English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Mixed response to CJI’s proposal on Ayodhya

Published

on

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]A significant section of the political and religious leadership desires that the top court intervene to resolve the controversy

By an APN correspondent

The observations of the Chief Justice of India, JS Khehar, in the Ram Mandir case have generated a mixed response among the political leadership and the Hindu and Muslim communities, with a significant section desiring that the top court intervene to resolve the controversy.

The Supreme Court on March 21 extricated itself from initial wrangles by suggesting that the two parties sit and settle the issue, bringing the issue to court only if it is still essential at a later stage.

“Whoever you want we will ask him to mediate. If you want me I will come. If you want my sitting brother judges, you take them, but mediate. These kinds of issues should be mediated rather than we passing an order,” the CJI had said.

BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, who had filed the appeal, however, had his reservations vis-à-vis this proposition. He told the media that the Ramjanambhoomi in Ayodhya should be used only for constructing the Ram Temple.

“Masjid can be built anywhere, Namaz can be read anywhere… it can be read on the street. The Ramjanambhoomi is for the Ram Mandir and it should be used for the Ram temple only,” Swamy said.

He said there’s a proposal to let the mosque be constructed across the Saryu river. He expected that the Supreme Court will appoint a judge from the top court itself to mediate between the rival parties.

Rakesh Sinha, an RSS ideologue, opined the Ram temple may be constructed in three different ways—by passing an Act in the parliament, through dialogue or through a court order.

But, senior advocate Zafaryab Jeelani, who has been associated with the matter right from the start, was against an out-of-court settlement. “We [Muslims] have faith on the CJI. He may mediate in the matter himself or nominate other judges for the purpose. He may even hear the case. But we can’t go for an out-of-court settlement. We will definitely consider any order passed by the CJI in this regard,” he said.

Iqbal Ansari, son of Hashim Ansari, the late main plaintiff in the case, told the media that a peaceful settlement should be arrived at. “A compromise is possible if both the communities agree to it,” he said.

Senior BJP leader Vinay Katiyar, who has been involved in the Ram Mandir agitation for years, however, said that the Supreme Court has taken a very positive stand. “We now have a BJP government in the state and we will work with a positive mindset towards a solution,” he said.

Rajeev Shukla from Congress said that both the parties in the dispute have expressed their readiness to accept the court’s opinion. “Now both should study the proposal and implement the same,” he said.

Meanwhile, All India Muslim Personal Law Board member Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahli said that he respects the CJI’s observations but still felt that the court should decide the matter. “The ulema will sit together and formulate a collective opinion. But similar efforts earlier were marred by political interference. Since the issue is related to property, we desire that the Supreme Court should decide the matter,” he said.

Maulana Yasoob Abbas, spokesperson of All India Shia Personal law Board, welcomed the CJI’s observations and said that all outstanding issues can be resolved through dialogue only. “Neither Hindus or Muslims want to be entangled in any controversy. Everybody wants to raise themselves above the religious divide and desire development and progress,” he said.

President of All India Imam Association Maulana Umair Ilyasi expressed that it would be nice if the issue is resolved through peaceful means. “It should be resolved through dialogue between imams and pujaris,” he said. 

Senior BJP leader LK Advani has welcomed the move and said that everyone involved should come to a consensus on the matter.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

President’s rule imposed in Manipur following Political turmoil and violence

After escalating violence and a no-confidence motion threat, President’s Rule has been imposed in Manipur, following the resignation of CM N Biren Singh.

Published

on

Manipur, President's Rule, N Biren Singh, political unrest, Congress, no-confidence motion, violence, ethnic tensions, state governance

In a dramatic turn of events, President’s Rule has been imposed in the northeastern state of Manipur. This decision comes shortly after the resignation of Chief Minister N. Biren Singh, who stepped down under the shadow of a no-confidence motion threat from the opposition Congress party.

Political crisis escalates in Manipur

The political instability in Manipur has reached a critical point. For months, the state has been grappling with violent unrest, primarily driven by ethnic tensions between the Meitei and Kuki communities. The state has witnessed widespread protests, clashes, and the disruption of normal life, which have been fueled by both local grievances and larger political issues.

Amid this chaos, Chief Minister N. Biren Singh, under immense pressure from the opposition, decided to resign rather than face a possible no-confidence motion in the state assembly. Singh’s resignation marks a significant shift in the state’s political landscape and has left the state in a state of uncertainty.

The imposition of President’s Rule

With no immediate resolution in sight, the central government took the drastic step of imposing President’s Rule in Manipur. Under this provision, the state will be governed directly by the President of India, and the state assembly will be dissolved. This move aims to restore order and ensure the smooth functioning of the state’s administrative machinery, but it has also raised concerns about the long-term impact on local governance and autonomy.

Opposition’s response

The Congress party, which has been at the forefront of the protests against Singh’s leadership, welcomed the imposition of President’s Rule. They had been demanding Singh’s resignation for months due to his inability to control the escalating violence and unrest in the state. However, questions remain about how effective the central government’s intervention will be in resolving the underlying issues that have fueled the unrest.

Challenges ahead for Manipur

As President’s Rule takes effect, the people of Manipur are left to grapple with the uncertain future. The region continues to face severe challenges in terms of security, economic stability, and communal harmony. The question now is whether the central government will be able to bring about lasting peace and address the root causes of the ongoing violence.

What’s next for Manipur?

The imposition of President’s Rule is seen as a temporary solution to a larger crisis. The political vacuum left by Singh’s resignation and the suspension of the state government raises concerns about the next steps in Manipur’s recovery. For the people of the state, the priority remains the restoration of peace, security, and effective governance.

