The ongoing water war between AAP-ruled Punjab and the BJP-ruled Haryana further escalated after the Punjab government claimed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court that Haryana had overdrawn its quota and was now seeking water for irrigation under the pretext of drinking needs.
The Aam Aadmi Party made this claim before the court on Monday (5th May) during the hearing on a plea filed by the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). This plea sought the court’s intervention against the Punjab government’s obstruction of the release of water to Haryana.
In its plea, the Bhakra Beas Management Board argued that on 1st May, Punjab deployed police personnel to take control of the Nangal Dam and Lohand Control Room Water Regulation Offices. This resulted in the obstruction of the release of 8,500 cusecs of water to Haryana as decided in the board meetings. BBMB’s lawyer Rajesh Garg called Punjab’s action “unconstitutional and illegal”. The senior counsel further alleged that the AAP government’s actions infringed on BBMB’s statutory authority under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966.
The BBMB’s legal representative added that upon confrontation over the takeover of the Nangal Dam and Lohand Control Room Water Regulation Offices, the Punjab government sent a letter to BBMB on 5th May saying that police personnel have been deployed in view of escalating tensions with Pakistan after the Pahalgam attack.
As per the BBMB, in view of the shortage of drinking water in Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi, a Technical Committee meeting was held on 23rd April to decide on increasing water allocation. This involved reallocation of 500 cusecs for Rajasthan and 496 cusecs for Delhi. However, Punjab refused to comply beyond its voluntary offer of 4,000 cusecs. The AAP government in Punjab cited Haryana’s alleged overuse and mismanagement of its water share.
The issue emerged after the Bhakra Beas Management Board decided to release 8,500 cusecs of water to Haryana from the Bhakra Dam. This triggered protests by AAP and a war of words between the two state governments.
AAP argues that Haryana has already received its share of water from the dam, and Punjab should get all the water. Notably, Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Delhi are partnering states that meet their water requirements from Bhakra and Pong dams managed by the BBMB. The board decides the annual quota of water supply to the three states for a cycle from May 21 to May 21 every year. Water purification systemsPakistan travel packages.
As reported earlier, after the meeting, Haryana CM Nayab Singh Saini called Bhagwant Singh Mann, saying Haryana needs additional water. But Mann refused, saying Punjab is already facing a water crisis, and it did not have a drop to spare. Soon after, the Punjab government decided to escalate the matter and refused to release water to Haryana from the dam. The government also ordered increased security at the Nangal dam.
In a significant comment, CM Saini said that if the Punjab government keeps capping water released from the dam at 4,000 cusec, excess water will overflow during monsoon and reach Pakistan. He said that the Bhakra dam reservoir has to be emptied before monsoon so that excess water accumulated during monsoon can be stored in the reservoir.
He said, “It is necessary to empty the Bhakra Dam water reservoir before June so that rainwater can be stored during the monsoon. If there is no space left in the water reservoir, excess water will go to Pakistan via Hari-ke-Pattan, which is neither in the interest of Punjab nor the nation.”
Notably, if Saini’s warning becomes true, it will nullify the impact of the Government of India stopping the flow of water to Pakistan. Because the flow can be stopped only by dams. But if the water overflows the dams because of filled-up reservoirs, then the water can’t be stopped from flowing downstream and reaching Pakistan.
ਭਾਖੜਾ ਬਿਆਸ ਮੈਨੇਜਮੈਂਟ ਬੋਰਡ ਇੱਕ ਚਿੱਟਾ ਹਾਥੀ ਬੰਨ੍ਹਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਪੂਰਾ ਖਰਚਾ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਕਰਦੀ ਹੈ। ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸ ਦਾ ਸਖ਼ਤ ਵਿਰੋਧ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ। ਇਸ ਦਾ ਪੁਨਰਗਠਨ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾਣਾ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ। —- भाखड़ा ब्यास मैनेजमेंट बोर्ड एक सफेद हाथी बन चुका है, जिसका पूरा खर्चा पंजाब सरकार उठाती है। हम इसका कड़ा विरोध… pic.twitter.com/bFIr7S3xOA
Meanwhile, Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann has sharpened his attacks on BBMB. Calling the Board a ‘white elephant’ while addressing the state assembly, CM Mann said, “The Bhakra Beas Management Board has become a white elephant, the entire expense of which is borne by the Punjab Government. We strongly oppose this. It should be restructured. On the basis of humanity, we are already providing Haryana with an additional 4000 cusecs of water. But instead of thanking us for this, they called an overnight BBMB meeting, changed the chairman, and demanded an additional 8500 cusecs of water.”
The United Nations Security Council members raised tough questions for Pakistan at its informal closed door session on Monday, sources in New York told ANI. The 15-nation Security Council held deliberations on Monday afternoon amid growing tensions between India and Pakistan.
