000 settlement paid by SpaceX in 2018 to resolve a sexual misconduct case involving Musk. The case involved a flight attendant who worked on a contract basis for SpaceX’s corporate jet fleet.

According to a declaration signed by a friend of the attendant, the flight attendant was encouraged by her superiors to complete professional masseuse training at her own expense so she could provide massages to Musk during flights. During a late 2016 flight to London inside a private cabin on Musk’s Gulfstream G650ER jet, Musk asked her to come to his room for a full-body massage. The attendant found Musk completely naked except for a sheet covering the lower half of his body. During the massage, Musk exposed his erect penis, touched her thigh without consent, and offered to buy her a horse if she would perform sex acts. The attendant declined the proposal and continued with the massage without engaging in sexual conduct.

Following her refusal, the flight attendant experienced retaliation, with her work shifts cut back significantly. Feeling pushed out, she retained a California employment lawyer in 2018 and submitted a complaint to SpaceX’s HR department. The matter was resolved quickly following a mediation session attended by Musk personally, culminating in a $250,000 severance payment bound by strict non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreements.

Global security concerns: Starlink’s connection to crime and terrorism

Beyond Musk’s controversial personal ties, Indian national security agencies and global law enforcement bodies have serious reservations regarding the deployment of Starlink technology. Around the world, Starlink’s high-speed, satellite-based internet terminals have repeatedly ended up in the hands of terrorist groups, scam syndicates, and violent criminals.

The threat has already hit close to home for India. Security forces in Manipur recovered Starlink satellite equipment from Kuki terroists groups, raising alarm bells over how advanced communication systems are being smuggled across borders into sensitive conflict zones.

This issue extends far beyond India’s borders. In Myanmar, signal intelligence reports revealed that transnational crime syndicates rely heavily on Starlink systems to run massive online scamming hubs targeting victims worldwide. Security forces raiding a Chinese-run scam centre in Myanmar seized 30 Starlink satellite units that provided high-speed connectivity for international fraud operations.

In Africa, violent extremist organisations have exploited Starlink to coordinate brutal campaigns. Islamic terror groups, including Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), Boko Haram, and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), actively smuggle portable Starlink terminals across the borders of Nigeria and Libya into the Sahel region. By deploying these satellite kits across Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, terrorist organisations circumvent traditional telecom blackouts and enhance their command-and-control capabilities.

In South America, Brazilian authorities discovered Starlink terminals installed at illegal gold mining sites deep within remote Amazonian rainforests, where wildcat miners used the internet connection to evade police raids and organise logistics.

Starlink’s potential for geopolitical misuse became glaringly evident during the conflict in the Middle East. Elon Musk triggered massive international concern when he announced plans to provide Starlink satellite internet to recognised aid organisations in Gaza following an internet blackout during military operations. The decision drew fierce opposition from Israeli authorities, who warned that the terrorist group Hamas would inevitably hijack the connectivity to plan and carry out insurgent attacks.

Indian government dismisses allegations, prioritises National security

Given the real-world security risks demonstrated across multiple continents, the Indian government has firmly rejected Musk’s narrative that Starlink is being blocked to shield domestic monopolies like Reliance. Official statements emphasise that telecom licensing is strictly a matter of national security and regulatory compliance, not political favouritism.

Addressing Musk’s aggressive social media posts, the government clarified its position, stating: “The Government has put in place a fair and non-discriminatory authorisation framework for all telecommunication services, including satellite communication services. Under this, telecom licences have been granted to three Global Mobile Personal Communication by Satellite services based on non-geosynchronous satellite orbit-based satellite communications, as part of its commitment to enable provision of satellite communication services in India.”

The government made it clear that every operator seeking to offer satellite broadband must undergo rigorous security vetting before being allowed to operate or receive spectrum assignments. “Under the terms and conditions of license, every such licensee is required to demonstrate compliance with security conditions. This is aimed at ensuring that services provided meet various security requirements to ensure safety of all users and their data. Security assessment as part of this process is currently under way in respect of all the three licensees,” the government explained.

Rubbishing claims of cronyism, official authorities confirmed that all applicants are treated equally and face the exact same security standards. “As and when this process is completed for a licensed entity, it may proceed to the next step of seeking assignment of spectrum. At present, all three entities are at broadly the same regulatory stage. As such, the suggestion that the framework or its application is unfair or discriminatory is baseless and misconceived,” the statement concluded.

Ultimately, while Elon Musk continues his public relations war against Mukesh Ambani and the Indian government, New Delhi remains steadfast. Facing valid security concerns illuminated by global instances of Starlink misuse, the government is taking a cautious, safety-first approach to protect national sovereignty and consumer data before handing over the keys to India’s digital skies.

LIVE UPDATES on CJP protest: Saurav Das, Abhijeet Dipke and Ashutosh Ranka released from detention

The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and Left organisations like AISA and SFI have called for a protest at Jantar Mantar on the 10th of October 2026, demanding the resignation of CEC Gyanesh Kumar. The Delhi Police denied permission for the protest and enforced heavy police security in the area to maintain security and peace after the violence during the protest in July 2026. The Ministry of Home Affairs has made 221 companies of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF), comprising around 23,000 personnel, available to the Delhi Police from October 8 to 12. A total of 26,000 CAPF officials have been deployed in Delhi, according to reports.

Below is our live blog brining you latest updates from the ground.

Rahul Gandhi uses Elon Musk’s shoulder to target Modi govt: How Congress’s own opposition to Starlink exposes its politics of convenience

Recently, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi was seen cosying up to American business tycoon Elon Musk on X, as the latter launched a tirade against the Modi government, alleging that the license for his satellite internet service, Starlink, was being deliberately stalled.

Musk’s application for a satcom license in India is currently under consideration. Starlink has already been granted a Global Mobile Personal Communication by Satellite (GMPCS) licence and is awaiting final regulatory clearances to begin its commercial operations in India.

Nonetheless, over the past couple of days, the trillionaire launched a series of attacks on the Modi government by posting messages on X, suggesting that the Indian government was acting on the directions of “oligarchs” like Indian businessman Mukesh Ambani in delaying Starlink’s license.

The mention of Mukesh Ambani, that too in a message casting aspersions on the Modi government, was enough ammunition for Rahul Gandhi, who quickly joined forces with Musk in attacking the Indian government. “Welcome to India, Elon. Wait till you discover the other guy,” Gandhi replied to Musk.

Notably, Ambani’s Jio Satellite, along with Starlink and Bharti Group-backed Eutelsat OneWeb, is also in line for security clearance and final regulatory approval. But the Congress scion is not known for caring about facts. Famous for his part-time politics, Gandhi’s political strategy is driven by convenience rather than facts. In the desperation to settle political scores with the Modi government, Gandhi forgot that he was not only contradicting facts but also his own party’s public stance on Starlink. Well, this is not the only time he has caused public humiliation for his party.

The Congress Party has been opposing Starlink’s entry into India, claiming that it was PM Modi’s strategy to buy goodwill with US President Donald Trump. Last year, speaking to the media, senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh termed Starlink’s entry into India as “a friendship-buying move” by PM Modi. “The Prime Minister is clearly hoping that Mr Trump will be kept happy because we have kept Mr Musk happy…” Ramesh said.

He further cited national security concerns for opposing Starlink. The Congress Party expressing concerns over national security is rarer than spotting a mermaid in the ocean. Yet, Rahul Gandhi did not give another thought before spoiling the rare phenomenon by openly supporting Musk. This is on top of the self-goal that Gandhi scored by supporting Musk’s allegation that the Modi government was deliberately delaying Starlink’s license, while his own party earlier claimed that PM Modi was behind Starlink’s entry into India.

