On the 20th of October, a student from ABES College of Engineering in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, found themselves reprimanded by an assistant professor during a college cultural festival and student induction program. The professor, identified as Mamata Gautam by social media users, scolded the student for greeting the audience with a courteous “Jai Shri Ram.”
The incident came to the fore after the video of a professor, purportedly Gautam, yelling at the student went viral over the internet. Gautam scolded the student saying, “Why did you raise the slogan of Jai Shri Ram? Do you come to the college for this? This is a cultural program. This cannot be allowed. Out. Get Out.” Meanwhile, the student said that he was just responding to the ‘Jai Shri Ram’ calls from the audience.
Mamata Gautam, a teacher from ABES Engineering college in Ghaziabad expelled a student from stage for greeting audience with "Jai Shree Ram". The student was about to perform at the College Cultural Fest.
The video vividly captures several students on stage greeting the individual with “Jai Shri Ram,” to which the person on stage responded with the same phrase. After this, the entire college stadium very delightfully cheered ‘Jai Shri Ram’ which irked Mamata Gautam who stood from her seat and expelled the student from the stage.
The incident, as per the viral video, seems to have happened during a college cultural fest named ‘Navtarang 2023-24’. The program was also organized for the welcome of the BTech first-year students at the ABES College of Engineering, Ghaziabad.
The videos sparked online outrage, with a raft of netizens calling for punishing the teacher for unnecessarily slamming the student who responded to the audience with ‘Jai Shri Ram’ greeting. “This needs an Investigation. The student should be reinstated ASAP,” said one of the users. Meanwhile, the other one said that the incident exposed people hiding for years in the garb of secularism.
Screenshot from Twitter
Screenshot from the Twitter
College authorities say they ‘don’t know anything’ about this
Dr Mamata Gautam, as per the official website of ABES College of Engineering, Ghaziabad has 16 years of experience and specialises in Chemistry. She has a PhD and has been working with the college as one of the Assistant Professors.
Image- Official website of ABES College of Engineering, Ghaziabad
OpIndia’s team attempted to contact the institute to confirm the incident and inquire about the matter, but their calls went unanswered. Nonetheless, one of the assistant professors who requested anonymity over the matter said he had “no comments” on the matter.
A student with whom OpIndia spoke was reluctant to share information about the matter. He also claimed that he does not whether Mamata Gautam was a teacher at the institute or not. However, one of the representatives of the faculty members confirmed that Mamata Gautam was indeed a faculty at the institute. The representative, though, remained cagey about the incident, claiming that he knew nothing about the matter.
OpIndia has sent an email to the institute and the said professor over their stand on the incident, the response to which will be updated in the report as and when they respond.
The Ghaziabad Police has taken cognisance over the matter after the video had gone viral and launched a preliminary investigation into the incident.
थाना प्रभारी क्रासिंग रिपब्लिक को जाँच कर आवश्यक कार्यवाही हेतु निर्देशित किया गया है |
— POLICE COMMISSIONERATE GHAZIABAD (@ghaziabadpolice) October 20, 2023
The sacred chant of ‘Jai Shri Ram’ is wrongly portrayed as a ‘war cry’
Notably, the divine chant of ‘Jai Shri Ram’ has been wrongly portrayed as a ‘war cry’ by several ‘seculars’ and ‘liberals’ time and again. However, varied Islamist slogans like ‘Sar Tan Se Juda’ which is a literal call for beheading, or ‘Allah-hu-Akhbar’ are never addressed by these people with the condemning tone they actually deserve.
It is necessary to take an account how a non-violent simple Dharmic chant ‘Jai Shri Ram’ is demeaned as a provocative slogan as opposed to several dreadful Islamist slogans that are ignored and usually get a free pass.
It has been observed that the ‘liberals’ and ‘seculars’ widely use the sacred ‘Jai Shri Ram’ slogan to defame Hindus and portray them as hateful. The ‘liberals’ have deep-rooted hatred towards Hindus and they have been targeting, and demeaning Hindus over the divine chant especially since the BJP, known for its Hindutva beliefs, came to power in 2014. OpIndia has recorded several such incidents in which the ‘Jai Shri Ram’ slogan was misused to turn a random crime into a ‘hate crime’. The said report can be read here.
On Friday (20th October), a Delhi Court extended the judicial custody of Chinese propaganda portal NewClick‘s editor-in-chief Prabir Purkayastha and its human resources (HR) head Amit Chakraborty. This comes as both were produced before the court on the expiry of their ten days of judicial custody.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Hardeep Kaur of Patiala House Court passed the order on Friday, extending the judicial custody of Prabir Purkayastha and Amit Chakraborty for five more days.
They had previously been remanded to police custody for seven days, which the Delhi High Court upheld. As reported earlier, the duo has now petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the dismissal of their petitions challenging their police remand under the anti-terror law UAPA registered by Delhi Police’s Special Cell in the case of Chinese funding.
The duo was arrested by the Special Cell of Delhi Police on Tuesday (October 3) and subsequently remanded to seven days of police custody by a Delhi court on October 4th. The special cell of the Delhi Police had registered an FIR in the matter on 17th August under Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, and 22 of the UAPA and Sections 153A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the news portal.
The arrest came after the Delhi Police conducted raids on the homes of several journalists and employees linked to NewsClick. The Delhi Police had registered a fresh case under UAPA, other than the ED case, as per reports. UAPA is related to charges under terrorist activities and terror funding.
The Delhi office of NewsClick was sealed by the police. According to reports, 46 people were questioned, and digital gadgets, including laptops and mobile phones, as well as documents, were seized for investigation. Journalists Urmilesh, Aunindyo Chakravarty, Abhisar Sharma, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, and Sohail Hashmi, as well as satirist Sanjay Rajoura and D. Raghunandan of the Centre for Technology & Development, were among those questioned. They were permitted to leave after being questioned for more than six hours.
TMC MP Mahua Moitra’s alleged scandal of getting favours for questioning against Gautam Adani in the parliament has become the talk of the town for the past few days. But what emerged during the rounds of accusations and counter-accusations between Mahua Moitra, her collaborator-turned-approver Darshan Hiranandani and Mahua Moitra’s former ‘close aide’ advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai is not less than a prime-time ‘saas-bahu’ drama typically seen on ay Indian TV channel.