There was no statement published by the UN body following the “closed consultations” that was requested by Pakistan, a non-permanent member of the Council whose presidency for the month of May is currently held by Greece.
Sources told ANI that UN Security Council members raised tough questions for Pakistan at its informal closed door session. The members refused to accept the “false flag” narrative planted by the Pakistani side and asked whether the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a proscribed terror organisation with deep ties to Pakistan, was likely to be involved in the terror attack.
Sources said, there was broad condemnation of the terrorist attack and recognition of the need for accountability. Some members specifically brought up targeting of tourists on the basis of their religious faith.
Many members expressed concern that Pakistan’s missile tests and nuclear rhetoric were escalatory factors. Pakistan on Monday conducted a training launch of a Fatah Series surface-to-surface missile with a range of 120 kilometres as part of the ongoing “Exercises Indus”,
Pakistan’s efforts to internationalize the situation also failed. They were advised to sort out the issues bilaterally with India.
Meanwhile, Dawn News has reported that water flows in the Chenab, recorded at the Marala head works, decreased from up to 35,000 cusecs on Sunday to about 3,100 cusecs on Monday morning. Chenab is very important for Pakistan’s irrigation system, as its canals, including the UCC and BRB canals, irrigate a vast tract of agricultural land in Punjab.
India had held the Indus Water treaty in abeyance following the Pahalgam attack and the shortage of water is seen as a likely fallout of that.
In another setback for Pakistan, Lufthansa Airlines on Monday suspended operations via the Pakistani airspace, according to an official release of the German aviation group.
Earlier, India closed its airspace to all aircraft registered in Pakistan and those operated by Pakistani airlines, according to the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA). India issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) confirming the closure of its airspace to all Pakistani-registered, operated, or leased aircraft, including military flights, from April 30 to May 23 (estimated duration).
(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)
A Hindu woman living in Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh has registered a case of love jihad. The victim Hindu woman says that Iqrar Pasha married the victim by posing as Raj Thakur. After marriage, it was revealed that his real name is Iqrar and he is a Muslim.
According to media reports, the victim woman said that the accused Iqrar and his family members are pressurising her to change her religion. The victim told that when she refused, they forcibly fed her meat and beat her up.
The victim woman also said that Iqrar’s brothers raped her and threatened her children with a gun. The victim mentioned that she met Iqrar Pasha in 2022. She told that Iqrar Pasha used to apply tilak on his forehead and pretended to be Raj Thakur and also tied Kalawa on his wrist.
मुरादाबाद-जिले में सामने आया लव जेहाद का मामला, आरोपी इकरार पाशा ने राज ठाकुर बन प्रेमजाल में फंसाया
पीड़िता को मंदिर ले जाकर उसके साथ की शादी, शादी के ढाई साल बाद सामने आई सच्चाई
पहले से शादीशुदा और तीन बच्चों का बाप है आरोपी, पीड़िता ने एसएसपी से की पूरे मामले की शिकायत, SSP… pic.twitter.com/NCBb4IcQBj
— भारत समाचार | Bharat Samachar (@bstvlive) May 5, 2025
The victim said that he befriended the victim by posing as a Hindu and trapped her in his love trap. The accused Iqrar Pasha married the victim Hindu woman in a temple. It has also come to light that he used to perform puja-paath at home so that no one comes to know that he is a Muslim.
The victim further said that Iqrar Pasha did not introduce her to his family for two and a half years after marriage. Getting suspicious, the victim investigated about Iqrar and found out that her husband is not a Hindu but a Muslim. She also found out that Iqrar Pasha is already married and has 3 children.
When the victim protested against this and went to Iqrar Pasha to seek answers, he threatened to kill her and asked her to convert. The woman complained about this in Majhola police station. Hindu organizations have met SSP Moradabad and demanded action in this matter.
SSP Satpal Antil has said that the woman’s complaint will be investigated and appropriate action will be taken.
Israel has launched a massive air strike on Yemen’s Hodeidah Port in response to the Houthi attack on Tel Aviv’s main airport that occurred on Sunday, 04 May. As per reports, as many as 50 bombs have been dropped on the Hodeidah Port in Yemen as Israeli war planes launched a coordinated strike on May 5.
Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu had promised to avenge the Tel Aviv airport attack.
Houthis of Yemen, backed by Iran, have been targeting Israel and Red Sea shipping for months. Most of their missiles targeted at Israel have been deflected by air defence systems so far, except one incident of hitting Tel Aviv city in 2024. The May 4 incident of a Houthi missile falling near Ben Gurion airport was an exception. Soon after Houthis had announced a comprehensive blockade of Israeli air space and declared that they would continue attacking the airports.
