Home Blog Page 2

Neha Bora’s ‘priests rape in temples’ remark: How Rahul Gandhi and Congress mainstreamed anti-Hindu rhetoric

Balendu Singh Angad
-
0
Neha Bora’s ‘priests rape in temples’ remark: How Rahul Gandhi and Congress mainstreamed anti-Hindu rhetoric

The latest controversy surrounding AISA president Neha Bora is not an isolated outburst. It is the visible tip of a deeper ideological iceberg that the left-liberal ecosystem and the Congress Party have nurtured for decades. Her vulgar generalisation about temple priests and her claim that temples are sites of predation is outright Hindu hatred.

Bora has been repeatedly seen alongside Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, given proximity and legitimacy by the Congress leadership. Rahul Gandhi himself laid the groundwork years ago by equating temple worship with molestation.

Bora’s affiliation with the Congress and the Rahul Gandhi-inspired ecosystem made her rhetoric predictable. This is not a fringe gaffe; it is the party’s hostility to Hindu society speaking through its proxies.

Neha Bora’s Hindu Hate: A calculated assault on the temple

Neha Bora’s hatred for Hindus is widely known. During a recent interview, she said, “Gareeb, shoodra, pashu, nari taadna ke adhikari hai”. She emphasised the word “taadan”, which means chastisement according to her (Her Translation: The poor, Shudras, animals, and women are deserving of chastisement), but her statement is pure propaganda because the Hindi word ‘taadan’ means “To look after/Care”. So the real translation is ” The poor, the Shudras, animals, and women are entitled to care.

She further spewed venom in Hindu hate: “Mandiro main pujaari rape karte hai” (Translation: priests commit rapes inside temples); later, she said women, including Brahmin women, are unsafe under what she called the “Brahmanical system”.

She tried to paint an entire class of Hindu religious functionaries as predators. This is not a call for women’s safety. It is a deliberate desecration of the temple as an institution, using the language of feminism as a sham for Hinduphobia.

Bora the “poster girl” of Rahul Gandhi’s politics and noting that her words echo Gandhi’s own past utterances. The Congress’s reflexive rejection of the charge rings hollow when its own leaders have spent years cultivating exactly this vocabulary. Bora is not a fringe figure; she has been seen alongside Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders during protests.

When a party marches shoulder to shoulder with those who slander the faithful, it cannot later claim plausible deniability. The temple is the beating heart of Hindu civilisational life. To reduce it to a site of criminality, without evidence and with sweeping generalisation, is not critique; it is incitement. And the ecosystem that amplifies such voices while claiming to fight “hatred” stands exposed as the very engine of anti-Hindu prejudice.

Rahul Gandhi’s ‘Mandir’ canard: The original sin

Bora was “inspired by Rahul Gandhi” rests on a specific and damning history. Gandhi reportedly said that “mandiro main ladkiyon ke sath ched chad hoti hai” (Translation: that girls are molested inside temples). This is not a stray remark from a political novice. It is a pattern.

In 2014, reacting to a horrific gang rape in Delhi, Gandhi framed the crime through a bizarre equivalence: people who go to temples to worship goddesses also molest women on buses. The implication of this remark is unmistakable: the temple, the most sacred space in Hindu life, is no better than a site of sexual violence.

He also supported Indian students being taught Phule’s book Gulamgiri (slavery). This book contains highly objectionable references to Hindu scriptures and deities in the name of “deconstructing” the religion. This includes Lord Brahma, who is not only subjected to deeply derogatory language but is also falsely accused of having sexual intercourse with his consort, Goddess Saraswati, who is wrongfully described as his daughter.

This is not progressive politics. It is the recycling of colonial tropes that portrayed Hindu worship as degraded and Hindu men as inherently predatory. Gandhi’s defenders will argue he was speaking about patriarchy. But patriarchy exists in every community and every institution; singling out the temple for this rhetorical treatment while never applying the same sweeping indictment to other religious spaces such as mosques, madrasas, and churches.

Hindus see women as Shakti and worship them as a goddess. while muslims use derogatory terms for women, like maal-e-ganimat (war booty/Sex Slave) mentioned in Surah Al- Ahzab (Chapter 33:50) of the Quran and according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 21:10–14), a Christian can make a war captive non-Christian woman his sex slave.

Students are often sexually assaulted in madrasas, including male students as well. lot of stories around the world have surfaced about Christian pastors molesting children, but Rahul Gandhi never commented on that. It reveals selective contempt, hypocrisy, and outright Hindu hate.

Hindu Hater ‘Pastor Ponniah’ and the ‘Bharat Jodo’ double standard

If further proof were needed that Rahul Gandhi’s commitment to “Bharat Jodo” excludes Hindus, the Bharat Jodo Yatra’s encounter with Pastor George Ponniah provides it. During the Yatra in Kanyakumari, Gandhi met the Hindu-hating Catholic priest and asked him whether Jesus Christ is a form of God.

Ponniah’s reply, captured on video, was that “Jesus is the real God…not like Shakti”. The pastor had a documented history of anti-Hindu provocation; he had been arrested for hate speech and had previously said he wears shoes so that “impurities of Bharat Mata should not contaminate us”.

Gandhi’s defenders called the controversy a BJP “hate factory” invention. But the video was not fabricated. The pastor’s words were not ambiguous. And Gandhi’s decision to platform such a figure, to sit with him, to amplify his voice, to treat him as a partner in “so-called uniting” India, sent a clear message: Hindu sentiment is expendable in the pursuit of vote-bank alliances.

The Yatra was marketed as a so-called healing exercise. For Hindus who watched their goddesses dismissed as false and their motherland insulted, it looked like anything but. A leader who genuinely sought to bridge communities would not choose as his interlocutor a man who had built a reputation on denigrating the Hindu faith. The Ponniah episode was not a media smear. It was a clear hatred towards Hindus and Hindu culture.

The ‘Hindu Terror’ fabrication: Congress’s Hinduphobic agenda

The most enduring indictment of the Congress’s attitude toward Hindus is not a single remark or a single meeting. It is the deliberate, institutional campaign to construct a fictitious category called “Hindu terror” and to pin the worst Islamist atrocity in modern Indian history—the 26/11 Mumbai attacks on the RSS.

During the UPA years, senior Congress leaders, including P. Chidambaram and Sushilkumar Shinde, mainstreamed the terms “Hindu terror” and “saffron terror”. But the rot went deeper. After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Congress leader Digvijaya Singh publicly suggested that the RSS might have been responsible.

A fake claim so perverse that Union Home Minister Amit Shah later recalled it in Parliament as proof of the Congress’s willingness to absolve Pakistan and indict Hindus. Former Mumbai Police Commissioner Rakesh Maria later revealed that Lashkar-e-Taiba had conspired to present 26/11 as a “Hindu terror” plot.

Congress and the terrorists shared an identical agenda in coining the phrase. After the Malegaon blast, the Congress government attempted to paint all Hindus as terrorists, targeting RSS office-bearers in a planned manner.

This is not ancient history. It is the political soil in which Neha Bora’s remarks took root. A party that spent years telling the nation that Hindus are terrorists, that the Sangh, the temple, the saffron flag were synonymous with violence.

The “Hindu terror” thesis was the intellectual scaffolding. Bora’s slander is the finished building. And Rahul Gandhi, who now poses as a champion of constitutional morality, inherited and normalised that scaffolding. His refusal to unequivocally repudiate the “Hindu terror” industry, his silence on Digvijaya Singh’s 26/11 smear, and his party’s continued indulgence of anti-Hindu rhetoric form a continuum of contempt.

DRDO successfully tests the quasi-ballistic Pralay missile off the Odisha coast: All you need to know

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
DRDO successfully tests the quasi-ballistic Pralay missile off the Odisha coast: All you need to know

In a major success for the advancement of India’s defence, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) conducted a successful test of the Pralay missile near Chandipur in Odisha on 3rd November from Launchpad number 3 at the DRDO’s Integrated Test Range (ITR). The quasi-ballistic missile successfully destroyed two artificial targets 500 kilometres away. 

 Why a quasi-ballistic Pralay missile matters 

While the DRDO is yet to issue an official statement about the test, reports say that the tested missile was a quasi-ballistic Pralay missile.  The missile is reported to have achieved Mach-5 speed, which is 5 times faster than the speed of sound, about 6174 km/h. 

Post-launch, Pralay pivots at Mach 1.6 and accelerates upwards. In the terminal phase (near target), it dives at Mach 5+. 

Simply put, a 500-kilometre journey takes about 7-8 minutes, and the terminal phase is so fast that defence systems like the Iron Dome or HQ-9 find it near impossible to track and intercept it, as a quasi-ballistic Pralay missile can change course in the last 30 seconds. 

A quasi-ballistic Pralay missile follows a low trajectory, can alter direction mid-flight, and manoeuvres in the terminal phase.  

Frequent mid-air trajectory changes make it immensely challenging for enemy radar and missile defence systems to intercept the quasi-ballistic missile. 

Notably, Pralay is a surface-to-surface quasi-ballistic missile developed by the DRDO.  It has a range of up to 500 kilometres and can target multiple enemy targets.  

Industrial partners such as Bharat Dynamics Limited and Bharat Electronics Limited significantly contributed to its manufacturing and system integration.  

It employs state-of-the-art guidance and navigation to ensure high precision. The missile is capable of carrying multiple types of warheads against various targets. 

Pralay missile is powered by a solid propellant rocket motor. Solid fuel offers a massive storage benefit as solid fuel can be stored in a ready state for extended periods and launched quickly when required.  

Moreover, a Pralay quasi-ballistic missile can be fired from a mobile launcher, meaning that its launch is not necessarily dependent on a single launcher.  

Reports say that a NOTAM covering approximately 595 km was issued ahead of the test, and residents within a 2-kilometre radius were evacuated before the test. Russia and the United States have already developed systems with similar multi-missile launch capabilities. India has developed this capability using its own indigenous technology. 

A conventional ballistic missile, on the contrary, flies straight up and then back down, with its path known in advance. 

Set to be inducted into both the Indian Army and the Air Force. Such short-range, high-precision weapons can play a significant role if a conflict breaks out along the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan. 

Previous tests of the Pralay missile 

While the first test of the Pralay missile was conducted in December 2021, in July 2025, the DRDO conducted two successful consecutive tests off the coast of Odisha. 

It must be recalled that in December 2025, the DRDO successfully conducted the salvo launch of two Pralay missiles in quick succession from the same launcher off the coast of Odisha.  

“The flight-test was conducted as part of user evaluation trials. Both the missiles followed the intended trajectory meeting all flight objectives as confirmed by tracking sensors deployed by the Integrated Test Range, Chandipur. The terminal events were confirmed by Telemetry systems installed onboard ship, deployed near the impact points,” the Ministry of Defence stated back then. 

‘Revolutionary Love’ when convenient: How the Left celebrates Hindu-Muslim romance but ignores Muslim women’s fight for personal freedom

Shriti Sagar
-
0
‘Revolutionary Love’ when convenient: How the Left celebrates Hindu-Muslim romance but ignores Muslim women’s fight for personal freedom

The definition of ‘revolution’ and ‘rebellion’ seems to change depending on the religious identities of the people involved, at least in the narratives promoted by leftists. A photograph of a girl kissing a Muslim man at the ‘Chalo Dilli’ rally organised at Ramlila Maidan in Delhi on Sunday, 1st November, has gone viral on social media. The photograph was soon portrayed as a symbol of ‘revolutionary love’ by leftists.

What made the incident particularly strange was the way the woman’s religious identity was repeatedly highlighted in these posts. Several users described her as a Hindu girl kissing a Muslim boy, even though the woman identifies herself as an atheist on her Instagram profile. 

