SC pulls up Rahul for 'Chinese thrashing our soldiers' remark
NEW DELHI:
Rahul Gandhi
, the leader of opposition in Lok Sabha, got a rap on his knuckles on Monday from the Supreme Court for his 2022 statement - Chinese are "thrashing our soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh" - while criticising the government for its handling of the Galwan Valley clash at the LAC.
"If you were a true Indian, you would not say all this," the apex court told him.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih lambasted Rahul for making allegations that China captured 2,000 sq km of Indian territory and asked him whether he was present there. It made it clear to him that as leader of opposition he cannot go on saying whatever he wants.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, defended him saying, "if he cannot say these things which are published in the Press, he cannot be a leader of opposition".
However, he agreed that the statement could have been worded better.
SC's censure came during the hearing on Rahul's plea for staying a defamation case filed against him over his claim about Indian jawans having been walloped by the Chinese during the Galwan standoff. After the hearing, the court stayed the defamation proceedings against him but not before giving him an earful.
"Tell, Dr Singhvi, how do you get to know that 2,000 sq km of Indian territory was occupied by the Chinese? Were you there? Do you have any credible material? Why do you make these statements without any...If you were a true Indian, you would not say all this if there is a conflict at the border," the bench said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
Ukraine raises alarm over Indian-made components found in Russian drones, flags issue with MEA: Report
Ukraine has formally raised concerns with India and the European Union after Indian-made or assembled electronic parts were reportedly found in Iranian drones used by Russia in the Ukraine war, report says. read more Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a meeting, at Mariinskyi Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine in August 2024. File image/PTI Ukraine has formally raised concerns with the Indian government and the European Union over electronic components manufactured or assembled in India that were found in Iranian-designed drones used by Russian forces in the Ukraine war, Hindustan Times reported, citing sources. According to officials familiar with the matter, Ukraine approached India's Ministry of External Affairs through diplomatic channels on at least two occasions since last year, after Indian-origin components were discovered in Shahed-136 combat drones used by Russia. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The issue was also brought up with EU sanctions envoy David O'Sullivan during his visit to New Delhi in July. O'Sullivan was in India to brief officials on the EU's latest sanctions package, which included action against Russian-linked entities, including the Vadinar refinery. Ukrainian investigations reportedly identified components from two firms, Vishay Intertechnology and Aura Semiconductor, in the drones. A bridge rectifier made by Vishay, assembled in India, was found in the voltage regulation system, while a chip produced by Bengaluru-based Aura Semiconductor was used in the satellite navigation antenna. Officials clarified that the companies have not violated any Indian laws, as the components are classified as dual-use items, technologies that can serve both civilian and military purposes. Responding to the development, External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India's export of dual-use items adheres to international non-proliferation norms and is governed by a robust domestic legal framework. 'Due diligence is conducted to ensure such exports do not violate any of our laws,' he said. While the Ukrainian embassy in New Delhi has not issued an official statement, Ukraine's Defence Intelligence Directorate (HUR) has publicly reported the presence of Indian-origin parts in Shahed drones on its official Facebook and Telegram channels. Vishay Intertechnology, a US-based electronics manufacturer, did not respond to requests for comment. Meanwhile, Kishore Ganti, co-founder of Aura Semiconductor, said the company fully complies with all national and international export control laws and strongly opposes any unauthorised use of its products. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We are deeply disturbed by the possibility that any of our components may have reached defence manufacturers through unauthorised third-party channels, in violation of our compliance policies and distribution agreements. We are committed to investigating and addressing any compliance gaps,' Aura said in a statement.
Hindustan Times
11 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Disability no licence to fire govt employees: SC
The employer's discretion ends where the employee's dignity begins, the Supreme Court held while ruling that public sector employers cannot mechanically retire employees who acquire disabilities during service without first exploring meaningful alternatives for their redeployment. Disability no licence to fire govt employees: SC 'While judicial restraint guards against overreach, it must not become an excuse for disengagement from injustice. When an employee is removed from service for a condition he did not choose, and where viable alternatives are ignored, the Court is not crossing a line by intervening, it is upholding one drawn by the Constitution itself,' said a bench of justices JK Maheshwari and Aravind Kumar, in a significant reaffirmation of the constitutional right to dignity and equality in employment. The August 1 judgment came as the bench directed the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) to reinstate a driver who was compulsorily retired in 2016 after being diagnosed with colour blindness. Coming down hard on TSRTC for its failure to consider alternative roles for the driver, who had expressed willingness to be reassigned to a non-driving post, the court held that this omission was not just an administrative lapse, but a violation of both statutory obligations and constitutional principles. The judgment drew upon the principle that public employers are duty-bound to provide 'reasonable accommodation' to employees who acquire disabilities during service. Retirement on medical grounds, the court said, must be a measure of last resort, only after all viable options for redeployment have been exhausted. 'The obligation to reasonably accommodate such employees is not just a matter of administrative grace, but a constitutional and statutory imperative, rooted in the principles of non-discrimination, dignity and equal treatment,' noted the bench. The judgment further drew strength from a consistent line of rulings to reaffirm that beneficial legislation must be interpreted purposively to protect the rights of disabled employees. 'Employment security is central not only to individual dignity but also to familial survival,' said the court, emphasising that livelihood cannot be severed 'by the stroke of a medical certificate' without first exhausting all avenues for reassignment. The court cited the example of the driver seeking reassignment to the post of Shramik (helper) , a job that did not require normal colour vision. However, the Corporation did not even attempt to assess his suitability for such a role. According to the bench, the burden lies on the employer, not the employee, to prove that no suitable post exists or can be reasonably created. The court also referenced the pertinent provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and a binding memorandum of settlement signed by TSRTC in 1979, which explicitly mandated alternate employment for colour-blind drivers with pay protection and continuity of service. The court ruled that TSRTC failed to comply with this binding obligation, adding that internal circulars cited by the Corporation in denying alternate employment, were merely administrative instructions and could not override statutory service conditions created by an industrial settlement. The bench further made it clear that even in the absence of such a settlement, constitutional and statutory principles demand the accommodation of employees who develop disabilities. 'This obligation is not rooted in compassion, but in constitutional discipline and statutory expectation,' it stated. The bench thus ordered the Corporation to appoint the driver to a suitable post consistent with his condition, at the same pay grade he held in 2016, within eight weeks. It also directed payment of 25% of arrears from the date of retirement until reinstatement and held that the intervening period must be treated as continuous service. 'In doing so, we not only vindicate the appellant's rights but also reaffirm our constitutional commitment to a just and humane employer-employee relationship,' the bench concluded.
Time of India
11 minutes ago
- Time of India
Mahadev to Shamsheer, Indian Army names to inspire
Unlike Pakistan which largely sticks to Islamic symbolism, our military relies on myth, morale and maps to christen operations A recent public debate triggered by the naming of 'Operation Mahadev' – launched by Indian army special forces in coordination with Jammu & Kashmir police – has raised questions about the symbolism and perceived religiosity in the naming of military operations. The operation, executed with precision over 12 days, led to the elimination of three terrorists now confirmed to be involved in the heinous Pahalgam massacre. Yet, many chose to focus less on the operation's success and more on its naming, raising concerns about communal undertones and ideological symbolism. As someone who has observed, lived, and led within the ethos of Indian army for over six decades, I find the controversy misplaced. It is a symptom of how little is understood about the military's traditions, its internal cohesion, and the layered symbolism it deploys – not to divide, but to inspire. Read full story on TOI+ Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