The Houthis had also sent emails to major International Airport organisation bodies, asking them to avoid the Israeli airspace as the airports would be constantly on their target.
Reports suggest that around 30 fighter planes were engaged from the Israeli side to bomb the Hodeidah Port and a cement factory nearby. Fuel depots and storage facilities were targeted, causing a massive oil spill and fire on seawater and land.
It is notable here that Yemen lies over 2000 km away from Israel, and the two nations are separated by the entire span of Saudi Arabia’s western coast along the Red Sea. The land distance even includes the breadth of Jordan after the Saudi mainland, still the Houthis have been trying to hit Israel with ballistic missiles for over a year.
Reuters reported that 70% of damage has been sighted at the port’s 5 docks, warehouses and customs area. The air strikes came when two container ships were unloading their cargo.
Yemen’s Hodeidah Port is the second largest port of the country after Aden. It handles 80% of the food supplies coming to Yemen. Houthi official Abdul Qader al-Mortada has stated that Israel should now wait for the ‘unimaginable’ counter attack by the Houthis.
The Houthi-run Saba news agency has reported that one person has been killed and 35 injured in the attack.
On 3rd May, Government of India imposed a blanket ban on all imports from Pakistan. The decision has been taken following the deadly Pahalgam Terrorist Attack that claimed lives of 26 innocent tourists, as Hindus were targeted. Pakistan-sponsored terrorist outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba’s offshoot, The Resistance Force, claimed responsibility for the attack, before taking a U-turn. India has taken several steps against Pakistan since then including revoking visas issued to Pakistani nationals including medical visas, suspending Indus Water Treaty, banning social media accounts of Pakistan celebrities, shutting down port for Pakistani ships and more.
The recent decision to ban imports will intensify the economic retaliation against the hostile neighbouring country. The decisive move covers both direct shipments and goods routed through third countries. With this decision, India has signalled a complete breakdown in trade ties with Pakistan. Notably, while direct imports from Pakistan are minimal, the indirect imports from Pakistan tune to around $500 million via countries like Sri Lanka, UAE, Indonesia and others.
What did India import from Pakistan?
Several products from Pakistan are popular in Indian markets. Top most products from Pakistan include Sendha Namak or Himalayan Rock Salt. It is mined from the Khewra salt range in Pakistan and is commonly used during fasts and in Ayurvedic practices. Despite the religious and health-linked relevance in India, the pink salt originating from Pakistan will not be allowed to enter India.
Similarly, Peshawari chappals and Lahori Kurtas, along with salwar suits and other garments will soon not be available in Indian markets. These products are often marketed by Indian boutiques as exclusive fashion imports.
The hidden trade between India and Pakistan
According to media reports, around $500 million worth of Pakistani goods enter India via intermediary countries like Sri Lanka and the UAE. These products used to come directly via Pakistan; however, the hostile relations between the two countries have resulted in them being channeled through alternate countries. The UAE often repackages and relabels Pakistani dry dates, leather, fruits and textiles before sending them to India. Chemicals from Pakistan come to India via Singapore.
Furthermore, Pakistani cement, soda ash, and raw materials for the textile industry also come from Pakistan via Indonesia. Sri Lanka serves as an alternative country for products like dried fruits, salt, and leather goods.
An estimated $500 million worth of exports reach India through these routes. As India has put a blanket ban on products originating from Pakistan and coming to India via direct and indirect routes, monitoring and identifying these products has become a necessity for the officials. Speaking to PTI, an unnamed official said, “This comprehensive ban imposed by India, including a ban on indirect exports, would enable the customs authorities to prevent Pakistani exports from entering India through circumvention.”
Direct imports from Pakistan are around $0.5 million per year, which is now expected to drop to zero. Notably, the only product that may attract the attention of consumers in India is Himalayan Pink Salt, also known as Sendha Namak, as the majority of it is produced in Pakistan. However, there are other sources from which India can obtain it.
Not to forget, India had imposed a 200% tariff on Pakistani goods in 2019 following the Pulwama attack. Direct trade between India and Pakistan between April 2024 and January 2025 was merely $0.42 million, which mostly included figs, basil, rosemary, and Sendha Namak.
As trade has stopped between India and Pakistan, products that were exported to Pakistan are also halted. These include cotton, organic chemicals, food products, animal fodder, edible vegetables, plastic articles, man-made filament, coffee, tea, spices, dyes, oil seeds, dairy products, and pharmaceutical items, which will create a void in the Pakistani consumer market.