Atheist doctor calls herself a Hindu girl to present a kiss as ‘revolution’

The viral image was first posted on Instagram by the girl in the pic, who identified as Dr Aiswariya Ravi. She shared the photograph on her Instagram account with username @thatwitchdoctor on Sunday, 1st November, tagging the man, identified as Sabid Kabir, a CPI(M) member. Despite prominently identifying as an atheist on her profile, she deliberately framed the public act around traditional religious identities to drive home a political point. 

In her caption, she wrote: “A Hindu girl kissing a Muslim guy can cause an uproar in this empire they have built. They have politicised the love we hold. They have politicised the food we eat and the way we dress. They dictate what is right and wrong and the in-betweens. And yet, here we are. Holding the same red flag they have always been against, 🚩🚩 standing for everything they are not, amid a sea of humans who call each other comrades. Love is political. Personal is political. Sanghis who come and cry ‘love jihad under our posts, please see this as a tribute to your hate. Long live rebellion. Viva Revolution.”

The photograph and the caption soon attracted attention on social media, with several leftists sharing the image and describing the kiss as an act of revolution against the RSS, BJP and what they called the politics of hatred. 

One such X user, @RahulSeeker, shared the picture with a well-framed caption, “The strongest picture of today’s protest – LOVE. A Hindu girl kissing a Muslim boy in public and posting it on social media. What can be more radical than LOVE in today’s India? For the last 12 years, those RSS Sanghis dictated what to do, what to eat, whom to love. Now all that is crumbling apart. This is revolutionary. This is rebellion. Long live Revolution.”

The wave of amplification continued as another X account, “Liberal and Atheist Abhilasha,” shared the image to echo the same narrative, framing the public kiss as a direct defeat of political groups, “A Hindu girl is kissing a random Muslim guy at this event, symbolising the win of love over the hate-filled politics of RSS/BJP/Bajrang Dal/VHP, etc.”

Similarly, another X user @Hafsa_fatimah reposted the photograph while using informal vernacular to further highlight the religious identity aspect of the pairing, “Sabid Kabeer with his Hindu Baddie.”

Atheism for the bio, Hindu for the propaganda

A notable aspect of this viral phenomenon lies in how personal identity was conveniently adapted to build a specific political narrative. On her personal social media profile, Dr Aiswariya explicitly identifies herself as an atheist. Yet, when crafting the social media post, she deliberately shed her non-religious identity and adopted the label of a “Hindu girl.”

By doing so, both she and leftists who amplified the post converted it into propaganda. The act of public affection was celebrated as a grand act of defiance specifically because it was presented as a Hindu woman pairing with a Muslim man. This reveals a clear paradox: personal beliefs like atheism are shelved whenever taking up a traditional religious identity offers a more potent weapon for political messaging.

This selective framing exposes a broader hypocrisy within activist spaces. The idea of personal liberty and revolutionary love is passionately defended, but only when it follows a specific, politically useful direction. When the religious identities in an interfaith relationship are flipped, the loud enthusiasm for rebellion and freedom of choice suddenly turns into abuse, violence and hostility.

When a Muslim girl celebrates a Hindu festival, the ‘love is political’ slogan disappears

The public enthusiasm for breaking cultural boundaries of these leftist and so-called seculars disappears remarkably fast when a Muslim woman decides to embrace Hindu traditions or date a Hindu man. In these scenarios, the progressive commentary that usually preaches personal liberty falls silent, leaving women exposed to intense religious fundamentalism and online abuse.

A clear example of this dynamic played out on Monday, November 2nd, when television actor Shafaq Naaz was forced to publicly address a wave of online harassment. The controversy started after she posted photos of her Karwa Chauth celebrations alongside her husband, Mumbai-based businessman Zeeshan Pewekar. Dressed in a traditional red saree with sindoor and bangles, she had captioned her post, “All dressed up for the man who has seen me at my absolute worst. Happy Karva Chauth.”

Even though both Shafaq and her husband are practising Muslims, the simple act of observing a Hindu festival triggered immediate, widespread abuse from online fundamentalists who accused her of betraying her faith. 

Disturbed by the hostility and abuse from Islamists, Shafaq released a video message to directly challenge the intolerance: “Honestly, it’s sad that we’re even having to discuss something like this. And this isn’t about one religion or one community. It goes for everyone. A little more respect, a little more understanding and a little less hate.”

In her video statement, she called out the extreme fragility of those attacking her personal choices and questioned the logic behind such religious gatekeeping: “How does wearing sindoor change your religion? Is your religion so fragile that celebrating another culture or its festival can shake your faith completely? What kind of logic is that? No one has any right to dictate how another person should practice their faith.”

The fact that Shafaq had to repeatedly explain that her husband was also Muslim highlights how quickly personal freedom is condemned when a Muslim woman crosses traditional boundaries. Where was the left ecosystem celebration of cultural harmony here? The silence from self-proclaimed progressives during her ordeal made it clear that their support for personal choice depends entirely on who is making that choice.

Neha Fathima’s relationship with a Hindu contestant becomes a family controversy on Bigg Boss Malayalam.

This aggressive policing of Muslim women is not limited to social media comments; it actively spills over into mainstream media and public life. A striking instance occurred recently during Season 8 of Bigg Boss Malayalam, where contestant Neha Fathima confessed her feelings for her Hindu co-contestant, Tashi Raj (alias Santhosh).

Rather than allowing her to navigate her personal life independently, the show took an unusual intervention. Neha’s parents made an unexpected visit to the stage ahead of the standard ‘Family Week’ specifically to pressure her into quitting the show. 

During a confrontation broadcast to millions, her mother emotionally targeted her decision to open up on camera and asked, “Neha, do you remember us? We don’t think you do. Everyone in the house is playing games, but you’re just hanging on to your emotions. You’re being used by others for their own purposes… We’re the ones who are feeling 100 per cent of the pain.” The episode brought Neha’s relationship with Tashi and her family’s objections into the spotlight.

Sara Ali Khan faces a fatwa over her visit to Kedarnath Temple

The issue of religious freedom becomes even more evident in the case of Bollywood actor Sara Ali Khan, who has repeatedly faced criticism from Muslims for visiting Kedarnath Temple and participating in Hindu religious festivities.

Recently, Maulana Mufti Shahabuddin Razvi Barelvi, national president of the All India Muslim Jamaat, issued a fatwa against her for visiting the Kedarnath Temple. The cleric publicly condemned her prayers as a grave sin under Sharia law, stating, “For any Muslim, whether a man or a woman, to participate in the faith of another religion, offering prayers and performing religious rituals, is considered impermissible (najayaz). Such actions are not allowed.”

This is not the first time Sara has faced criticism for visiting Hindu temples. In 2023, her visit to a Shiva temple in Lucknow with actor Vicky Kaushal and her pilgrimage to Kedarnath attracted hostile reactions from Islamist social media users. Some accused her of committing ‘shirk’, while others questioned her religious identity and asked her to read the Quran.

In 2024, her Ganesh Chaturthi greetings also attracted derogatory comments, abusive remarks and demands for her excommunication from Islam.

Sara Khan faces backlash for marrying Hindu actor Krish Pathak

Another example of online hostility towards Muslim women exercising their personal choices emerged last year when television actor Sara Khan, known for her role in Sapna Babul Ka… Bidaai, faced trolling after marrying Hindu actor Krish Pathak.

Trolls flooded her social media with threats and insults for marrying a Hindu man. In a courageous video response, Sara Khan stood up to the Islamists by emphasising mutual respect: “Krish and I belong to different cultures, but we believe both our religions taught us love. Our families taught us to respect others first and not to hurt anyone… Please learn that any religion does not teach you to put down any other religion or beliefs or disrespect anyone… Any relation with My God is mine, completely mine.”

Hindu men assaulted for being seen with Muslim women

The double standard reaches its most dangerous level on the ground, where Hindu men face severe physical violence, mob harassment, and false accusations simply for being seen in public with Muslim women. While leftists quickly label any Hindu opposition to interfaith relationships as oppression, they consistently turn a blind eye when violent Islamist mobs enforce their own strict religious segregation.

A terrifying example occurred in December 2023 in Davanagere, Karnataka, when a 26-year-old Dalit man named Srinivas gave a lift to a 17-year-old Muslim classmate wearing a hijab. A mob of nearly twenty Islamists intercepted them, dragged Srinivas away, locked him in a banquet hall, and beat him within an inch of his life before dumping his unconscious body in a secluded field. A viral video recorded by the attackers showed them physically intimidating the teenage girl, attempting to forcibly strip off her hijab, and demanding her family’s contact details while violently assaulting Srinivas.

A similar violent confrontation took place in May 2023 at an eatery called Gopika Chaats in Chikkaballapur, Karnataka. A young Hindu man was publicly thrashed by an Islamist mob simply for sitting down to share snacks with his Muslim classmate. Even though the Muslim woman bravely tried to protect him and explained to the crowd that they were just friends, the mob refused to stop the violence and later pressured her family into forcing her to issue a public apology.

This pattern of street-level intimidation is widespread. Near the Bareilly Junction railway station in Uttar Pradesh, a mob barged into a hotel room to interrogate and harass a Hindu man simply because he was staying in the same establishment as a Muslim woman. 

In another viral video shared by radical accounts online, a Muslim mob surrounded a Hindu man riding a motorcycle, forcibly pulled off his helmet, and intimidated the burqa-clad woman riding with him while hurling religious slurs at the man.

Conclusion

The photograph of Dr Aiswariya Ravi and Sabid Kabir has once again brought the selective use of religious identity for narrative building and spreading propaganda. The hypocrisy of the left’s definition of “revolutionary love” becomes impossible to ignore. When an atheist woman uses a Hindu label to post a picture with a Muslim man, the leftists label it as a brilliant act of secular defiance and rebellion.

However, the moment a Muslim woman exercises the same freedom of choice, whether by observing Karwa Chauth, visiting a Hindu temple, marrying a Hindu partner, or simply sharing a ride with a Hindu friend, the rhetoric around “freedom” completely vanishes. In those moments, progressive voices go silent, leaving conservative mobs and Islamists to enforce their rules through harassment and violence. This selective outrage proves that for these activists, love is not actually about individual liberty; it is merely a political tool to be praised when convenient and ignored when it breaks their narrative. 

Kashmir hotels, Dubai based businessman, and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul: What lies behind a web of commercial deals and payments

Nupur J Sharma
-
0
Kashmir hotels, Dubai based businessman, and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul: What lies behind a web of commercial deals and payments

(Editor’s Note: This investigation on Sanjay Kishan Kaul is the first in a series of articles which will explore judicial corruption and impropriety specifically in connection with Sahul Agarwal. The stories are based on whistleblower accounts and documents)

Following is the abridged version of the investigation. The full investigation can be read at Chapter 1 Magazine: LINK

There are some secrets that are known but often unspoken. Not because those who know don’t want to speak about it, but because the price they may pay for breaking the omerta is too high, the consequences too serious. Corruption in the judiciary is one such subject. We often convince ourselves that judges are pristine, incorruptible, and virtuous because acknowledging corruption in the high judiciary essentially means that justice, that people so desperately seek, is often turned into a tradeable commodity by those sworn to righteousness. The truth, however, is often uncomfortable, no matter how much we may want to look away. 

If one works in Delhi, especially as a journalist, one hears several stories. One story you’re bound to hear after you make friends with some chatty folks who love to talk about their connections is how they meet, wine and dine in hotels, cut deals, and walk away with exactly what they want. These “professional” exchanges occur either for cash or kind. And these “deals” aren’t above board. In such circles, the law is often viewed as a highly elastic polymer.  

So, what exactly happens at the Hyatt? Who owns and funds this hotel? What deals are cut, who benefits from these deals and who loses? What do these deals, by those with immeasurable power, say about the state of our Judiciary? Has Justice become a commodity, sold to the highest bidder (or those with files containing dirty little secrets)? Have the Justices been compromised? 

We may not have many answers – yet. But when Hyatt and the entity which owns it are investigated, we do get a glimpse into the underbelly of the justice marketplace. 