Talking about the national security concerns linked to Starlink, these are not totally unfounded. As pointed out by former IT Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar earlier in the day, satellite communication has been used by terrorists during several terrorist attacks, including the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and the Pahalgam terror attack.

Indian agencies have recovered Starlink equipment in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and from Kuki terrorists in Manipur. In November 2024, Indian authorities intercepted a Myanmar vessel near Barren Island in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, seizing a massive drug consignment alongside Starlink communication gear and navigation waypoints. A month later, in December 2024, during a search operation against Kuki terrorists in Manipur, Indian forces seized a massive cache of weapons along with Starlink equipment.

Starlink internet devices have been used in carrying out criminal and terror activities not only in India but across the world. In October 2025, security forces in Myanmar raided a Chinese-run scam centre and seized 30 Starlink satellite internet units. These were being used by the scammers for high-speed internet.

Islamic terror groups like Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), Boko Haram, and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) actively smuggle portable Starlink satellite internet terminals across borders from Nigeria and Libya into the Sahel region, including Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, to enhance their operational capabilities.

In May 2023, Starlink devices were found involved in illegal mining sites in the remote regions of the Amazon in Brazil. Illegal miners were using Starlink devices to facilitate their illegal mining activities. The same year, Elon Musk triggered global concerns when he announced that he would provide Starlink internet connectivity to internationally recognised organisations in Gaza, following an internet ban imposed by Israel in the region in the aftermath of the ghastly October 7 terrorist attacks. Musk’s decision was strongly opposed by Israel, which said that the terrorist group Hamas would use this internet for its terrorist activities.

It is clear from the above-mentioned examples that the Starlink internet system has been widely used by criminals and terrorists to carry out their activities. In light of these facts, it is not unlikely that the regulatory authorities might be conducting rigorous scrutiny and exercising greater caution in granting licenses to satcom companies in India. However, one cannot expect the level of political maturity from Gandhi that requires not forsaking national interest for political opportunism.

UP CEO rejects Reporters’ Collective’s allegations of mass voter deletions, says 85,854 Form 7 entries were generated after due process

Uttar Pradesh Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Navdeep Rinwa has strongly refuted allegations made by The Reporters’ Collective that the Election Commission of India (ECI) used its ERONET software to facilitate the arbitrary deletion of nearly 86,000 voters from the state’s electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

Rejecting the investigative report’s findings as misleading and factually incorrect, Rinwa issued a detailed, point-by-point clarification, maintaining that the electoral roll revision was conducted in accordance with statutory provisions and established procedures.

The controversy erupted after The Reporters’ Collective alleged that the ECI’s ERONET software had automatically generated 85,854 Form 7 applications bearing election officials’ digital signatures, without specifying the grounds for deletion. The report also questioned the timing of these applications, alleged irregularities in bulk objections, and raised concerns about the possible targeting of minority voters.

However, the Uttar Pradesh CEO maintained that the report had misrepresented administrative actions taken following statutory inquiries as arbitrary attempts to disenfranchise voters.

85,854 Form 7 entries generated after hearings and formal orders, clarifies CEO

Addressing the central allegation concerning the automatic generation of 85,854 Form 7 entries, Rinwa explained that these were not fresh objections seeking the removal of voters. Instead, they represented the administrative implementation of decisions taken by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) after completing the prescribed verification process.

According to the clarification, when the draft electoral roll was published on January 6, 2026, it contained approximately 12.55 crore electors. Of these, nearly 3.26 crore entries required further verification, including 2.22 crore electors with logical discrepancies and another 1.04 crore whose details could not be mapped.

Rinwa explained that EROs and AEROs were empowered under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, to initiate suo motu inquiries into such cases.

He maintained that the electors concerned were served physical notices identifying the discrepancies or mapping deficiencies in their records. They were also allowed to submit supporting documents and establish their eligibility during the prescribed hearing process.

Where an elector was found ineligible following the inquiry, the concerned officer passed a reasoned, or speaking, order explaining the decision.

These orders were subsequently uploaded to ERONET, following which the relevant entries were marked for deletion.

The CEO clarified that the system-generated Form 7 entries merely reflected decisions already taken through the prescribed quasi-judicial process. Since the grounds for the decisions had been recorded in notices and formal orders, their absence from the automatically generated entries did not, according to him, establish that voters had been removed without justification.

Why were thousands of deletion entries recorded after the March 6 deadline?

The investigative report also alleged that election authorities had entertained 87,127 officer-initiated deletion requests and more than 1.10 lakh individual submissions after March 6, 2026, the deadline for filing claims and objections.

Rinwa disputed this interpretation, drawing a distinction between the deadline for submitting fresh objections and the subsequent disposal of cases already under consideration.

He explained that although March 6 marked the end of the claims and objections filing period, hearings and quasi-judicial proceedings were permitted to continue beyond that date under the notified SIR schedule.

According to the CEO, hearings continued until approximately March 15, after which EROs and AEROs issued final orders in the latter half of March.

The Form 7 entries appearing in ERONET during this period, he maintained, were generated as part of the administrative implementation of those orders rather than through the acceptance of fresh, time-barred objections.

Consequently, Rinwa rejected the suggestion that the dates on which these entries appeared in the software necessarily demonstrated violations of the statutory deadline.

Allegations of targeted voter deletions rejected; CEO cites scale of bulk objections

The CEO also rejected allegations that the deletion mechanism had been used to systematically target voters belonging to minority communities.

Responding to concerns about bulk Form 7 submissions, Rinwa referred to figures cited in the investigative report itself.

According to those figures, only 198 individuals across Uttar Pradesh had submitted 10 or more Form 7 applications, involving approximately 4,700 voters.

Rinwa contrasted these numbers with the state’s electorate of more than 13.39 crore voters, arguing that the figures did not substantiate allegations of a widespread, coordinated campaign to remove voters from the electoral rolls.

However, the CEO’s response focused on the limited number of bulk submissions and their administrative treatment, rather than presenting a separate demographic analysis of the affected voters.

All 188 objections filed under ‘Reshma’ in Tarabganj were rejected

The clarification also addressed a specific case highlighted by The Reporters’ Collective, involving 188 Form 7 objections allegedly submitted under the name “Reshma” in the Tarabganj Assembly constituency on January 31, 2026.

The investigative report had cited the incident while questioning the safeguards against mass objections and potentially fraudulent attempts to remove voters.

Rinwa stated that election authorities had already identified the irregularity and rejected all 188 applications during scrutiny.

He further pointed out that the CEO’s office had issued instructions to field officials on January 31, 2026, specifically addressing the issue of bulk Form 7 submissions.

Under these instructions, officials were directed not to entertain bulk objections and to accept applications only when submitted individually or in respect of immediate family members, in accordance with the applicable procedure.

The CEO cited the rejection of the Tarabganj applications as evidence that the scrutiny mechanism had prevented questionable objections from resulting in voter deletions.

ECI’s October 2025 instructions were publicly available, says CEO

Rinwa also challenged the report’s suggestion that the Election Commission had relied on undisclosed instructions to carry out the electoral roll revision.

He maintained that the SIR instructions issued on October 27, 2025, had been available on the Election Commission’s official website under the “Instructions” section since their issuance.

According to the CEO, the allegation that these directions were concealed from public scrutiny was therefore incorrect.

He reiterated that the revision exercise was governed by the Constitution of India, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and the Electoral Roll Manual.

UP CEO maintains SIR followed due process

Concluding his clarification, Rinwa asserted that the Special Intensive Revision exercise in Uttar Pradesh had been conducted in accordance with the applicable legal framework, with prescribed safeguards for verification, hearings and the disposal of objections.

He maintained that the electoral rolls were updated only after following the established procedure and rejected allegations that the Election Commission had used its software to arbitrarily remove eligible voters.