The lead characters in the Mahua Moitra story
This story has drama, infatuation, separation, politics, business, emotions, and whatnot. The expensive gifts allegedly received by Mahua Moitra have raised the budget of the story. This whole story has a ‘Samdhi’ angle, a ‘bhai’ angle, and most importantly a so-called ‘jilted ex’. Readers may recall a song at the end of the story – ‘Thukra ke mera pyar mera intekam dekhegi’ meaning you will see my revenge after rejecting my love. Besides, there is a journalist Sucheta Dalal who is asking the TMC MP back – Hum Aapke Hain Kaun? – only after writing articles praising the accused lady crusader.
TMC MP Mahua Moitra is the central character in this saga. Image Source: The Citizen
There is also a cute little dog who has lost everything in the turn of events. This dog once enjoyed its life in the laps of a democratically elected lady lawmaker showering kisses on the pup. Now this dog has become the subject of a heated custody battle and has been reduced to a topic of some petty police FIRs over the veracity of its ownership and allegations of theft. So, without wasting a moment, let us dive into the details of the complicated relationships in this story as intriguing as some daily soap serial.
It began with the ‘jilted ex’
People may call ‘jilted ex’ a ‘bhadka hua ashiq’ in Hindi. But for the premise of this story, we will go by the classical definition. If someone is jilted, the person they are having a romantic relationship with suddenly ends the relationship in a surprising and upsetting way. Mahua Moitra has called advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai her ‘jilted ex’.
Mahua Moitra with Jai Anant Dehadrai. Image Source: PGurus
The story starts with advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai writing a letter to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Lok Sabha MP Nishikant Dubey. In this letter, Dehadrai made some startling revelations about TMC MP Mahua Moitra, claiming that she was paid to ask questions in Lok Sabha targetting the Adani Group. Based on this letter, the BJP MP sent a formal complaint to the Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla seeking an inquiry against Moitra and urging the Speaker for her immediate suspension. The reasons for such demands by the lawyer were revealed in the chapter where this all story was broken.
Then came a political angle in the story
On 15th October, Nishikant Dubey levelled serious allegations of bribery against Trinamool MP Mahua Moitra, based on details provided by advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai. In his complaints, Advocate Dehadrai alleged that Moitra was paid in cash and gifts for asking questions in Parliament that favoured tycoon Darshan Hiranandani’s business interests primarily against Gautam Adani. Following the allegations, Mahua Moitra claimed that a “jilted” ex was framing her, referring to the advocate.
Mr A – this lame statement your best efforts? Falling back on Fake Degree MP & a jilted ex’s lies? I won’t rest till @dir_ed , @CBItweets investigate & freeze ₹13000 cr coal scam you have stolen from Indians.
On 16th October (Monday), the Adani Group released an official statement reiterating that some groups and individuals, both inside and outside India, have been engaged in a smear campaign to besmirch the repute and harm the interests of the Adani Group. In the official letter, the Adani group spokesperson highlighted reports that indicated a “quid pro quo” between Member of Parliament Mahua Moitra and Darshan Hiranandani, CEO of Hiranandani Group. Mahua Moitra’s X post regarding the ‘jilted ex’ came in response to the same press release by the Adani Group. In this post, she called Gautam Adani ‘Mr A’ which further adds spice to the story.
Mahua Moitra sent a legal notice to her “jilted ex”
In response to the formal complaint submitted to the Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla by Nishikant Dubey, seeking an inquiry against Mahua Moitra, the TMC MP sent a legal notice to the BJP Lok Sabha MP and advocate and her former “personal friend” Jai Anant Dehadrai and a multiple media organisations for allegedly ‘defaming’ her.
BJP MP Nishikant Dubey writes a letter to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla demanding to constitute an inquiry committee against TMC MP Mahua Moitra and her 'immediate suspension' from the House alleging that 'bribes were exchanged between her and businessman Darshan Hiranandani to ask… pic.twitter.com/pbqlMgbCvD
Mahua Moitra claimed that Nishikant Dubey went against her interest because she had doubted his educational credentials in the past. On advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, she claimed that they were once “close friends” but after a falling out, Dehadrai allegedly repeatedly threatened Moitra with several vile, malicious and vulgar messages, trespassed on her official residence, stole personal belongings, including Moitra’s dog.
Billionaire Darshan Hiranandani turns approver
In what turned out to be a huge blow to the TMC MP, Darshan Hiranandani reportedly decided to become an approver in this case. In a statement issued by Hiranandani on 19th October, the billionaire businessman accepted paying for most of the questions asked by Mahua Moitra in the Lok Sabha in the form of cash and gifts. He also acknowledged that the TMC MP provided him with her Parliamentary login credentials which he used to ask questions to the central government on her behalf.
Hiranandani also said that Mahua Moitra was getting unverified information to target Gautam Adani from various people, including journalist Sucheta Dalal and lawyers Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff.
Darshan Hiranandani is the son of Indian billionaire businessman Niranjan Hiranandani and holds a key position in his father’s real estate empire. Darshan Hiranandani is significantly engaged in managing the group’s international real estate ventures. The top real estate firm has been diversifying into other sectors, and many of them directly compete with Adani Group companies. This includes data centres, cloud computing, energy, and industrial warehousing.
His statement came a day after Lok Sabha Secretariat’s Privileges & Ethics Branch issued letters to Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai and Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey to submit evidence against Mahua Moitra.
Darshan Hiranandani was also very impressed by Mahua Moitra
Darshan Hiranandani’s statement revealed that he was also impressed by the qualities of the TMC MP. He wrote, “I found her to be knowledgable, expressive and outspoken. We exchanged contact details and remained in touch ever since. Over a period of time, she has been a close personal friend of mine. In the course of my interactions with her, I found her to be a bright intellectual and one of the public representatives who thoroughly understands both the economy and business matters. We used to communicate frequently on the telephone, ranging from weekly to daily calls. We frequently met when I came to India or when she visited Dubai.”
Darshan Hiranandani also found Mahua Moitra to be a dominating person
A dominating Saas (mother-in-law) is often seen in the TV serials. Here, besides estranged close friend of the advocate, Mahua Moitra also played a dominating lady. This added more interesting things to the story.