This is the story about Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. The same Sanjay Kishan Kaul, who has recently become concerned about the independence of the judiciary and judicial propriety, has connections that raise serious questions not only about his independence, but about his integrity itself. 

The story concerns the properties of Sanjay Kishan Kaul in Srinagar, the hotels he allegedly owns, who seems to have paid to have those properties constructed, his daughter and son-in-law, and a businessman deeply linked to his family. This story concerns an investigation into the said businessman allegedly routing money to construct hotels owned by the family of Sanjay Kishan Kaul. 

Executive Summary

While Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul sat on the Supreme Court of India, his house in Srinagar was being rebuilt as a hotel. His son-in-law’s company now runs it. And the money, the builder and the architect that seem to be behind that hotel venture lead back to one man: Sahul Agarwal, a Dubai-based businessman with almost no public footprint, whom our sources describe as a man with close ties to the judiciary. His wife now controls the Hyatt Regency Delhi, but has exerted significant power in Asian Hotels (North) Limited (AHNL) since at least 2020, owing to family ties to the promoters and one Director. 

Every outside lender to Sanjay Kishan Kaul son-in-law’s company is tied to Sahul Agarwal’s family. So is the company that paid its alleged builder, and so is the client named on its architect’s contracts that OpIndia has accessed through a whistleblower. 

Throughout, the daughter of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul was in court for the Hyatt’s owner, in nearly 300 court orders from 2021. That includes Supreme Court hearings – all of this while her father was a Supreme Court judge himself. After he retired, she appeared for Sahul Agarwal’s mother.

While his daughter represented AHNL (a company that now owns Hyatt and Sahul has been significantly influenced since 2020), Justice Kaul, still a Supreme Court judge, was photographed in Kashmir in 2022 with Sahul Agarwal. 

The year 2022 becomes important. Several transactions, contract notes and threads originate in this year – right around the time Justice Kaul was pictured with Sahul Agarwal in Kashmir. 

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul with Sahul Agarwal in 2022; picture taken in Kashmir
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul with Sahul Agarwal in 2022; picture taken in Kashmir

As a Supreme Court judge, Justice Kaul never disclosed his assets. He has not explained any of this.

The house of Sanjay Kishan Kaul became his son-in-law’s hotel

  • Pratap Villa, in Rajbagh, Srinagar, was registered with Kashmir’s tourism department as a guest house “in the name of Mr. Kanwar Sanjay Kishan Kaul & others”. That is by his own public notice. The registration ran until March 2018, after he joined the Supreme Court in February 2017.
  • Photographs obtained from whistleblowers show the villa being rebuilt in 2022. Justice Kaul was then a sitting Supreme Court judge, and from November 2022 was the court’s second most senior.
  • Kaul Hotels Pvt Ltd was incorporated in 2023, his last year on the bench. His son-in-law, Adit Khorana, owns 99.99% of it. The one remaining share belongs to Bilal Ahmed Sofi, a man with no public trace. The company’s registered office is Pratap Villa.
  • Days after retiring in December 2023, Justice Kaul told ETV Bharat that he had gone back to Kashmir and redone his house for the hospitality sector.
  • In October 2025, he applied to transfer the guest house’s title from “Sanjay Kishan Kaul & others” to “Kaul Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (The Pratap Villa)”.
  • Kaul Hotels’ general manager says the company runs three luxury hotels: at Rajbagh, Nigeen Bagh and Tan marg. Tan Marg is where Justice Kaul has ancestral land, which he went to court in 2007 to protect.

The asset is the judge’s own house. His son-in-law owns the company that profits from it. The company receives large sums of money from Sahul Agarwal fronts.

The man in the photograph with Sanjay Kishan Kaul – Sahul Agarwal

  • OpIndia has a photograph of Justice Kaul with Sahul Agarwal. According to our sources, it was taken in Kashmir in 2022, the same year Pratap Villa was being rebuilt.
  • Sahul Agarwal is reportedly a Grenadian citizen based in Dubai and has almost no trace online. In Delhi’s legal circles, we are told he is described as a wheeler-dealer with contacts in the judiciary.
  • His wife, Shreya Agarwal, has been a shareholder in Asian Hotels (North) Ltd (AHNL), the Hyatt’s owner, since September 2020. That was while the Jatia group ran it. From September 2022 to March 2024, AHNL’s own filings listed her as the relative of one of its directors. The only director that fits is Akhilesh Bhuwalka. He joined the board in June 2020, the quarter before she appeared, and shares three family companies with Sanjay Bhuwalka, who our whistleblower says is her father. When he resigned in May 2024, AHNL stopped describing her as a director’s relative. A court filing in a matrimonial case also describes her as the cousin of Amritesh Jatia, AHNL’s former chairman.
  • In March 2024, she bought 18.9% of AHNL from a Jatia company. In early 2026, AHNL issued ₹765 crore of new shares to her Singapore company, Elana Holdings, under a SEBI route for stressed companies that required no open offer. Together they now hold 64.35%. AHNL’s 2025-26 annual report says it has “no promoter”, and on the same page calls itself a subsidiary of Elana.

Sahul Agarwal’s circle financed the company of the son-in-law of Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Kaul Hotels’ audited accounts list unsecured loans from Adit Khorana himself and from three outside lenders. Each of the three leads back to Sahul Agarwal.

LenderLoan to Kaul HotelsLink to Sahul Agarwal
Evaan Holdings₹66.52 lakh (31 March 2024)90% owned by his parents; his wife is a shareholder. First directors: his mother and Sanjay Bhuwalka. Registered at an address inside the Hyatt Regency.
Angel Expanders₹1.01 lakh (2024), ₹13 lakh (2025)Run by Sumit Shyam Lulla, whom our whistleblower describe as Sahul’s frontman, and his mother-in-law. It later held 4.03% of Hyatt.
Standard Capital Markets₹1.50 crore (31 March 2025)Its MD, Ram Gopal Jindal, sat on the board of Sahul’s company in 2016, when his family bought their shares from Sahul and his father. His son chaired Standard Capital until March 2026. 
  • The swap. In one year, the lenders changed. By March 2025, Evaan’s loan had vanished and Adit Khorana’s own loan had fallen from ₹60 lakh to ₹15 lakh. Standard Capital, absent the year before, now held ₹1.50 crore, about 84% of all unsecured debt. The accounts do not say whether Standard Capital’s money paid off Evaan and Khorana. The timing demands an explanation.
  • The lender’s record. In October 2024, Standard Capital bought a ₹150 crore loan owed by Veer Chemicals. Days later, Veer defaulted for the first time. Sumit Shyam Lulla (Sahul Agarwal’s frontman) and his mother-in-law then joined Veer’s board, and Standard Capital pushed the company into insolvency. Separately, before the NCLAT, the Exclusive group alleges that in October 2023, AHNL’s loan rights were moved to Standard Capital without board approval, and that Sahul’s parents were behind it.

The Hyatt’s owner paid the alleged builder; Sahul’s father-in-law hired the supposed architect

  • The builder. Kaul Hotels owes ₹49.69 lakh to BL Projects, a construction firm. BL Projects’ bank statements (acquired from the whistleblower) show it received ₹1.16 crore from AHNL, the Hyatt’s now owner, in ten payments between April 2022 and July 2023, while Justice Kaul was a Supreme Court judge. Angel Expanders paid it almost ₹4 lakh more. According to its own documents, AHNL has no hotel in Kashmir.
  • The Agarwals were already inside. The Jatia group ran AHNL then, but Shreya Agarwal (wife of Sahul Agarwal) was already on its register, listed as a director’s relative. In October 2022, in the middle of those payments, Evaan Holdings was incorporated with Sahul’s mother and Sanjay Bhuwalka as its first directors, and its registered office inside the Hyatt Regency.
  • The architect. OpIndia holds two contract notes from 2022 by Architecture Discipline, a Delhi firm, sourced from the whistleblower. One is for a 50-room, 90,000 sq ft hotel at Tan Marg (a ₹2 crore fee). The other is for an 18,000 sq ft villa with up to eight houseboats at Nigeen Bagh (₹1 crore, against a ₹15 crore build budget). Both name the client as “Mr. Sanjay Bhuwalka, M/s Sulojay Realty Pvt. Ltd.”
  • Sulojay paid the architect. Sulojay’s own books show Architecture Discipline among its creditors, with ₹40.35 lakh paid. Until June 2022, Sulojay was owned by Bhuwalka and Sahul Agarwal’s parents, who lent it ₹28.30 crore and ₹32.46 crore. Sulojay lent ₹75 lakh to AHNL. After it was sold in June 2022, the NCLAT records that about ₹55.66 crore was paid out to members of the Agarwal family.
  • The sites. OpIndia found no hotel run by Sulojay or Bhuwalka at Tan Marg or Nigeen Bagh as the contract note states. Kaul Hotels’ general manager lists three properties as the hotels he manages. He mentions Raj Bagh (Where Pratap Villa is), Tan Marg and Nigeen Bagh (both mentioned in the Architecture Discipline contract notes). 

The sites in the contract notes are exactly where the Kaul Hotel manager says the hotels are. We suspect the money came from Sahul Agarwal’s circle.

Daughter of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, the Agarwals’ lawyer, on both sides of his retirement

  • Aakanksha Kaul, Justice Kaul’s daughter, appears as counsel for AHNL in nearly 300 court orders from August 2021 onwards. They include Supreme Court hearings in 2022 and 2023 while her father sat on that court, though not on his benches. The Supreme Court’s record of 13 January 2023 lists both her and her husband, Adit Khorana (also the owner of Kaul Hotels), for AHNL.
  • In September 2026, she appeared in the Supreme Court for Kanta Agarwal, Sahul Agarwal’s mother, on three dates. A member of that legal team also represented Sanjay Bhuwalka.
  • For five years, from 2021 to 2026, the judge’s daughter has worked for the Hyatt’s now owner and the Agarwal family, while Sanjay Kishan Kaul was a Supreme Court judge and also, after his retirement.

Essentially, while Sanjay Kishan Kaul sat as a judge in India’s highest court, his daughter was representing a certain company as a lawyer in the same court and it seems like that very company was building/financing high value luxury hotels for the judge’s family.

Measured against the judges’ own code

In 1997, the Supreme Court adopted the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, the code of conduct for India’s higher judiciary.

  • Trade or business. Value 13 says a judge “should not engage directly or indirectly in trade or business”. Pratap Villa was a registered guest house in Justice Kaul’s name while he sat on the Supreme Court. It was rebuilt as a luxury hotel in 2022, while he was still a judge, for his son-in-law’s company to run.
  • Gifts and hospitality. Value 10 says a judge “shall not accept gifts or hospitality”, beyond narrow exceptions for family and friends. If the rebuilding of the judge’s own house was paid for, directly or through his son-in-law’s company, by people tied to Sahul Agarwal, this rule is at the heart of the case.
  • Family at the Bar. Value 4 keeps a judge’s family away from cases he hears. His daughter appeared before other benches, and OpIndia has found no breach on that count. But the code exists to keep a judge’s family and his court apart. Here, his daughter spent years representing a company the family of a man photographed with him had already entered.
  • Assets. From 2009, Supreme Court judges were free to publish their asset declarations, and several did. Justice Kaul, who had publicly declared eight properties as a High Court judge in 2010, did not.

