The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday ruled that live-in relationships are not illegal and that the state is bound to protect every citizen from any threats or interference, regardless of their marital status, The Indian Express reported.

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh ruled that living together without marriage is not an offence, and that adults in live-in relationships are entitled to the protection of life and personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution, Bar and Bench reported.

“Mere fact that the petitioners have not solemnized marriage, would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in the Constitution of India being citizens of India,” the court said.

The ruling came in response to petitions filed by 12 women in live-in relationships who sought police protection after alleging threats to their lives, The Indian Express reported.

They claimed that they had approached local police for help but received no support.

In response to the petitions, the court held: “The concept of a live-in relationship may not be acceptable to all, but it cannot be said that such a relationship is an illegal one or that living together without the sanctity of the marriage constitutes an offence.”

Singh emphasised on an adult’s right to autonomy including in matters of choosing a partner and where to live, Bar and Bench reported.

“Once an individual, who is a major, has chosen his/her partner, it is not for any other person, be it a family member, to object and cause a hindrance to their peaceful existence,” the court said while holding that right to human life stands at a “much higher pedestal,” Live Law reported.

The court rejected arguments from the state counsel, who had contended that live-in relationships could not “be accepted at the cost of our country’s social fabric”, The Indian Express reported.

The counsel had also argued that live-in relationships could not be legally recognised and were akin to a contract that could be terminated at will, thus leading to complications in legal matters such as the status of children born out of such relationships.

However, Singh found these arguments unconvincing.

As part of its ruling, the court said the petitioners can approach the commissioner of police, senior superintendent of police, or superintendent of police, with a certified copy of the court order, if any disruption occurs in their peaceful living.

Police officers, upon confirming that the individuals are adults and living together voluntarily, are required to provide immediate protection and take no coercive action against them, The Indian Express quoted the court as saying.

“If they do not have any documentary proof regarding age and they come from a rural background and or are illiterate/semi-literate, the police officer can subject such a boy or girl to an ossification test to verify their correct age,” the court added.

Nobel economics laureate Joseph Stiglitz and nine other academics on Thursday wrote an open letter to the Indian government saying that repealing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act “would be a historic error”.

The letter came on a day when the Lok Sabha passed the 2025 Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace MGNREGA. The draft legislation was also cleared by the Rajya Sabha on Friday amid protests by Opposition parties. It awaits presidential assent.

MGNREGA was introduced in 2005 by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance and aimed at enhancing the livelihood security of households in rural areas. The scheme guaranteed 100 days of unskilled work annually for every rural household that wants it, covering all districts in the country.

While the wage bill for the scheme is borne by the Union government, the states share the cost of materials and administrative expenses.

The new bill proposes increasing the number of guaranteed working days to 125 from 100 and raising the state’s share of the costs to 40%.

Describing MGNREGA as a “landmark legislation”, the academics on Thursday urged the Narendra Modi government to recommit to the Act. MGNREGA “stands as the world’s most significant policy operationalising a demand-driven, legal right to employment”, they said.

The Act being replaced “affirms economic dignity as a fundamental right” and empirical evidence “underscores its impact”, the academics said.

“The early years of the Act coincided with unprecedented rural wage growth, and studies confirmed the program’s positive effects on economic output and efficiency, dispelling myths of unproductivity,” the group added.

They said that chronic underfunding and delay in payments had for long hampered the employment guarantee scheme's implementation.

The signatories added: “The current shift to devolve the scheme to states and without commensurate fiscal support, now threatens its existence. States lack the central government’s financial capacity.”

“The new funding pattern creates a catastrophic Catch-22: states bear legal liability for providing employment, while central financing is withdrawn,” they added. “Previously contributing only 25% of material costs, states now face burdens of 40% to 100% of total costs, ensuring poorer states will curb project approvals, directly stifling work demand.”

The “structural sabotage is compounded by discretionary ‘switch-off’ powers”, the academics said, adding that this would allow the scheme to be suspended and render the guarantee meaningless.

“The unexplained defunding of West Bengal in the last three years exemplifies this political misuse,” they added. “The new framework institutionalises this risk, imposing unfunded mandates on states without consultation.”

In March 2022, the Union government suspended MGNREGA funding to West Bengal, citing widespread irregularities and alleged violations of the scheme’s implementation rules by the state government.

West Bengal received Rs 7,507 crore in the financial year 2021-’22 under MGNREGA but has received no funds in the following three financial years.

On December 5, the Union government told Parliament that it was in the “process of reworking and refining the necessary modalities and procedures” to resume the scheme under the Act in West Bengal.

The signatories said that MGNREGA not only provides wages but also helps build important rural infrastructure such as wells, roads and ponds, and stimulates the local economies. “By making projects financially untenable for states, these multiplier effects are extinguished,” they said.

The signatories also include Olivier De Schutter, the United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty, Pavlina Tcherneva, the president and professor of economics at The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College in New York, and Thomas Piketty, the co-director of the World Inequality Lab.

The proposed legislation states that the Union government will determine the state-wise normative allocation for each financial year based on “objective parameters”. It also proposed that only the Union government can notify rural areas in a state where the scheme will be implemented.

As per the bill, the governments in the North East states, Himalayan states (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) and the Union Territories with legislature (Jammu and Kashmir) will contribute to 10% of the scheme’s funding.

The Centre will bear all costs in Union Territories that do not have a legislature.

The proposed legislation retains the provision that a person is entitled to a daily unemployment allowance if work is not provided within 15 days of applying under the scheme. The cost of the allowance will be borne by the state governments.

Significant rollback of workers’ rights: Right to Food campaign

On Friday, the Right to Food Campaign, a network of activists working on food and nutrition, said that the VB-G RAM G bill marked a “significant rollback of hard-won statutory guarantees” for workers’ rights.

Describing the passing of the bill in Parliament as a “dark day for workers’ rights”, the activists said that repealing MGNREGA “undermines the right to work of people and all principles of decentralisation, community participation and federalism”.

The bill does not reform employment guarantee but destroys it, they said in a statement, adding that by repealing MGNREGA, the Union government had “converted a demand-based legal right to work into a centralised, discretionary, budget-capped scheme, fully controlled by” it.

It claimed that employment was no longer guaranteed by law but was subject to annual allocations, political priorities and fiscal arbitrariness.

“This is a betrayal of rural workers, especially women, landless households, Dalits, Adivasis, and migrants who depend on MGNREGA for survival and dignity,” the activists said.

The statement also said that the Union government’s claim that the proposed legislation signified an improvement from the old Act as it provided 125 days of employment in place of 100 was “just an illusion”.

It added: “Under the MGNREGA, on average only about 50 days of work per household has been provided per household, with the entitlements being undermined through delayed payments, low wages, digital exclusions and so on.”

The activists said that the VB-G RAM G bill makes it worse by including state-wise “normative allocations” imposed by the Union government. Any expenditure above these allocations were to be borne entirely by the state government.

“With such restrictions, the amount of work provided will only decrease further,” they said.

Noting that the fiscal burden on state governments would also increase with the shift to a 60:40 cost-sharing ratio for wages, the activists added that “this changed cost-sharing norms increases the burden on the already fiscally starved state governments and would disproportionately harm poorer states where the capacity to spend is low”.

They also claimed that the bill “systematically erodes” all principles of decentralisation by shifting most decision making powers to the Union government.

Claiming that MGNREGA had also been systematically undermined over the last decade through several administrative interventions, the activists said that what was required was strengthening it by increasing the wage rate, withdrawing mandatory digital attendance and Aadhaar-linked payments, strengthening social audits and empowering local communities, among other such steps.

“Instead, what we have now is the VB-GRAM G which represents a rollback of hard-won workers’ rights, centralises authority, and leaves the most vulnerable behind,” they added.

The statement also claimed that the draft legislation was brought to Parliament in “total secrecy”.

“In flagrant violation of basic democratic norms & provisions of the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy, the government did not make public the proposed legislation and did not hold any public consultations,” it said.

The activists claimed that the “tearing hurry with which the bill was railroaded through Parliament” prevented any meaningful deliberation and parliamentary scrutiny.

Also read:

• BJP chief ministers wanted MGNREGA to include farm work. Modi government’s bill goes another way
• ‘A bill to destroy MGNREGA’: Why experts fear the worst from new job guarantee bill

The NREGA Sangharsh Morcha, an umbrella organisation of workers’ unions from across the country, on Friday called off its march against the Modi government’s Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission Bill, after the Delhi Police denied permission for it.