Darshan Hiranandani and his father Niranjan Hiranandani. Image Source: Flickr
Darshan Hiranandani wrote in his statement, “As our interactions grew over time, she started asking for odds and ends which involved my time. Once she asked you for something, it was always a ‘drop everything and do it now for me’ approach. She was dominating by nature and assertive in her temperament. She would always say, it was always urgent and critical for her and would slowly take control of your time. It was a way of reeling in your interest and in some way controlling some of your actions.”
The emergence of the ‘Bhai’, ‘Samdhi’, and journalist angle in the story
Darshan Hiranandani said in his statement, “Ms Moitra, in her endeavour, was getting help from other people like Sucheta Dalal, Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff, who were also in touch with her, and who was feeding her with all kinds of unverified information relating to Gautam Adani and his companies.” This is how the names were introduced in the story. Hiranandani also claimed that Moitra was interacting with Rahul Gandhi over the Adani issue and “bonded extremely well” with Shashi Tharoor and Pinaki Mishra adding more names to the complex story.
Shardul Shroff and his wife Pallavi Shroff. Image Source: Business Standard
To understand the next plot of the story, it is necessary to first know that Shardul Shroff is the brother of Cyril Shroff. Pallavi Shroff is the wife of Shardul Shroff. Cyril Shroff is the father-in-law of Gautam Adani’s son Karan Adani. So, Cyril and Shardul are sons of Suresh Amarchand Shroff, a former managing partner of the law firm Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co. His grandfather started the firm in partnership with Mangaldas Mehta in 1917.
Cyril Shroff and Gautam Adani are samdhis, as Gautam Adani’s son Karan Adani is married to Cyril Shroff’s daughter Paridhi Shroff. Cyril Shroff and his brother Shardul Shroff were managing partners of Amarchand Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co, a top law firm. However, there was a rivalry between the two brothers over the firm, and they decided in 2015 to split the company. Shardul Shroff now runs Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, while Cyril Shroff runs Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, India’s largest full-services law firm. The brothers and their respective wives are among the top corporate lawyers in the country.
Karan Adani with his wife Paridhi Shroff-Adani. Image Source: Stars Unfolded
Mahua Moitra’s reply to Hiranandani’s statement introduced the ‘Samdhi’ angle to the story
Mahua Moitra’s response to Darshan Hiranandani’s statement revealed her version of the story as well as some new sub-tracks in this Mahuagate. Mahua Moitra wrote, “Shardul Shroff is the brother of Cyril Shroff who has had a bitter separation of business from him.”
Cyril Shroff and his wife Vandana Shroff. Image Source: The Economic Times
After explaining this Bhai angle, she went ahead to explain the Samdhi angle, as she wrote, “Cyril Shroff is Gautam Adani’s “samdhi” and was on the SEBI’s committee in total conflict of interest. Rahul Gandhi and Shashi Tharoor are both people the government targets relentlessly. Sucheta Dalal is an investigative journalist who is always exposing the government.”
Mahua Moitra also mentioned that as all these names were allegedly unfavourable to the ruling party and the Prime Minister, Darshan Hiranandani’s statement was drafted by someone working in the PMO in order to implicate all of them at once as this would be the best opportunity to do so.
Mahua Moitra wrote the second episode on the “jilted ex”
In her latest statement, Mahua Moitra went on to reveal more about her “jilted ex” advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai. She wrote, “This BJP government has been waiting to somehow shut me up on the Adani issue desperately. Jai Dehadrai is not some “Supreme Court lawyer” who has done painstaking research on me. He is a jilted ex with an acrimonious personal history with me who wanted to somehow get back at me. If indeed he was witness to all of my corruption why was he with me during the time and why did he wait till now to make it public?”
Mahua Moitra sharing a cigar with Jai Anant Dehadrai. Image Source: Newslaundry
However, Mahua Moitra did not clarify much about the exact nature and reason for the acrimony that developed between her and her former close friend advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai. Meanwhile, media reports were flooded with Mahua Moitra’s photographs with Jai Anant Dehadrai where both are seen sharing a cigar. Both of them looked comfortable in the image, and no sign of any acrimony was noticed.
The sad sub-plot of Henry the dog
In a legal notice sent to Jai Ananat Dehadrai, Mahua Moitra alleged that the lawyer took away many of her belongings including a dog named Henry. The feud between TMC MP Mahua Moitra and her ‘jilted ex’ advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai got murkier with the duo fighting over the custody of this dog. Three days after the TMC MP sent a legal notice to her former personal friend accusing him of stealing her dog, Dehadrai wrote to the Delhi police commissioner accusing Mahua Moitra of stealing and hiding his pet dog Henry.
Heartless | TMC MP in Row
An emotional dog parent Jai Dehadrai tells Delhi Police: My bond with my dog Henry is of parent – child. I have looked after him since he was 40 days. Ms Mahua Moitra deliberately kidnapped & hid Henry since Oct 10 with intent to blackmail after CBI… pic.twitter.com/jwCd82bhOL
In an emotional letter penned to the Delhi Police Commissioner Sanjay Arora on October 19 (Thursday), Jai Anant Dehadrai alleged that Moitra deliberately kidnapped and hid his Rottweiler dog, Henry, with the intention to harass and blackmail him to avenge the complaint he had filed against her with the CBI, accusing Moitra of taking cash and gifts to ask specific questions in the Parliament.
In his written complaint, the emotional dog parent Jai Dehadrai provided documents to prove his legal ownership of Henry, which he purchased in January 2021 from a private shop in Delhi’s Janakpuri area. Dehadrai also included proof of purchase documentation for the Rottweiler breed dog. These documents comprised a payment receipt, a litter’s registration certificate, and details on the litter’s microchip. Meanwhile, the social media was flooded with various videos in which Mahua Moitra was seen kissing the dog.
Sucheta Dalal in ‘Hum aapke hain kaun?’ mode
On Thursday (19th October), journalist Sucheta Dalal denied knowing Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and helping her in targeting the Adani Group with unverified information. The development came hours after Darshan Hiranandani, the CEO of Hiranandani Group, turned approver in the ‘cash for query’ scandal (also called ‘MahuaGate’) and accused Dalal of aiding Moitra in defaming the Adani Group.