How it unfolded

WhenWhat happenedJustice Kaul was
Before 2018Pratap Villa is a registered guest house in his nameA Supreme Court judge (from Feb 2017)
Sep 2020Shreya Agarwal enters AHNL’s share registerA Supreme Court judge
Aug 2021His daughter starts appearing for AHNLA Supreme Court judge
2022Photographed with Sahul Agarwal (per sources); Pratap Villa rebuilt; architect hired for Tan marg and Nigeen Bagh by Sulojay; AHNL starts paying BL ProjectsA Supreme Court judge
2023Kaul Hotels incorporated; AHNL’s payments to BL Projects continue to JulyA Supreme Court judge, until December
Dec 2023Says he has redone his Kashmir house for hospitalityRetired
Mar 2024Evaan, the Agarwal family company, has lent Kaul Hotels ₹66.52 lakh; Shreya buys 18.9% of AHNLRetired
Mar 2025Standard Capital holds ₹1.50 crore, 84% of Kaul Hotels’ unsecured debtRetired
Oct 2025He applies to move Pratap Villa to Kaul HotelsRetired
2026The Agarwals control the Hyatt; his daughter appears for Sahul’s motherRetired

What the documents add up to

Put the documents side by side and one picture emerges.

While Justice Kaul was a Supreme Court judge, several things happened at once, especially in the year 2022. His house was being rebuilt as a hotel. The Hyatt’s owner, already home to Sahul Agarwal’s wife, was paying a builder that now counts Kaul Hotels among its clients. A company owned by Sahul’s father-in-law and parents was hiring an architect for hotels at sites his son-in-law’s company, the GM says, runs. And his daughter was in court for the Hyatt’s owner.

After he retired, companies tied to Sahul Agarwal financed his son-in-law’s company, and the judge moved his house into it or, the company was moved to his house.

The asset is the judge’s. The company, on paper, is his son-in-law’s. The lenders and the architect’s client trace back to Sahul Agarwal’s circle, and the alleged builder’s paymaster is the company his wife now controls.

That is the pattern of a sitting Supreme Court judge whose family’s private property became financially entangled, through his son-in-law, with a businessman, beginning while he was in office. Whether it was a favour, a payment or a business arrangement, and what, if anything, Sahul Agarwal received in return, are questions only Justice Kaul can answer. OpIndia has found no document showing money paid to him personally, or a judgment of his that favoured the Agarwals. It does not need one to demand answers. A judge of India’s highest court is expected to be above suspicion. On these documents, he is not.

Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion. Justice Kaul has much to explain.

What Justice Kaul must answer

  1. Pratap Villa. It stood in your name and your family’s, and was rebuilt in 2022 while you sat on the Supreme Court. Who paid for that work, and how much did it cost?
  2. Sahul Agarwal. When and where were you photographed with him, and how often did you meet him while you were a judge? Were your family’s Kashmir properties ever discussed with him?
  3. The loans. Did you know your son-in-law’s hotel company was being funded by Evaan Holdings, a company owned by Sahul Agarwal’s parents and registered inside the Hyatt Regency, and by Angel Expanders, run by a man described as his frontman?
  4. The swap. Did Standard Capital’s ₹1.50 crore pay off Evaan’s loan and your son-in-law’s own? Who arranged the switch?
  5. The builder. BL Projects, which Kaul Hotels owes ₹49.69 lakh, received ₹1.16 crore from AHNL while you sat on the court. AHNL has no property in Kashmir. Was any of that money spent on your family’s properties?
  6. The architect. Why was Sahul Agarwal’s father-in-law, through Sulojay Realty, the client on architecture contracts for hotels at Tan marg and Nigeen Bagh, the very sites your son-in-law’s company now runs, and where you hold ancestral land? Are they the same hotels?
  7. Disclosure. While your daughter appeared for AHNL in the Supreme Court, did you disclose your family’s ties to AHNL and the Agarwal family to the Chief Justice? Did you step aside from any matter involving them?
  8. Assets. You declared your Kashmir properties publicly in 2010. Why did you never publish your assets as a Supreme Court judge, while one of those properties was being turned into a hotel? Did your confidential declaration to the Chief Justice mention it?
  9. The transfer. On what terms, and at what valuation, is Pratap Villa being moved to Kaul Hotels? Is your family being paid for it by a company funded through Sahul Agarwal’s circle?
  10. Bilal Ahmed Sofi. Who is he, and why does he hold the one share in Kaul Hotels that your son-in-law does not?
  11. For Adit Khorana. If these loans were payment for legal work, why were they paid as unsecured loans to a hotel company rather than as fees to a lawyer?
  12. Did you introduce any other judges to Sahul Agarwal? Were any judgments ever discussed with him? 

Timeline

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sahul Agarwal and the money: 2022–2025

How the dates are marked

  • No mark: the exact date is known.
  • † Only the month is known. The date is set to the 1st of that month, unless a note says otherwise; the exact date is unknown.
  • ‡ Only the year, or a financial year, is known. The date is set to 1 January of that year, unless a note says otherwise; the exact date is unknown.

2022

DateEventNote on the date
1 Jan 2022 ‡Justice Kaul is photographed with Sahul Agarwal in Kashmir (per sources).We know they met in 2022 but not the exact date, so the date is taken as 1 January 2022.
1 Jan 2022 ‡Pratap Villa is under construction (photographs from local sources) while Kaul sits on the Supreme Court.The photographs are dated only to 2022.
1 Jan 2022 ‡Architecture Discipline’s contract notes: a 50-room hotel at Tan marg (₹2 crore) and a villa with houseboats at Nigeen Bagh (₹1 crore). Client: Sanjay Bhuwalka, Sulojay Realty.The notes are dated only to 2022.
1 Jan 2022 ‡Aakanksha Kaul appears for AHNL in Supreme Court hearings.Hearings during 2022; individual dates not listed.
1 Jan 2022 ‡Sulojay takes unsecured loans from Angel Expanders and Sahul Agarwal’s parents, and lends ₹75 lakh to AHNL.2021–22
1 Jan 2022 ‡Exclusive Capital lends AHNL ₹2.5 crore and ₹1.66 crore.2021-22
14 Jan 2022Exclusive Capital lends Sulojay ₹5 crore, while the Bhuwalka and Agarwal families still own it. 
11 Apr 2022AHNL makes the first of ten payments to BL Projects. 
1 May 2022 †Sanjay Bhuwalka’s loans to Sulojay end, totalling ₹7.47 crore since April 2021.April 2021 to May 2022
2 Jun 2022The Bhuwalka and Agarwal families sell all of Sulojay to Exclusive Motors (Satya Prakash Bagla). Bhuwalka resigns; Bagla and Achal Kumar Jindal take control. 
4 Jun 2022Exclusive Capital lends Sulojay another ₹12 crore. 
30 Jun 2022 †Sulojay pays about ₹55.66 crore to members of the Agarwal family towards their loans (NCLAT).The NCLAT records only that this came after the June 2022 change of management. We have taken it as June 2022, but cannot be sure of the month. Set to 30 June, not 1 June, because the payout followed the 2 June sale.
30 Jun 2022Shreya Agarwal’s AHNL stake rises to 2.08%. Exclusive Capital holds 3% of AHNL and Exclusive Motors 1.25%.Quarter ending June 2022.
25 Aug 2022Ram Gopal Jindal becomes Managing Director of Standard Capital Markets. 
5 Sep 2022Kanta and Suresh Agarwal buy 1,17,325 shares each in Exclusive Capital. 
30 Sep 2022Shreya’s stake reaches 2.98%. AHNL first lists her under “Directors and their relatives”.Quarter ending September 2022.
26 Oct 2022Evaan Holdings is incorporated. First directors: Sanjay Bhuwalka and Kanta Agarwal. Registered office inside the Hyatt Regency. 
9 Nov 2022Justice Kaul becomes the Supreme Court’s second most senior judge. 
28 Dec 2022Exclusive Capital takes over all of IndusInd Bank’s loans to AHNL, including a ₹100.58 crore term loan. 
31 Dec 2022AHNL’s governance filing lists six directors, including Akhilesh Bhuwalka, the only non-independent, non-executive director.Quarter ending December 2022.

2023

DateEventNote on the date
1 Jan 2023 ‡Aakanksha Kaul continues appearing for AHNL in the Supreme Court; Adit Khorana appears alongside her.Hearings during 2023.
1 Jan 2023 ‡Kaul Hotels Pvt Ltd is incorporated in Kashmir. 
13 Jan 2023 A Supreme Court record lists Aakanksha Kaul and Adit Khorana together for AHNL. 
31 Mar 2023The Jatia promoter group holds 50.69% of AHNL.End of FY 2022-23.
21 Jul 2023AHNL makes its last payment in the April 2022 – July 2023 series to BL Projects, totalling ₹1,16,39,064. 
1 Oct 2023 †Allegation by the Exclusive group before the NCLAT: AHNL’s loan rights were assigned to Standard Capital without board approval. 
25 Dec 2023Justice Kaul retires from the Supreme Court. 
29 Dec 2023 In an ETV Bharat interview, Kaul says he went back to Kashmir and redid his house for the hospitality sector. 
31 Dec 2023 ‡Evaan Holdings lends Kaul Hotels ₹66.52 lakh, unsecured.The loan was made in FY 2023-24, but its exact date is unknown, so we have taken it as 31 December 2023. Justice Kaul retired on 25 December 2023. If the money came before that date, Kaul Hotels took it while he was a sitting Supreme Court judge; if after, within weeks or months of his retirement. Only the transaction date, which we do not have, can settle this.

2024

DateEventNote on the date
20 Mar 2024Shreya buys 36,76,700 AHNL shares (18.90%), taking her stake from 2.98% to 21.88%. Suresh and Kanta Agarwala named as acting in concert. Yans sold 20.97% to Shreya and Manohar Tikamdas Ruprell. 
31 Mar 2024AHNL lists Shreya as a director’s relative for the last time.Quarter ending March 2024.
31 Mar 2024The Jatia promoters have diluted their entire stake (AHNL auditor’s report).End of FY 2023-24.
31 Mar 2024Kaul Hotels’ accounts: unsecured loans from Evaan (₹66.52 lakh), Adit Khorana (₹60 lakh) and Angel Expanders (₹1,01,120), about ₹1.27 crore in total. About ₹49.70 lakh payable to BL Projects.Year-end balances; the dates of the loans themselves are not shown.
1 May 2024 †Executive director Ashish Dhanuka leaves AHNL’s board.May 2024
6 May 2024Akhilesh Bhuwalka resigns from AHNL’s board. 
30 Jun 2024Shreya is listed as an NRI, no longer as a director’s relative. Angel Expanders holds 7,84,284 AHNL shares (4.03%).Quarter ending June 2024.
1 Oct 2024 †Standard Capital buys a ₹150 crore loan owed by Veer Chemicals. Days later, Veer defaults.October 2024
1 Nov 2024 † Sumit Shyam Lulla and Pushpa Dutta join Veer’s board; Standard Capital starts insolvency proceedings. 

2025

DateEventNote on the date
1 Jan 2025 ‡Kanta Agarwal is an AHNL shareholder. 
1 Jan 2025 †Angel Expanders pays BL Projects almost ₹4 lakh.The article gives January 2025; the exact date is unknown.
31 Mar 2025Kaul Hotels’ accounts: Standard Capital ₹1,50,03,510 (84.27% of ₹1,78,03,510 in unsecured loans). Evaan’s loan gone; Adit Khorana’s down to ₹15 lakh; Angel Expanders’ up to ₹13 lakh. The ₹49.70 lakh owed to BL Projects carried forward unchanged.Year-end balances.
31 Mar 2025Kaul Hotels’ auditor’s report: Adit Khorana 99.9999%, Bilal Ahmed Sofi one share. Directors: Smita Khorana and Sofi. 
1 Jun 2025 † Tripurari Singh becomes Kaul Hotels’ general manager, opening three hotels at Rajbagh, Nigeen Bagh and Tan marg.From his professional profile
1 Oct 2025 †Kaul applies to Kashmir’s tourism department to transfer the Pratap Villa Guest House from “Sanjay Kishan Kaul & others” to Kaul Hotels. 
16 Oct 2025 AHNL issues its EGM notice for a preferential allotment of up to 2,31,80,000 shares to Elana Holdings. 
28 Oct 2025 Kaul’s application is published as a public notice in Greater Kashmir. 