The protest was slated to be held on Friday at Jantar Mantar, the designated site for such gatherings in the national capital. The NREGA Sangharsh Morcha had given the call for it on Thursday.

However, the police wrote to the organisers the same day, warning them against going ahead with the protest. They said that any violation of its directive could lead to legal action.

Scroll has seen a copy of this letter, which was signed by Anand Kumar Mishra, one of the additional deputy commissioners of police in the New Delhi district. The letter said that the organisers had failed to give the authorities 10 days’ advance notice about the protest.

But social scientist Rajendran Narayanan, a member of the NREGA Sangharsh Morcha, took strong exception to this reasoning.

“It takes two days to repeal an Act that has been in force for 20 years, but we civilians need to give 10 days of notice to register our protest,” he remarked to Scroll. “The right to work has been repealed and the right to protest is being denied.”

Narayanan was referring to the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which the Narendra Modi-led government has replaced with the VB-G RAM G Bill. Despite Opposition protests, the bill, which was introduced in Parliament only on Tuesday, was passed in both houses on Thursday, just a day before the end of the Winter Session.

The decision has stoked concern in India’s civil society, given the far-reaching impact the employment guarantee scheme has on rural livelihoods. Activists have criticised the bill for effectively upending the rights-based framework that formed the bedrock of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which the United Progressive Alliance government had introduced back in 2005.

MGNREGA guaranteed a minimum of 100 days’ work to every rural household in India annually, which was to be paid for by the Union government. Though the VB-G RAM G bill replacing MGNREGA ostensibly proposes to increase this guarantee to 125 days of work, experts worry about its fine print.

The new law partially shifts the financial burden of the policy to the states while also expanding the Centre’s discretionary power when it comes to its implementation. This, activists say, is a significant departure from the demand-based, decentralised nature of its predecessor.

“There are 26 crore registered workers under NREGA [shortened form of MGNREGA] in the country,” Narayanan added. “You are changing their destiny in three days. How can you decide something so significant like this?”

On Friday, despite the Delhi Police denying them permission, Narayanan and a few other NREGA Sangharsh Morcha members gathered to protest at Jantar Mantar, where they were joined by five Opposition MPs. The police eventually forced them to leave.

“NREGA Sangharsh Morcha condemns such high-handedness and asserts its intention to continue protesting against the repeal of MGNREGA at every opportunity,” the organisation said in a press statement issued later. “We appeal to all concerned organisations and citizens to join the country-wide wave of protests against this attack on the right to work and right to protest.”

Calls and messages to the deputy commissioner as well as the additional deputy commissioner of police in the New Delhi district went unanswered. This story will be updated if and when they respond.

The denial of permission for the protest came just five weeks after the Delhi Police allegedly pressured the organisers of a protest against the hazardous levels of air pollution in the city to call off their stir. At that time, Scroll had reported that police officials had called the organisers and threatened to file first information reports against them.

The Delhi High Court on Friday set aside an order issued by the Lokpal permitting the Central Bureau of Investigation to file a chargesheet against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra in connection with a cash-for-query row, Bar and Bench reported.

A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar ruled that the anti-corruption ombudsman had made an error in understanding provisions of the Lokpal Act, Live Law reported.

It directed the Lokpal to reconsider the sanction for prosecution in accordance with the law within a month.

The case against Moitra, the legislator from West Bengal’s Krishnanagar constituency, stems from allegations that she shared her login credentials to the Parliament website with businessman Darshan Hiranandani and accepted gifts in exchange for asking questions in the Lok Sabha.

Moitra has admitted to sharing her Parliament login details with Hiranandani but denied receiving any cash or gifts.

The allegations against the Trinamool Congress MP were made in October 2023 by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey and advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, her estranged partner. Dubey also filed a complaint with the Lokpal, accusing Moitra of taking cash for bribes.

The anti-corruption ombudsman had directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the matter, following which the central agency submitted its report in February 2024. In March 2024, the Lokpal directed the CBI to investigate the allegations made against Moitra.

This report was submitted by the central agency to the Lokpal in June, The Indian Express reported.

In August, Moitra was directed by the Lokpal to provide her comments to the report.

It passed the sanction order on November 12 after also granting her an opportunity for a hearing.

Moitra challenged the order allowing the CBI to file a chargesheet, arguing that it grossly violated the principles of natural justice, Live Law reported.

In her petition, she contended that her submissions, both written and verbal, were ignored before the sanction was granted.

Her petition also said that the sanction order reduced the role of the Lokpal to merely “rubber-stamping of the investigation report”, The Hindu reported.

Her counsel pointed out that under Section 20(7) of the Lokpal Act, the anti-corruption ombudsman was required to consider the comments and submissions of the accused before granting sanction for prosecution.

However, the CBI, represented by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, submitted that Moitra was not entitled to a oral hearing by the Lokpal but was still given one, Live Law reported. Raju added that the law only required the accused to submit comments.

Amid a row over Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar pulling down a Muslim woman’s hijab at an event where he was distributing appointment letters to doctors, Union minister Giriraj Singh on Thursday said that it was up to her to refuse the government job or “go to hell”, PTI reported.

The event, during which appointment letters were distributed to newly-recruited AYUSH, or Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, and Homeopathy practitioners had taken place at the chief minister’s secretariat in Patna on Monday.

In a video of the incident circulated widely on social media, Kumar is seen pointing towards the woman’s hijab when she came up to collect her letter. The Janata Dal (United) chief is then seen suddenly pulling the garment down.

Deputy Chief Minister Samrat Choudhary, who was standing behind him, appears to intervene and restrain Kumar, while state Health Minister Mangal Pandey and Deepak Kumar, the chief minister’s principal secretary, are seen laughing.

Kumar’s actions led to a controversy, with Opposition parties demanding an apology from the chief minister.

यह क्या हो गया है नीतीश जी को?
मानसिक स्थिति बिल्कुल ही अब दयनीय स्थिति में पहुंच चुकी है या नीतीश बाबू अब 100% संघी हो चुके हैं?@yadavtejashwi #RJD #bihar #TejashwiYadav pic.twitter.com/vRyqUaKhwm

— Rashtriya Janata Dal (@RJDforIndia) December 15, 2025

Singh, however, claimed on Thursday that Kumar had done nothing wrong, ANI reported.

“If someone goes to collect their appointment letter, will they not show their face?” the news agency quoted the Union textile minister as telling reporters. “Is this an Islamic nation? Nitish Kumar did this as a guardian.”

He added: “Do you not show your face when you go to the passport office? Do you not show your face when you go to the airport?...This is India and it will be governed by the rule of law.”

Responding to reports that the woman had refused to take up the job after the incident, he said, “Whether she refuses the job or goes to hell, that’s her choice”, PTI reported.

In response to the chief minister’s actions and Singh’s remarks, Congress MP Tariq Anwar said that these were “third-rate people, they have a cheap mindset”, the news agency reported.

“They don’t understand that our country is secular,” PTI quoted the MP from Bihar’s Katihar as saying. “Everyone is free to practice their religion. What Nitish Kumar has done is shameful and saddening.”

Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar) MP Fauzia Khan also criticised Kumar and Singh, saying that it was “very saddening that responsible people do such acts”.

Khan added that this would send a wrong message to the world.

“It is a personal decision of a woman as to how much she covers up and removing the veil is akin to disrobing a woman,” PTI quoted her as saying. “He [Kumar] should have given a public apology but instead of that they are saying that what happened was right.”

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah claimed that Singh’s statements were exactly what we can expect from the Bharatiya Janata Party, ANI reported.

“If it had been a Hindu woman from Rajasthan or Haryana, wearing a veil, and I had removed it, would the BJP have said the same thing?” the National Conference leader asked. “Imagine the uproar if a Muslim leader had removed the veil of a Hindu woman.”

Abdullah added: “But now, because it was a Muslim woman doctor, the BJP’s reaction is different. What else can we expect from them?”

The Communist Party of India (Marxist) said that first Kumar displayed “utterly indecent, condemnable behaviour” by pulling down a woman’s hijab.