Dry fruits and industrial goods also hit
Dry fruits coming from Balochistan and Peshawar such as almonds, walnuts, figs and raisins were in demand during winters and festival season in India. These too will go off shelves. Furthermore, cotton, confectionery items, optical goods, chemicals, steel and cement were part of the broader trade list between the two countries.
Impact and the road ahead
Pakistan’s economy is struggling and import ban will further push the country to bankruptcy. Domestically Indian markets may experience a temporary disruption in supply of some specialty products such as pink salt or sendha namak, however, alternates for the products are always available in the market. Government of India is likely to push for domestic production of certain products that were imported from Pakistan.
India has sent a strong signal that trade and talks cannot happen if Pakistan continues to sponsor terrorism in India. Cross-border terrorism will be met with unflinching economic consequences for the neighbouring country.
The ‘Sharia Court’, ‘Court of Qazi’, ‘Darul-Qaza’ or ‘Kajiyat’, have no legal recognition and their observations are not legally binding. The Supreme Court of India ruled this on the 28th of April 2025, while hearing the case of a Muslim woman who challenged the Allahabad High Court’s 2018 decision upholding a family court’s decision not to award her any maintenance on the ground that she was the cause of the dispute.
The court gave the woman ₹4,000 in monthly support from the date she first filed the petition, overturning the Allahabad High Court’s decision. Additionally, the husband was ordered to keep providing for the children’s financial needs until they reached adulthood.
Despite being focused on a specific case, the Supreme Court’s ruling upholds a more general constitutional principle: India’s legal system cannot be superseded or overruled by Islamic statements or arbitration through Sharia courts. Although parties may voluntarily choose to abide by such decisions, they cannot be enforced by the law. Most importantly, the Supreme Court minced no words in making it abundantly clear that only Indian courts have the power to make decisions when rights under statutory provisions, like maintenance, are at issue.
“‘Court of Kazi’, ‘Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat’, ‘Sharia Court’, etcetera, by whatever name styled, have no recognition in law,” the Supreme Court bench comprising justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah said.
Compromise in Darul Qaza, divorce in Darul Qaza: The paradox of Sharia courts in a secular country with a full-fledged judiciary
In the present case, the Muslim man named Gaffar Khan had earlier obtained a talaqnama through a Darul Qaza (Qaziyat) in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, and used it to argue against his obligation to pay. The Supreme Court, however, clarified that such forums are not recognised in Indian law and their declarations are not legally binding.
Notably, the couple were both in their second marriage when they tied the knot in 2002. The husband is employed with the Border Security Force (BSF). The couple had two children together. However, their marriage turned bitter later on. In 2005, the husband filed for divorce in the ‘Court of Kazi’, Bhopal, securing a compromise on 22nd November 2005. Under this, the duo agreed to live together.
However, their marriage further declined as the appellant woman named Shahjahan claimed her husband used to beat her, demanded dowry, including a motorcycle and ₹50,000. She also alleged that Gaffar Khan forced her and the children out of their home in May 2008. Subsequently, the husband then sought a divorce again, this time in the ‘Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat’, Bhopal, in September 2008.
However, soon after, the Muslim woman filed a plea with the Family Court seeking maintenance of ₹5,000 a month for herself and ₹1,000 each for their two children. The court, however, decided to grant maintenance only for children since the woman voluntarily decided to leave her matrimonial home. The court had also said that since it was the petitioner woman’s second marriage, there was no question of dowry demands. The matter reached the Allahabad High Court, which alarmingly upheld the Family Court’s ruling, saying that the woman’s separation lacked justification and the Family Court’s observations were not perverse.
Fast forward to 2025, the Supreme Court overturned the Allahabad High Court’s decision and ordered the husband to provide maintenance to the petitioner. In this case, the apex court bench made several observations that negate the legal status of Sharia courts and similar Islamic bodies functioning as a parallel judiciary. This came after Shahjahan moved the Supreme Court challenging the rulings of the lower courts, contending that she was illiterate, had no income and that she was wrongly blamed for leaving the matrimonial home. She disputed the lower court’s reliance on the ‘compromise deed’ and Sharia court divorce.
Supreme Court’s observations regarding the legal status of Sharia Courts
In its analysis of the present case, the Supreme Court observed that the proceedings made several references to bodies such as the “Court of Kazi,” the “Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat,” and the “Sharia Court.” In response, the Court addressed this matter in a “Post-Script” section of its ruling.
Under this, the apex court cited the 2014 Vishwa Lochan Madan vs Union of India case. In that case, the court had undertaken the examination of whether Dar-ul-Qaza is a parallel court and “fatwa” has any legal status. The court had observed that while the adjudication by a legal authority sanctioned by law is enforceable and binding and meant to be obeyed unless upset by an authority provided by law itself, however, the decisions of Dar-ul-Qaza or the fatwa “do not satisfy” any of these requirements. Dar-ul-Qaza is “neither created nor sanctioned by any law made by the competent legislature.”
