
Think twice before messing with Marathi: Maha Cong chief
Speaking at the "We are Marathi, We are Indian' workshop organised by the Congress in Mira-Bhayandar town of neighbouring Thane district, he said that Marathi must be preserved—not just because it is a language, but because it is a culture, an identity and the spirit of Maharashtra.
Congress is not opposed to Hindi language but strongly resists the compulsory imposition of a third language, he said.
"However, vandalism and violence in the name of Marathi will not be tolerated. We will not resort to violence; instead, we will teach and preserve Marathi. Everyone in Maharashtra is Marathi anyone who tries to mess with it, will have to face us," he warned.
Speaking further, Sapkal said the forced promotion of Hindi originates from former RSS chief Golwalkar's book 'Bunch of Thoughts'.
Mentioning that the BJP and the RSS do not respect the Indian Constitution, he said that India is known for unity in diversity, but the BJP wants to impose the idea of One Nation, One Election, One Language.
"This toxic ideology stems from a Bunch of Thoughts. BJP and RSS aim to push the narrative of Hindi, Hindutva, and Hindu Rashtra. It is with this intent that the BJP government has deliberately triggered this controversy," he alleged.
Explaining the choice of Mira Road as the venue for the event, Sapkal said, "... This is a battle of ideas. I have come to Mira Road to assert: 'We are Marathi, We are Indian'. Saying 'I won't speak Marathi' is sheer arrogance, but assaulting someone for not speaking Marathi is equally
wrong."
The forced imposition of Hindi will damage the education system, and could even lead to the repeal of the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, he added.
UNI SP SS
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
How Maharashtra ‘Urban Naxal' Bill targets Property Rights
Written by Prashant Randive In the name of public order and national security, the line between legitimate state interest and authoritarian overreach is often blurred. The recently enacted Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill (MSPS), 2024, is a troubling example of this phenomenon. While the State justified the bill as a necessary response to threats posed by 'unlawful organisations', several provisions, particularly those that empower police to seal, seize or restrict the use of private property, pose a grave challenge to the constitutional right to property under Article 300A. Article 300A of the Constitution stipulates that 'No person shall be deprived of his property except by authority of law.' Though the framers left it to the legislature to define the contours of the lawful deprivation, Indian courts have consistently held that this power must be exercised fairly, non-arbitrarily and with due process. Yet, Sections 9 and 10 of the new law allow the police, with prior approval of the commissioner or District Magistrate, to prohibit the use of any premises allegedly linked to unlawful activity. The law authorises eviction, sealing, and restriction of use without prior judicial oversight, without compensation, and crucially, without providing the occupant or owner a chance to be heard beforehand. In the landmark judgement K T Plantation Pvt Ltd v State of Karnataka (2011), the Supreme Court laid down the core principles that must guide deprivation of property by the state. Most notably, the Court held that there must be a legitimate public purpose. Secondly, there must be fairness and, in most cases, compensation. Finally, the law must be subject to judicial scrutiny for reasonableness, non-arbitrariness and proportionality. In the case of the MSPS 2024, all three constitutional safeguards appear to be compromised. First, it allows the state to seal or restrict the use of property merely based on the 'belief' of association with an unlawful organisation. This does not meet the constitutionality of the required threshold of a clearly defined public purpose. A blanket seizure of homes, businesses, or rented premises based on such vague suspicion, without establishing direct and deliberate involvement in unlawful activity, cannot be justified as serving a proportionate or legitimate public end. The concept of guilt by association dilutes the principle of individual responsibility and turns property holders into collateral damage in a scrutiny operation. Second, the law failed to provide for any form of compensation to those whose properties are sealed or rendered unusable, often with serious livelihood consequences. While Article 300A does not mandate compensation in every instance, the Supreme Court has made it clear that it is often an inherent component of lawful deprivation, especially when action causes material harm. In the absence of compensation and with no clear path to restitution, the law violates both the spirit and substance of the Constitution's property protections. Third, and most dangerously, the law bypasses the prior judicial oversight. The decision to seal, evict or restrict property use is taken by police with approval from the Commissioner or District Magistrate, but not a judicial authority. Review mechanisms are post-facto, limited, and internal to the executive. The Supreme Court in K T Plantation explicitly stated that such statutes must be amenable to judicial review, which implies that they must be designed in a way that embeds procedural fairness and provides a genuine avenue for redress, without preventive remedies or an impartial tribunal, affected citizens are left vulnerable to arbitrary state action. The failure of the Act to meet these constitutional benchmarks of public purpose, just procedure and proportionality renders its property-related provision deeply problematic. Far from being an exception in extraordinary circumstances, the law risks becoming a template for routine and unchecked executive overreach, with ordinary citizens paying the price through the loss of homes, shops and shelters. While countering extremist threats, a democratic state must not wield the weapon of national security in a manner that tramples civil liberties. Laws targeting unlawful associations must not become tools for harassment, chilling dissent, or arbitrary seizure of private spaces. Unfortunately, the MSPS 2024 resurrects colonial impulses of the idea that executive suspicion is sufficient to invade homes, shutter businesses, and override property rights. In doing so, it inverts the constitutional promise from the state that serves its people to one that surveils and punishes without accountability. If left unchecked, such laws may set a dangerous precedent across states, normalising a 'guilt by association' doctrine with wide-ranging implications not just for activists and dissenters but also for ordinary citizens whose homes, hostels, and businesses could fall victim to vague suspicions. The Right to Property may no longer be 'fundamental', but it is still the foundation to liberty, livelihood and dignity. Any law that seeks to erode it must be subjected to the highest standards of constitutional scrutiny. The act, in its current form, fails that test. The writer is an independent researcher and development practitioner working with Savitribai Phule Resource Centre