“Now, BJP leader Giriraj Singh abuses the victim and all women,” it said on social media. “Deeply communal and misogynistic – shame on them. We strongly protest and condemn.”

Peoples Democratic Party leader Iltija Mufti also criticised Singh, saying that “only phenyl will work to clean this man’s filthy mouth”.

“You dare not touch the hijabs & naqabs of our Muslim mothers and sisters,” Mufti said on social media. “Otherwise we Muslim women will set you right by teaching you a lesson you and your ilk will remember for all times to come.”

On Friday, Mufti also filed a complaint at the Kothi Bagh Police Station in Jammu and Kashmir’s Srinagar against the chief minister for “violating the dignity of a Muslim woman by forcibly removing her naqaab”.

“Hope the Jammu and Kashmir Police takes cognisance of this violation,” she said on social media while also sharing a copy of the complaint. “Hands off our hijabs & naqaabs.”

Earlier, Amnesty International had issued a statement against Kumar, describing his actions as an “assault on this woman’s dignity, autonomy, and identity”.

“When a public official forcibly pulls down a woman’s hijab, it sends a message to the public that this behaviour is acceptable,” the human rights organisation said.

“Such actions deepen fear, normalise discrimination and erode the very foundations of equality and freedom of religion. This violation demands unequivocal condemnation and accountability,” it said. “Urgent steps must be taken to ensure that no woman is subjected to such degrading treatment.”

Also read: Pity, contempt and identity: The difference between the hijab and the ghoonghat

The Sahitya Akademi on Thursday was forced to cancel a press conference it had organised to announce its annual literary awards after receiving a directive from the Union Ministry of Culture, The Hindu reported.

The autonomous literary body, which is the country’s national academy of letters, confers awards each year to books in 24 languages.

The press conference, which was scheduled for 3 pm in Delhi after a meeting of the Akademi’s executive board, was called off minutes before it was supposed to begin, and the awards process was put on hold.

In a note sent to the Akademi ahead of the press conference, the culture ministry cited an ongoing restructuring process of the awards, The Telegraph reported.

“This is to invite your attention to the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Akademies and the ministry for the year 2025-’26, wherein it has been stipulated that the exercise of restructuring of awards is required to be undertaken in consultation with the ministry,” The Hindu quoted the note as saying.

Four autonomous bodies – the National School of Drama, the Sangeet Natak Akademi, the Lalit Kala Akademi and the Sahitya Akademi – come under the culture ministry. The note was sent to all four bodies.

The note added: “In this regard, you are requested to inform this ministry of the measures taken so far.”

The ministry added that until it clears the restructuring process, “no process for declaration of awards shall be undertaken” without its approval, the newspaper reported.

An unidentified official in the culture ministry told The Hindu that the note was necessitated as the press conference had been called without the ministry’s knowledge, and without the process for the selection of the awardees being approved.

Unidentified officials told The Hindu that the MoUs for restructuring had been signed in line with the restructuring of awards across the board being undertaken under the aegis of the Union Ministry of Home Affairs.

An unidentified member of the Akademi’s executive board told The Telegraph that a suggestion from a ministry representative on the board to review the names of the awardees had been rejected.

When presented with the names of the winners, the official said that the ministry “would review it and make the announcement”, the newspaper quoted the member as saying.

According to the individual, the other members said that the ministry had no business reviewing the names and that once the board had approved the names, the secretary would make the announcement. The official had accepted this, and the names of the winners had been cleared by the board, the individual said.

He added that there “were no suggestions from the ministry to include any names”.

KP Ramanunni, writer and a member of the Akademi’s executive board, said this was the first such cancellation in the history of the literary body and described the postponement of the awards process as “unfortunate”, Mathrubhumi reported.

MA Baby, the general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), said that it was “extremely deplorable that the Sahitya Akademi has sent the recommendations for its awards to the Union government”.

In a social media post, Baby added: “This is the first time ever in its history that an autonomous body such as the Akademi is bowing down to the ruling powers and seeking their approval”.

He added that it was “a shame that the Akademi, which is now functioning without a secretary, is on its knees for the government’s permission, betraying the vision of its illustrious founders”.

An official of the level of director in the culture ministry has been officiating as the member secretary of the literary body since the superannuation of a previous member secretary in October, The Hindu reported.

“Strongly condemn the [Prime Minister Narendra] Modi- [Union Home Minister Amit] Shah-[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan] Bhagwat triumvirate’s efforts to make India’s cultural institutions dance to their tunes,” Baby said. “All those who love letters and literature should unite to resist this affront on our freedom of expression!”

The RSS is the parent organisation of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

Extremely deplorable that the Sahitya Akademi has sent the recommendations for its awards to the Union Government. This is the first time ever in its history that an autonomous body such as the Akademi is bowing down to the ruling powers and seeking their approval. It is a shame…

— M A Baby (@MABABYCPIM) December 18, 2025

The Lok Sabha passed the 2025 Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace the 2005 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act amid protests from the Opposition. It needs to be cleared by the Rajya Sabha before it is sent for presidential assent.

Opposition members stormed the well of the House, shouted slogans against the Union government for removing Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme. They tore up copies of the bill, forcing the Lok Sabha to be adjourned for the day.

MNREGA, introduced by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government in 2005, guaranteed 100 days of unskilled work annually to rural households. The new legislation proposes increasing this to 125 days while also increasing the state’s share of funding to 40% – up from the current system where costs are borne by the Centre. Read on.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India alleged that Pranav Adani, the nephew of billionaire businessman Gautam Adani, violated insider trading norms by sharing unpublished price sensitive information about the Adani Group’s open offer for NDTV with close relatives, the Economic Times reported.

The market regulator issued show cause notices on October 15 to Pranav Adani, his brothers-in-law Kunal and Nrupal Shah and his father-in-law Dhanpal Shah. SEBI alleged that call records indicated frequent communication among them during the unpublished price sensitive information period.

The Adani Group acquired majority stakes in NDTV on December 30, 2022, after it acquired a 27.26% equity stake in the media firm from co-founders Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy.

More than four months before that, on August 23, 2022, the stock exchange was informed, after market hours, that Adani-linked entities would acquire up to 26% of NDTV.

SEBI said the information remained unpublished and price sensitive until markets reopened, when NDTV shares rose sharply. It alleged that Kunal, Nrupal and Dhanpal Shah made unlawful profits through these shares. Read on.

The Lok Sabha passed the 2025 Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Bill, which aims to open up the civil nuclear sector to private operators. The bill was passed despite Opposition demands that it be referred to a parliamentary committee and now awaits approval by the Rajya Sabha.

The legislation proposes to allow private companies, joint ventures and government firms to construct, own, operate and decommission nuclear power plants. It also seeks to remove a provision that permits plant operators to take legal action against suppliers if defective equipment causes an accident.

The changes are intended to attract investment and help India meet its target of 100 gigawatt of nuclear power capacity by 2047. Read on.

The Union government told Parliament that the number of schools covered under a scheme to give students mid-day meals declined from 11.1 lakh in 2020-’21 to 10.3 lakh in 2024-’25. This marks a reduction of 84,453 schools covered under the Pradhan Mantri Poshan Shakti Nirman scheme over five years.

The sharpest fall occurred between 2020-’21 and 2021-’22, when coverage declined by 35,574 schools, from 11.1 lakh to 10.8 lakh.

The number fell to 10.7 lakh in 2022-’23, down by 7,604 schools, and slipped further to 10.6 lakh in 2023-’24 – a dip of 9,509 schools.

It declined in 2024-’25 to 10.3 lakh, marking a reduction of 31,766 schools in a year, data provided by the Union Ministry of Education showed. Read more.

If you haven’t already, sign up for our Daily Brief newsletter.

The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed a bill aimed at preventing hate speech and hate crimes amid protests by the Opposition, The Hindu reported.

The Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes Prevention Bill was introduced in the Assembly by state Home Minister G Parameshwara. It covers hate speech in public view verbally, in print or online.

The bill proposes to make hate crime punishable with imprisonment of less than one year, which could be extended to seven years, along with a fine of Rs 50,000.

In case the offence is repeated, the punishment would not be less than two years, which may be extended to seven years, along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh.

Parameshwara said that the bill was necessitated in the wake of a direction by the Supreme Court in May, which stated that attempts to spread communal hatred and hate speech should be dealt with strongly, The New Indian Express reported.