“Therefore, the opinion or the fatwa issued by Dar-ul-Qaza or for that matter anybody is not adjudication of dispute by an authority under a judicial system sanctioned by law. A Qazi or Mufti has no authority or powers to impose his opinion and enforce his fatwa on anyone by any coercive method. In fact, whatever may be the status of fatwa during Mogul or British Rule, it has no place in independent India under our constitutional scheme. It has no legal sanction and cannot be enforced by any legal process either by the Dar-ul-Qaza issuing that or the person concerned or for that matter anybody. The person or the body concerned may ignore it and it will not be necessary for anybody to challenge it before any court of law. It can simply be ignored,” the Supreme Court said in its 2014 ruling in the Vishwa Lochan Madan vs Union of India case.
In the same ruling, the Supreme Court back in 2014 had also said that the Fatwa or Islamic proclamation has no legal status in our constitutional scheme. Notwithstanding that, it is an admitted position that fatwas have been issued and are being issued. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board feels the “necessity of establishment of a network of judicial system throughout the country and Muslims should be made aware that they should get their disputes decided by the Qazis”.
Excerpt of SC ruling in the Vishwa Lochan Madan case (2014) cited by the bench in its order in the present case
However, the court had observed that a Fatwa is bereft of any legal pedigree and has no sanction in the laws of the land. They are not part of the corpus juris of the State. A fatwa is an opinion; only an expert is expected to give. It is not a decree, nor binding on the court or the State or the individual. Although not legally binding, the Supreme Court had observed that the existence of Darul-Qaza or the practice of issuing Fatwas is not essentially illegal. In addition, the court said that the issuance of a Fatwa should not be objected to as long as it does not infringe upon the rights of individuals granted under the law.
Citing the Supreme Court’s observations made in the 2014 Vishwa Lochan Madan case, the Supreme Court bench recently said that ‘Court of Kazi’, ‘Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat’, ‘Sharia Court’, etc., by whatever name styled, have no recognition in law.
The top court came down heavily upon the approach of the Family Court and the Allahabad High Court of relying on the ‘settlement deed’ presented before the ‘Qazi court’ in Bhopal. The bench stressed that courts cannot rely on the declarations of non-judicial bodies like Sharia courts to decide legal entitlements.
“As noted in Vishwa Lochan Madan (supra), any declaration/decision by such bodies, by whatever name labelled, is not binding on anyone and is unenforceable by resort to any coercive measure. The only way such declaration/decision can withstand scrutiny in the eye of law could be when the affected parties accept such declaration/decision by acting thereon or accepting it and when such action does not conflict with any other law. Even then, such declaration/decision, at best, would only be valid inter-se the parties that choose to act upon/accept the same, and not a third-party,” the recently passed Supreme Court order reads.
The court also slammed the Family Court for its speculative and “baseless” observation that just because it was the petitioner and respondent no-2’s (husband, Gaffar Khan) second marriage, there was no likelihood of a dowry demand. It said that such an observation was “unknown to the canons of law.”
“The family court’s observation that there was no likelihood of dowry demand because it was a second marriage is baseless and contrary to legal reasoning,” the Supreme Court stated.
The court also noted that the Family Court’s assumption that Shahjahan caused the marital discord was based on mere conjecture and was devoid of any evidence.
In the present case, the apex court directed the husband to pay Rs 4,000/- per month as maintenance to the appellant, from the date of filing of the maintenance petition before the Family Court. The maintenance awarded to the children will also be payable from the date of filing of the maintenance petition before the Family Court.
Are Sharia courts ‘supreme’ for Indian Muslims?
Over the years, several Muslim clerics and politicians have issued statements prioritising Sharia over the constitution, with many asserting that Indian Muslims will follow only Sharia. A latest example of this came on 14th April 2025, when Hafizul Hasan, a minister in the Jharkhand government, said that for him, Sharia comes before the constitution. In an accidental moment of truth, Hasan divulged the Al-Taqqiya Islamists often use to fool ‘secularists’, as he said that “We carry the Quran in our hearts and the Constitution in our hands. Muslims walk with the Quran in their hearts and the Constitution in their hands.”
There are around 100 Sharia courts in ‘secular’ India. Back in 2023, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) boasted that there are over 100 Sharia courts in India and that AIMPLB intends to set up such Islamic courts in all of India’s Muslim majority districts. In 2018, too, the Muslim body had said it plans to open Darul-Qaza (Sharia courts) in all districts of the country.