The CEO also reaffirmed the Election Commission’s commitment to conducting future electoral processes in a transparent, peaceful and impartial manner.

The clarification directly challenges the central conclusions of The Reporters’ Collective investigation. While the report raised questions about automatically generated deletion entries, statutory deadlines and safeguards against misuse, the CEO’s response maintains that the disputed records were the outcome of documented administrative and quasi-judicial proceedings rather than evidence of unlawful voter deletions.

The Starlink Tantrum: Debunking Elon Musk’s meltdown over Starlink in India

0

Elon Musk recently launched a coordinated digital campaign on X, alleging that the Indian government is intentionally withholding a licence for Starlink to benefit domestic oligarchs like Mukesh Ambani. However, beneath this social media outrage lies a fundamental misrepresentation of India’s statutory telecom frameworks. For mainstream commentators, this narrative was simply a case of crony capitalism, but the operational reality is entirely different.

The Regulatory Queue is Universal

Factually, Starlink is not being denied market access. The company already received its Unified Licence with Global Mobile Personal Communication by Satellite (GMPCS) authorisation in June 2025. What remains pending are the final Home Ministry security clearances and the critical allocation of satellite spectrum.

Crucially, these approvals are pending for all applicants across the board. Domestic giants like Reliance Jio and state-run BSNL, alongside Eutelsat OneWeb, are waiting in the exact same regulatory queue. Therefore, framing a universal administrative pause as a targeted attack is factually incorrect.

Notably, the very telecom firms Musk accuses of monopolistic behaviour previously signed agreements to retail his equipment. In March 2025, both Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel agreed to distribute Starlink services in India once final approvals were secured.

Demographics and the Pricing Paradox

Moreover, Musk’s assertion that Starlink is uniquely positioned to deliver connectivity to vast, unconnected Indian regions demonstrates a staggering ignorance of the subcontinent’s digital infrastructure. While Low Earth Orbit (LEO) constellations are essential in sparsely populated terrains like the Sahara, India is densely populated and intensely connected. According to government data, 5G services are already available in 99.6% of Indian districts, while 98% of villages are covered by 4G.

Furthermore, the BharatNet initiative has structurally connected over 2.14 lakh Gram Panchayats via high-speed optical fibre. To bridge the remaining 1.7% connectivity gap in border areas and islands, BSNL is already testing direct-to-device satellite services.

Consequently, the claim that Starlink will provide affordable data to the masses is empirically false. India boasts the lowest mobile data rates globally, with annual prepaid plans costing roughly ₹3,599 to ₹3,999. In stark contrast, Starlink previously announced an anticipated monthly rate of ₹8,600 for India, alongside a ₹34,000 upfront hardware cost. Expecting rural Indian consumers to pay nearly ₹9,000 a month for satellite broadband is an economic absurdity. The low sale of Tesla cars in India is proof, when cheaper alternatives are available, Indian don’t buy costlier products and services in large scale.

Techno-Nationalism and Protectionist Hypocrisy

Which means Musk’s invocation of the “oligarch” trope demands rigorous scrutiny, particularly given his own reliance on American state protectionism. The Trump administration routinely weaponises tariffs to block cheaper Chinese electric vehicles, actively protecting Tesla from superior foreign competition.

Ultimately, this sudden outburst aligns perfectly with a broader escalation of hostilities against India by Washington. New Delhi will dictate the terms of satellite spectrum based on sovereign statutory processes, and no amount of coordinated social media posturing will alter that reality.

Read the full article on Chapter 1 Magazine.

US suspends green card programme for 8 tech companies, but Indian H-1B workers need not panic: Here is what Trump’s move actually means

The Trump administration’s latest immigration crackdown has triggered fresh concerns among Indian professionals working in the United States. Washington has suspended eight major technology companies from a programme used to sponsor foreign employees for permanent residency, raising questions about whether thousands of Indians could be forced to reconsider their American dream.

The companies affected include Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), Infosys, Wipro, HCLTech, Cognizant, Capgemini, Microsoft and Adobe. The action, announced on October 8, 2026, targets the Permanent Labour Certification programme, commonly known as PERM, amid allegations of fraud and misuse of employment-based immigration procedures.

But before the news sparks panic among Indian IT professionals, one crucial distinction needs to be understood: the US government has targeted a route to green cards, not the H-1B visa programme itself.

Indians already working legally in America on valid H-1B status do not automatically lose their right to work because their employers have been suspended from the PERM process. The move does not, by itself, cancel existing H-1B visas, invalidate approved H-1B petitions or require Indian employees to pack their bags and return home.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) clarified on October 9 that the suspension would not, by itself, affect the validity of existing H-1B visas or the status of H-1B holders and their dependents. It acknowledged, however, that eligible employees could face consequences for their green card applications.

In other words, the immediate concern is the route to permanent residency, not an automatic loss of permission to work in America.

What exactly has the Trump administration suspended?

To understand the implications, it is necessary to distinguish between the two principal immigration pathways involved.

The H-1B visa allows American employers to hire eligible foreign professionals for speciality occupations, subject to the programme’s requirements. It is a temporary employment-based immigration category.

A green card, on the other hand, grants lawful permanent resident status, allowing an individual to live and work permanently in the United States, subject to the applicable laws.

PERM is an important step in the employment-based green card process for many foreign workers. Before sponsoring an employee for certain employment-based immigrant categories, an employer must generally obtain labour certification from the US Department of Labour.

The employer is required to demonstrate that it has tested the American labour market and that hiring the foreign worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed American workers.

Once the labour certification is approved, the employer can generally proceed with an immigrant petition before US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), followed by the remaining steps required for permanent residency.

The administration’s action against the eight technology companies restricts their participation in this process while the government investigates alleged violations. The precise treatment of pending cases and the duration of the suspension will determine the extent of the disruption.

What the action does not establish, however, is a blanket ban on employing Indian nationals or a cancellation of every immigration benefit associated with these companies.

The distinction is significant because the US immigration system operates through separate visa categories and procedures. Restricting access to one stage of the green card process does not automatically terminate a worker’s status under another category.

Why Indian H-1B workers need not panic

Consider an Indian software engineer employed by Microsoft on a valid H-1B petition. The employee continues working in the approved role and maintains lawful immigration status. If Microsoft is unable to initiate a new PERM application during the suspension, the employee’s existing H-1B status does not automatically disappear.

The same principle applies to eligible H-1B workers employed by TCS, Infosys, Wipro, HCLTech, Cognizant and Capgemini.

The suspension, by itself, does not revoke their H-1B status, make their employment unlawful or require them to leave the country.

Nor does the action automatically cancel an already-issued green card. Permanent residents hold a different immigration status from H-1B workers, and a restriction on an employer’s ability to initiate PERM proceedings is not, on its own, a cancellation of that status.

However, this distinction should not be mistaken for a blanket guarantee that every affected employee will remain unaffected. H-1B status is subject to its own rules. An employment termination, an expired petition or another immigration violation can have separate consequences.

The relevant point is that the PERM suspension itself does not cancel an existing H-1B visa or automatically strip an employee of lawful status.

The real casualty could be the green card dream.

While the immediate threat to existing H-1B status is limited, the suspension could prove consequential for Indians seeking permanent residency.

For many Indian professionals, the H-1B visa is not the final destination. It is the first step towards building a long-term life in the United States. They work for years, pay taxes, establish families and plan their futures around the possibility of eventually securing a green card.

The PERM process is often an essential part of that journey.

An employee whose employer has not yet filed a PERM application could face a delay before the green card process can begin. Those with pending applications could also face uncertainty over how their cases will be handled during the suspension.

The consequences will depend on the stage of the application, the relevant immigration rules and the government’s eventual treatment of individual cases.

