English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Congress takes a jibe at Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma after he explains India’s stand on IMF bailout to Pakistan

“Russia voted against an IMF aid tranche for Ukraine on 12 September 2016, and India voted against Zimbabwe’s expulsion on 11 September 2005.”

Published

on

The Congress on Saturday took a swipe at Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma following his defence of India’s position on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout to Pakistan.

Sarma, taking to X earlier in the day, accused Congress leaders, including Jairam Ramesh and Pawan Khera, of spreading misinformation about India’s stance.

In a post on X, Khera responded sharply, saying, “Mr Chief Minister, please review this and have your team verify how often an ‘against’ vote has been cast.”

He cited examples, noting, “Russia voted against an IMF aid tranche for Ukraine on 12 September 2016, and India voted against Zimbabwe’s expulsion on 11 September 2005.”

The exchange followed India’s decision on Friday to oppose the IMF’s proposal for a $2.3 billion loan to Pakistan, citing concerns that the funds could be diverted to support state-sponsored cross-border terrorism.

Sarma, in a detailed X post, accused Congress leaders of distorting facts, asserting, “There is no ‘NO’ vote at the IMF. The only way to express dissent is through abstention, which India appropriately chose.”

Explaining the IMF’s weighted voting system, Sarma clarified that it operates on a proportional quota based on each nation’s financial contribution, unlike the equal-vote format of the UN General Assembly.

“India’s abstention was a deliberate and strategic act, sending a clear message that we will not endorse financial aid to a country exporting terrorism across our borders,” he stated.

He described the move as a balanced diplomatic signal, demonstrating India’s refusal to support Pakistan’s actions without destabilising the global economic framework.

Sarma accused the Congress of engaging in “reckless politics,” claiming, “Leaders like Jairam Ramesh and Pawan Khera are undermining national interests with their narrative, portraying India as weak when it has acted with strength and responsibility.”

He highlighted India’s firm responses to terrorism under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, referencing actions in Uri, Balakot, and ‘Operation Sindoor,’ and framed the IMF abstention as a reflection of strategic diplomacy.

Ramesh, in an earlier X post, had claimed that the Congress urged India to vote against the IMF loan to Pakistan during its Executive Board meeting on Friday, 9 May 2025, but lamented that India’s abstention diluted the message. “A firm ‘NO’ vote would have been a stronger signal,” he argued.

The IMF approved a $1 billion tranche for Pakistan under its $7 billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF) and a $1.3 billion tranche under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF) on Friday. India abstained, with the Union Ministry of Finance expressing concerns over Pakistan’s “poor track record” with IMF programmes and the potential misuse of funds for terrorism, reinforcing India’s cautious yet principled stand amid ongoing tensions.

India News

India hits back at Shehbaz Sharif at UN, says terror will have consequences

India hit back at Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s UN speech, with New Delhi warning that terrorism will have consequences.

Published

on

India has responded to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s remarks at the United Nations, delivering a strong message on terrorism and warning that such actions will have consequences.

The response came after Mr Sharif addressed the UN and raised issues concerning India and Pakistan. New Delhi rejected the narrative presented by the Pakistani prime minister and highlighted the issue of terrorism.

India’s message was delivered by Petal Gehlot, who represented New Delhi in the response to Pakistan.

India warns Pakistan over terrorism

India’s response focused on Pakistan’s record and its approach towards terrorism. New Delhi made clear that terrorism cannot be separated from its consequences and that those responsible cannot expect such actions to go unanswered.

The Indian side also pushed back against the claims and allegations made by Mr Sharif during his UN speech.

The exchange comes amid continuing tensions between India and Pakistan, with terrorism remaining a major point of disagreement between the two countries.

Shehbaz Sharif’s UN remarks

In his address, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke about India-Pakistan relations and raised several issues concerning New Delhi.

India subsequently exercised its right of reply to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the United Nations.

New Delhi’s response underlined its position that terrorism remains a serious issue in the relationship and that there would be consequences for terrorist actions.

The latest exchange at the UN adds to the continuing diplomatic confrontation between the two neighbouring countries.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

India News

Women wrestlers challenge Brij Bhushan’s acquittal in sexual harassment case

Four women wrestlers have challenged the acquittal of former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and co-accused Vinod Tomar in a sexual harassment case.

Published

on

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

Four women wrestlers have approached a Delhi court challenging the acquittal of former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.

The wrestlers have also challenged the acquittal of co-accused Vinod Tomar. The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Special Judge at the Rouse Avenue Courts.

The appeal challenges the order passed by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on August 3, 2026, when Brij Bhushan and Tomar were acquitted in the case.

Wrestlers challenge court’s reasoning

In their appeal, the wrestlers have argued that the acquittal order is legally unsustainable and that the evidence was not assessed appropriately.

They have also alleged that the order relied on assumptions about how victims of sexual assault and harassment were expected to behave instead of assessing the evidence and circumstances of the complainants.

The challenge seeks judicial scrutiny of the findings that resulted in the acquittal of Brij Bhushan and Tomar.

Brij Bhushan was acquitted in August

The Rouse Avenue court acquitted Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on August 3 in the sexual harassment case involving women wrestlers. The court’s decision followed consideration of the evidence and statements presented during the proceedings.

The case had emerged after several women wrestlers accused the former WFI chief of sexual harassment. The allegations had led to a major protest by wrestlers in 2023.

The latest appeal means the acquittal is now being challenged before a higher court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com