The minister added that the proposed legislation could bring substantial changes and help in preventing the dissemination, publication or promotion of hate speech and hate crimes.

R Ashoka, the leader of the Opposition, said that the bill violated the freedom of speech and the press. But nothing more could be expected from the ruling Congress that imposed Emergency in the country, the Bharatiya Janata Party leader said.

All proposals in the bill were already part of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Ashoka said, adding that the goal of the draft legislation was to target the Opposition parties and the media, The New Indian Express reported.

The BJP leader said that the proposed law could be used as a weapon to settle political scores and warned the Congress that it could boomerang.

Subsequently, the BJP members demanded that the bill be referred to a committee for scrutiny but this was turned down by the speaker, The Hindu reported. State Law Minister HK Patil said that the bill had been passed and there was no chance to discuss it again.

Following this, the BJP members walked out of the Assembly.

The Rajya Sabha after midnight on Friday passed the 2025 Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace the 2005 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act amid protests by Opposition parties.

It was cleared by the Lok Sabha on Thursday, even as Opposition members stormed the well of the Lower House shouting slogans against the Union government for dropping the name of Mahatma Gandhi from the scheme.

The bill will now be sent to the president for assent.

The MGNREGA was introduced in 2005 by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance and aimed at enhancing the livelihood security of households in rural areas. The scheme guaranteed 100 days of unskilled work annually for every rural household that wants it, covering all districts in the country.

While the wage bill for the scheme is borne by the Union government, the states share the cost of materials and administrative expenses.

The new bill proposes increasing the number of guaranteed working days to 125 from 100 and raising the state’s share of the costs to 40%.

After the bill was passed by voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, Opposition leaders criticised the Union government for “bulldozing” the draft legislation through the Upper House and held an overnight protest inside the Parliament complex.

In a social media post, Trinamool Congress’ Rajya Sabha deputy leader Sagarika Ghose said the Opposition MPs were protesting the manner in which the Narendra Modi government had introduced the “anti-poor, anti-people” bill.

“With just five hours’ notice, this bill was given to us,” she said. “We were not allowed a proper debate.”

The Trinamool Congress leader added: “Our demand was such an important bill should be sent to the select committee and let the Opposition parties examine it, let the Opposition parties discuss it, let all stakeholders discuss it, but no.”

Opening the Congress’ statement against the bill in the Rajya Sabha, party MP Mukul Wasnik said that the MGNREGA was passed unanimously in Parliament after undergoing scrutiny, reported The Hindu.

“Can the government say the same thing about this legislation?” he asked, adding that the bill was introduced just days before the Winter Session was to conclude.

The session, which began on December 1, will end on Friday.

“Did you speak to the state governments before increasing their financial liability?” Wasnik further asked. “Were they taken into confidence? And if it has been done, can the government table those consultations in the House?”

All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP M Thambidurai criticised the Union government for increasing the state governments’ share of the cost of the employment guarantee scheme.

He said that if states are to bear 40% of the costs, then they should also get 100% of taxes and other cesses that the Centre collects.

The AIADMK is an ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party in Tamil Nadu.

The proposed legislation states that the Union government will determine the state-wise normative allocation for each financial year based on “objective parameters”. It also proposed that only the Union government can notify rural areas in a state where the scheme will be implemented.

As per the bill, the governments in the North East states, Himalayan states (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) and the Union Territories with legislature (Jammu and Kashmir) will contribute to 10% of the scheme’s funding.

The Centre will bear all costs in Union Territories that do not have a legislature.

The proposed legislation retains the provision that a person is entitled to a daily unemployment allowance if work is not provided within 15 days of applying under the scheme. The cost of the allowance will be borne by the state governments.

Also read:

• BJP chief ministers wanted MGNREGA to include farm work. Modi government’s bill goes another way

• ‘A bill to destroy MGNREGA’: Why experts fear the worst from new job guarantee bill

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday observed that shouting the slogan “gustakh-e-nabi ki ek saza, sar tan se juda, sar tan se juda” constitutes a challenge to the authority of the law, and the sovereignty and integrity of India.

The slogan translates to “the only punishment for disrespecting the prophet is beheading”.

A bench of Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal made the observation while denying bail to a person accused of being involved in the violence in Bareilly in September.

The court observed that the slogan incites people to an “armed rebellion” and is punishable under Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita section 152, which pertains to acts that endanger India’s sovereignty, unity and integrity.

The single-judge bench of the High Court also said that the slogan was against the basic tenets of Islam. It added that the slogan does not have any trace in the Quran or other Muslim religious texts.

The court further said that shouting religious slogans such as “‘nara-e-takbir’ followed by ‘Allahu Akbar’”, “Jo bole so nihaal, Sat Sri Akal”, “Jai Shree Ram” or “Har Har Mahadev” was “not an offence unless they are maliciously used to intimidate persons belonging to other religions”.

The prosecution argued that on September 26, two leaders of the Muslim community allegedly incited a crowd to gather at a college to demonstrate against “atrocities as well as lodging false cases against the Muslim youth”.

Despite prohibitory orders barring the assembly of more than five individuals having been in place, a crowd of more than 500 persons allegedly gathered and shouted slogans against the government and called for beheading, the prosecution alleged.

A clash broke out when the police tried to intervene, the prosecution argued.

Denying bail to one of the persons accused in the violence, the court said that while the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, the right is subject to reasonable restrictions.

Shouting the slogan that calls for beheading is “not only against the constitutional object but also a challenge to the lawful authority of the Indian legal system”, the court added.

The bench said that there was sufficient material showing that the bail applicant “was part of an unlawful assembly which not only raised objectionable slogans challenging the authority of the Indian legal system but also caused injuries to police personnel and damaged public as well as private property, which is nothing but an offence against the state and he was arrested from the spot”.

The Special Investigation Team probing the death of Assamese singer Zubeen Garg has filed a first information report against Raijor Dal MLA Akhil Gogoi for allegedly circulating unverified details of the chargesheet in the case on social media, a police officer told Scroll.

Garg, a renowned Assamese singer, died on September 19 during a yacht trip in Singapore, a day before he was scheduled to perform at the North East India Festival there.

On December 12, the Special Investigation Team probing the matter filed a chargesheet in a Guwahati court, charging four out of the seven arrested persons with murder.

On Wednesday, Gogoi, who represents the Sivasagar Assembly constituency, shared on Facebook details of the charges against the seven persons accused in the matter.

He claimed this was part of the chargesheet submitted by the SIT.

“I have come to know that the government has filed a case against me for making the chargesheet related to Zubeen public,” Gogoi said on social media on Thursday. “I am severely ill. Even then, I will go to Guwahati tomorrow to face the case.”

The event where Garg was scheduled to perform had been organised by the Indian government and the Indian High Commission in Singapore, with support from the Assam Association and the North East India Association in the country.

A death certificate issued by the Singaporean authorities on September 20 stated the cause of Zubeen Garg’s death as drowning.

The Singapore Police Force had on October 17 said that it did not suspect foul play in the singer’s death following preliminary investigations into the matter.

It had added that the probe may take up to three more months to complete, following which the findings would be submitted to the State Coroner, a judicial officer, who would determine whether the matter required a Coroner’s Inquiry.

However, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has repeatedly claimed that Zubeen Garg’s death was not accidental but was a “plain and simple murder”.

The four persons who have been charged for murder are Shyamkanu Mahanta, who was the organiser of the North East India Festival, Zubeen Garg’s manager Siddharatha Sharma and two musicians who were with the singer on the yacht – Shekharjyoti Goswami and Amritprava Mahanta.

Besides, Zubeen Garg’s cousin, Deputy Superintendent of Police Sandipan Garg, who had travelled with him to Singapore, has been charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder, while two of the singer’s personal security officers have been accused of criminal breach of trust.

Munna Prasad Gupta, the chief of the SIT, had on December 12 said that the main chargesheet is about 2,500 pages. When combined with various additional documents, such as bank records, digital evidence and forensic reports, it adds up to approximately 12,000 pages, he added.

Also read:

• Are Assam protests over Zubeen Garg’s death becoming a political challenge for Himanta?

• ‘Police raj’: In aftermath of Zubeen Garg death, a spate of arrests, detentions of protesting fans

The administration in Assam’s Nagaon district ordered 15 declared foreigners to leave the state within 24 hours on Wednesday.