In 2020, AIMIM urged Muslims to disregard the Indian Judiciary and approach Sharia courts to resolve their disputes. This, however, was not shocking as Hamid Ansari, the former Vice President of India, had also once made a similar assertion. He had backed the idea of setting up the Shariat courts in every district of the country, saying that each community has the right to practice its own personal law.
While AIMPLB, Muslim-appeasing politicians and Islamists continue to push Muslims towards resolving their disputes through Sharia-courts or Darul-Qaza, essentially bolstering a parallel judiciary functioning on Islamic religious lines, the Family Court in the Shahjahan vs State of Uttar Pradesh vs others case, treating the compromise deed from the ‘Court of Kazi’ and the Talagnama from Darul-Qaza as authoritative, essentially granted judicial legitimacy to non-judicial Islamic entities. As the Supreme Court observed, this effectively violated the principle that only statutory courts, established under the Constitution of India, can adjudicate disputes. The courts placing reliance on non-judicial entities for settling disputes essentially undermines the country’s secular legal framework while endorsing a parallel judicial system in violation of constitutional principles.
The Allahabad High Court, upholding the same, was even more alarming. If courts themselves would extend legitimacy to the Sharia courts or rely on the declarations of such non-judicial bodies to determine legal entitlements, what would even be the point of existence of the judicial system in India? The Supreme Court’s intervention, however, overturned this miscarriage of justice and reaffirmed the primacy of statutory law while also reiterating that Sharia Courts/Darul-Qaza, Kazi Courts or any such Islamic ‘courts’ are non-legal entities and their ‘rulings’ are not legally binding.
On Saturday, May 3, a 43-year-old woman lawyer Sheetal Bhosale was disrobed, harassed, slashed with a blade, and threatened by two passengers aboard a Mumbai-Indore train. The complainant, a Thane lawyer stated that she entered the general compartment of the 12961 Mumbai Central-Indore Avantika Express after an impromptu decision to travel to Indore. Now, the Palghar Government Railway Police has arrested Imtehaj Abidbhai Odia (28) of Bhavnagar and Rubina Yusuf Pathan (43) of Surat on 4th May.
The victim stated that Rubina Pathan got into a confrontation with her shortly after the train left on its journey. According to The Free Press Journal, a disagreement over religious symbols escalated the dispute as the Muslim woman took issue with the religious symbols (a rudraksha bracelet and a bangle engraved with the name of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj) worn by Bhosale. “Wearing rudraksha is nonsense,” she stated to which the latter replied, “Do I say anything about your burqa? Then why are you offended by my beads?” The argument then descended into violence.
The victim went to use the restroom at approximately 9:45 pm as the train passed through Saphale. Upon her return, she discovered Rubina Yusuf Pathan searching through and discarding items from her suitcase. When questioned, Rubina alleged that the lawyer had stolen her purse and reportedly pulled down her pants in an attempt to search for missing Aadhaar and PAN cards in front of everyone, while abusing her.
BREAKING:
Advocate Shital Bhosale allegedly attacked with knives by 4 Muslim men and a Muslim women aboard the Avantika Express—her only “crime”?
Wearing a Rudraksha Mala & a Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj tattoo.
An officer revealed to Hindustan Times, “When Rubina did not find the identity cards, she attacked the lawyer with a sharp object.” She drew a knife and cut the latter’s forearms.
During the assault, the accused even threatened to use a key to pierce her neck. “The two accused pushed the lawyer against the window and kept assaulting her, causing injuries to her neck and lips. They also prevented other passengers from taking photographs or videos during the incident,” the official mentioned.
During the incident, the accused called the GRP to complain about the lawyer. A GRP team then stopped the train at Valsad station and found that she had a serious cut on her arm and was bleeding profusely. After her wound was treated, the authorities arrested the pair of accused and sent them to Palghar along with the lawyer. The attorney filed a case against the two in Palghar, stating that they had beaten her and taken ₹1,500 from her handbag. She added that her golden ring went missing.
The accused have been booked in accordance with pertinent Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita sections including section 74 (assault or use of criminal force to women), 118 (1) (voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), and 351 (2) (criminal intimidation punishment).
The complainant charged that a house guard at the Vapi railway station ignored her repeated pleas for assistance. Staff from the Valsad Railway Police only stepped in after she called the railway helpline. Moreover, she stated that Imtehaj Abidbhai Odia was harassing and causing annoyance to other passengers while intoxicated.
On Sunday (4th April), the family of the deceased Haragobindo Das wrote to the West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose, narrating how they are being threatened by Trinamool Congress (TMC) goons and the police.
For the unversed, Harogobindo Das (70) and his son Chandan Das (40) were killed on 11th April this year by Muslim rioters opposing the recently enacted Waqf Amendment Act. A total of 4 extremists, namely Kalu Nadar, Dildar Nadar, Inzmam Ul Haque and Ziaul Sheikh, were arrested in connection with the murder of the father-son duo.