This is particularly important for Indian nationals because employment-based green cards are subject to per-country limits. India has faced substantial backlogs in several employment-based immigration categories, leaving many applicants waiting years for permanent residency.

For workers already caught in these backlogs, an additional delay at the labour certification stage could complicate long-term immigration planning.

But it would be inaccurate to claim that every Indian employee working for the eight companies will suffer the same consequences. Many may not be pursuing employer-sponsored green cards at all. Others may already have progressed beyond the PERM stage.

The impact is therefore likely to be concentrated among workers whose permanent residency applications depend on actions their employers can no longer take during the suspension.

The six-year H-1B limit: Where the situation could become complicated

There is one category of workers for whom the suspension could have more serious indirect implications: those approaching the maximum period of H-1B stay.

H-1B status is generally subject to a six-year limit, although qualifying workers can obtain extensions beyond that period under specific circumstances.

For example, eligible workers may qualify for one-year extensions beyond the six-year limit if the required labour certification or immigrant petition was filed at least 365 days earlier. Certain workers with approved I-140 immigrant petitions may also qualify for extensions of up to three years when an immigrant visa is unavailable because of the applicable green card backlog.

This is where the PERM suspension could complicate matters.

A worker who has not yet initiated the green card process and is approaching the end of the six-year H-1B period may have fewer options if the employer cannot file the required paperwork in time. Whether an extension is available will depend on the individual’s immigration history, filing dates and eligibility under the applicable rules.

This is a genuine concern, but it is not the same as saying that all Indian H-1B workers employed by the affected companies will lose their status.

The distinction between direct and indirect consequences matters. The suspension does not automatically cancel existing visas, but it could disrupt immigration planning for some employees who rely on the green card process to qualify for future extensions.

Indian IT companies are not necessarily facing an operational crisis

The suspension also raises questions about its potential impact on Indian IT companies operating in the United States.

However, the consequences for corporate operations must be separated from those for individual employees.

Nasscom, the industry body representing Indian technology companies, has highlighted the industry’s reduced dependence on H-1B visas over the years as firms expanded local hiring in the United States. TCS has also indicated that the suspension would not materially affect its workforce strategy or customer engagements, pointing to the limited number of PERM applications it had made in recent years.

These statements suggest that the immediate operational consequences for the wider Indian IT industry may be contained, although the experience of individual workers could vary.

Companies that rely less heavily on new PERM applications may face limited disruption to their overall workforce plans. Employees already in the United States on valid H-1B status can continue working under the terms of their approved petitions, provided they continue to meet the relevant requirements.

Nevertheless, industry-wide assessments do not eliminate the uncertainty facing employees whose green card applications are already underway.

The suspension could create administrative complications, delay permanent residency plans, and force affected workers to reconsider their long-term options if the restrictions remain in place.

What should Indian professionals do now?

For Indian workers employed by the eight companies, the first step is to establish whether their immigration plans actually depend on the suspended PERM process.

Those working legally on valid H-1B status should not assume that their visas have been cancelled or that they must leave the country.

Employees pursuing permanent residency should ask their employer’s immigration team to clarify the status of their applications, whether any filings have been affected, and what alternatives may be available under existing immigration rules.

Workers approaching the six-year H-1B limit should be particularly careful. They may need individual legal advice to determine whether they qualify for an extension and whether the suspension changes their options.

The government could also clarify how pending applications will be treated and whether the affected employers will eventually regain access to the programme. Until then, sweeping predictions about the fate of every Indian worker would be premature.

A setback for settlement plans, not a blanket ban on Indians working in America

The Trump administration’s latest action reflects a tougher approach towards employment-based immigration and the use of foreign labour by American companies. Its stated objective is to investigate alleged abuses and protect American workers.

The immediate consequences, however, must be assessed on the basis of what has actually been suspended.

The PERM restrictions could delay green card applications and disrupt the long-term settlement plans of Indian professionals employed by the affected companies. For some, especially those approaching the H-1B limit, the indirect implications could be significant.

But the announcement does not amount to a blanket cancellation of H-1B visas, nor does it automatically render the employment of Indian professionals unlawful.

The headline distinction is simple: the United States has restricted an important route to permanent residency for employees sponsored by eight technology companies; it has not, through this action alone, ordered Indian H-1B workers to leave the country.

For thousands of Indians already working legally in America, there is no reason to assume that their immediate right to work has vanished overnight. The uncertainty concerns how quickly, and through which available routes, some of them will be able to turn temporary employment into permanent residency.

That is a serious setback for those waiting for a green card. It is not the same as shutting the door on every Indian professional working in the United States.

The story of Reservations: Read this past before attempting to shape the future

Few issues have shaped India’s political and social landscape as persistently as caste-based reservation. What began as an effort to address unequal access to education and employment has evolved into a complex debate over historical injustice, representation, constitutional rights and political power. 

Understanding this journey requires looking beyond independent India and B.R. Ambedkar to the social transformations of the nineteenth century, the policies of British colonial rule and the pioneering reforms of India’s princely states, because caste-based reservations started there, not in Independent India. Reservations are older than our constitution.

The roots of social inequality obviously lie in the varna-jati system, which historically linked social identity and occupations to birth. Yet its evolution was neither uniform nor unchanging. Birth-based occupations were not unique to ancient India either. In an age with no industries as we know today and no economic system as evolved as today’s, societies everywhere chose a system that was birth-based. It was probably the simplest way to give people a role and a livelihood. India was no exception, where it was doing something particularly atrocious. Different regions, religious traditions and historical periods developed different practices. Caste discrimination and exclusion became serious realities, but the relationship between religious prescriptions, economic opportunities and social inequality remains contested. Colonialism introduced another powerful force, reshaping institutions and determining which communities could access emerging opportunities.

Jyotirao Phule, a wealthy contractor, builder and merchant, became one of the earliest influential critics of caste inequality in nineteenth-century Maharashtra. Appearing before the Hunter Education Commission in 1882, he challenged Brahmin dominance in government employment and modern education. He demanded greater educational opportunities and official appointments for non-Brahmin communities, arguing that if the British educated the Shudras instead of the Brahmins and put them in important jobs, those communities would remain loyal to the Raj.

Employment data from that period does show Brahmin dominance, especially in the Bombay and Madras Presidencies. In the Bombay Presidency in 1886, Brahmins occupied 211 of 328 judicial and executive positions available to Indians. They also constituted approximately 66% of college students in 1875. Yet the pattern differed across regions, with Kayasthas occupying prominent positions in Bengal. But was it the whole truth? Far from it.

An alternative perspective emerges from Dharampal’s research into indigenous education, which documents substantial non-Brahmin participation in several early nineteenth-century schools. In the indigenous schools across almost every part of India, children of all castes, including jatis belonging to the Shudra varna, studied together. In nearly all these schools, students from non-Brahmin castes were found to be in the majority. No Brahmin monopoly is reflected in the data captured by this book.

Reservation first became official in 1902, when Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj of Kolhapur introduced 50% reservation for backward communities in government employment. The reform followed the Vedokta controversy, in which a palace priest refused to recognise Shahu’s Kshatriya status for Vedic rituals. His confrontation with caste privilege helped transform demands for social recognition into government policy.

Reservation subsequently spread to Mysore and the Madras Presidency. Krishnaraja Wadiyar IV introduced measures for non-Brahmin representation in Mysore in 1921, while the Justice Party government implemented communal reservations in Madras. These developments established precedents involving public employment, education, hostels and promotions decades before independence.

British governance, meanwhile, presented striking contradictions. The Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 subjected numerous communities to hereditary criminalisation and surveillance. The communities that took this blow are today almost all in the SC, ST or OBC lists — Nat, Bawariya, Madari, Khatik, Pasi, Dom, Mehtar, Valmiki, and many others. That brings a question: Why did Phule, Shahu, and later Ambedkar not attack the Criminal Tribes Act or such policies of the British with the same energy they reserved for the Brahmins? This is just one of the uncomfortable questions that is never asked.