The orders were issued by the Nagaon District Commissioner Devasish Sharma under the 1950 Immigrants Expulsion from Assam Act.

The Act grants power to district commissioners and senior superintendents of police to expel “illegal migrants” from the state by bypassing the foreigners tribunals.

Those named in the orders were Jahura Khatun, Abdul Aziz, Aheda Khatun, Azufa Khatun, Hussain Ali, Fazila Khatun, Anura Begum, Asha Khatun, Nazrul Islam, Rahim Sheikh, Burek Ali, Idris Ali, Rustam Ali, Anwar Khan and Taher Ali.

The orders issued to the 15 individuals said that as declared foreign nationals, their presence was “detrimental to the interest of the general public” and “internal security of the state”.

The district commissioner directed them to leave the state through the Dhubri, Sribhumi or South Salmara-Mankachar routes.

The orders warned that failure to comply would lead to the government taking appropriate action to “remove you” from the state under the provisions of the Act.

The 15 persons are currently lodged at the Matia Transit Camp in Goalpara district and at an Assam Police battalion facility in Kokrajhar district, The New Indian Express reported.

Nagaon Superintendent of Police Swapnaneel Deka told the newspaper there were 19 such cases, but expulsion orders had been issued in only 15, as the remaining four had pending court cases.

He added that police personnel would escort the 15 persons to the India–Bangladesh border for deportation.

In November, similar orders were issued against five persons in the state’s Sonitpur district.

In September, the Assam Cabinet approved the framing of a standard operating procedure under the Act. Earlier, cases pertaining to undocumented migrants were handled by foreigners tribunals.

Sarma had said that the standard operating procedure to use the 1950 Act had been approved, which would, to a large extent, “nullify” the role of the foreigners tribunals.

Foreigners tribunals in Assam are quasi-judicial bodies that adjudicate on matters of citizenship. However, the tribunals have been accused of arbitrariness and bias, and of declaring people foreigners on the basis of minor spelling mistakes, a lack of documents or lapses in memory.

As per the standard operating procedure, if a district commissioner receives information from the police or other sources that a person is suspected to be an “illegal immigrant”, the official will direct the person to produce evidence of his citizenship within 10 days, Sarma had at the time.

If the district commissioner finds that the evidence submitted is not satisfactory, he can pass an expulsion order by invoking the 1950 Act, ordering the removal of the undocumented immigrant from Assam “by giving 24 hours’ time and by the route so specified”.

In June, Sarma informed the Assembly that the state government was planning to invoke the 1950 law to “push back” more suspected foreigners.

The chief minister had claimed that the expulsion of declared foreigners was justified in the legal framework provided by the Immigrants Expulsion from Assam Act.

Also read: Why experts contest Assam CM’s use of 1950 law to justify forcing out people into Bangladesh

The Ministry of External Affairs on Thursday told Parliament that of the 202 Indian citizens believed to have been recruited into the Russian military, 26 had been killed and seven are missing.

One hundred and nineteen persons have been discharged from service, Minister of State Kirti Vardhan Singh said in response to a question in the Rajya Sabha.

Efforts are being made to secure the release of the remaining 50 persons, he added.

The external affairs ministry has repeatedly issued advisories warning Indian citizens against joining the Russian military. New Delhi contends that many are duped by unscrupulous agents and are often hired as support staff, such as cooks and helpers, amid Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, triggering the deadliest conflict in Europe since World War II.

The Russian defence ministry stopped recruiting Indians in April 2024, according to the country’s embassy in New Delhi. However, contracts for military service have delayed the release of several Indians.

The ministry and Indian diplomatic missions in Russia have been assisting citizens discharged from the Russian Army for their return to India by facilitating their travel documents and providing them with air tickets, Singh said.

“The Indian mission in Russia has also assisted with the task of evacuation of mortal remains,” Singh said. “Once the mortal remains are shifted to a safe zone, the identification process involves matching of DNA samples with the next of kin.”

The discharge of Indian citizens is discussed bilaterally at several levels, including during interactions between leaders, ministers and officials, he added.

The National Investigation Agency on Thursday said it has arrested another man accused in the blast near Delhi’s Red Fort on November 10 that killed 13 persons.

The central agency identified the ninth person arrested in the case as Yasir Ahmad Dar, who is a resident of Jammu and Kashmir’s Shopian. He was arrested in Delhi.

Dar has been accused of being an “active participant in the conspiracy” behind the blast and taking an oath for “carrying out self-sacrificial operations”.

“Investigations by the anti-terror agency have further shown that Yasir was in close contact with the other accused persons in the case, including Umar Un Nabi,” stated the agency.

Nabi, a doctor, was believed to have been driving the car that exploded. Two days after the explosion, the Union government had described it as a “terrorist incident”.

The NIA further stated that earlier this month, it conducted searches at the premises of several persons it suspects were involved in the blast. The searches were conducted in Jammu and Kashmir, and several devices and “incriminating material” were seized, said the central agency.

On December 9, the agency arrested another person, Bilal Naseer Malla, from Jammu and Kashmir’s Baramulla, alleging that he harboured and provided logistical support to Nabi. He was also accused of destroying evidence related to the terror attack.

The central agency had on November 16 arrested an alleged aide to Nabi, who was identified as Amir Rashid Ali. The NIA alleged that the Hyundai i20 car used in the blast was registered in Ali’s name. This was the first arrest in the case.

A day later, the NIA arrested another alleged associate of the doctor, Jasir Bilal Wani alias Danish, from Srinagar. Wani is a resident of Qazigund in Jammu and Kashmir’s Anantnag.

On November 20, four more persons were arrested. They were identified as Muzammil Shakeel Ganai from Pulwama, Adeel Ahmed Rather from Anantnag, Mufti Irfan Ahmad Wagay from Shopian and Shaheen Saeed from Uttar Pradesh’s Lucknow.

Another man, identified as Soyab from Dhauj in Haryana’s Faridabad, was the seventh person arrested in the case on November 26. He was also accused of harbouring and providing logistical support to Nabi.

Hours before the blast, the police said that it had cracked an “inter-state and transnational terror module” in Faridabad and Uttar Pradesh’s Saharanpur.

The police said at the time that it had recovered 2,900 kg of improvised explosive device-making material in raids in several states.

The NIA has been conducting raids at locations in Jammu and Kashmir in the backdrop of the blast and the terror module case.

Today, we are flooded with information (and misinformation) about Vande Mataram, India’s national song, a song that has been valorised and weaponised, a song around which the government felt it was imperative to conduct a ten-hour discussion in Parliament last week. But there is utter silence regarding the core message of Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s novel Anandamath in which the song Vande Mataram is embedded.

Vande Mataram was written in 1875 and published in Bangadarshan, a Bengali literary magazine started by Chattopadhyay and later revived by Rabindranath Tagore. In 1882 it was inserted in Anandamath.

Anandamath is set in the latter half of the eighteenth century. It deals with the sufferings of the Bengali people during the famine of 1770. The Nawab of Bengal, a puppet ruler under the British East India Company, was obliged to extort heavy land taxes from the peasantry. The Nawab and his officials, rather than the British, became the visible face of oppression.

The novel also draws inspiration from the sanyasi rebellions of the time. The sannyasi and fakir rebellion between 1760s and 1800 was a widespread uprising in Bengal and Bihar against British East India Company rule. It was led by Hindu monks and Muslim fakirs protesting heavy taxes, the plight of famine victims and restrictions on religious practices.

They were joined by impoverished peasants, artisans, and disbanded soldiers.

But in the novel, the Santans, as the rebels were called in the novel, were not traditional monks but were recruited from the common people who were ready to take part in a violent struggle, even rob and loot the oppressor, to free the beloved motherland, described so evocatively in Vande Mataram.

Anandamath is often described as a rallying cry for freedom – but from whom? And by whose help would it be gained? Though there are at least two good English translations available on the net, one by Aurabindo Ghosh and his brother Barindra Kumar Ghosh and the other by Nares Chandra Sen-Gupta, very few people seem to have actually read the novel.

The concluding paragraphs of Anandamath reveal the author’s ambivalent attitude towards the British. They are a dialogue between Mahatma Satyananda, the leader of the rebels, and a mysterious saintly doctor, Chikitsak, who acts as a mouthpiece for Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s ideas on education and the role of the British in India’s ultimate rise to greatness.