Sucheta Dalal. Image Source: Postcast
In a tweet, the ‘journalist claimed, “The very fact that he has named me makes this whole letter and his ‘solemn’ statements a farce — I don’t know Mahua Moitra and I think she can confirm it. The question of helping her simply does not arise, NOR did she EVER reach out and ask for any help either!”
Dear @bhupendrachaube — the very fact that he has named me makes this whole letter and his 'solemn' statements a farce — I don't know @MahuaMoitra – and I think she can confirm it. The question of helping her simply does not arise, NOR did she EVER reach out and ask for any… https://t.co/YEsXTTFLNt
Several netizens pointed out that Sucheta Dalal, who claimed to not know Mahua Moitra personally, had sent information to the Trinamool Congress MP with respect to Essar Group. They shared a screenshot of the interaction between the journalist and the politician, who is now under fire over the ‘cash for query’ scandal.
Screengrab of the exchange between Dalal and Moitra on X (formerly Twitter)
Sucheta Dalal however claimed that the Twitter interaction was no proof of her personal comaraderie with Mahua Moitra.
Expensive gifts soared the budget of the Mahua drama
OpIndia accessed a copy of the complaint filed by Adv Dehadrai that contained a list of items that Moitra allegedly got in exchange for asking questions in the Parliament. These expensive gifts soared the budget of the Mahua drama.
Apart from luxury items, Advocate Dehadrai claimed Moitra received regular packets of cash in Indian Rupees and Pound Sterling. He further claimed to have seen her counting 20,000 pounds sterling at her residence. A detailed account of the expensive items received by the TMC MP can be read here.
So far, this story has taken many twists and turns of allegations, rebuttals, and emotional breakouts. It remains to be seen how it proceeds further as the Privileges & Ethics Branch of the Lok Sabha Secretariat has yet to hear and record the statements of the parties involved.
Days after BJP MP Nishikant Dubey wrote to the Lok Sabha speaker seeking a probe against TMC MP Mahua Moitra accusing her of taking luxury gifts for asking questions in Lok Sabha, things have rapidly escalated for the West Bengal politician. First, it was revealed that Dupey’s allegations were based on information provided to him by advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, former partner of Mohua Moitra.
After that, the statement by Dehadrai appeared in public, giving detailed accounts of the allegations against Moitra. He said that Mahua Moitra received expensive gifts and other benefits from business tycoon Darshan Hiranandani, in exchange for asking questions in parliament targeting Gautam Adani, Hiranandani’s business rival in several sectors.
It was also alleged that Mahua Moitra had provided her Lok Sabha portal’s login credentials, allowing him to post questions directly on her behalf. While the TMC MP had denied the charges, things exploded on 19 October, when Darshan Hiranandani himself issued a statement, confirming the allegations. He confirmed that he was given Mahua Moitra’s Parliament login and password to post questions. Hiranandani also confirmed that he had given luxury gifts to Moitra, paid for her holidays and travels, helped her in renovating her house etc.
The real estate tycoon said that Mohua Moitra chose to target Gautam Adani to attack Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as there was nothing to target the PM directly. Adding to the allegations, Darshan Hiranandani alleged that Mahua Moitra was getting unverified information from several people to target Adani. He specifically mentioned three names, Sucheta Dalal, Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff. Here, Sucheta Dalal is a well-known journalist, while Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff are advocates.
Mahua Moitra has issued a statement in response to Hiranandani’s statement, alleging that he was forced to issue the statement by putting a gun to his head. However, she didn’t refute charges that she had given him her Lok Sabha login ID and password and also didn’t deny getting gifts from him and asking questions based on his inputs. She added that Cyril Shroff, brother of Shadul Shoff mentioned by Hiranandani, is the Samdhi of Gautam Adani, and the two brothers had a bitter separation of the business. Before mentioning this Samdhi and his Bhai (brother), Moitra had also mentioned her ‘jilted-ex’. Here are the concerned persons and their links to the entire story.
Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff are lawyers, and they run one of the largest law firms in India, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. Shardul Shroff is the Executive Chairman and his wife Pallavi Shroff is the Managing Partner of the law firm, and interestingly, they have an Adani connection. Especially, they were in a bitter fight with Shardul’s brother over the law firm, and that brother is a relative of Gautam Adani.
Shardul Shroff and his brother Cyril Shroff were managing partners of Amarchand Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co, a top law firm. However, there was a rivalry between the two brothers over the firm, and they decided in 2015 to split the company. They reached a settlement following mediation and decided that they would split the law firm established in 1917 by their grandfather.
The dispute was the result of the will by their mother Bharati Shroff, who had handed over her entire share in the law firm to Shardul Shroff. Shardul Shroff had moved the Delhi High Court seeking implementation of the will, triggering a bitter war between the brothers.
However, they finally decided to settle the matter by signing a Family Framework Agreement. According to this agreement, the shares of their mother were divided equally between them. As a result of the settlement, Cyril Shroff chose to not contest the implementation of the will, and Shardul Shroff chose to not go ahead with the lawsuit seeking implementation of the will.
Accordingly, Shardul Shroff now runs Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, while Cyril Shroff runs Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, India’s largest full-services law firm. Now that Darshan Hiranandani has accused Shardul Shroff and his wife Pallavi Shroff of helping Mahua Moitra in the campaign against Gautam Adani by feeding unverified information, it becomes interesting to note that Shardul’s brother Cyril is related to Gautam Adani.
Paridhi Shroff is the daughter of Cyril Shroff and his lawyer wife Vandana Shroff. Paridhi is married to Karan Adani, the elder son of Gautam Adani. Therefore, Gautam Adani and Cyril Shroff are Samdhis, the Hindi word for fathers of spouses.
Karan Adani married Paridhi Shroff in a high-profile wedding ceremony in 2013, which was attended by several well-known guests including Mukesh Ambani and Anand Mahindra. Paridhi Shroff is also a lawyer and is a partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
Given the proximity of Cyril Shroff’s family with Adani and also with his brother, it is possible that Shardul Shroff and Pallavi Shroff had obtained information about the Adani group through Cyril’s firm, which then they passed on to Mahua Moitra.