B.R. Ambedkar carried his demand for reservations into national constitutional politics. The 1932 Communal Award proposed separate electorates for the Depressed Classes, prompting Gandhi’s opposition and the Poona Pact, which substituted reserved legislative seats within joint electorates. Ambedkar continued pressing for representation in government services. In 1943, pressurised by the ongoing World War and needing support from leaders like Ambedkar, the colonial administration finally introduced an 8.33% quota for Scheduled Castes in central employment, alongside concessions involving age limits, examination fees and scholarships.

Independence did not settle the question. In 1951, the Supreme Court’s decision in the Champakam Dorairajan case invalidated communal allocation of educational seats in Madras, prompting the First Constitutional Amendment and Article 15(4), which enabled special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

The history of reservation is therefore considerably older and more complicated than its familiar association with Ambedkar and the Constitution. It involves social hierarchy, colonial institutional change, regional political competition, reform movements and constitutional negotiation. It also raises some uncomfortable questions on the standard atrocity narrative that is so popular. Competing interpretations continue to disagree over the relative responsibility of caste practices and British policies.

That disagreement remains central to contemporary politics. Whether reservation is understood primarily as compensation for inherited discrimination, a means of securing representation or an instrument requiring periodic reform depends heavily on how its origins are interpreted. India’s future debate over reservation cannot be separated from its contested understanding of the past.

Read the complete article by Rahul Roushan here on Chapter One Magazine.

US suspends Microsoft and other IT companies from Green Card sponsorships: How white nationalism and racism fuelled the move by the Trump administration

A series of significant events has been playing out in the United States, and interestingly, India and Indians seem to be at the centre of many of them. In fact, it would not be wrong to say that the country and its people have been weighing heavily on the mind of the Trump administration.

In its latest heavy-handed move, Washington has suspended the Permanent Labour Certification (PERM) program for Microsoft, Adobe, Capgemini and other major Information Technology (IT) companies that served as a key step towards permanent residency for skilled foreign workers.

The announcement is especially crucial for India because it includes Infosys, Tata, Wipro, Hindustan Computers Limited (HCL) and Cognizant. Indian IT firms have been major actors in America’s technology and outsourcing industries.

Indian experts have historically made up a substantial portion of the H-1B workforce. Therefore, the decision could be pivotal to the long-term immigration plans of these workers whose employers are sponsoring their green card applications or were preparing for it.

More importantly, this is another redux of the Trump administration’s disruptive policy shift directed towards Indians.

It has rolled out multiple such measures, from demanding $100,000 for the H-1B visa and overhauling the H-1B visa lottery system, to proposing multi-thousand-dollar fees alongside increased audits and scrutiny by federal authorities, under the banner of taking a tough stance against “foreign workers and students,” which specifically targets the community.

President Donald Trump had even issued an executive order prohibiting federal agencies from hiring or subcontracting foreign workers, with a focus on those with H-1B visas, which he suspended earlier.

However, these developments are neither isolated incidents nor entirely spontaneous occurrences. On the contrary, they are a conscious effort, aimed at appeasing the racist, anti-Indian and Hinduphobic sections of the MAGA (Make America Great Again) support base of Trump.

The fundamental claim which lies at the centre of this xenophobia is that Indian employees have replaced Americans in the US. This rhetoric has even received endorsement from the nation’s top leadership.

“Our message to Microsoft is: You’re a great American company, but you’ve got to hire great American workers,” Vice President JD Vance stated, accusing the aforementioned IT businesses of “abusing” the visa system and prioritising “foreign workers” over Americans. However, the administration was met with a swift response from the companies, refuting the allegations.

The reality remains that the circumstances taking shape in the country are not anchored in accuracy but rather constitute a pernicious propaganda intended to damage India, a phenomenon that has repeatedly manifested through intensely hostile commentary aimed at New Delhi or blatant Hinduphobia that has been evident among white Christian nationalists there.

The tariff row: How Trump administration attacked India over Russian oil purchases

The Trump administration’s hostility toward India shone through when it blamed the country for the Ukraine war and slapped 50% tariffs, including 25% for Russian oil purchases, to pressure it into ending energy imports from Russia. This antagonism was compounded by a glaring contradiction. Washington had previously urged New Delhi to continue the procurement to help stabilise global energy markets.

However, when the Modi government refused to comply with their demands and asserted its sovereign right to make decisions in its own national interest, the Trump administration reacted with petulant retaliation.

Interestingly, China, which buys a large portion of Russian oil, did not face any such action. Furthermore, European nations were continually supplied Russian gas as the West collectively criticised India, and the US wanted to punish it for its alleged “insubordination.”

However, the episode transcended a mere diplomatic standoff between the two sides, as the US directly held India responsible for the conflict only for consuming Russian oil and not buckling under the pressure. Trump had threatened, “India will continue to pay massive tariffs if they do not cease buying oil from Russia.”

Afterwards, the rate was reduced to 18% due to a bilateral agreement, but he reiterated, “India was getting 50% tariffs dropped down to 18%, but they have to agree to stop buying Russian oil,” framing this as a prerequisite to sever energy ties with Moscow.

“Trump has applied aggressive economic leverage, for example, secondary tariffs on India, to try to make it harder for the Russians to get rich from their oil economy. It is meant to force Russia to the negotiating table and stop the killing,” Vance had similarly argued, justifying the unwarranted targeting of India.

The entire Trump lobby maintained this strategy of regularly invoking India’s name in connection with the Ukraine dispute to wrongly assign it accountability. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent even dragged industrialists Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani into it, claiming that the centre was taking oil from Russia to fill their pockets at the expense of citizens. The intention was to stoke political tensions with unsubstantiated statements.

Washington has wielded tariffs as leverage against India to compel adherence to American objectives. It is even considering 100% tariffs on Russian trading partners, including India. The US Trade Representative (USTR) has further suggested imposing additional 12.5% tariffs on products from India and other countries over goods produced using “forced labour,” after which the Indian government outlined the absence of adequate evidence in the probe.

Trump has characterised India as a “high tariff” country that was not a “good trading partner,” which “used to really rip us off” while also threatening to impose sweeping tariffs on many occasions. He even pushed Apple Inc.’s executive chairman Tim Cook to limit investments in manufacturing facilities in India, reiterating accusations of “high tariffs.”

“I said to Tim, we put up with all the plants you built in China for years, but we are not interested in you building in India. They can take care of themselves very well,” he recounted.

When anti-India rhetoric gets the stamp of approval at the highest levels of power

The Trump administration’s actions to pander to its pro-Nazi and white nationalist voters encompass not merely acting on conspiracy theories about Indian workers, but also instrumentalising obnoxious stereotypes to vilify the community and expose them to greater risk.

Last month, the US Department of Homeland Security shared an AI-produced image patterned after a poster from the acclaimed “Transformers” film series. Designated “Transformers: America for Americans,” it combined a formidable Transformer with the Homeland Security seal, positioned along with a photograph of a bearded Indian man with a brown complexion and a religious head covering.

The poster read, “Self-deport or find out,” and “Get off our roads, you don’t know how to drive, Mr Singh.” The egregiously racist upload was fiercely condemned, especially by the Indians, who also highlighted how a government department was peddling such a narrative, which could have serious real-world consequences for many members of the community residing in the nation.

This, however, represents merely a minor incident within the broader tide of anti-India sentiment regularly articulated by the Trump administration, including the president himself.