Saint: “Unless the English rule this land, there is no chance of the renaissance of the eternal religion. Listen patiently. I shall explain to you as it has been seen and understood by the ancient sages. The worship of three hundred and thirty million deities is not the eternal religion; that is an inferior popular religion. Under its influence, the true religion, as the Mlechhas call it, is lost.

The true Hindu religion is based on knowledge, not on action. That knowledge is of two kinds; – secular or external and spiritual or internal. The inner spiritual knowledge is the chief part of true religion. But unless secular knowledge about the outside world comes, the other knowledge about the inner world cannot grow. Unless one knows what the gross is, one cannot arrive at the knowledge pertaining to the subtle. For a long time this esoteric knowledge has been lost in this country – so the true eternal religion is also lost.

In order to restore the eternal religion, at the outset knowledge of the material world must be preached. There is not much material knowledge in the country now; there is none capable of teaching it. We are not adepts in spreading popular education. So the necessary knowledge has got to be brought and introduced from other countries.

The English are past masters in the knowledge pertaining to the material world. They are adepts in the art of teaching. So we shall make the British our rulers. Through English education our people attaining knowledge of the material world will also be made capable of understanding inner knowledge.

There will then be no obstacle against preaching the true eternal religion. True religion will, under the circumstances, grow spontaneously. So long as that does not happen, so long as the Hindus do not become wise, worthy and strong, British rule will endure. The subjects will be happy under the British control. They will pursue their religious life without hindrance. So, О wise one! Desist from fighting the British and follow me.”

Satyananda said, “O noble-hearted one! If our purpose was to put the British in control over us as our rulers, if British rule was considered beneficent for our country, then why did you engage us in this heartless fighting?”

The Saint said, “The English are now merchants, they are busy earning money, they do not care to undertake the responsibility of government. Under the pressure of this Santan rebellion they will be compelled to undertake the responsibility of governing this country. Because without that the financial resources of the country cannot be explored. The Santan rebellion has come only to put the British on the throne. Come now with me, you will understand things yourself after attaining knowledge.”

Satyananda: “O Noble-hearted one! I don’t crave after knowledge, I have no use for it. I shall fulfil the vow that I have taken. Bless me so that my devotion to my Mother remains unshakable.”

The Sage: Your vow stands fulfilled – you have achieved the well-

being of your Mother – you have helped to establish British Rule. Give up fighting, let people engage in cultivation, let the earth become fruitful with crops, let the people of the country become prosperous.”

As if sparks flew from Satyananda’s eyes. He said, “I shall drench the mother earth with the enemy’s blood and thus make her fruitful.”

The Sage: “Who is your enemy? Here is hardly any enemy. The British are our ally and friendly power. Besides none has the requisite power to be victorious in the long run in a war against the British.”

Satyananda: “If we haven’t got the power, I shall give up my body before this image of my Motherland.”

The Sage: You will die in ignorance? Come, attain knowledge first. There is the Mother’s temple on the peak of the Himalayas, from there I shall reveal and show you her true form.

(Translated by Nares Chandra Sen-Gupta)

For a country that is in proud denial of its colonial past, the above revelation, the core message of the novel, is quite startling. The Motherland has to be colonised first under the British to become great again.

Almost two decades before Anandamath was published, Nandashankar Mehta’s historical novel, Karan Ghelo: Gujarat’s Last Rajput King, written in Gujarati, was published in 1866.

In an uncanny way, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s historical fiction seems to echo more forcefully and explicitly the sentiments expressed in the closing paragraphs of this Gujarati novel.

“Since Karan Vaghela’s death, 550 years have elapsed. Much has changed since those times. Those Rajputs, those Muslims, those Marathas – where are they now? What has become of them? Who would believe that the indolent, weak and decadent Rajputs of today are descended from the valiant race that once ruled the land? Who would believe that the weak, starving, illiterate Muslims of today have descended from the Muslims of those times? And as for the Marathas, no trace of their former glory survives. All have been subjugated by the white man.

The bhats and charans who once graced the courts of kings, now wander the hills and jungles. The whole of Gujarat is under British control. But by God’s grace, this province will once again flourish and achieve greatness in a different way, and learning, art and social reform will spread over this beautiful land. May it once again become a garden of paradise, the abode of Lakshmi, the storehouse of all virtue. Astu! Astu! So be it.”

Aban Mukherji is a translator and freelance writer.

The Rajya Sabha on Thursday passed the 2025 Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Bill, which aims to open up the civil nuclear sector to private operators.

The bill, acronymised as Shanti, had been cleared by the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. It requires presidential assent to become a law.

The amendments to the bill and a proposal moved by the Opposition to send the draft legislation to a parliamentary committee for scrutiny were defeated in a voice vote, The Hindu reported.

The draft legislation proposes to grant licenses to private companies, joint ventures and government companies to construct, own, operate or decommission nuclear power plants or reactors.

Other proposed provisions included the removal of a clause in the 2010 Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act that allows the operator of a nuclear power plant to file legal proceedings against suppliers if their equipment was found to have been in an accident.

In 2008, the Bharatiya Janata Party had moved a no-confidence motion against the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government at the time citing, among other things, the absence of such a provision.

However, after the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act was passed in 2010, this provision was believed to be a reason for the lack of foreign participation in the country’s nuclear sector despite the Indo-US nuclear deal.

The new legislation will introduce a tiered system of payouts by operators in case of accidents, in which their liability will depend on the thermal power capacity of the nuclear plant.

The 2010 law established a flat maximum liability for operators at Rs 1,500 crore.

The bill aims to boost investments in the nuclear power sector to help India achieve its target of 100 gigawatt of nuclear power capacity by 2047.

During the debate in the Upper House on Thursday, Trinamool Congress MP Sagarika Ghose said that the bill was fundamentally dangerous. “This bill brings neither Shanti nor security...” she said.

She added: “We are not debating whether India should pursue nuclear energy, India has always pursued nuclear energy responsibly for decades...But as a country, are we now prepared to abdicate our sovereign responsibility, gamble with public safety and place one of the most sensitive sectors of the nation at the mercy of crony capitalism and government-friendly oligarchs as well as foreign pressure?”

The bill was not a reform, “it is recklessness”, the Opposition MP said.

“This bill is not for the public, it’s for profit,” she added, adding that it was the Modi government’s “surrender” to the Donald Trump administration in the United States.

Jitendra Singh, the minister of state for the Department of Atomic Energy, said that nuclear power is a reliable source of energy, adding that safety will not be compromised, The Hindu reported.

After the bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha on Thursday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that the new law marks a “transformational moment” for India’s technology landscape. The law will provide a “decisive boost to a clean-energy future”, Modi said on social media.

On Monday, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar pulled down a Muslim doctor’s hijab leading to an uproar. Opposition leaders from the Congress criticised Kumar while some politicians from the Bharatiya Janata Party have defended him. Kumar’s Janata Dal (United) is part of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance at the Centre and in the state.

A BJP politician immediately made a comparison with Ashok Gehlot of the Congress who had done the same with a Hindu woman’s ghoonghat a few years ago.

It is true that both the Islamic veil in all its forms and the Hindu ghoonghat are patriarchal tools with the sole function of creating submissive women. There is one difference though: unlike the Islamic veil, the ghoonghat is politically benign. The ghoonghat is deemed socially oppressive, and rightly so. But the hijab and the burqa are not only seen as socially oppressive but also part of some diabolical Islamic stratagy that will, one day, overthrow Hindu civilisation.

If there is pity for the Hindu woman in the ghoonghat, there is contempt for the Muslim woman in burqa or hijab.

It is this difference that makes the Gehlot example deceptive. In 2019, when Gehlot set out onhis anti-ghoonghat campaign, he had targeted the practice itself. The BJP, however, targets the very identity of the Muslim: what they wear, what they eat, where they live, whom they marry, everything begets suspicion.

When identity is targeted, the actual culprit – patriarchy – gets brushed under the carpet.