Continue Reading

India News

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Rajan Salvi joins Eknath Shinde faction, day after quitting party

Despite previously holding an extensive meeting with Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray and vowing to remain loyal to the party, Salvi ultimately decided to leave Thackeray’s camp, blaming his electoral defeat on former MP and Shiv Sena-UBT leader Vinayak Raut, who refuted Salvi’s claims.

Published

on

Shiv Sena (UBT) faced another setback as three-term legislator Rajan Salvi, who was defeated in the 2024 Assembly elections for the Ratapur constituency in the Konkan region, joined the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena on Thursday.

Discontent with the party following his electoral loss, Salvi resigned as the deputy leader of Shiv Sena (UBT) on Wednesday. “I am a devoted Shiv Sainik of Balasaheb Thackeray. I have carried out my duties as he envisioned and will continue to uphold his ideology,” Salvi proclaimed.

Sources within the Shiv Sena indicated that Salvi’s departure from the Thackeray faction and move to join Eknath Shinde’s camp is part of an initiative dubbed ‘Operation Tiger.’ They noted a growing interest among Shiv Sena (UBT) leaders, workers, and several sitting legislators to switch allegiances.

Salvi’s transition occurred in the presence of party chief and Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, Industry Minister Uday Samant, and other party leaders in Thane. He had met with Shinde alongside Uday Samant and Kiran Samant, who had defeated Salvi in the recent elections.

Assurances were made by the Samant brothers to involve Salvi in the development efforts for the Rajapur seat and to recognize his contributions within the party’s organizational structure. There is speculation that the Shinde faction may also consider nominating Salvi to the state Legislative Council through the Governor’s quota.

By joining Shinde’s faction, Salvi quashed rumours about a potential alliance with the BJP. He expressed his commitment to working alongside Eknath Shinde to strengthen Shiv Sena in the Rajapur constituency and the broader Konkan region, alongside Uday and Kiran Samant.

Salvi was accompanied by supporters who left Shiv Sena (UBT) to join the Shinde faction. Shiv Sena (UBT) is currently experiencing significant turmoil, especially following Eknath Shinde’s rebellion and subsequent alliance with the BJP in June 2022, and the recent poor performance in the 2024 Assembly elections has prompted numerous defections. Many leaders and workers from Shiv Sena (UBT) are opting to align with the Shinde faction, fearing an uncertain future.

Despite previously holding an extensive meeting with Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray and vowing to remain loyal to the party, Salvi ultimately decided to leave Thackeray’s camp, blaming his electoral defeat on former MP and Shiv Sena-UBT leader Vinayak Raut, who refuted Salvi’s claims.

Insiders in Shiv Sena (UBT) suggested that Salvi’s departure was motivated by a desire to escape ongoing investigations by the Anti-Corruption Bureau related to property matters. Shiv Sena (UBT) legislator Bhaskar Jadhav criticized Salvi’s decision, stating that he should have remained with the party instead of shifting to the Shinde faction.

Jadhav emphasized the need for party leadership to address these departures seriously and work towards unifying the party for its rejuvenation, urging leaders to prevent additional exits instead of adopting an indifferent stance by saying, “those who want to quit can quit.”

Continue Reading

India News

Social media reacts as Virat Kohli unfollows Ranveer Allahbadia following roast show scandal

Virat Kohli has reportedly unfollowed Ranveer Allahbadia on Instagram after the YouTuber’s controversial remarks on Samay Raina’s roast show. The incident has led to a national debate on free speech and decency in comedy.

Published

on

Virat Kohli unfollows Ranveer Allahbadia on Instagram amid controversy.

YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia, popularly known as ‘BeerBiceps’, is at the center of a storm after making controversial remarks during his appearance on comedian Samay Raina’s roast show, India’s Got Latent. The comments, which involved an inappropriate question to a contestant, have sparked widespread outrage and controversy, including scrutiny from law enforcement.

The controversy: The incident occurred during an episode of India’s Got Latent, where Ranveer Allahbadia asked a contestant a question deemed highly inappropriate: “Would you rather watch your parents have sex every day for the rest of your life or join in once and stop it forever?” The comment quickly ignited a firestorm of reactions on social media, with many expressing disgust at the crudeness of the joke.

Virat Kohli’s reaction: In the wake of the backlash, cricketer Virat Kohli’s decision to unfollow Ranveer on Instagram has grabbed attention. Social media users were quick to notice that Kohli, who had previously posted pictures with Ranveer and his wife Anushka Sharma at public events, was no longer following the YouTuber. However, as of now, neither Kohli nor Ranveer has officially commented on the matter.

Impact on Ranveer’s social media following: Amid the growing backlash, Ranveer Allahbadia has seen a sharp decline in his social media following. Reports suggest he has lost over 8,000 followers on Instagram since the incident. Ranveer, who is known for his motivational content, has found himself at the center of heated debates on freedom of speech and the boundaries of comedy.

Legal action and apologies: An FIR has been filed against Ranveer Allahbadia, Samay Raina, and other participants involved in the show. They are set to appear before the police in the coming days to record their statements. Both Ranveer and Samay have issued public apologies, with Ranveer describing his comment as a “lapse in judgement” and acknowledging that comedy is not his forte. The India’s Got Latent episode has since been taken down from YouTube, and the show’s producers have removed all related content.

The bigger debate: The controversy has sparked a larger discussion on the boundaries of free speech and decency in digital content. While some argue for freedom of expression in comedy, others stress the need for responsible content creation in the wake of such incidents.

As the legal proceedings unfold, both the influencers involved and the general public continue to debate the implications of this incident on the digital landscape. Meanwhile, the question remains—has Virat Kohli’s unfollowing of Ranveer Allahbadia been influenced by the ongoing controversy?

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com