Hence, there are several people involved in the story involving the ‘gift for questions’ charges against Mahua Moitra. There is Cyril Shroff, the Samdhi of Gautam Adani, and Shardul Shroff, who is the bhai or brother of Cyril Shroff.
There is also a ‘jilted-ex’ in the story, who is none other than advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, who unfolded the entire scam. Mahua Moitra has described him as her ‘jilted ex’, acknowledging their previous relationship. She alleged that the allegations against her were based on lies of a ‘jilted ex’.
There is also a dog in the story, named Henry. Apparently, both Mahua Moitra and Jai Anant Dehadrai are claiming ownership of this pet dog. Dehadrai has alleged that he had bought the dog, and now his ex Mahua Moitra has stolen it. He has even written to the Delhi police, seeking to get the Rottweiler dog back from the TMC MP.
Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra on Friday alleged that the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) agenda is to expel me from the Lok Sabha.
“Chairman Ethics Committee openly speaks to media. Please see the Lok Sabha rules below. How does an “affidavit” find its way to media? Chairman should first do an enquiry into how this was leaked. I repeat – BJP 1 point agenda is to expel me from LS to shut me up on Adani,” Moitra posted on X (Formerly Twitter).
Moreover, Vinod Sonkar, Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee of Ethics on Friday informed that he has received an affidavit from the businessman Darshan Hiranandani regarding the ‘Cash for Query’ scandal which mentions the alleged role played by TMC MP Mahua Moitra in this row.
“I have received a letter/affidavit from Darshan Hiranandani,” Ethics Panel chairman Sonkar said.
“In his 3-page signed affidavit to the Ethics panel, Darshan Hiranandani had admitted to his friendship with the TMC MP Mahua Moitra and claimed that the Lok Sabha Member saw attacking the Adani group as a route to fame, She became Lok Sabha MP in May 2019. She was advised by her friends that the shortest route to fame was by attacking Narendra Modi. She thought that the only way to attack PM Modi was by attacking Gautam Adani and his group as they both come from Gujarat,” Hiranandani’s affidavit read.
Hiranandani had further claimed that Mahua Moitra did share her Parliament Login credentials with him.
“She knew that Indian Oil Corporation was getting into an arrangement with Dhamra LNG a joint venture of the Adani group…..She drafted few questions that she could raise in parliament that would have elements to embarrass the Govt and target the Adani group. She shared with me her email ID as MP, so I could send her information and she could raise the questions. I went along with her proposal,” the affidavit read.
Hiranandani also claims that the TMC MP also demanded favours and gifts from him.
Earlier in the day, the TMC MP welcomed the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee enquiry into the ‘Cash for Query’ scandal and said that she is ready to answer the questions of the panel when the Committee calls her.
In a post on X (former Twitter), Mahua Moitra said,” I welcome answering questions to the CBI and Ethics Committee (which has an absolute majority of BJP members) if and when they call me. I have neither time nor interest to feed an Adani-directed media circus trial or answer BJP trolls. I am enjoying Durga Puja in Nadia. Shubho Sashthi.”
Meanwhile, Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai in a post on X, alleged that attempts were made towards him to withdraw his complaint registered at the Central Bureau of Investigation.
“An attempt was made yesterday afternoon, to coerce me into withdrawing my CBI complaint and letter to Nishikant Dubey, in exchange for Henry (his dog). I flatly refused – will give details to CBI. Messenger is totally innocent – but tells you everything about her,” the Advocate went on to say in what appears to be a dig at TMC MP Mahua Moitra against whom the allegations of ‘Cash for Query’ have been made.
According to BJP MP Nishikant Dubey’s complaint to the Parliament Ethics Committee, Advocate Dehadrai had provided him proof of TMC MP Mahua Moitra’s involvement in the alleged ‘Cash for Query’ scandal.
Earlier businessman, Darshan Hiranandani, who was allegedly behind the said payoffs in the ‘Cash for Query’ scandal responded in a 3-page affidavit and claimed that the Mahua Moitra saw attacking the Adani group as a route to fame.
Questioning the credibility of Darshan Hiranandani’s affidavit, TMC MP Mahua Moitra said, “The affidavit is on white paper, and not an official letterhead or notarized. Why would one of India’s most respected/educated businessmen sign a letter like this on white paper unless a gun was put on his head to do it?
“The contents of the letter are a joke. It has clearly been drafted by some half-wit in the PMO who doubles up as a creative writer in the BJP’s IT cell. It sings paeans to Modi and Gautam Adani while linking every opponent of theirs to me and my alleged corruption,” Moitra alleged.
Alleging that Businessman Hiranandani was “compelled” to sign the letter, Moitra said, “The PMO held a proverbial gun to Darshan and his father’s heads and gave them 20 minutes to sign this letter sent to them. They were threatened with a total shutdown of all their businesses. They were told they would be finished, the CBI would raid them and all government business would stop and all PSU bank financing would be stopped immediately.”
Earlier Nishikant Dubey in his letter to the Lok Sabha Speaker, titled “Re-emergence of nasty ‘Cash for Query’ in Parliament” had alleged “‘serious Breach of Privilege’, ‘Contempt of the House’ and a ‘Criminal Offence’ under Section 120A of IPC” by the Trinamool Congress MP. Dubey claimed that an Advocate, Jai Anant Dehadrai had provided him with proof of a bribe.
In her response to this letter the TMC MP had said that she would welcome a probe by the speaker after he dealt with alleged breach of privilege by other BJP MPs.
(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)
Several incidents of love jihad and atrocities against Hindu girls are reported on a regular basis. A video of one such incident that recently took place in Gujarat went viral on social media. In this video, it is reported that a Muslim youth named Firoz trapped a Hindu young woman Janki in Bhuj city and married her after forcibly converting her to Islam. After the marriage, Firoz asked the girl to have a relationship with other people. The young woman refused to do so, after which, Feroz brutally beat her up. The victim has confirmed in a media interaction that this viral video is true.
According to a report by Zee News, the woman said, “He wants to involve me in the drugs business. Whenever I refuse, he beats me up. He wants to trap me in a dirty business. I am trapped in this. I wish no sisters fall into the trap of such heretics.”