Bihar CM Nitish Kumar pulled the veil of a woman while distributing appointment letters to Ayush practitioners. Even Deputy CM tried to stop him. He wouldn't have done this if he was in his sense. There are several such videos of him behaving awkwardly. pic.twitter.com/M3za0FkQFe

— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) December 15, 2025

A couple of years ago during research for my book on purdah, I had met several Hindu women in cities in Rajasthan. Many had voiced their protest against the ghoonghat. In a beautiful Hindi poem, Mamta Jaitley, an activist from Jaipur, lamented how late she was to realise that “the purdah you hurled over my face obscured my mind too… made me see things as you wanted me to see, hear things as you wanted me to hear”.

For the Muslim woman, even voicing an opinion, let alone protest, is not as straightforward. In the shadow of Hindutva, she encounters a much deeper struggle than her ghoonghat-clad counterpart. She is not dealing merely with a social norm or religious practice within her community, but a political leviathan that seeks to codify prejudice against the entire community.

Yes, patriarchy must be resisted. But when women’s reforms are steeped in malicious intent, they cause more harm to the very women they seek to help. For example, the Indian government’s ban on triple talaq only added to the woes of Muslim women. Muslim men who could no longer divorce their wife quickly began to abandon them. These women could neither ask for maintenance nor remarry.

When dress codes are attacked, regardless of how patriarchal they are, often women willingly bypass their own subordination and adopt visible symbols that bind them to a collective identity. The hijab and the burqa are the perfect visual signals of Muslim solidarity and belonging. I met Muslim women in various cities who had taken up some or the other form of the Islamic veil to signal defiance against prejudice, although they acknowledged the patriarchal purpose of hijab.

A young abaya-clad forensic sciences student I met in Mangaluru last year had adeptly explained the catch-22: “If I abandon the veil, I please the government (which I would never do); if I adopt the veil, I abide by my religion but also lose a part of myself, my own identity.”

Besides, patriarchy as an institution is old. Very old. Its origins date back 300,000 years. The practice of veiling itself is 4,000 years old. One cannot simply will away deeply-embedded practices through sudden expurgations: change has to come from within society. Veiling is part of the system of purdah (seclusion), a system so normalised that even Mohandas Gandhi, as a young married man, would refuse to allow his wife, Kasturba, to go anywhere without his permission.

He had been made a jealous husband by the thought, “If I should be pledged to be faithful to my wife, she also should be pledged to be faithful to me” – a fallibility he later regretted. So, at a public address in Fatehpur in 1947, when he said, “True purdah should be of the heart. What is the value of the outer veil?”, it is likely that his words ordained a focus on the inequality of sexes rather than just a sanction against a dress code.

Whether a woman wears a veil out of coercion, which is very common, or willingly adopts it in political protest or piety, paternalistic bans and attacks are likely to fail. Just as paternalistic mandates that make hijab compulsory have failed – as in Iran. The problem is that the woman in whose name bans and abstruse verdicts are passed is universally ignored.

Unless there is a political ideology targeting an entire group of people, leading to defiance, mainstream education can significantly help in breaking harmful practices. Most Muslim women I met in India who had rejected the veil were educated and financially independent. But forcing students to remove their veils stops this progress midway.

Many girls and women who went to school and college in Karnataka in their hijab dropped out when forced to remove it. The French hijab ban in 2004, too, led to increased perceptions of discrimination, which hindered Muslim girls from finishing school.

Attacks on the hijab will likely worsen the status of Muslim women because the only option that would leave for many is religious education. It is more accessible, less restrictive – and patriarchal. Is that the objective?

Raheel Dhattiwala is a sociologist.

The Supreme Court on Thursday urged the Election Commission to “sympathetically consider” requests to extend the deadline for submitting enumeration forms as part of the ongoing revision of voter rolls in Uttar Pradesh and Kerala, Live Law reported.

The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was told by advocate Kapil Sibal that 25 lakh names have been deleted in the electoral rolls in Uttar Pradesh alone, PTI reported.

“In some cases, the name of the husband is there and the wife is not there,” he added.

The counsel for the poll body opposed the petition, arguing that extensions had already been granted.

“The ECI is keeping a watch and wherever required, it is extending the time,” Live Law quoted the counsel as saying. “So it is not that if two weeks are given now, it cannot be extended further.”

The deadline for Kerala has already been extended twice, from December 4 to December 11 and then to December 18 and the draft voter list is now scheduled for publication on December 23.

In Uttar Pradesh, the revised enumeration period ends on December 26, with draft rolls due on December 31.

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed petitioners to submit representations to the Election Commission and directed the poll body to take an appropriate decision after considering “all the ground realities and all the relevant factors,” Live Law reported.

The Supreme Court has listed the hearing on the constitutionality of the voter roll revision for January 6.

On December 11, the poll body extended the timelines for the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in six of the 12 states and Union Territories where the exercise is underway. This included Uttar Pradesh.

Kerala was among the other six states and Union Territories for which the poll panel did not extend the timelines.

The draft list in West Bengal was published on Tuesday and over 58 lakh voters have been removed from voter lists in the state as they either died, migrated outside the state or did not submit their enumeration forms, the poll body said.

In Bihar, where the revision was completed ahead of the Assembly polls in November, at least 47 lakh voters were excluded from the final electoral roll published on September 30.

Concerns had been raised after the announcement in Bihar that the exercise could remove eligible voters from the roll. Several petitioners also moved the Supreme Court against it.

Thengapattanam’s coast bustles on weekday mornings, even when the rain is unrelenting. The largest fishing harbour in Kanniyakumari district on the southern tip of India, its air is thick with calls and conversations between merchants and boat owners.

The local fishers are on edge. An incident in August has highlighted the ongoing tensions surrounding wildlife protection in India, in particular the struggle to differentiate between species of shark. It could result in them being inadvertently fined or even dragged into court.

Thengapattanam is the nearest harbour to Thoothoor, a coastal village renowned for its shark fishing. Every day, this harbour hosts crores of rupees worth of business, equivalent to hundreds of thousands of US dollars. A good part of that revolves around shark meat.

On August 19, the daily catch was seized from multiple boats by authorities and a merchant was taken into custody. They were charged with being in possession of a legally protected shark species.

“For a couple of weeks after the incident in August, many of the boats, including mine, refrained from catching sharks. Not because we had been catching banned species and violating wildlife laws, but [because] getting into a legal tussle with the authorities wasn’t worth it,” says Julius Kasper, a fisher and boat owner from Thoothoor who has been fishing for over 36 years.

Kaspar and others whose day-to-day life revolves around Thengapattanam have since returned to their normal fishing activities. But they say India’s ambiguous wildlife laws, and the wildlife department’s aggressive stance on them, hang over their heads.

The Thengapattanam incident

After the August seizures, a fish merchant and three boat owners were fined for dealing with sharks from the Alopiidae family, known as thresher sharks. Although the international trade of these animals is controlled, there is no regulation against catching and trading them within India. Vincent Jain, president of the Federation of Indian Fisher Organizations, is one of the union representatives who has intervened on behalf of those charged. He says the group was fined Rs 30,000 in total.

Fishers believe the officials involved misidentified the sharks in question as being protected and wrongfully levied the penalties. Those from Thoothoor say they have been walking on eggshells since, paranoid about the heavy losses they might incur if the incident were repeated.

On 2 September, trade unions representing the fishers along this coast held a meeting in the nearby city of Thiruvananthapuram, demanding change. They want an independent committee formed to investigate the arrests. They also want a panel of government officials, scientists, police and fishers created, to produce a better way of identifying shark species and the legality of landing them.

Jain says this is a systemic problem that needs addressing: “It would be pointless to blatantly criticise only the officials who were involved in the incident on 19 August. We, the fishers’ collectives, are demanding a permanent resolution for this.”

Jain says a more practical and flexible approach is needed: authorities should improve their shark identification methods, and be more lenient when fishers accidentally catch protected species while trying to hook something else. “In the long run, having such a healthy relationship between the fisherfolk and the authorities will only help the cause of species conservation.”

What the rules say

Many shark populations are in decline due to fishing pressure. Countries around the world are stepping up efforts to protect them, including India.

India’s Wildlife Protection Act was created in 1972 to conserve terrestrial biodiversity. In 2001, a blanket ban was enforced on the fishing of “all shark and ray species”. After massive protests from fishing communities across the country, the order was reformed to a selection of 10 shark and ray species, including the Pondicherry shark, the Ganges shark, the porcupine ray and the knifetooth sawfish.