The wife of Haragobindo Das, Parul, and daughter-in-law Pinki wrote a 4-page letter to CV Ananda Bose requesting to make travel arrangements to the Calcutta High Court, where the duo wanted to file a petition.
The letter read, “We, the two widows of Haragobindo Das and Chandan Das, are writing to you with a broken heart and trembling hands, seeking justice and ensuring security. We are writing this from a hidden location, not only fearing the threats of the ruling party but also the police who are continually threatening us.”
The tragic deaths of Late Haragobinda Das and Late Chandan Das in Jafarabad, Samsherganj, Murshidabad, are a heartbreaking reminder of the fragile safety of our Sanatani community in WB. The WB Government, under Mamata Banerjee, must be held accountable for failing to ensure the… pic.twitter.com/YwRNI7hnD9
According to Parul and Pinki Das, a team from the Bidhannagar police station came to abduct them from Salt Lake BG Block.
They informed, “There were at least 40 uniformed police personnel and that apart there were several police personnel in plain clothes. They started shouting, threatening and hurling abuses and despite us saying that we will not open the door, in a fit of rage they broke open the doors, damaged the property and barged inside the house where we were camping.”
The Muslim-dominated Murshidabad district has witnessed large-scale incidents of violence, vandalism, arson and targeted attacks against the Hindu community on 11th April) in the garb of protests against the newly enacted Waqf Amendment Act.
OpIndia has reported in detail how Hindus were selectively targeted, including their homes, shops and temples. The carnage began soon after Jumma Namaz on 11th April in the name of ‘protests’ against the new Waqf law and continued till 12th April.
As grief gives way to fury, a seething India finds itself once again confronting the reality of jihadist terror nurtured across its western border. Decades of Pakistani complicity in fomenting violence have brought the nation to a boiling point. New Delhi now pushes for Pakistan’s diplomatic isolation, while quietly weighing tougher, more decisive countermeasures.
The trigger this time—a horrifying act of savagery in Pahalgam. Hindu tourists were hunted down and executed in cold blood, reportedly after being religiously profiled. Some were even forced to disrobe to confirm circumcision—a grotesque ritual of hate. The brutal nature of the killings, the calculated targeting, and the indignity inflicted on the victims have ignited nationwide outrage. India is no longer just mourning—it is demanding justice, and more than that, retribution.
Yet, amid this national reckoning, the political knives are out. Some Congress leaders, instead of standing with the nation, have chosen to mock and question the government. Former Punjab Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi cast doubts on the Balakot airstrikes. Congress leader Ajay Rai went further, waving a toy Rafale jet adorned with lemons and chilies, making a mockery of national security.
It is political theatre at its worst.
Worse still is the amnesia. In attempting to portray Prime Minister Modi and the BJP as hesitant to act against Pakistan—a claim the BJP vigorously counters, especially when contrasting it with former PM Manmohan Singh’s post-26/11 inaction—Congress ignores its own damaging legacy. A long series of miscalculations, both geographic and geopolitical, committed under Congress rule, sowed the seeds of today’s Kashmir crisis.
One of the most costly? The return of the Haji Pir Pass.
The mountain pass that should have never been returned
India’s resounding military victory in the 1965 war with Pakistan offered an unprecedented strategic opportunity. Among the most critical gains was the Haji Pir Pass—perched at 2,637 meters in the formidable Pir Panjal range, it wasn’t just a patch of high ground. It was a tactical prize that offered a vastly shorter and more secure land corridor between Jammu and Kashmir. Retaining it could have made cross-border infiltration arduous, if not impossible.
In August 1965, under the shadow of monsoon clouds and enemy fire, the Indian Army launched a daring offensive. Major (later Lt Gen) Ranjit Singh Dayal led the elite 1st Para Special Forces through the treacherous Hyderabad Nallah. With just biscuits in their packs, they struck under cover of rain and darkness. By dawn on August 26, the impossible had been done—Haji Pir Pass was in Indian hands.
India crowned the 1965 victory with the capture of strategically important Haji Pir Pass
It was a feat of military brilliance, unheard of in 1965, achieved with raw courage and minimal resources.
At the time, Pakistan was executing Operation Gibraltar—a plan to infiltrate thousands of irregulars into Jammu and Kashmir, using the Haji Pir Bulge as a funnel. Behind enemy lines, arms and supplies were stockpiled. Indian Army Chief General J.N. Chaudhury called for bold, offensive action. “Make them react to us,” he ordered—and that’s exactly what the Army did.