હિન્દુ પત્નીને વિધર્મી પતિએ એવો માર માર્યો કે, મહિલા આખા શરીર પર મારના ચાઠા પડી ગયા…
The victim is facing this problem for the last four years. She is now admitted to a local hospital and she has demanded struict action against Feroz.
The video went viral on social media
A video circulating on social platform X shows a young woman lying down, bearing evident signs of severe physical abuse. The footage shows dark bruising on her back, accompanied by areas where the skin appears to be torn. The disturbing nature of the scenes has sparked widespread concern. Allegations suggest that the young woman, identified as Janki, was ensnared and married by a young man named Firoz.
The X handle named ‘The Analyser (News Update)’ posted this video and wrote, “It’s high time now for our Hindu Girls to leave their obstinacy on their obsession with ‘Mera Abdul alag hai’. In Bhuj, Jihadi Firoz traps a Hindu girl named Janki, converts her & gets married. Then he starts forcing her to sleep with others, makes unnatural relationships & beats her badly.. Just see her condition. Too painful to watch, she was beaten by an iron pipe all night.”
It's high time now for our Hindu Girls to leave their obstinacy on their obsession with 'Mera Abdul alag hai'.
In Bhuj, Jihadi Firoz traps a Hindu girl Janki, converts her & gets married.
Then he starts forcing her to sleep with others, makes unnatural relationship & beats her… pic.twitter.com/OtLi2Nftcb
— The Analyzer (News Updates?️) (@Indian_Analyzer) October 20, 2023
A similar post was also made by English weekly ‘Organiser Weekly’. The post said, “In Gujarat’s Bhuj, a Muslim man named Firoz, allegedly trapped a Hindu girl, Janki, and forced her into marriage and conversion. According to allegations made by Janki, Firoz forced her to sleep with others. The video shows how Janki was beaten up mercilessly by the accused.”
In Gujarat's Bhuj, a Muslim man named Firoz, allegedly trapped a Hindu girl, Janki, and forced her into marriage and conversion.
According to allegations made by Janki, Firoz forced her to sleep with others.
It’s important to note that the video shared by multiple users portrays the girl in a significantly injured state. All sources present identical information, saying that a Muslim youth named Firoz has trapped and subjected a Hindu girl, Janki, to torture in Bhuj. Every part of the girl’s body captured in the footage displays visible signs of injury. Initially met with scepticism from netizens, the veracity of these videos has now been affirmed, as the victim herself has appeared before the media to provide a statement regarding the entire incident.
On Friday, October 20, Canada withdrew 41 diplomats and their families from India. The move came after India gave an ultimatum for revoking the diplomatic immunity of those diplomats who stayed back post-10th of October even after being told to leave.
Diplomatic ties between India and Canada nose-dived after Canada prematurely expelled an Indian diplomat on the 19th of September following baseless allegations by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of the involvement of Indian agents in the murder of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar. India went on to promptly expel a Canadian diplomat in a tit-for-tat response to Ottawa’s expulsion of an Indian official over the case. New Delhi also suspended visa services for Canadian nationals.
The chill in relations between the two countries was even evident at the G20 Leaders’ Summit in New Delhi on September 9 and 10, so much so that even local Canadian media chastised its Prime Minister for being overlooked by Indian and other foreign leaders during the G20 Summit.
As the bilateral relations between Canada and India worsen, several reports suggest that Canada has been desperately trying to diffuse the diplomatic row with India. India, on its part, has made it clear that it is no longer a pushover nation and would not tolerate acts of aggression, hate, and intimidation from the rest of the world.
The Western big powers like the US, Russia and the UK have also when it came to the India-Canada standoff, chosen to steer clear of strongly-worded public statements that would antagonise India, fearing diplomatic backlash from one of the fastest-growing countries in the world and regarded as a potential counterweight to an increasingly assertive China. This is why, when the Canadian Prime Minister sought the support of many countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, to raise the issue with India he was snubbed by everyone fearing diplomatic backlash from India.
The USA, which has a habit of interfering in every nation’s domestic affairs, was also compelled to toe a fine diplomatic line when it came to the India-Canada standoff. While avoiding offending Canada, one of its closest allies, it did not dare to oppose India. This is primarily because, India, in recent years, has advanced to a position where it is seen as a crucial defence partner for the United States and an essential counterweight to China.
The West, including Canada, also has other major things to consider when it comes to India, including strong defence and trade ties that both sides would rather see maintained and strengthened.
Another major reason why the Western nations haven’t taken sides may be that they are aware that India’s demand for parity in mutual diplomatic presence does not violate any international rules. In fact, when Canada accused India of flouting the Vienna Convention in withdrawing diplomatic immunity from 41 Canadian diplomats, India strongly responded to Canada’s statement on the withdrawal of some of its diplomats following India’s prod and said no international norm was violated seeking parity in the mutual diplomatic presence in New Delhi and Ottawa.
Basically, the Canadian presence in India is much more than India’s presence in Canada. Therefore, India has asked Canada to take back the excess diplomats so that it is equal to Indian diplomats in Canada.
Moreover, the West is also completely aware that India is well aware that it has the upper hand and that, if it chooses, it can turn the faucet off and hurt Canada where it hurts the most.
The majority of overseas students studying in Canada are from India. According to statistics provided by the Canadian government, around 40% of the 8 lakh international students studying in Canada at the moment are from India. Indian students pay three to five times more in tuition than Canadians do at private colleges. In a sense, Indians support the entire Canadian private college ecosystem, which will disintegrate if the Indian government decides to stop the outflow. Moreover, as many as 600 Canadian companies, including Bombardier and SNC Lavalin, have a strong presence in India, while more than 30 Indian companies, such as infotech majors TCS, Infosys and Wipro have invested billions of dollars in Canada, creating thousands of jobs.
The above multiple reasons might have also compelled Canada to change its rhetorics. On Tuesday, October 17, Trudeau and Foreign Minister Melanie Joly indicated that they did not want to fuel tensions with India by speaking about them publicly — a sharp contrast with the open claims against India that the prime minister made in parliament.