In April, he posted a four-page transcript of alleged podcaster Michael Savage’s comments regarding birthright citizenship in the US, in which the latter attacked individuals from China and India for “abusing the privilege.” The racist whined, “A baby here becomes an instant citizen, and then they bring the entire family in from China or India or some other hellhole on the planet.”

This also sparked considerable outcry, as Trump’s choice to amplify the offensive message drew criticism as “disgraceful” and “unbecoming of his office.” It was stated that the action could potentially endanger diplomatic ties with strategic partners for the sake of political gain.

His deputy Vance, who is married to an Indian named Usha, is predictably the other pea in this racist pod. He dehumanised Indian workers as “indentured servants” while pronouncing the decision to bar the eight IT companies, triggering a decisive reply from the Modi government, which labelled his comments as “unwarranted” and “deeply offensive.”

Vance, soon after taking the oath of office, advocated for the reinstatement of Marko Elez, a now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) employee who wanted to “normalise Indian hatred.” His derogatory rants became public, which forced him to resign. However, Elon Musk, supported by Vance, recruited Elez again following a poll conducted on X, in a disturbing act to effectively legitimise racism.

It is also important to note that Vance has openly voiced his desire to convert his wife, who comes from a Hindu background, to Christianity, despite her reluctance. She had supported him during his spiritual journey, but this is the manner in which he chose to reciprocate by delivering such a remark before his MAGA supporters.

Conclusion

Megalomanic Trump, driven by a personal vendetta against India for rightly refusing to credit him for the ceasefire during “Operation Sindoor,” and his entire administration have actively courted the White supremacists harbouring racist sentiments and deep-seated prejudice against Indians and Hindus.

These groups have not only attacked the country and its people, but also ridiculed Hinduism, its religious festivals, and Gods, even calling for the destruction of statues of Hindu deities. This bigotry forms the ideological foundation of the current American rulers.

Trump administration has chosen to exploit the same, instead of countering it, to advance their political agenda by marginalising an already vulnerable community and systematically discriminating against this segment of society. The regulatory action targeting IT firms is an element of this propaganda campaign, which has escalated to such proportions that political expediency has taken over both reason and rationality.

Avoid over-borrowing: Using an online gold loan calculator to plan repayments

0

When you take a gold loan, it can be tempting to borrow up to the maximum amount available against your gold. However, taking more than you need can increase your interest cost and make repayment harder to manage. Using a gold loan calculator before applying can help you estimate the cost of borrowing and choose an amount that fits your repayment capacity.

A gold loan can give you access to funds by using eligible gold as collateral, but borrowing only what you need can help you manage the overall cost. A gold loan calculator can help you estimate the interest and repayment amount based on your loan details.

  • Start by identifying the amount you actually need rather than borrowing the maximum available.
  • Use the calculator to understand how the loan amount and repayment period can affect your interest cost.
  • Review the applicable interest rate, fees and repayment terms before accepting the loan.

Why can over-borrowing make repayment difficult?

Borrowing more than you need through a gold loan can increase the amount on which interest is charged. Even if additional funds are available against your eligible gold, taking them without a clear need can raise your overall borrowing cost.

For example, if you need Rs. 1 lakh but take Rs. 1.5 lakh simply because you are eligible for the higher amount, you will have to repay interest on the additional Rs. 50,000 as well. This can make the loan more expensive than necessary.

Before applying, it is useful to identify your actual funding requirement and consider how comfortably you can manage the repayment.

How much should you borrow?

You should ideally base your loan amount on the purpose for which you need the funds and your ability to repay them. List the expenses you need to cover and estimate the amount required before deciding how much gold to pledge.

You should also leave enough room in your budget for regular household expenses and other financial commitments. This can help you avoid relying on additional borrowing to meet your repayment obligations.

How can an online gold loan calculator help?

An online gold loan calculator can give you an estimate of the borrowing cost based on details such as the loan amount, interest rate and repayment period. This lets you compare different borrowing scenarios before making a decision.

For instance, you can enter a lower loan amount and compare the estimated interest with what you would pay if you borrowed more. You can also adjust the repayment period to understand how it may affect the overall cost.

The estimate is meant for financial planning. Your actual loan terms and repayment obligations will depend on the applicable offer and loan agreement.

What should you check in the calculation?

When using the calculator, pay attention to more than just the amount you may receive. Consider the following:

  • The loan amount you actually require
  • The applicable interest rate
  • The repayment period
  • The estimated interest payable
  • Any applicable processing fee or other charges
  • The repayment amount or schedule applicable to your loan

Looking at these figures together can give you a more realistic picture of the cost of borrowing.

How does the loan amount affect your repayment cost?

The amount you borrow has a direct bearing on the interest charged, assuming the applicable rate and other terms remain the same. A larger loan can therefore result in a higher overall interest cost.

Suppose you compare two borrowing options of Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 1.5 lakh at the same interest rate and for the same period. The second option would generally attract more interest because you are borrowing an additional Rs. 50,000.

This is why you should avoid choosing a loan amount simply because you are eligible for it. Borrowing according to your actual requirement can help you keep the repayment cost under control.

Can a longer tenure reduce your repayment burden?

A longer repayment period can spread your repayment over more time, which may make each periodic payment easier to manage. However, keeping the loan outstanding for longer can also increase the total interest payable.

A shorter period may reduce the overall interest cost, but you may need to make larger periodic payments. The right repayment period therefore depends on your income, expenses and ability to meet the scheduled payments.

You can compare different repayment periods using the calculator before finalising your borrowing amount and tenure.

What should you consider before taking a gold loan?

Using a calculator is only one part of responsible borrowing. You should also consider your financial position and the terms of the loan before pledging your gold.

1. Check your repayment capacity

Review your regular income, essential expenses and existing financial commitments. Make sure the proposed repayment fits comfortably within your budget rather than relying on uncertain future income.

2. Borrow for a defined requirement

Having a clear purpose for the loan can help you decide how much you actually need. Avoid increasing the loan amount simply because a higher amount is available against your gold.

3. Review the applicable charges

Interest is an important part of the borrowing cost, but you should also check the applicable processing fee, stamp duty, penal charges and any other fees before accepting the loan.

4. Understand the consequences of non-repayment

Your pledged gold serves as security for the loan. You should understand the repayment terms and the consequences of failing to repay the outstanding dues within the applicable period.

How can you use a calculator to avoid over-borrowing?

Start with the amount you need and enter it into the calculator. You can then compare different repayment periods and review the estimated interest cost.

If increasing the loan amount provides funds that you do not currently need, consider whether the additional borrowing is justified by your financial requirements. Comparing these scenarios before applying can help you choose a loan amount that is easier to manage.

A little planning before you pledge your gold can help you avoid unnecessary borrowing and keep your repayment obligations aligned with your financial capacity.

Singer Mika Singh says he loves Pakistan because it ‘maintains’ Gurudwaras, hails Pakistani Muslims as tolerant: Here’s how he is delusional

Such is the power of perception and narrative-building that people refuse to see the obvious problems in their country’s adversaries just because their personal experiences were not bitter. Despite having Islamic exclusivity, the narrative game of Pakistan is so strong that it manages to influence even a section of Indian people that Pakistani Muslims are ‘secular and tolerant’. In a podcast with Times Now anchor Navika Kumar, singer Mika Singh said that Pakistani Muslims are good because they ‘maintain Gurudwaras really well’. 

Appearing on the Baatein Dil Se podcast released on 2nd October, singer Mika Singh said that he does not understand why Indians view Pakistani Muslims differently while Muslims living in Dubai are viewed positively.  

While defending the Pakistani Muslim majority, Mika Singh claimed that they maintain Sikh religious sites very well, and when he visited Pakistan, the Pakistani Muslim “brothers” helped with cleaning the Gurudwaras. 