2026

DateEventNote on the date
March 2026By this date, AHNL has paid BL Projects over ₹2 crore in total, roughly ₹84 lakh more than the April 2022 – July 2023 payments. 

Family connections

To understand this layered investigation better, we are providing family ties for reference. Following this could make it simpler to understand the connections mentioned in the story. 

Family trees and connections
Family trees and connections: How they are linked

The Judiciary in India often mistakes itself for contemporary Gods. They dispense judgements – moral and legal – and the sheep are meant to simply bow their heads and accept their fate – sealed by the Gods in black coats. They expect resolute loyalty and submission, much like the vengeful Abrahamic God who would smite anyone who dares to disobey. Questioning the Judiciary is quite literally akin to religious blasphemy. While in some faiths, one may be rewarded by unbridled violence, when it comes to the Gods in black coats, heathens are smitten with contempt. 

As the saying goes, and we must thank Plutarch for making our jobs easier, Caeser’s wife must be above suspicion. But when it comes to the Judiciary, the multiple wives of Caesar are soaked in the putrid odour of corruption and impropriety. It’s time our Lords and Saviours pick up a soap, wash that odour off their extremities and provide answers to the very heathens they judge. 

‘4000 Bengali-speaking Muslims displaced’: Al Jazeera pushes Muslim victimhood narrative over anti-encroachment drive in Assam’s Dhubri; here’s the truth 

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
‘4000 Bengali-speaking Muslims displaced’: Al Jazeera pushes Muslim victimhood narrative over anti-encroachment drive in Assam’s Dhubri; here’s the truth 

Al Jazeera, the Qatari state-funded Islamist propaganda outlet, has a penchant for giving a Muslim victimhood spin to incidents and administrative actions in India that may happen to involve Muslims. From regular hit jobs against the ‘Hindu nationalist’ Modi government to passing off demolition of illegal structures as target destruction of mosques, Al Jazeera has been consistent in its anti-India and anti-Hindu agenda. In continuation of the Muslim victimhood bogey, Al Jazeera has published a video report, claiming that the recent anti-encroachment drive in Assam’s Dhubri ‘displaced’ 4,000 ‘Bengali-speaking Muslims’. 

The report, published on 3rd November with the headline “Thousands displaced as homes are bulldozed in India’s Assam state”, claims, “Hundreds of homes have been bulldozed in the Dhubri district of Assam state in northeastern India as part of a government campaign to evict families it says do not legally live there. Local media says most of the 4,000 people displaced were Bengali-speaking Muslims.” 

Source: Al Jazeera

According to the Al Jazeera report, the Assam government ‘claims’ the occupants of the targeted properties had been living there illegally.  

Despite the Indian authorities stating that the affected persons had illegally occupied the land in question, Al Jazeera described them as “Muslim Bengalis” of Dhubri, giving the impression that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, led by ‘Hindu nationalist’ CM Himanta Biswa Sarma, was targeting Bengali-speaking Muslim Indians apparently due to their faith. 

Did the Dhubri administration demolish 550 homes to target ‘Muslim Bengalis’, as Al Jazeera claims?  

While Al Jazeera demonstrated unreal dexterity in painting Muslims as the victims of supposed ‘yet another’ crackdown by the ‘Hindu nationalist’ government in Assam, it deliberately skipped key facts about the eviction and demolition drive in Dhubri, knowing that it would dilute its Muslim victimhood propaganda. 

The Assam government or Dhubri district administration did not single out and demolish 550 houses of ‘Bengali-speaking Muslims’ or ‘Muslim Bengalis’.  

The eviction drive in Muslim-majority Gauripur’s Alamganj Part-IX under Dhibru district was carried out to reclaim approximately 650 bighas (nearly 215 acres) of government khas land that was illegally encroached upon by about 550 houses. 

The drive began on 1st November at around 7:30 a.m. 

It targeted the largest contiguous stretch of encroached government land, which was encroached by Muslims. The encroached land was identified in the Gauripur revenue circle. 

Dhubri District Commissioner Dibakar Nath informed that the administration had issued notices to around 700 families occupying roughly 800 bighas; however, 150 bighas were excluded from Sunday’s action because the occupants had approached the court and the matter was sub judice. 

“So far, we are focused on Alamganj Part-IX as the maximum khas land is there. There are a few cases in the High Court, and once those cases are resolved, we can accordingly move forward in other parts,” Nath said. 

In addition to the fact that the demolished houses encroached upon government land, Al Jazeera also chose not to mention that nearly 80% of residents had voluntarily vacated the area after receiving notices, removing their belongings before the bulldozers arrived. 

While official figures placed the number of affected families at around 550, some reports suggested that up to 750 families were removed from the 650-bigha area. The population evicted was estimated at around 4,000 to 4,500 people. 

Reports say that around 19,000 families, most of them Muslim, have been evicted from government land over the past decade. Sunday’s operation in Alamganj was preceded by the eviction of more than 1,100 Muslim families from forests across Nagaon, Hojai, and Golaghat districts in October this year. 

These eviction drives, however, are not arbitrary. The district administration maintains that the drive was conducted after a three-month process involving show-cause notices, hearings, document verification, and a one-month window for residents to vacate. 

Although Muslims form the majority of those affected by the eviction and demolition action, this does not automatically mean that the government is ‘targeting’ Muslims for their religious or linguistic identity. 

Instead of questioning why it is that most of the illegal encroachment of government land is carried out by Muslims, Al Jazeera and Indian Islamo-leftists push the apocryphal ‘persecution of minorities’, ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Muslims under attack’ narrative. 

However, it appears that Al Jazeera is competing with Turkish state-run propaganda portal TRT World over pushing anti-India and anti-Hindu propaganda to malign India’s reputation internationally. 

Al Jazeera and its track record of peddling anti-India propaganda 

Al Jazeera has long been pushing anti-India narratives and platforming anti-Hindu individuals, particularly brown sepoys from India. 

The Qatari state-funded propaganda machinery was part of a systematic campaign to undermine India’s global reputation by depicting it as a “third world nation” overextending its geopolitical influence during the consequential BRICS summit in September 2026. 

Al Jazeera had also raised questions about the West Bengal assembly election, portraying the outcome as a triumph of “hegemonic power” driven by ‘religious polarisation’ instead of the state’s collective mandate for change. 

During the “I Love Muhammad” controversy in October this year, it resorted to showcasing Muslims as victims and held the entire country accountable instead of covering the violence committed by their preferred community. 

The Qatari propaganda rag made no mention of the fact that Muslim youths intentionally desecrated Hindu religious posters during their Barawafaat procession in Uttar Pradesh and then ensued to create unrest in various parts of the nation after authorities took action against the accused. 

Al Jazeera was also caught contextualising Islamist violence in West Bengal’s Murshidabad against Hindus during 2025 anti-Waqf Bill protests.  

It justified the bloodthirsty Muslim mobs in Murshidabad that forced numerous Hindus, including women and children, to abandon their homes for their safety, declaring the rioting resulted from“religious discrimination” and blamed Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the mayhem. 

A Hindu father-son duo, Hargobind Das and his son Chandan Das, were lynched to death by the Islamists amidst the rampage as Hindu houses and businesses were destroyed, as death and rape threats were issued to the community members. 

In 2023, Al Jazeera released a propaganda documentary titled, “India….Who Lit The Fuse?” 

The documentary was nothing but an extensive piece of Muslim victimhood and Hindu vilification propaganda. An interim stay was placed on its telecast, broadcast or release by the Allahabad High Court in response to a petition. 

In early August 2024, when Hindus were being singled out, looted, assaulted, raped and killed, and their temples were destroyed by Muslim mobs in Bangladesh, Al Jazeera attempted to pass off the communally motivated attacks on Hindus as an act of political revenge.  It described criticism of bloodthirsty Muslim mobs as ‘Islamophobic’. 

Al Jazeera’s hatred for India is such that the Qatari propaganda machinery has no qualms about peddling blatant fake news. 

During Operation Sindoor in May 2025, Al Jazeera’s correspondent Kamal Hyder cited Pakistani military sources to announce that Indian Air Force pilot Squadron Leader Shivani Singh was captured by the Pakistan Army after they shot down the Rafale fighter jet. However, Pakistani forces had to clarify that no Indian pilots were in custody and dismissed these unfounded stories as unverified social media discourse.  

Months later, in October 2025, Shivani Singh was seen posing with President Droupadi Murmu at Haryana’s Ambala Air Force base. 

Source: NDTV

Besides anti-India propaganda, Al Jazeera also manufactures and amplifies pro-Hamas narratives.  

In 2024, Israel Defence Forces exposed how Al Jazeera journalists were moonlighting as terrorists associated with Hamas and other such entities, based on intelligence information and documents uncovered in Gaza. 

Noa Argamani, an Israeli citizen who was abducted along with her boyfriend during the Hamas-led October 2023 assault, was discovered at the residence of an Al Jazeera journalist.   

Moreover, the Al Jalaa Building, which contained offices for Al Jazeera and other international media houses, was revealed to be utilised by Hamas, prompting its demolition. In the ultimate irony, the outlet had been awarded by Hamas for its purportedly “impartial coverage” during the conflict. 

Al Jazeera also has connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and has broadcast messages from its late leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Interestingly, a substantial rift appeared between Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Qatar as a consequence of its endorsement of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. 

‘India is secular’: Bombay HC rushes to rescue Dia Mirza’s Diwali sermon, but where is this environmental concern during Bakrid?

Jinit Jain
-
0
‘India is secular’: Bombay HC rushes to rescue Dia Mirza’s Diwali sermon, but where is this environmental concern during Bakrid?

There is something deeply peculiar about India’s secularism discourse. When Hindus celebrate Diwali, they are expected to listen to lectures on pollution, reconsider their traditions and modify the way they celebrate their festivals. When candles are burned, decorative lights are switched on and other forms of festive consumption take place during Christmas, nobody launches a nationwide moral campaign asking Christians to reconsider their celebrations. When thousands of animals are slaughtered during Bakrid, environmental concerns and animal welfare rarely receive the kind of celebrity-driven public sermonising that Diwali attracts.

But the moment somebody questions why Hindus should be lectured about celebrating their own festival, the country’s secular credentials suddenly become a matter of constitutional concern.

The latest example is the Bombay High Court’s intervention in the controversy surrounding actor Dia Mirza’s anti-firecracker video.

On Tuesday, November 3, the Bombay High Court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to restore Mirza’s video promoting an environment-friendly Diwali after the civic body removed it following objections from BJP leaders.

A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Neela Gokhale expressed displeasure over the comments made by politicians, saying it was “disturbed by the stray comments made by some politicians”.

The court reminded everyone that India is a secular country and observed that environmental protection was an issue affecting everybody, irrespective of religion or caste.

“Everyone is breathing the same air, be it anyone,” the bench remarked.

Fair enough. Everyone does breathe the same air. But does the same principle apply when the environmental consequences of other religious celebrations are discussed?

The court could have confined its intervention to questioning why the BMC selectively removed Mirza’s video while retaining similar appeals featuring Madhuri Dixit, Nishigandha Wad and cricketer Ajinkya Rahane. That would have been a perfectly legitimate question about the civic body’s conduct.

Instead, the court chose to invoke secularism and expressed its hurt over political comments.

The larger question, however, is whether secularism requires Hindus to accept unsolicited instructions on how to celebrate their festivals, or whether environmental responsibility should be applied uniformly across communities.

When Diwali becomes an environmental problem, but other festivals escape similar scrutiny

Every year, as Diwali approaches, a familiar exercise begins. Celebrities, environmental activists and public figures start telling Hindus how they should celebrate their festival.

Firecrackers are targeted, traditional celebrations are questioned, and citizens are reminded that their festivities must conform to the environmental expectations of a select group of self-appointed moral guardians.