It is, however, not just in reference to how India has been handling the India-Canada standoff but there are other recent bold decisions India has taken under the leadership of PM Modi like maintaining a neutral stance over the Russia-Ukraine war and India’s strong retaliation to China’s Galwan misadventure, that has strongly signalled to the world that India has a mind of its own and that the days of India caving in to pressure from world powers are long gone by.
When Modi initially took office as Prime Minister in May 2014, nobody anticipated this three-time Chief Minister of Gujarat and outsider to Lutyens’ Delhi would become the nation’s top diplomat and steer foreign affairs like a gifted artist. But like in other areas, PM Modi took the initiative and crafted a new multi-dimensional foreign policy of multiple allegiances and issue-based allegiances, which has elevated India to the position of most sought-after partner on the international stage. After all, who could hug two arch-rivals- US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin with the same panache?
It is difficult to think of another world leader who could tell Putin directly that this is “not the age of war,” and also persuade his foreign minister S Jaishankar to tell the arrogant West that “Europe’s problems are not the world’s problems,” while yet managing to maintain good relations with both sides.
Ukraine-Russia war: How India showed the world that it would no longer buckle under western pressure
The West actually fought tooth and nail to have us on their side during the Russia-Ukraine war. India was under intense pressure from the United States to adopt a position. Despite the pressure, India resisted giving in. India remained impartial in regard to the situation between Russia and Ukraine despite pressure from the West.
India’s toughness in its attitude was warmly received by the West, which was demonstrated by the fact that despite their differences, the U.S. and India have continued to have a strong collaboration in areas such as business, technology, security, and education.
China’s Galwan misadventure showed that India isn’t a pushover
In June 2020, Indian and Chinese troops clashed in the Galwan Valley. The clash was the worst fighting in over four decades and resulted in severe casualties on both sides. The deaths of 20 Indian soldiers was the first time Indian Army personnel were killed on the Line of Actual Control since October 1975.
China, still celebrating its victory in 1962, blatantly misjudged India’s resolve to oppose its land-grabbing strategies this time. Beijing was shocked when the Modi administration chose to protect India’s frontiers.
At first, India and China had multiple rounds of discussions, both officially in Delhi and Beijing and at the level of military commanders on the LAC. However, when it became clear that China would not back down, India made the decision to establish trade limitations on Chinese investors and goods.
The Indian government, led by Prime Minister Modi, authorized the Indian Army to respond to any further escalation on the front lines in a responsible manner. An example of this was the aggressive occupation of specific heights by Indian troops near the Pangong Tso on August 5, 2020, which caught China off guard.
With its handling of China’s Galwan misadventure, India once again demonstrated to the world that it is no longer a nation to be taken lightly.
On Friday (20th October), the Indian Ministry of External Affairs rejected the Canadian government’s claim that India violated the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations by asking Canada to remove 41 diplomats.
In a statement, MEA made it clear, “We have seen the Statement by the Government of Canada on October 19 regarding Canadian diplomatic presence in India. The state of our bilateral relations, the much higher number of Canadian diplomats in India, and their continued interference in our internal affairs warrant a parity in mutual diplomatic presence in New Delhi and Ottawa.”
“We have been engaged with the Canadian side on this over the last month In order to work out the details and modalities of its implementation…Our actions in implementing this parity are fully consistent with Article 11.1 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which states the following,” it further added.
Article 11.1 of the Vienna Convention says [pdf], “In the absence of specific agreement as to the size of the mission, the receiving State may require that the size of a mission be kept within limits considered by it to be reasonable and normal, having regard to circumstances and conditions in the receiving State and to the needs of the particular mission.”
“We reject any attempt to portray the Implementation of parity as a violation of International norms,” the Indian Ministry of External Affairs clarified.
The Background of the Controversy
Canada Foreign Minister Melanie Joly announced on Thursday (19th October) that Canada has removed 41 diplomats and their 42 family members, from India over the ongoing row between the two countries.
“As of now, I can confirm that India has formally conveyed its plan to unethically remove diplomatic immunities for all but 21 Canadian diplomats and dependents in Delhi by tomorrow, October 20. This means 41 Canadian diplomats and their 42 dependents were in danger of having immunity stripped on an arbitrary date. And this would put their personal safety at risk,” Joly said, as she confirmed the departure of Canadian diplomats.
This comes after India suspended visa operations to Canada and called for a reduction in Canadian diplomats in India, calling for ‘parity’, owing to the ongoing diplomatic row between the two nations.
Canadian Foreign Minister said, “…We have facilitated their safe departure from India. This means that our diplomats and their families have now left diplomatic immunities. Keep diplomats safe, no matter where they’re from and where they’re sent to. Immunities allow diplomats to do their work without fear of reprisal or arrests from the country they’re in.”
“They are a fundamental principle of diplomacy and this is a two-way street. They only work if every country abides by the rules. A unilateral revocation of diplomatic privilege and immunities is contrary to international law. It is a clear violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and threatening to do so is unreasonable and escalatory. If we allow the norm of diplomatic immunity to be broken no diplomats anywhere on the planet would be safe,” she said, adding that Canada “will not reciprocate,” she said, according to CTV news.
On Thursday (19th October), Hyderabad Police said that criminal cases had been filed against former cricketer Mohammed Azharuddin and some other former officer bearers of the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA) over alleged misappropriation of funds up to Rs 3.85 crore.
Other than former HCA president Mohammed Azharuddin, those named in the FIR are former secretary R Vijay Anand and former treasurer Surender Agarwal. The case against the accused persons was registered on a complaint lodged by Association Chief Executive Officer Suneel Kante Bose on Wednesday.
The accused persons have been booked with criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy in violation of IPC sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 469, and 120-B.
They have been accused of misappropriating money while procuring gym equipment, cricket balls, fire extinguishers, and bucket seats for the HCA’s premises as well as the Rajiv Gandhi International Cricket Stadium.
The alleged misappropriation of HCA funds and diversion of funds to private agencies under the guise of supplying material to the HCA, which occurred between March 2020 and February 2023, was discovered during a forensic audit conducted by a private firm at the request of the HCA. The forensic audit discovered financial loss, fund diversion, and misappropriation of HCA assets funds. The findings of the audit prompted Suneel Kante Bose to file a complaint against Mohammad Azharuddin and others.