Explaining the reason behind his deep love and admiration for Pakistan, Mika Singh said that it is because three main Sikh religious sites, Gurdwara Janam Asthan in Nankana Sahib, Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Kartarpur, and Gurdwara Panja Sahib in Hasan Abdal, are situated in Pakistan. 

 “When I went to Pakistan, many Muslims who are our brothers have served at the gurdwaras and helped with the cleaning,” he said. 

The singer elaborated, “Pakistan bura nahin. Pakistan ke log kahin se bure nahin hain. Ye bas pata nahin kyun humein Pakistan ke hi Musalman kharaab lagte hain. Lekin Dubai ke Musalman bahut achhe lagte hain. Ye mujhe aaj tak nahin samajh aaya. (Pakistan isn’t bad. The people of Pakistan aren’t bad at all. I just don’t know why, but for some reason, we seem to dislike Muslims from Pakistan. But we really like Muslims from Dubai. I’ve never understood that),”. 

“Nankana Sahib and Panja Sahib are there. There are three very important gurdwaras in Pakistan. For me, it is not about money. The first thought is that I can reach the gurdwara through this… “If Pakistanis are giving me respect, we should be happy about it. At least there is someone who is going there and performing,” Singh said. 

Mika Singh might have had a good personal experience and accorded warm hospitality since he is a celebrity, and such visits hand Pakistan rare opportunities to present a good image beyond its “Islamic terror-sponsor” disrepute. However, his observation sits against the documented record of demographic collapse, property loss, demolition of Gurudwaras and other minority religious sites, and attacks on Hindus, Sikhs and other non-Muslim communities. 

The state of Gurudwaras in Pakistan 

In December 2025, Pakistan’s own Parliamentary Committee on Minority Caucus was informed that the country has 1,285 Hindu worship places and 532 Gurudwaras, of which merely 37 are functional. The two main reasons cited were the weak presence of Hindu and Sikh populations, and pathetic maintenance by y the Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB). 

In fact, a Pakistan-based documentation project on Lahore district alone found 42 historic Sikh shrines, of which only five were functional, one maintained but non-functional, while 14 were standing but occupied by local Muslims, eight lying in ruins, and 14 disappeared, which means they were replaced by other buildings. 

There have been numerous incidents of Muslim-orchestrated attacks on Sikh Gurudwaras in recent years alone.  

On the night of 24–25 June 2026, a 125-year-old Gurdwara Sri Guru Singh Sabha Sahib in Farooqabad, near Nankana Sahib, connected to the Singh Sabha movement, was demolished by a local businessman without the required clearance. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs called it a “highly deplorable and targeted act of vandalism” and demanded investigation and restoration. Pakistani Sikh representatives said earlier sites, including Gurdwara Chobacha Sahib, had also been lost without meaningful action. 

In August 2026, the local Sikhs in Quetta said that the building of Gurdwara Sri Singh Sabha (Archer Road), long used as a school, was razed for a commercial plaza without consultation. The Sikh leaders also lamented that dozens of pre-Partition Gurdwaras in Quetta had already been occupied by Muslims. 

In 2019, partial demolition and sale of fittings at Nanak Mahal in Narowal and sale of high-value land associated with Gurdwara Bebe Nanaki near Lahore’s Gurdwara Dehra Sahib were reported. 

While Mika Singh claimed that Pakistani authorities protect Nankana Sahib and other historical Sikh religious sites, in January 2020, a Muslim mob led by Mohammed Imran, the brother of Mohammed Hassan, a man who abducted and forcibly married a Sikh girl. The attack was carried out by the Muslim mob after the Sikh girl’s brother filed a police complaint. 

Even the Kartarpur Corridor had encountered furious objections from within the country. Late Maulana Khadim Hussain Rizvi, the founder of radical Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan, expressed that the Islamic nation was not founded to create Sikh universities or to provide a corridor for them, and those who love this minority community should move to Amritsar. 

In April 2020, five domes of the  Kartarpur Sahib Gurudwara collapsed due to strong winds.  

A 9-foot bronze statue of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the founder of the Sikh Empire whose reign stretched from Afghanistan to the outskirts of Delhi, had been defaced on three occasions. It is located in Lahore Fort and was first attacked in 2019 shortly after the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir. A man named Zaheer then broke the statue’s arm in 2020 as he was influenced by Khadim Hussain Rizvi’s sermons, while the artwork was completely vandalised in 2021, sparing only the horse. 

Pakistan, a cultureless Islamic Republic suffering from an identity crisis, long dismissed its pre-Islamic, essentially Hindu past as an age of Jahiliyyah or the era of spiritual darkness that achieved redemption only after the arrival of Islam through Mohammad Bin Qasim. 

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s institutionalized intolerance for Hindu and Sikh religions and history also reflects in its negligence in the maintenance of the region’s pre-Islamic, essentially the historical sites of Ancient India or Ancient Bharat.  

In July 2026, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) formally asked Pakistan to reverse recent ‘reconstructions’ and “unnecessary interventions” at Mohra Moradu, a Buddhist monastery and stupa complex from the Kushan era, and Sirkap, the Indo-Greek city layer. Both these sites are located in the Taxila (Takshashila) archaeological complex in present-day Pakistan’s Rawalpindi district. These sites are UNESCO-recognised World Heritage Sites from the post-Indus Valley Civilisation period (around 2nd century BCE to 5th century CE). 

In October 2009, the 7th-century CE rock-carved Buddha statue was dynamited and defaced by Pakistan Army-harboured Taliban Jihadis, who also attacked many Kushan-era stupas. The Taliban terrorists drilled holes into the face, shoulders, and feet of the statue, filled them with explosives, and detonated them, destroying the statue’s face and upper body, in an apparent emulation of the 2001 Bamiyan Buddhas destruction in Afghanistan. 

It must be recalled that in 2023, Pakistan, in its bid to erase the region’s Hindu past, demolished the Hinglaj Mata Mandir (temple) in Sindh province. 

Pakistan also destroyed the Sharda Peeth Mandir, which is another Hindu shrine along the Line of Control (LoC). Ironically, the ancient Hindu temple was recognised as a UNESCO heritage site, although that status could not save it from Pakistani hatred for Hinduism. 

A historically significant Hindu temple in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, close to the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, was destroyed last year. The property, which had been abandoned since 1947 when the initial inhabitants moved to India, became the site of a commercial complex. Once located in the Khyber district’s border town of Landi Kotal Bazaar, the “Khyber Temple” had gradually deteriorated over time as the Islamic state neglected its maintenance. 

In 2023, two Hindu temples in Pakistan’s Sindh region were violated and desecrated in a single day. A group of criminals used rocket launchers to attack a Hindu temple in the Kashmore area of Sindh. According to reports, the attackers targeted the temple and the Hindu houses nearby, aiming at Hindu believers. They fired randomly at the temple and the residences next to it. 

A Hindu temple in Karachi’s Soldier Bazaar that was more than 150 years old was destroyed. The local administration dismantled the ancient Mari Mata Temple. 

Panj Tirath, a 1000-year-old Hindu cultural monument in Peshawar, had been involved in a court dispute for more than three years. The Hindu heritage monument, which the Pakistani government designated a National Heritage site in 2019, was illicitly occupied and utilized as an amusement park warehouse, according to reports from 2023. 

If we include the temples demolished in the 1990s and before, this compilation will become too exhaustive and emotionally overwhelming, and would stoke the feeling that we know that not too far from India, Hindu and Sikh history is undergoing systematic humiliation, erasure, and even appropriation, but there is no end to this helplessness. 

As per an estimate by the Movement for Solidarity and Peace (MSP), as many as 1,000 Christian and Hindu girls, aged between 12 and 25 years, are abducted annually in Pakistan. In most cases, the police refuse to act against the perpetrators or are found to be helping the Islamists. 