There is nothing wrong with discussing pollution caused by firecrackers. Air pollution is a genuine public-health concern, and responsible celebrations are worth encouraging. But why does this environmental consciousness become so conspicuous when Hindus celebrate Diwali?

Consider Christmas. Candles are an integral part of several Christmas celebrations, alongside decorative lighting, plastic decorations, packaging and other forms of festive consumption. Candles themselves have an environmental footprint through the materials used in their production and the emissions generated when they burn. Yet nobody expects the courts to intervene or Bollywood celebrities to produce videos instructing Christians on how they should celebrate Christmas.

Then comes Bakrid, when large numbers of animals are sacrificed as part of religious observances.

The environmental consequences of livestock production are hardly a matter of conjecture. The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in its 2023 assessment, estimated that global livestock agrifood systems accounted for approximately 12% of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, using 2015 as the reference year. The assessment includes emissions associated with cattle, buffaloes, sheep, goats and other livestock, covering production and supply-chain activities.

This does not mean that all livestock emissions can be attributed to Bakrid. But it does raise legitimate questions about the environmental footprint of large-scale animal consumption and the need to discuss it honestly.

The Animal Welfare Board of India has also repeatedly issued advisories ahead of Bakrid, asking state authorities to prevent illegal animal slaughter, cruelty during transportation and violations of animal welfare laws. Its June 2023 advisory specifically noted that large numbers of animals were likely to be slaughtered during the festival and called for strict enforcement of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and relevant slaughterhouse rules.

The question is simple: why is there no comparable celebrity-led campaign asking people to examine the environmental and animal-welfare implications of large-scale animal consumption?

Why do we not see Bollywood celebrities recording videos asking people to reconsider wasteful consumption or highlighting the environmental footprint of livestock production during Bakrid?

If the argument is that everyone breathes the same air, then surely everyone should be equally accountable for the environmental consequences of their actions.

Environmental responsibility cannot be a one-way street where Hindu traditions are repeatedly scrutinised while other religious practices are treated as subjects that must not be questioned.

Bombay High Court’s secularism argument raises more questions than it answers

The Bombay High Court’s observation that India is a secular country is hardly controversial. What deserves scrutiny is the context in which the observation was made.

The immediate issue before the court was the BMC’s decision to remove a video after political objections. The civic body had commissioned several celebrities to promote an environmentally conscious Diwali in accordance with judicial directions. Mirza’s video was removed while similar messages from other personalities remained available.

The court was justified in questioning this inconsistency.

However, the controversy also raises a question about the judiciary’s approach to public discourse surrounding religious festivals. Why must every objection to an environmental campaign involving Diwali be framed as a threat to secularism?

There is a difference between opposing pollution-control measures and questioning the manner in which those measures are communicated.

People can support cleaner air while also questioning why a particular celebrity should be appointed to tell them how to celebrate a festival that has been part of their civilisational traditions for centuries.

The court’s observation that it had not seen politicians making similar videos about pollution also deserves some perspective. Public representatives are not environmental campaign managers, and their failure to record awareness videos does not invalidate questions about the consistency of celebrity activism.

More importantly, a court’s observations carry considerable moral and institutional weight. Invoking secularism in a dispute over a civic body’s social media campaign risks shifting the discussion away from the actual issue: whether environmental standards and public awareness campaigns are being applied consistently.

Secularism should guarantee equal treatment of communities, not create an expectation that the majority must constantly defend its cultural practices against public lectures.

If a court wants everyone to breathe cleaner air, it should encourage a consistent environmental conversation across communities. It should not allow the impression to grow that Diwali is uniquely deserving of judicial and celebrity-led moral scrutiny.

Dia Mirza: Bollywood’s environmental crusader has her own record of public sermons

The controversy is also an opportunity to revisit Dia Mirza’s much-publicised environmental activism.

Mirza has positioned herself as one of Bollywood’s prominent environmental voices. She has repeatedly spoken about plastic pollution, sustainable living, climate change and the need for ordinary citizens to change their consumption habits.

However, her interventions have often raised questions about the manner in which she approaches environmental activism and whether she understands the realities of the people she chooses to lecture.

In June 2026, Mirza appeared on Soha Ali Khan’s podcast and narrated an incident involving her five-year-old son, Avyaan, and a coconut water delivery worker.

According to Mirza, the delivery worker had brought coconuts packed in plastic bags and accompanied by plastic straws. Her son objected to the packaging and instructed the worker to take the plastic back, saying that plastic was not allowed in their house.

Mirza appeared to take pride in her son’s environmental consciousness and his willingness to stand up against plastic consumption.

But what exactly was the delivery worker supposed to do?

He was simply delivering an order. He was hardly responsible for deciding how the business packaged its products. If Mirza had an objection to plastic packaging, she could have taken it up with the supplier or chosen an alternative arrangement.

Instead, an ordinary delivery worker became the subject of an anecdote about environmental awareness in a celebrity household.

This is precisely where celebrity activism begins to look disconnected from ground realities. People working ordinary jobs do not necessarily have the power to dictate the packaging policies of the businesses they work for. Environmental responsibility also requires an understanding of their economic circumstances.

Then came another remarkable intervention.

During the same podcast appearance, Mirza made sweeping remarks about men being responsible for climate change and declared that patriarchy was the cause of the climate crisis.

“It is the men in this world. It is the men who have driven climate change, and they are totally responsible for the chaos,” she said.

She subsequently clarified that she was referring to patriarchal systems of domination, extraction and consumption rather than blaming every individual man.

Nevertheless, reducing a complicated global crisis involving fossil fuels, industrialisation, deforestation, corporate emissions and government policies to an ideological explanation raises questions about the substance of such environmental commentary.

There is also the larger question of celebrity lifestyles. Environmental responsibility cannot be measured merely by the number of awareness campaigns a celebrity participates in or the number of public lectures she delivers. It must also involve consistency in everyday consumption and an honest assessment of one’s own environmental footprint.

These episodes do not establish that Mirza personally violates every environmental principle she advocates. But they do expose the limitations of her approach and the disconnect between celebrity activism and the realities of ordinary Indians.

The problem is not that Mirza advocates cleaner air or reduced plastic consumption. These are legitimate concerns. The problem begins when environmental advocacy turns into public sermonising, with celebrities assuming the authority to instruct ordinary citizens on how they should live and celebrate their festivals.

Hindus do not need Bollywood celebrities to explain Diwali to them

There is a recurring pattern in India’s public discourse. Diwali is discussed through the prism of air pollution, Holi through water conservation, Ganesh Chaturthi through immersion-related pollution and other Hindu celebrations through questions about noise, safety and environmental damage.

Some of these concerns are legitimate and deserve attention. Hindu communities can and should explore ways to make their celebrations more sustainable.

But why is the same urgency not visible when other religious practices are discussed?

Why should Hindus be expected to accept lectures about firecrackers while questions about the environmental footprint of other festive practices are often conspicuously absent from mainstream celebrity activism?

Why should an actor’s video become an occasion for the Bombay High Court to remind everyone that India is secular, while the broader principle of equal environmental accountability receives so little attention?

There is no reason why Hindus should be exempt from environmental regulations. But neither should their religious traditions become convenient targets for celebrities seeking to demonstrate their environmental credentials.

The BMC was wrong to selectively remove Mirza’s video if its campaign was genuinely based on public-health concerns. The Bombay High Court was entitled to question that decision. But the judiciary should also be mindful that invoking secularism in such controversies can create an impression that questioning celebrity sermons directed at Hindus is somehow incompatible with India’s constitutional values.

Dia Mirza is free to advocate a cracker-free Diwali. Citizens are equally free to question her approach, examine her record and ask why her environmental sermons appear so selective.

And the Bombay High Court is free to insist that public awareness campaigns should not be withdrawn because of political pressure. But it should also recognise that secularism does not require Hindus to surrender their right to question the manner in which their festivals are portrayed or policed.

If everyone breathes the same air, everyone must be held to the same environmental standards. If every festival deserves respect, no community should be singled out for unsolicited moral instruction. And if environmental activism is to command public respect, those who preach it must demonstrate consistency rather than expect unquestioning acceptance of their sermons.

Medical expenses and the myth of free healthcare in government hospitals

श्रवण शुक्ल
-
0
Medical expenses and the myth of free healthcare in government hospitals

On 27 October 2026, a bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard a compelling public interest petition that laid bare the stark realities of India’s healthcare ecosystem. The court was presented with the case of a drug distributor’s wife receiving cancer treatment at a major private hospital. A chemotherapy injection available on the open market for ₹11,000 was barred from being brought from outside, and the hospital billed it to the patient at a staggering ₹1.30 lakh.

Expressing deep dismay, the bench questioned the justification for such “open plunder” and asked where the money leaving patients’ pockets ultimately goes. During the proceedings, other startling disclosures emerged – such as a saline drip line costing retailers ₹15 being billed at ₹250 by hospitals. Observing that approximately 90 per cent of medicines remain outside price control frameworks, the court bluntly remarked that these are human lives, not commercial trades. While private hospital counsels argued that high margins compensate for public infrastructure gaps, the Supreme Court firmly rejected the notion that institutions can mark up essential life-saving medicines by 100 to 200 times.

Price controls on cancer drugs: progress and persistent gaps

Shortly before these judicial observations, the Union Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers announced a significant policy intervention on 8 October 2026. Trade margins on all non-scheduled cancer drugs were capped at a maximum of 30% over the Price to Retailer (PTR) to determine the MRP, effective from 9 November 2026. According to the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA), the MRPs of 543 cancer-related drug formulations and packs were revised, resulting in dramatic cost reductions for several treatments- such as Palbociclib and Thiotepa.

However, patient rights activists, including Malini Aisola of the All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), note that several extremely high-cost immunotherapy and specialized drugs, such as Keytruda, priced at over ₹2.16 lakh, remain entirely outside this price control ambit. Analysts point out that exemptions granted to certain manufacturer assistance programmes and distributor margins still leave room for substantial markups, keeping financial toxicity a primary concern for cancer care.

Price control on cancer drugs

Decoding healthcare expenses: Insights from the NSS 80th round

While high-profile cancer cases highlight extreme medical costs, everyday health burdens for the masses involve common ailments like fevers, infections, hypertension, and diabetes. The 80th round of the National Sample Survey (NSS) on Household Social Consumption: Health, conducted by MoSPI between January and December 2025 and released in April 2026, offers authentic insights into Out-of-Pocket Medical Expenditure (OOPME).

The survey data reveals a wide chasm between public and private healthcare facilities:

  1. Average Admission Costs: The average out-of-pocket expenditure per hospital admission in a private hospital is roughly seven and a half times higher than in a government facility₹50,508 vs ₹6,631. At the median level, the gap widens to 22 times ₹24,000 vs ₹1,100.
  2. Institutional Childbirth: Deliveries in government hospitals incur an average out-of-pocket cost of ₹2,299 (median ₹801), compared to an average of ₹37,630 (median ₹32,000) in private setups.
  3. OPD Services: Outpatient department (OPD) visits in government hospitals reflect a median expenditure of zero, indicating that more than half of public OPD treatments are entirely free.

Despite these low public OPD costs, the share of total hospital admissions handled by government facilities has dropped to 36.7 per cent, down from roughly 42 per cent in the 2017-18 survey. Analyses by health experts like Oommen C. Kurian of the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) show that roughly two out of every three hospitalized patients now turn to the private sector.

