Prasad and prayers at bhandaras as last Bada Mangal festival of the yr concludes
Many bhandaras (community feasts) were organised on the occasion.
At Hanuman Setu temple, prasad of laddoo was served to the devotees, and bhog of puri and kheer was offered to the deity.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Payal Sharma, 27, who visited the temple along with her grandmother Nirmala Devi, 72, said, "I wanted to pray for the new chapter of my life as I am getting married in two days."
Another devotee, Shrikant Iyyer, said, "I am an ardent bhakt of Bajrang Bali, and whatever I got in life is because of him. I prayed for my civil service exam and ate puri sabzi in a bhandara."
At Lete Hue Hanumanji Temple, the deity was decorated with flowers and offered a bhog of 91 kg of laddoo, which was later served to the devotees.
The students of Bhatkhande Sanskriti Vishwavidyalaya sang bhajans. At Khatu Shyam Temple, the bhandara lasted for 12 hours, offering puri, sabzi, halwa, and chhole chawal.
Arti of Goddess Durga and Lord Hanuman was performed at Kali Bari Temple. This annual event is held in honour of Lord Hanuman and is observed on the Tuesdays of the Jyeshtha month of the Hindu calendar.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
8 hours ago
- India.com
Meet Lady Ambani of Bollywood, her father is Muslim, mother is Hindu, married to a star, has net worth of Rs 500 crore, she is...
In the bustling world of Bollywood, where star power often overshadows personal narratives, one woman has carved a distinct identity, earning the moniker 'Lady Ambani' for her entrepreneurial sense and philanthropic endeavors. Who is this powerful woman? This remarkable woman is Mana Shetty (earlier known as Monisha Kadri), who is the wife of Bollywood actor Suniel Shetty. Born to a Gujarati Muslim architect, Iftikhar M. Kadri, and a Punjabi Hindu social activist, Vipula Kadri, Mana was exposed to diverse cultural and professional influences from an early age. Her siblings, Isha Mehra and Rahul Kadri, have also pursued careers in social activism and architecture, respectively, reflecting the family's commitment to societal development. How did Mana Shetty begin her professional front? Mana's professional journey commenced at age of 15 when she co-founded a fashion label, 'Mana & Isha,' with her sister. Her entrepreneurial spirit led her to establish R-House, a luxury decor and lifestyle store in Mumbai, and to spearhead the S2 real estate project alongside her husband, resulting in the construction of 21 opulent villas, each spanning approximately 6,500 square feet. Beyond business, Mana is deeply involved in philanthropy, actively supporting the NGO Save The Children India and organizing fundraising events like the Araaish exhibition to aid underprivileged women and children. Where did Mana Shetty meet Suniel Shetty? Suniel Shetty met Mana Shetty (then Mana Kadri) at a pastry shop through a mutual friend. It was love at first sight for Suniel. Their friendship gradually turned into love, and despite coming from different religious and cultural backgrounds, they dated for almost 9 years before getting married on December 25, 1991. After marriage, Mana converted her religion from Muslim to Hindu and dropped the name Monisha Kadri. The couple has two children, Athiya and Ahan Shetty. Why is Mana Shetty referred to as Lady Ambani? Mana Shetty is known as the 'Lady Ambani' because of her powerful presence in business and philanthropy, similar to how the Ambani family is seen in India's corporate world. She runs a luxury lifestyle store (R House), a successful real estate venture with Suniel Shetty (S2 Realty), and supports major charitable causes like Save The Children India. Her success in multiple sectors, strong social influence and high-profile lifestyle have earned her this nickname, highlighting her stature beyond just being a star wife. As per Siasat, Mana and Suniel Shetty have amassed a combined net worth estimated at Rs 500 crore, reflecting their diverse investments in real estate, fashion, hospitality and in the field of entertainment.