The Hindu
15 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.S. Senate passes aid, public broadcasting cuts in victory for Trump
The U.S. Senate, early on Thursday (July 17, 2025), approved U.S. President Donald Trump's plan for billions of dollars in cuts to funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting, handing the Republican president another victory as he exerts control over Congress with little opposition. The Senate voted 51 to 48 in favor of Mr. Trump's request to cut $9 billion in spending already approved by Congress. Most of the cuts are to programs to assist foreign countries suffering from disease, war and natural disasters, but the plan also eliminates all $1.1 billion the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was due to receive over the next two years. Mr. Trump and many of his fellow Republicans argue that spending on public broadcasting is an unnecessary expense and reject its news coverage as suffering from anti-right bias. Standalone rescissions packages have not passed in decades, with lawmakers reluctant to cede their constitutionally mandated control of spending. But Trump's Republicans, who hold narrow majorities in the Senate and House, have shown little appetite for resisting his policies since he began his second term in January. The $9 billion at stake is extremely small in the context of the $6.8 trillion federal budget, and represents only a tiny portion of all the funds approved by Congress that the Trump administration has held up while it has pursued sweeping cuts, many ordered by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. As of mid-June, Mr. Trump was blocking $425 billion in funding that had already been appropriated and previously approved by Congress, according to Democratic lawmakers tracking frozen funding. However, Mr. Trump and his supporters have promised more of the "rescission" requests to eliminate previously approved spending in what they say is an effort to pare back the federal government. The House of Representatives passed the rescissions legislation without altering Mr. Trump's request by 214-212 last month. Four Republicans joined 208 Democrats in voting no. But after a handful of Republican senators balked at the extent of the cuts to global health programs, Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on Tuesday that PEPFAR, a global program to fight HIV/AIDS launched in 2003 by then-President George W. Bush, was being exempted. The change brought the size of the package of cuts to $9 billion from $9.4 billion, requiring another House vote before the measure can be sent to the White House for Trump to sign into law. The rescissions must pass by Friday. Otherwise, the request would expire and the White House will be required to adhere to spending plans passed by Congress. Republican 'No' Votes Two of the Senate's 53 Republicans - Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine - joined Democrats in voting against the legislation. "You don't need to gut the entire Corporation for Public Broadcasting," Ms. Murkowski said in a Senate speech. She said the Trump administration also had not provided assurances that battles against diseases such as malaria and polio worldwide would be maintained. Most of all, Murkowski said, Congress must assert its role in deciding how federal funds were spent. Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota called Mr. Trump's request a "small, but important step toward fiscal sanity." Democrats scoffed at that, noting that congressional Republicans earlier this month passed a massive package of tax and spending cuts that nonpartisan analysts estimated would add more than $3 trillion to the nation's $36.2 trillion debt. Democrats charged Republicans with giving up Congress' Constitutionally-mandated control of federal spending. "Today, Senate Republicans turn this chamber into a subservient rubber stamp for the executive, at the behest of Donald Trump," Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said. "Republicans embrace the credo of cut, cut, cut now, and ask questions later," Mr. Schumer said. The cuts would overturn bipartisan spending agreements most recently passed in a full-year stopgap funding bill in March. Democrats warn a partisan cut now could make it more difficult to negotiate government funding bills that must pass with bipartisan agreement by September 30 to avoid a shutdown. Appropriations bills require 60 votes to move ahead in the Senate, but the rescissions package needs just 51, meaning Republicans can pass it without Democratic support.


Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Gold trail leads to revival of ‘cash-for-votes' case against Tamil Nadu BJP chief
Tamil Nadu's CB-CID has revived a high-profile cash-for-votes case involving state BJP president and Tirunelveli MLA Nainar Nagendran. Citing the money trail and call data records, the agency has formally placed on record an alleged link between top BJP leaders and the seizure in April 2024 of Rs 3.98 crore cash, allegedly meant to bribe voters. The case, once dismissed as 'dead' by the BJP leadership, has gained new traction with the arrest of a key accused, who police said admitted to converting gold into cash — tightening the probe around Nagendran's inner circle. The deepening scandal has led to fears in the Tamil Nadu unit of the BJP that Nagendran could face arrest ahead of next year's Assembly election in the state. According to court documents, investigators arrested a man named Sooraj on June 30 for allegedly exchanging Rs 97.92 lakh in cash after selling a 1.5-kg gold bar. The CB-CID told the Principal Sessions Court in Chennai that Sooraj was approached by Vignesh, the driver of BJP's industrial wing president Govardhan, allegedly to facilitate the transaction. The agency alleged that call record analysis confirmed the involvement of Govardhan, BJP treasurer S R Sekhar, and state general secretary (organisation) Kesava Vinayakan in the distribution effort. Police suspect the money was intended to be funnelled to voters in Tirunelveli in support of Nagendran, who contested and lost the parliamentary seat in 2024. The court granted Sooraj bail on July 10, noting that the offences listed under Sections 171(C), 171(E), 171(F), and 188 of the Indian Penal Code are bailable. The case originated on April 6, 2024, when a flying squad of the Election Commission and Tambaram police seized Rs 3.98 crore in Rs 500 notes from three men aboard the Nellai Express. The trio — S Sathish, S Perumal, and S Naveen — claimed the cash was to be distributed to voters on Nagendran's instructions. Sathish, identified as the manager of a Chennai hotel allegedly owned by Nagendran, was in possession of the BJP leader's identity card and other documents, according to officials. Although the case was initially handled by Tambaram police, it was transferred to the CB-CID's Metro wing in April. Since then, the agency has summoned multiple BJP leaders, including Nagendran, for questioning. While Nagendran has denied any connection to the seized cash, CB-CID investigators have maintained that the money trail and testimonies point to a coordinated effort involving top state BJP leaders.