Average & Median OOPME

The three cracks in government hospitals: Medicines, machines and specialists

The preference for private facilities stems from fundamental supply chain bottlenecks within public institutions, often categorized into three major structural gaps:

  1. The medicine window shortage: Essential Drug Lists (EDLs) exist on paper, but Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audits across states like Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Bihar, and Rajasthan highlight frequent stockouts. Procurement delays force patients to secure essential prescriptions from external retail stores at full MRP.
  2. Idle diagnostic equipment: Advanced diagnostic machines (CT scanners, MRIs, and ultrasound units) frequently remain non-operational in district and rural hospitals due to a lack of trained technicians, radiologists, or delayed annual maintenance contracts (AMCs), pushing patients toward costly private laboratories.
  3. The human resource famine: Official data from the Ministry of Health’s Health Dynamics of India reports underscores a severe shortage of specialist doctors in rural Community Health Centres (CHCs). With nearly 80 per cent vacancy rates for surgeons, physicians, obstetricians-gynaecologists, and paediatricians, rural CHCs are unable to perform basic surgical procedures, triggering mandatory referrals to urban medical centers.

Ayushman Bharat (PM-JAY) and the burden of hidden costs

The Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) has expanded coverage significantly empanelling over 38,700 hospitals and extending benefits to senior citizens aged 70 and above. However, evaluation studies submitted to NITI Aayog’s DMEO indicate that roughly 65 per cent of beneficiaries treated in private hospitals still incur out-of-pocket expenses for non-covered items, diagnostics, and medicines. Furthermore, logistical expenses such as private ambulance transport, lodging, food, and wage losses remain outside scheme packages, placing continuous pressure on low-income households.

Conclusion: towards a true right to health

Recent National Health Accounts (NHA) estimates for 2022-23 indicate that government health expenditure has risen to ₹3.85 lakh crore (1.43% of GDP), helping lower the overall out-of-pocket share to 43.4 per cent. Yet, families still bear a substantial portion of day-to-day medical costs directly.

As the Supreme Court aptly noted, healthcare is fundamentally about human lives rather than commercial enterprise. Bridging the gap between policy claims and ground realities will require sustained financial investment in public infrastructure, uninterrupted medicine supply chains, functional diagnostic assets, and adequate deployment of rural specialists to ensure universal and truly free healthcare.

(This report was published on Chapter1Mag. Click here to read the detailed story.)

No Diwali in sight but Delhi’s AQI is above 300: Read how the Hindu festival has been maligned all these years for air pollution

Shriti Sagar
-
0
No Diwali in sight but Delhi’s AQI is above 300: Read how the Hindu festival has been maligned all these years for air pollution

On Monday, 2nd November, Delhi’s air quality deteriorated to the ‘very poor’ category for the first time this season, as a thick layer of smog enveloped the national capital ahead of Diwali. The Air Quality Index (AQI) stood at 307 at 7:05 AM on Monday, according to data from the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The city had recorded a 24-hour average AQI of 261 (“poor”) on Sunday, marking a sharp deterioration from 117 (“moderate”) a day earlier. On Friday, 30th October, the AQI had dropped to just 60 following heavy rainfall, giving Delhi its cleanest October air quality reading in four years. However, the improvement proved short-lived, with pollution levels rising sharply over the weekend.

Delhi’s AQI crosses 300 even before Diwali celebrations

Diwali is just around the corner, but Delhi’s AQI has already crossed the 300 mark, with the capital’s air quality entering the ‘very poor’ category. The city has witnessed a sharp deterioration even before the festival of lights, with no Diwali firecrackers having been burst yet. The AQI had already climbed to 261 on Sunday, placing the city in the ‘poor’ category, before crossing 300 on Monday morning.

The timing of the deterioration has also brought the annual debate around Diwali and air pollution into focus. Every year, Delhi’s AQI is discussed in connection with firecrackers, with the Hindu festival frequently singled out as a major reason behind the capital’s deteriorating air quality. This happens irrespective of whether firecrackers are banned, restricted or permitted in the form of so-called green crackers. 

This year, Diwali falls on 8th November, later than it does in several years. The Hindu lunar calendar has an additional month, known as Adhik Maas, in 2026, which affects the timing of festivals. Consequently, the capital has entered the ‘very poor’ air quality category before the festival itself. 

Over the years, Diwali has become a ‘festival of ridicule’ for liberals and propagandists. Every year, they come out and blame Hindus for bursting fireworks, claiming it worsens the air quality. But this year, with no Diwali in sight yet, Delhi’s AQI is already above 300. This narrative highlights how the leftist ecosystem and media have targeted Diwali and Hindu festivals for years whenever Delhi’s AQI increased after Diwali. 

The selective targeting in previous years is evident in the public commentary from several leftists and social media users:

Rocky Singh, who got famous from a food show, wrote last year just a day after Diwali, “DELHI AIR POLLUTION WAS AT LETHAL LEVELS YESTERDAY”.

Photographer Atul Kasbekar wrote: “In the name of ‘religion’ people in north India are voluntarily destroying their health”.

X user “The Protagonist” wrote: “F**k all of you, pathetic imbeciles for making life miserable. FYI India accounts for about 46% of global asthma deaths, and roughly 200,000 people die each year in India from asthma,” while sharing an image of an asthma inhaler.

X user Jatin Gupta wrote, “Delhi is a city full of buffoons and idiots. The air is unbreathable now because some dimwits think burning crackers = Diwali. Just dumb. Plain Dumb.”

Such remarks reflect how the Hindu festival frequently becomes a target of leftists whenever pollution levels rise during the winter months. By focusing almost exclusively on a seasonal festival that lasts a couple of days, these liberals overlook structural, atmospheric, and year-round contributors to NCR’s pollution, turning a complex environmental crisis into an ideological target. Instead of examining the multiple sources responsible for the capital’s pollution, the annual discussion often turns into a campaign against Hindus celebrating Diwali and bursting firecrackers.

What really chokes Delhi? Multiple pollution sources that are often ignored

The annual targeting of Diwali over Delhi’s pollution crisis also overlooks several facts about the sources responsible for deteriorating air quality. The left-liberal ecosystem frequently focuses on firecrackers while ignoring the impact of vehicular emissions, construction dust, industrial pollution, crop residue burning, waste burning and unfavourable meteorological conditions. These factors combine to create the toxic winter air that Delhi residents experience every year.

OpIndia’s vertical Chapter1 magazine reported the issue in detail, explaining the multiple factors responsible for choking the national capital. 

According to the report, temperature inversion, weak winds, local emissions, and early stubble burning have all had a combined effect. Stubble’s share in Delhi’s PM2.5 was recently put at around 4%, with projections to rise between 8 and 13% over subsequent days. 

In Punjab, 174 stubble burning cases had been recorded by 13th October, against 126 by the same date the previous year. On 18th October, 208 fire incidents were recorded across seven states, with more than half of them concentrated in Punjab.

The situation is similar across international borders. Smoke from forest fires in Indonesia has reached Malaysia and Singapore, pushing PM2.5 levels in Singapore up to 284. Schools have had to be shut in several Malaysian states, including Johor, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, and Selangor, along with Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya. Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim stated that Malaysia is ready to help Indonesia, and asked his foreign minister to convene a meeting of ASEAN environment ministers.

Delhi is not alone in experiencing transboundary atmospheric issues. Even far wealthier, better-equipped cities have had to live through spells of choking haze where the cause lies entirely beyond their control: Singapore, among the most developed cities in the world, breathes smoke originating from fires in another country.

Setting stubble aside, the broader sources of pollution reveal a clearer picture. The most reliable consolidated account is found in an expert report prepared on the Supreme Court’s direction, which the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) discussed at its February 2026 meeting. Experts from the IITs and other research institutions combined studies conducted between 2015 and 2025 into a single common picture, synthesising ten years of research.

Vehicles (Largest Local Source): Vehicles constitute the largest local source of pollution. Different studies attribute different precise percentages depending on counting methodologies. CAQM’s report places the vehicular share at 23% in winter, matching data from Aaj Tak’s analysis. A 2018 TERI-ARAI study put transport’s share at around 28%. According to the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), across multiple studies, vehicles consistently emerge as the largest ‘combustion’ source, accounting for 51 to 53% of Delhi’s local pollution (excluding external smoke and secondary particles). CSE also noted that at the start of winter, gases like nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide rise alongside PM2.5, directly linking them to vehicle combustion and secondary particle formation.

Who contributes how much to Delhi’s air, winter versus summer

Dust and construction: Dust accounts for 15% of pollution in winter and 27% in summer. This includes road dust, soil dust, and construction-demolition debris. In the 2018 TERI-ARAI study, road dust comprised around 8% and construction around 6% of coarse particles (PM10). Dust control remains among the quickest and most cost-effective measures via road cleaning, paving, green belts, water sprinkling, and construction curbs. Public perception aligns closely with this; surveys show people frequently identify construction dust and garbage burning as their primary surrounding concerns.

Industry and power plants: Industry and thermal power plants together account for 9% in winter and 14% in summer. While lower than vehicles and dust, their gaseous emissions contribute to secondary particle formation in the air. In a May 2026 review, CAQM highlighted six thermal power plants failing to comply with rules regarding stubble co-firing, indicating ongoing monitoring gaps.

Local versus Outside (The airshed concept): CSE analysis showed that in 2025, the share of local sources rose from 27.3% in 2024 to around 35%, meaning local shares increased even when external stubble smoke dipped. Experts stress the concept of an “airshed”; air respects no state boundaries, uniting Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and parts of Uttar Pradesh under shared atmospheric conditions. CAQM’s expert report factors in both local emissions and regional transport of pollution.

Meteorological & geographical factors

Wind speed plays a decisive role in pollutant dispersion. When wind speeds drop below 10 KM/Hr, pollution cannot clear out effectively. Delhi’s early warning system flags a low ventilation index and slow winds as primary drivers of elevated pollution. On 30th September, the ventilation index fell below 6,000 square metres per second, signalling unfavourable dispersion conditions. While rain alerts influenced by low-pressure systems over the Bay of Bengal were noted across 15 states, with weather shifts around NCR areas like Ghaziabad and Noida, substantial air quality improvements depend on sustained wind movement. Furthermore, snowfall in the mountains brings cold air into the plains, creating strong atmospheric inversion conditions.

Geography actively works against the National Capital Region. Bordered by the Himalayas, the Gangetic plains act as a structural bowl trapping air. Lower nighttime temperatures increase particle density, causing heavy morning haze well before any festive celebrations take place.

What has the government done to tackle Delhi’s pollution?

The Delhi government and the Centre have introduced several measures to tackle the recurring pollution crisis. These include the Air Pollution Mitigation Action Plan announced in April 2026, the new EV Policy 2026, the Winter Action Plan 2026-27 announced on 29th September and the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) implemented by the CAQM.

The measures focus on reducing vehicular emissions, controlling construction dust, monitoring industrial pollution, preventing waste burning and addressing crop residue burning in neighbouring states. The CAQM has also pushed for cleaner vehicles, stricter industrial emission standards and better monitoring infrastructure across Delhi-NCR.

However, the recurring deterioration in air quality shows that these measures require consistent implementation and coordination between Delhi and neighbouring states. A problem involving multiple pollution sources cannot be resolved by focusing on just one activity for a few days every year.

Conclusion

With no Diwali in sight, Delhi’s Air Quality Index has already hit the 300 mark, proving that the city’s toxic haze is driven by deeper geographic, meteorological, and year-round structural factors rather than a Hindu festival. For years, the leftist ecosystem and media targeted Diwali, framing the Hindu festival as the primary culprit behind the Capital’s suffocating air. 

The current reality, where severe air degradation manifests weeks before the festival due to a calendar shift, exposes the flaws in that narrative. Treating a long-standing environmental crisis as an occasion to malign traditional celebrations by Hindus ignores scientific source apportionment, distracting from the sustained, year-round policy actions required to clear Delhi’s skies.

‘OCI cardholder not at par with Indian citizens’: Bombay High Court pulls up Imran Khan, who joined the CJP protest; actor tenders unconditional apology, gets interim relief on Leave India notice; read details 

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
‘OCI cardholder not at par with Indian citizens’: Bombay High Court pulls up Imran Khan, who joined the CJP protest; actor tenders unconditional apology, gets interim relief on Leave India notice; read details 

On 2nd November (Monday), actor Imran Khan tendered an unconditional apology before the Bombay High Court for joining the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest against the Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar in early October despite not being an Indian citizen. The Bombay High Court stated that Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders are not Indian citizens. However, the court granted interim relief to the actor on the Leave India notice issued by the Foreigners Registration Regional Office (FRRO).