Reportedly, a tender for the procurement of fire safety equipment was given to M/s Firewin Safety Engineers, which quoted Rs 1,88,97,759 (exclusive of taxes) for HCA, however, a quotation acquired by the forensic auditors from a third-party expert was Rs 54,31,014. The audit discovered that the quotation was prepared at 248% higher than the existing prices, showing a significant outflow of funds beyond what should be reasonable for this item.
In addition, the officer bearers chose Sara Sports, whose credentials are questionable, to obtain red and white test balls. It is also claimed that the tender procedure was handled by Mohammad Azharuddin and the then-treasurer Surender Agarwal rather than the tender committee.
Despite the fact that the orders were not delivered, the vendor was paid in full, suggesting that the funds were misappropriated and diverted for their own use which led to a loss of over Rs 57 lakh.
Another case is related to the purchase of bucket chairs from M/s. Excellent Enterprises. Although the agreement stated that 1100 chairs would be delivered and installed within 15 days of the order date, this was manually modified to 45 days. Reportedly, the price of each was inflated to Rs 2,568. Furthermore, only 700 seats were supplied before the deadline, with the remaining 400 chairs getting delivered after around two years. This caused HCA to suffer a loss of Rs 43,11,720.
Additionally, for gym equipment procurement, an order was placed with Body Drench India Private, resulting in a price increase of Rs 1,50,37,112 (excluding taxes and outstanding dumbbell set price), suggesting over-invoicing and loss to the Hyderabad Cricket Association.
Furthermore, police have registered three additional cases in relation to the players submitting forged age certificates to play in underage teams. An investigation has been initiated into that as well.
Meanwhile, Azharuddin in an X post dismissed the accusations levied against him as “false” and “motivated,” and stated that he would respond to them at the appropriate time.
I have seen news reports that have reported that FIR's have been registered against me on complaints by CEO, HCA. I want to state that these are all false & motivated allegations & I am in no way connected with the allegations. I will reply to the motivated allegations against…
“I have seen media reports that have reported that FIR’s have been registered against me on complaints by CEO, HCA. I want to state that these are all false & motivated allegations & I am in no way connected with the allegations. I will reply to the motivated allegations against me at an appropriate time. This is just a stunt pulled by my rivals to ruin my reputation. We shall stay strong and fight harder,” Azharuddin posted on X.
The Congress has humiliated Samajwadi Party President and former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav, an important leader in the I.N.D.I Alliance. His party has been completely ignored in the upcoming assembly election in Madhya Pradesh which is scheduled to take place next month. Never mind the six seats that were promised, not a single seat was assigned to the Samajwadi Party which has left him belittled and furious.
Following the development, he declared that he would not have attended any meetings if he had known that there was no state-level alliance. Notably, he had shared his party’s performance statistics with the former Congress Chief Minister (Kamal Nath) in the state. After discussing with other Samajwadi party leaders until one in the morning, senior Congressmen declared that they were prepared to offer six seats to the former in the state polls.
According to Akhilesh Yadav, the Congress fielded candidates for every seat and left no room for the Samajwadi Party even after this arrangement was established. He mentioned that the matters pertaining to the general election would be seen later and stressed that he would not have attended any meeting or shared any list with the grand old party if he had been aware that there was no cooperation in the states.
He noted, “A former chief minister of Madhya Pradesh asked us about our performance in the state. We told him how many seats we had won and when as well as in which seats we stood at number two. We had a comprehensive discussion. They woke up Samajwadi Party leaders even at 1 a.m. They assured us six seats. However, when the lists were announced, there were zero seats for the Samajwadi Party.”
He highlighted, “If I had known on the first day that there is no alliance of I.N.D.I bloc at the assembly level then I would never have met with Congress. Our party leader wouldn’t have met or shared the list with their leaders. We would take into account if the coalition is only going to transpire in Uttar Pradesh for the Lok Sabha election.”
"अगर ये मुझे पहले दिन पता होता कि विधानसभा स्तर पर कोई गठबंधन नहीं है INDIA का तो कभी मिलने नहीं जाते हमारी पार्टी के लोग और न ही हम कभी सूची देते कांग्रेस के लोगों को। गठबंधन केवल उत्तर प्रदेश में केंद्र के लिए होगा तो उसपर विचार किया जाएगा।"
Furthermore, the Samajwadi Party announced to contest the elections on its own and has fielded its candidates in as many as 31 seats. The state in charge of the Samajwadi Party in Madhya Pradesh Vyaji Gond remarked that the party is working to nominate candidates for each of the 230 seats. The names of thirty-one candidates have been made public till now.
The two parties have been in strife for the past few days, particularly since Ajay Rai, the president of the Uttar Pradesh Congress requested the Samajwadi Party to withdraw from Madhya Pradesh as it “did not have a base” there. He claimed that the battle had always been between the Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party. He added insult to injury and pointed out that the party won only one seat in 2018 and that its sole MLA in the state assembly had later switched to the latter.
He added that his party is preparing to contest all 80 seats in Uttar Pradesh in 2024 which infuriated Akhilesh Yadav who cautioned the Congress against permitting its minor leaders to talk about his party. “The state chief has no authority. He was not there in the meeting held at Patna, Mumbai. What does he know about the INDIA alliance,” the SP supremo asked.
He observed “These people from Congress are involved with the BJP. If I had known that the alliance is not on the state level then I would not have sent SP leaders to Digvijaya Singh. I would not have trusted them if I had known that people from Congress would betray us. Congress should not get statements made by their small-time leaders about our party.”
On 17 October he emphasised that Congress needs to make clear where it stands on the alliance between the partners in the bloc and whether the sharing of seats would be applicable at the state or the national level.
Interestingly, since the announcement of the I.N.D.I Alliance the rift in the opposition parties has become quite apparent. The Congress party and Aam Aadmi Party are at loggerheads both in Delhi and Punjab. Their leaders regularly attack each other on multiple issues. The Congress and the Trinamool Congress are at odds in West Bengal while in Kerala the Communist Party of India (Marxist) which is presently in government there is part of the bloc along with the opposition in the state. Now, the alliance does not appear to be doing well in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