As per an October 2024 report by human rights group Jubilee Campaign, the modus operandi of perpetrators of such crimes rarely deviates from the following pattern: an adult Muslim man (in some cases married with children of their own) identifies a young Christian or Hindu girl (often a neighbour or acquaintance) whom he wishes to make his wife. The perpetrator exploits Sharia legal loopholes; the climate of police disinclination to investigate offenses against faith minorities; and the willingness of some radical Muslim leaders and entities to fabricate documentation regarding the victim’s age, religious affiliation, and marital status. 

In May 2023, a Christian girl named Muskan was kidnapped at gunpoint by Mohammad Adnan and his father, after which the minor was forced to convert to Islam. The minor was declared Adnan’s ‘wife’. Muskan was repeatedly subjected to sexual abuse. In June, 14-year-old Muskan Liyaqat of Muridke in Punjab’s Sheikhpura district escaped from captivity after nearly two years. After escaping captivity, Muskan said that she was beaten with an iron rod and insulting words were used for Christians. She had a miscarriage after torture during forced pregnancy. 

As per a Jubilee Campaign report, in the case of the forced conversion and marriage of a Christian girl named Shifa, the police officer told the 14-year-old victim’s father, “Your daughter will never return to you, inshallah [if Allah wills].” During the court hearing, her 48-year-old Muslim ‘husband’ Syed Shabbar Ali Gillani presented fake conversion and marriage documents to claim that Shifa was 18 years old even though she was 14. Shifa was abducted by her neighbour Najma Liaquat. 

In February 2023, a 17-year-old Hindu girl in Pakistan’s Sindh was kidnapped and converted to Islam. 

Notably, Mirpur Khas is notorious for the big conversion rackets operating there. Reports say that not only Hindu girls but entire families are targeted for forced conversions and then kept in mosque-cum-training centres to properly ‘Islamise’ them. In May 2023, around 50 Hindus were converted to Islam and were subjected to four months of Islamic training.   

In March 2025, Pakistan’s Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) released its report on the human rights situation in the country. The report, “Under Siege: Freedom of Religion or Belief in 2023/24,” gave a dark account of increasing violence, forced conversions, and institutionalised discrimination against Pakistan’s Hindus, particularly in Sindh province.  

Violence against Hindus in Pakistan includes mob violence, temple desecration, targeted kidnappings, and forced conversion of Hindu girls. The report highlights how the judicial process in Pakistan, extremist elements, and inaction of government officials have placed Hindus in a seriously vulnerable position with little chance of justice. 

In the year 2022 alone, 124 including 81 Hindu women forcefully converted to Islam with 58% of them being minors.  A Human Rights Observer 2023 fact sheet revealed  81 Hindu, 42 Christian, and one Sikh girl were forcibly converted to Islam. The fact sheet revealed that 23 per cent of girls were below 14 years of age, 36 per cent of them were between the ages of 14 and 18 years, and only 12 per cent of the victims were adults, while the age of 28 per cent of the victims was not reported. 

Notably, besides being forced to convert to Islam, Hindus in Pakistan are subjected to religious discrimination, humiliation, and killings over the false accusations of ‘blasphemy’ by Islamists. Hatred against Hindus is indoctrinated in educational institutes in the country. 

In August 2025, Pakistan’s own National Commission on the Rights of the Child (NCRC) exposed the serious and long-standing discrimination faced by children from minority religions, especially Sikhs, Christians and Hindus in the country. 

While Mika Singh lives in this delusion that Pakistan and Pakistani Muslims hold Sikhs and their religious site in high regard and protect them out of sheer respect, the reality of the ‘Sikh love’ is that during the May 2025 conflict, Pakistan launched drones and missiles toward the Harimandir Sahib, or the Golden Temple in Amritsar, on the night of 7-8 May. Their attacks, driven by religious hatred and the deliberate design of stoking ‘Khalistani’ sentiments in India, were foiled by Indian air defence systems, and the sacred shrine was protected from any damage. In Poonch, however, Pakistan attacked a Gurudwara and killed four Sikhs.

Pakistan’s deceitful ‘love’ for Sikhs and why it ‘maintains’ major Sikh pilgrimage sites  

 In recent times, there have been two parallel image makeovers going on in Pakistan. The first calculated manoeuvre is about establishing Pakistan as a civilisational state by appropriating ancient India or undivided India’s Hindu history, apparently, to build a favourable narrative that can be useful for the Indus Waters Treaty issue. Although OpIndia reported earlier how even this pretentious embrace of the pre-Islamic history of the region is not taking place without de-Hinduising the past, as seen with Basant returning to Lahore not as a festival honouring Maa Saraswati but as a ‘cultural’ kite-flying festival. 

The second is about building an apocryphal ‘Pakistan is pro-Sikh’ narrative. 

Pakistan protects, to some extent, the three main religious sites of Sikhs, is for controlled pilgrimage and tourism revenue, for its covert ISI operations as these sites attracted tourists mainly from India until the May 2025 conflict, and for maintaining the chimera of religious tolerance and cultural heritage preservation at global forums. 

Ironically, these concerted efforts are ongoing while Pakistan’s madrasa-bred de facto ruler, Field Marshal Asim Munir, intermittently reminds his country’s Muslim populace about the Islamic exclusivity and delusional superiority propagated by the bigoted and divisive Two-Nation Theory. “We are different from the Hindus”, this is what Munir said a few days before the Pakistan-orchestrated Pahalgam Islamic terror attack in April 2025. 

From sympathising with Khalistani terrorists and the ISI, even backing them, to pushing a narrative that they are pro-Sikhs and support even Indian Sikhs. Pakistan has banned the release of Indian movies in the country, and yet it allowed a film featuring Indian Sikh actor Diljit Dosanjh and Pakistani actress Hania Aamir to be released in Pakistani theatres last year.  

Pakistan, which officially banned Adita Dhar’s blockbuster Dhurandar series for exposing how it is a safe haven for Islamic terrorists, wanted to showcase Honey Trehan-directed Satluj, due to the film’s biased narrative against India, which completely fails to address the Khalistan movement and its numerous victims, particularly Hindus. 

Mika Singh doesn’t understand why Indians like Dubai Muslims but not Pakistani Muslims: Here’s why this is the case to some extent 

While singer Mika Singh did not very explicitly say who exactly did, he meant by ‘Dubai Muslims’, who are liked, or rather not hated, by Indians, primarily non-Muslim Indians; let’s address the case of both the local Emirati Muslims and the migrant Pakistani Muslims in Dubai or the UAE. 

Except for the bigoted and Islamically radicalised minority, Emirati Muslims are tolerant, peace-loving, and largely secular-minded. In fact, the UAE administration gets hate for allowing the construction of a Hindu temple in Abu Dhabi. The Emirati ruling dispensation is often labelled ‘Murtad’ by Islamic fanatics from other countries for their religious tolerance. This itself explains why ‘Dubai Muslims’ are not disliked by Indians as such. 

Regarding Dubai Muslim, who might be Pakistani migrants, exposure to the world beyond the bigoted Pakistani hellhole accompanies a change in thought process, to some extent de-radicalisation, and the development of religious tolerance. 

Since the UAE demonstrates a high degree of societal and state-level tolerance toward other religions, compared to other Islamic countries, including Pakistan, local laws also play an important role in keeping bigotry and intolerance of Pakistani Muslims in check. 

This does not mean each and every Pakistani Muslim is inherently anti-Hindu or bigoted; however, the deplorable state of Pakistani religious minorities, and even Ahmadiyya and Shia Muslims, does not allow any sane person’s conscience to accept this sweeping assertion that Pakistani Muslims are an outright secular, liberal, and tolerant community.