After challenging the Leave India notice, Imran Khan tendered an unconditional apology for participating in the CJP protest 

In his apology, Imran Khan said that he has no association with the organisers of the 10th of October protest and was not aware of the consequences of his participation in the protest.  

The 42-year-old actor submitted that he will not participate in any political protests in India in future. 

The apology came after Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna directed Khan to submit an unconditional apology while hearing his challenge to the Leave India notice issued by the Foreigners Registration Regional Office (FRRO) after the actor’s detention in October 2026. 

As Imran Khan, who is an American citizen, tendered an unconditional apology, the Bombay High Court division bench directed the FRRO to extend the Leave India notice issued against the actor. 

What the Bombay High Court said 

During the Monday hearing, the Bombay High Court bench observed that Imran Khan had no business joining the protest against CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, given he is an OCI cardholder and has no voting rights, let alone any supposed discrepancy in the SIR exercise affecting him. 

The bench reminded the petitioner that an OCI cardholder cannot partake in protests in India and their rights are not on par with Indian citizens. It also declared that such behaviour by OCI cardholders will not be tolerated. 

“Suppose you have participated inadvertently, etc then you need to apologise; without such unconditional apology we will not accept your undertaking… Because you are not even remotely affected by SIR… You have no business there… You need to understand that you as an OCI cardholder aren’t at par with Indian citizens…,” the court orally observed. 

“In our order, we will say that you will give him some time to file his response… He will file his undertaking and unconditional apology etc. because (at) some point of time you will show magnanimity and say this man must live here… Considering the fact that he has been living in our country for all these years and has worked here and got recognition from here, then you must show a big heart,” the court said. 

“Also, we may clarify that an OCI Cardholder cannot criticise or venture into all this by living here…this will not be tolerated…. Go to the USA and participate in protests there and you can even go and cast your vote, but you protesting anything here won’t be tolerated” 

The court questioned Khan’s motive behind his presence at the anti-SIR protests in Maharashtra on 10th October. It asked Khan to make clear whether he voluntarily joined the protest or was there for some work unrelated to the protest. 

“What for were you there? There’s a complete difference between the rights of citizens and OCI Cardholders… You need to clarify whether you were there for protests or for some other work? You will have to categorically make a statement that you had no association with the protests, etc. Because the agitation was with regard to SIR, with which you have no concern at all,” the court said. 

Khan’s representative advocate Venkatesh Dhond stressed that his client has no association with the organisers of the 10th of October protest and went to the protest site in Mumbai ‘out of curiosity’. 

However, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, who represented the Centre, contended that while Imran Khan made ‘curiosity’ claims, on social media, he had “instigated people”. 

The court also drew a parallel with how an Indian citizen would be treated if they joined a protest in the US.  

“Imagine if an Indian citizen does such protests in any other country, take, for example, your country – the US. That Indian citizen would have been sent back to the country on the next immediate flight,” the court stated. 

Moreover, the court also questioned why, if Imran Khan lived in India for most of his life, worked and married here, and even became a noted Bollywood actor here, he did not accept Indian citizenship. 

“Since your childhood you have been here. Why don’t you accept Indian citizenship? You have become a Bollywood star here,” it remarked. 

After hearing arguments of both sides, the court decided that the suspension of Leave India notice shall continue till the FRRO decides the matter after allowing Imran Khan an opportunity to respond to the notice. 

Pertinently, the Bombay High Court reiterated that OCI cardholders have no right to participate in political protests in the same way as Indian citizens. It stated that an apology and undertaking not to participate in any protests in future should not be construed as a green signal to indulge in similar activities. 

The next hearing in the matter will take place on 7th December 2026. 

Imran Khan was detained and booked for participating in the CJP protest 

Actor Imran Khan, an American citizen who holds an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card, was issued a notice to leave India following his participation in the CJP protest in Mumbai’s August Kranti Maidan. His partner, actor Lekha Washington, and his cousin Zayne Marie Khan also participated in the protest. 

Khan’s pictures waving a victory sign inside a police van after detention had gone viral online, suggesting that contrary to his submission in court, the actor’s presence at the protest was not out of curiosity.  

Sharing the photograph of himself inside a police van on social media, accompanied by the caption: “Apparently I’m going for a drive”. 

Source: Imran Khan’s Instagram page

The notice, issued by Mumbai Police, invoked provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, which empowers the government to regulate the entry, stay, movement and departure of foreign nationals in India. 

Notably, Section 7 of the Act empowers the Central Government to issue directions governing the entry, departure, presence and movement of foreigners in the country. Section 29 specifically deals with the removal of foreign nationals from India. 

Under Section 29, the Central Government can order the removal of a foreigner for violating the Act or rules and orders made under it, or based on an adverse security report. Government officers are also empowered to take reasonable measures to enforce such directions. 

OCI scheme 

The Overseas Citizen of India scheme was introduced in 2005. It allows eligible people of Indian origin who hold foreign citizenship to register for OCI status. 

Despite its name, an OCI card does not grant Indian citizenship. OCI cardholders remain foreign nationals, although they enjoy certain privileges, including a lifelong, multiple-entry visa to India, subject to applicable rules. They are also entitled to specified benefits relating to education, property ownership and certain professional activities. 

Source: MEA website

“OCI is not to be misconstrued as dual citizenship. OCI does not confer political rights. The registered Overseas Citizens of India shall not be entitled to the rights conferred on a citizen of India under Article 16 of the Constitution with regard to equality of opportunity in matters of public employment,” the Central government states. 

BMC deletes Dia Mirza’s anti-cracker video after backlash: A look at her history of performative environmental activism and public sermons

Jinit Jain
-
0
BMC deletes Dia Mirza’s anti-cracker video after backlash: A look at her history of performative environmental activism and public sermons

Bollywood actress Dia Mirza has found herself at the centre of a controversy after the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) deleted her anti-firecracker video from its social media accounts following objections from BJP Mumbai president Ameet Satam.

The actress had appeared in a civic awareness campaign urging Mumbaikars not to burst firecrackers during Diwali. However, Satam questioned why the BMC needed to enlist Mirza to tell people how to celebrate a festival deeply rooted in Indian traditions.

“We don’t need lessons on how to celebrate #Diwali from @deespeak. Our traditions are deeply rooted in our culture,” Satam wrote on X.

The BMC subsequently removed the video without offering an official explanation. Interestingly, similar appeals featuring Madhuri Dixit, Ajinkya Rahane and Marathi actress Nishigandha Wad continued to remain online.

After her video was removed, Mumbai Mayor Rity Tawde slammed the actor, saying that she shouldn’t teach Hindus how to celebrate Diwali. Twade also accused her of running a selective agenda and siding with divisive forces.

Mirza has since defended her participation, saying the video was recorded in the interest of public awareness and that air pollution is a public health concern.

But this controversy has brought back an uncomfortable question about the actress’s much-publicised performative environmental activism. Over the years, Mirza has repeatedly used her celebrity status to advocate sustainable living, lecture people about plastic consumption and offer explanations for environmental degradation. But she has often been found not following them herself.

Here is a look at the controversies surrounding Dia Mirza’s environmental activism.

1. When Dia Mirza’s five-year-old son schooled a coconut delivery worker on plastic pollution

In June 2026, Mirza appeared on Soha Ali Khan’s podcast and narrated an incident involving her five-year-old son, Avyaan, and a coconut water delivery worker.

According to the actress, the worker had arrived with coconuts packed in plastic bags and plastic straws. Her son objected to the packaging and instructed the delivery worker to take the plastic back, as it was not allowed in their house.

Mirza appeared to take pride in her son’s environmental awareness and his willingness to stand up against plastic consumption.

However, the anecdote exposed a rather peculiar approach to environmental activism.

A delivery worker is hardly responsible for deciding how a business packages its products. He is merely delivering an order. If Mirza has an issue with plastic packaging, the logical response would be to address the supplier or find an alternative arrangement rather than turn an interaction with a delivery worker into a lesson on environmental consciousness.

The actress appeared to celebrate her child’s intervention without considering the position of the person standing at her doorstep and doing his job.

Environmental awareness is important. But so is understanding the economic realities of people who cannot dictate the packaging practices of the businesses they work with.

2. When Dia Mirza declared that patriarchy causes climate change

Earlier in June 2026, Mirza triggered another controversy during her appearance on Soha Ali Khan’s podcast.

Discussing climate change, she made an extraordinary assertion that men had driven the climate crisis and were responsible for the resulting chaos.

“It is the men in this world. It is the men who have driven climate change, and they are totally responsible for the chaos,” she said.

She also declared that patriarchy was the cause of climate change.

The actress subsequently clarified that she was referring to patriarchal systems of domination, extraction and consumption, rather than blaming every individual man.

However, the original remarks raised questions about the tendency to turn complicated environmental challenges into ideological arguments.

Climate change is driven by several interconnected factors, including fossil fuel consumption, industrialisation, deforestation, corporate emissions and government policies. Reducing this enormous challenge to patriarchy is hardly an adequate explanation.

For someone who frequently speaks about environmental awareness, a more substantive discussion about practical solutions would arguably have been more useful.

3. The environmental footprint of celebrity lifestyles

Mirza has built a public identity around sustainable living and reducing environmental damage. She has frequently advocated limiting plastic consumption and adopting environmentally responsible practices.

But celebrity activism also raises a question that is rarely addressed with sufficient seriousness: what is the environmental footprint of the lifestyles enjoyed by the very celebrities who lecture ordinary people?

Mirza has often seen in luxury automobiles, and there is a video of Mirza driving a motorcycle doing the rounds on the internet.

Environmental responsibility cannot be measured only by the number of awareness videos a celebrity records or the number of campaigns she endorses. It must also involve consistency in everyday consumption.

4. From environmental campaigns to a Diwali lecture: The latest controversy

The latest episode began after the Bombay High Court pulled up the BMC over rising air pollution and its failure to effectively regulate firecracker use.

The court suggested that celebrities should participate in public awareness campaigns without charging fees. Acting on the observations, the BMC approached several prominent personalities, including Mirza, Madhuri Dixit and Ajinkya Rahane.

Mirza’s video urged citizens to avoid bursting firecrackers and contributing to noise pollution.

Satam objected to her inclusion, saying Indians did not need celebrities to teach them how to celebrate their festivals.

Shiv Sena spokesperson Shaina NC also questioned the message, emphasising Diwali’s cultural significance. Union Minister Ramdas Athawale, meanwhile, said that while excessive pollution was a concern, people also had a constitutional right to celebrate their festivals.

Mirza responded that her message was about public health and a healthier celebration, not an attempt to undermine Diwali.

The BMC eventually deleted her video, although it has not explained why similar videos featuring other celebrities remain online.

5. The larger question about celebrity activism

There is nothing wrong with Dia Mirza advocating cleaner air, reduced plastic consumption or sustainable living. These are legitimate concerns, and celebrities can certainly use their popularity to promote public awareness.

But public awareness should not become public sermonising.

Indians do not need to be treated as though they are incapable of understanding their traditions or making decisions about their celebrations. Nor should people working ordinary jobs become convenient examples in stories about a celebrity family’s environmental consciousness.

The same environmental standards that celebrities expect ordinary citizens to follow must also apply to them. Advocacy becomes more credible when it is accompanied by humility, consistency and an understanding of ground realities.

The BMC’s decision to delete Mirza’s video may have settled the immediate controversy, but it has reopened a much larger debate about celebrity activism, cultural sensitivity and the tendency of Bollywood personalities to assume the role of moral instructors.

123...7,678Page 2 of 7,678