Indian Express
9 hours ago
- Indian Express
Raanjhanaa's AI-altered re-release: Why director Aanand L Rai is unhappy, what the law says
The 2013 romantic drama Raanjhanaa, starring Dhanush and Sonam Kapoor, is being re-released in theatres with a new AI-assisted ending. The production house, Eros International, has announced that the film will now include a new climax created with the help of artificial intelligence. The change is being promoted as a way to offer the audience a 'happy ending' to the original story. However, the film's original director and co-producer, Aanand L Rai, has publicly distanced himself from the re-release. In a statement to The Indian Express, he said, 'I've to be very careful while signing the dotted line.' He added, 'AI is the future. Everybody knows that. But then use it for the future or for the present. Don't use it to distort the past!' Eros, on the other hand, has maintained that it holds complete rights to the film and is within its legal bounds to alter it. In its view, using AI is simply a means to connect with evolving technology. This clash between artistic and commercial ownership has sparked broader questions about creative control, technological intervention, and the fine legal line between them. Why is the re-release happening? Raanjhanaa, directed by Aanand L Rai and written by Himanshu Sharma, is widely regarded as one of the most impactful Hindi films of the 2010s. The film, starring Dhanush, Sonam Kapoor, and Abhay Deol, explored themes of unrequited love, caste, and political ambition through the tragic arc of Kundan (Dhanush), a Hindu boy hopelessly in love with a Muslim girl, Zoya (Sonam Kapoor). The film received critical acclaim and went on to win numerous awards. More than a decade later, the production house has decided to re-release the film with a new AI-assisted ending, one they say is a 'respectful creative reinterpretation'. This alteration was done without the knowledge or consent of the director. Rai has been vocal in his criticism, expressing emotional and creative disapproval. Legally, however, Rai's disapproval does not stand much ground because, under Indian Copyright Law, the rights to a cinematograph film typically rest with the producer or production house, in this case, Eros International, not with the director. The controversy is not just about one film. It brings into focus broader concerns in the film industry: Who controls the final cut, what counts as 'authorship' in the age of AI, and whether artistic integrity can survive? While the director's outrage may be creatively valid, the law, as it stands, doesn't offer much recourse. 'Under Indian Copyright Law section 2(d), the author of a cinematograph film is the producer,' explains advocate Ankit Sahni. 'The director, unless they have a specific contract that grants them ownership or economic rights, cannot claim any legal control over the film.' According to Section 14 of the Copyright Act, the copyright owner has the exclusive right to adapt, reproduce, and communicate the work to the public. Section 2(d) clearly defines the 'author' of a cinematograph film as the producer, not the director, writer, or editor. Directors do not enjoy moral rights under Section 57 unless they are also credited as the author in another capacity, such as screenwriter or performer. This means that, unless Aanand L Rai retained specific rights in his contract with Eros, he cannot stop the production house from modifying or re-releasing the film, even using AI. As for AI-generated content, there is no standalone law in India yet. 'As per a Parliamentary statement, India currently protects AI-assisted works, as long as there is a significant human contribution,' explains Sahni. Fully autonomous AI creations or such works with minimal human contribution are not protected by copyright. 'In this case, if they are admitting the use of AI, it could mean three things. AI has contributed to suggesting changes to the plot, writing new dialogues, and/or animation using generative AI,' says Sahni. 'If the new ending was created with the help of AI, it would still be protected, provided enough human input was involved,' Sahni adds. Ultimately, the law prioritises ownership and contract over sentiment or creative authorship. The Raanjhanaa case may be emotionally charged, but it's unlikely to lead to legal redress, unless the law itself evolves. What does it say about the larger AI debate? The Raanjhanaa controversy is more than a clash between a director and a production house; it signals a deeper and rapidly evolving debate about AI's role in art, authorship, and ownership. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into creative processes, questions emerge about what constitutes 'authentic' art and who controls its future. Is a story still the director's vision if it can be altered in the future by AI? Across the globe, filmmakers have employed AI in controversial ways. In The Brutalist (2024), AI refined actors' Hungarian accents and generated architectural visuals, and in Roadrunner (2021), the director used AI to recreate Anthony Bourdain's voice for lines he never recorded. Closer home, AI was used to create a credibly younger version of actor Mammootty in the Malayalam movie, Rekhachitram (2025). Legally, the ground is still shifting. While Indian copyright law protects works created by humans, it does not yet fully recognise autonomous AI creations. At the heart of this legal vacuum is a deeper question: should commercial stakeholders be allowed to override original artistic expression using technology, even if the law permits it? The Raanjhanaa case highlights this dilemma, where a film that once carried the emotional signature of its director is now reshaped without his consent. As AI tools grow more powerful, the need to revisit legal frameworks and ethical boundaries in the creative industry becomes important. The writer is a student who is a summer intern at The Indian Express.
NDTV
11 hours ago
- NDTV
Rajkummar Rao's Behen Hogi Teri Accused Of Hurting Religious Sentiments. Details Inside About The Legal Case
New Delhi: Rajkummar Rao has found himself embroiled in a legal case over a scene in his 2017 film Behen Hogi Teri. He is facing a court case for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The case also mentions director Nitin Kakkar, producer Amul Vikas Mohle, and actress Shruti Haasan. What's Happening Rajkummar Rao is currently facing a legal case against him for his film Behen Hogi Teri, over a poster and a particular scene. According to the controversy that's making the rounds, the scene in question shows Lord Shiva wearing slippers, which was offensive to a section of viewers. The case has its next hearing today at a Jalandhar court. The issue resurfaced because Rajkummar Rao did not attend a hearing scheduled before, prompting a non-bailable warrant. Yesterday (July 29, 2025), Rajkummar Rao surrendered in a Jalandhar court and marked his presence at 4 PM. Judge Srijan Shukla granted him bail. Rajkummar Rao was previously given an anticipatory bail. But he was then issued a non-bailable warrant as he missed the assigned court date. 2017 Complaint That Led To The Case The case was first filed in 2017. Ishant Sharma, a Hindu leader and film producer, filed the case at Police Division No 5 in Jalandhar, as reported by Bhaskar English. His statements mentioned how Lord Shiva was represented in a disrespectful manner, which would hurt religious sentiments. The controversy went viral thereafter. In A Nutshell No official comment has been received from Rajkummar Rao's team yet on the ongoing legal case. The verdict or next course of action on the legal case is awaited after the hearing taking place today.