Haji Pir Pass was captured by Indian Armed Forces in 1965 war
The operation not only plugged infiltration routes but also threw Pakistan’s plans into disarray. But just days later, Islamabad launched Operation Grand Slam, a blitzkrieg-like attack on Akhnoor meant to sever Jammu and Kashmir from the rest of India. India’s quick counter-offensive on September 6, pushing into Lahore and Sialkot, forced Pakistan to pull back. Had it succeeded, Pakistan would have taken control of the Jammu-Srinagar highway, and with it, the entire state. Disaster was averted—barely.
But what was won by sweat and blood on the ground was soon lost to diplomacy in a conference room abroad.
Tashkent: Where strategic advantage was traded for the chimera of peace
Just five months later, during the Soviet-brokered Tashkent talks, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri agreed to return Haji Pir to Pakistan. The declaration was signed on January 10, 1966. Shastri died mysteriously the very next day. For many, it wasn’t diplomacy. It was capitulation.
And those who closely followed the 1971 Bangladesh war of liberation, it was an appalling precedent that came back to haunt India, when it agreed to return 93,000 Prisoners of War captured in Bangladesh, again while chasing the chimera of peace with a nation whose identity was deeply rooted in its pathological animosity towards India.
The surrender in Tashkent had stunned military establishment as it led to two crippling disadvantages: Pakistan retained a key infiltration route, and India lost a critical piece of geography that could’ve altered the Kashmir equation permanently.
For many back in India, it wasn’t just surrender, it was an opportunity lost to secure its flank permanently.
A missed opportunity in 1971
After the 1965 ceasefire, India had leverage. Pakistani forces were just four kilometers from the vital Akhnoor bridge. Indian policymakers, fearing another dagger thrust at Jammu, agreed to return Haji Pir in exchange for Pakistani withdrawal from Chhamb.
The real tragedy? India never attempted to retake Haji Pir in the 1971 war, despite having overwhelming superiority and strategic momentum on the Western front. As Lt Gen Dayal would later reflect, “It was a mistake to hand it back. Our people don’t read maps.”
Indeed, maps tell the tale clearly. According to Maj Gen (Retd.) Sheru Thapliyal, had Haji Pir remained with India, infiltration into the Kashmir Valley, Poonch, and Rajouri would have been drastically reduced. The road from Jammu to Srinagar via Uri and Poonch would have been 200 km shorter—and far more secure.
Veteran special forces officer P.C. Katoch put it plainly: the pass, though modest in altitude, was mighty in military significance. And yet, it was lost—not in battle, but at the negotiating table.
Strategic advantage lost at a negotiating table
The saga of Haji Pir is not merely a chapter in military history. It is a mirror held up to India’s strategic thinking—of victories won by soldiers but lost by politicians. It is a tale of maps ignored, sacrifices squandered, and hard lessons still unlearned.
Today, as India faces yet another bloody provocation, the story of Haji Pir serves as a solemn reminder: some opportunities don’t come twice. And when they do, the nation must not flinch, falter, or forget.
Some mistakes are forgiven. Others, like Haji Pir, are etched into the mountains—and seared on to the memory of a nation that must learn from its past to safeguard its future.
The Ministry of Finance dismissed media reports that said New Delhi has asked Italy to cut down on financing to Pakistan in the wake of Pahalgam terror attack.
In reports published by various news outlets, the demand was made at a meeting between Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and her Italian counterpart Giancarlo Giorgetti, on the sidelines of the 58th ADB Annual Meeting in Italian city of Milan.
As per United Nations Development Programme website, the Italian Development Cooperation is an essential UNDP partner in Pakistan and across the world. “Some of Italy’s major initiatives and contributions are in Pakistan,” UNDP website read.
In a separate meeting with the Asian Development Bank (ADB), India has demanded that the regional development bank cut funding for Pakistan.
India has sharply downgraded diplomatic ties with Pakistan after the April 22 terrorist attack on tourists in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam, leading to the death of 26 individuals and several other injured, mostly tourists.
India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, which would over a period of time will severely reduce Pakistan’s water supply.
Further, sources told ANI that India will also approach FATF (Financial Action Task Force) to include Pakistan in the grey list.
Sitharaman is leading the Indian delegation of officials from the Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance for the 58th Annual Meeting of the Board of Governors of Asian Development Bank (ADB), scheduled from May 4 to 7 in Milan.
According to an official statement from the Ministry of Finance, the meetings will be attended by official delegations of the Board of Governors of ADB, official delegations of ADB members and international financial institutions. The Union Finance Minister will participate in the Annual Meeting’s focal events like the Governors’ Business session, Governor’s Plenary Session and as a panelist in the ADB Governors’ Seminar on “Cross-Border Collaboration for Future Resilience”.