Things have largely been quiet between shark fishers and authorities since then. But amendments to the Wildlife Protection Act in 2022 have strained their relationship. Those amendments were designed to create a more robust legal framework to protect sharks and rays. Several marine species were added to the act’s s most protected categories, called schedule 1 and schedule 2.

Schedule 1 is the strictest, covering marine species whose capture and landing is strictly forbidden; this category includes whale sharks. Schedule 2 covers species whose capture is not permitted but if this occurs accidentally, landing is permissible, although the authorities must be notified to dispose of the bodies; great hammerhead sharks are included. Thresher sharks have never been a part of schedule 1 or 2.

Fishers from Thengapattanam say they rarely land species listed in schedules 1 and 2. An exception is the occasional stranding of whale sharks and the equally rare oceanic whitetip shark that gets mixed with other species. But the August arrests and overlapping rules of the Wildlife Protection Act and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) have created confusion and concern.

Can technology help identify sharks?

Eldho Varghese, a senior scientist at the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) in Kochi, southern India, believes technology could be a solution to the problem of identifying India’s sharks.

He has developed a mobile app named MARLIN that allows fishers to share digital information related to fish landings. Now Varghese hopes to build on this with an artificial intelligence-based tool for identifying species.

“The main roadblock we face with respect to species identification is certainly developing a strong image-based database,” Varghese says. “While researchers, wildlife organisations and scientific experts can help us in building this, our main sources of that information inarguably will be the fishers, who go out into the ocean and encounter the wide varieties of species on a regular basis.”

Fisheries or forestry

One of the main shark identification challenges that fishers and wildlife officials face is how small the differences between certain species and subspecies are to the naked eye.

Dialogue Earth consulted Shoba Joe Kizhakudan, head of the CMFRI’s finfish fisheries division. She agrees that educating both officials and fishers in identifying marine species is imperative. The institute has held multiple training sessions to enhance knowledge among fishers.

Inspections such as that on 19 August are carried out by the state wildlife and forestry department, with much of the relevant law focused on terrestrial species. But much of the necessary expertise is found in the fisheries department, which is a separate entity.

Kizhakudan points out that the hunting or poaching of terrestrial wild animals is very different from what happens on the ocean, where protected species can easily be accidentally caught on lines or in nets as bycatch. “Our organisation has in the past formally appealed to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change that a separate wildlife framework be enacted for marine organisms,” she adds.

Following the August 19 arrests, a Thengapattanam fisheries inspector told Dialogue Earth that the wildlife and forestry department had not notified them of the raid in advance – the inspector acknowledged a lack of communication between these departments when it comes to inspections and penalties.

Satish Kumar is deputy director of the Tamil Nadu Forest and Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, which gathers intelligence that it reports to the wildlife and forestry department. Kumar says observations recorded across several days before August 19 suggested there had been multiple landings of protected sharks and rays, and that the department’s inspection was carried out based on concrete evidence. He declined to say which species the bureau believed were being landed.

Fishers insist they are complying with the law, and say authorities are simply getting their sharks muddled up.

Where next for Thengapattanam?

Jerickson is a native of Thoothoor who runs a fishing boat and acts as a fish merchant. He was present at Thengapattanam on 19 August but was not one of those arrested or fined.

“The wildlife authorities had been hanging around the harbour for a few days before that, observing,” Jerickson says. “We didn’t think too much into it: Thengapattanam is a huge harbour; hundreds of boats come here every morning.” He says that on days when many boats that have been at sea for weeks arrive at the harbour, fish trading can generate up to Rs 300 million.

Jerickson fears more officials will arrive to inspect sharks – and potentially misidentify them – next year, once Tamil Nadu’s state legislature elections wrap up in April and May. He believes the present lull in such raids is down to the need to secure votes from the fishing communities.

Jerickson and other Thengapattanam fishers acknowledge that it would be beneficial for everyone if there was a better system for identifying protected species, especially sharks.

He points to a hammerhead shark waiting to be auctioned off: “You see … we can catch … the arrow-headed hammerhead, whereas the great hammerhead and smooth hammerhead are banned from [being caught]. The fishers are well aware of that, and we do not catch them intentionally as we can recognise them. But my question is, are the officials who are scrutinising us knowledgeable of such distinctions?”

That question continues to weigh heavily on India’s shark fishers, and those who police them.

Bharath Thampi is a journalist and documentarian based in Kerala, India, who works on social, cultural and environmental long-form features and documentaries.

This article was originally published on Dialogue Earth under the Creative Commons BY NC ND licence.

The Kerala High Court on Thursday stayed for three months the show cause notices and proposed proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and two others in connection with alleged foreign exchange violations by the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board, Bar and Bench reported.

The court also stayed notices issued to former state finance minister TM Thomas Isaac and KM Abraham, the chief executive officer of the board.

Justice VG Arun passed the interim order on a joint petition filed by the Vijayan, Isaac and Abraham and issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate on the contentions in the petition, PTI reported.

Earlier in the week, the court had granted a similar three-month stay on the show cause notice and adjudication proceedings against the investment board itself. The judge on Thursday said that the same relief would apply to the three petitioners.

The Enforcement Directorate informed the court on Thursday that it would file an intra-court appeal against the order, Bar and Bench reported.

The central agency is investigating whether about Rs 2,150 crore raised through masala bonds issued in 2019 and listed on the International Securities Market in London were used to purchase land in alleged violation of Foreign Exchange Management Act norms.

In another complaint, the probe agency alleges this amounted to prohibited “real estate activity” under the Reserve Bank of India’s 2015 Master Directions, Bar and Bench reported.

Masala bonds are bonds that are issued outside India but are denominated in Indian rupees. They allow Indian companies to raise capital from foreign investors in Indian currency, and are usually used to fund infrastructure projects.

The Lok Sabha on Thursday passed the 2025 Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace the 2005 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act amid protests from the Opposition.

The bill will need to be cleared by the Rajya Sabha before it is sent for presidential assent.

The MGNREGA was introduced in 2005 by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance and aimed at enhancing the livelihood security of households in rural areas. The scheme guaranteed 100 days of unskilled work annually for every rural household that wants it, covering all districts in the country.

While the wage bill for the scheme is borne by the Union government, the states share the cost of materials and administrative expenses.

The new bill proposes to increase the number of guaranteed working days to 125 from 100 and raise the state’ share of the costs to 40%.

Responding to an eight-hour discussion on the bill, Union Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan on Thursday claimed that there were several shortcomings in the MGNREGA, The Indian Express reported.

The Bharatiya Janata Party leader said that states had spent more on labour and less on material procurement. He also added that successive governments had launched employment guarantee schemes before MGNREGA.

Rejecting the Opposition’s claim that the Narendra Modi government was arbitrarily changing the names of schemes, he added: “Congress killed ideals of Mahatma Gandhi when it accepted Partition… when they gave special status to Kashmir…when Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency…”

Opposition members stormed the well of the Lower House shouting slogans against the Union government for dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme. The MPs also tore copies of the VB-G RAM G bill and flung it towards the chair.

The bill was passed by voice vote amid the uproar. Subsequently, the Lok Sabha was adjourned for the day.

During discussions in the Lower House on the proposed legislation a day earlier, the Telugu Desam Party flagged the increased burden on the state government, The Hindu reported.

Andhra Pradesh was a revenue-deficient state, Telugu Desam Party Lavu Sri Krishna Devarayalu said.

“When we have to cough up 40% from the state to fund this scheme, we request that the same amount of support that has been extended for the last one and a half years be continued so that the scheme can be implemented well,” the newspaper quoted Devarayalu as saying.

The Telugu Desam Party is part of the ruling NDA at the Centre.

Opposition Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP K Kanimozhi said that while the share of the state government in central taxes had been shrinking, the financial burden on them was increasing.

She also criticised to the Hindi nomenclature of the bill, The Hindu reported. “This is not a ‘Viksit Bharat’ bill but a ‘vexed’ bill,” the newspaper quoted Kanimozhi as saying.

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra noted that the word “guarantee” appeared 92 times in the bill. However, if the fine print was read, it did not guarantee anything as the Union government gets to fix the budget and also notify the areas where the scheme would be implemented.

The proposed legislation states that the Union government will determine the state-wise normative allocation for each financial year based on “objective parameters”. It also proposed that only the Union government can notify rural areas in a state where the scheme will be implemented.

Congress MP Kodikunnil Suresh claimed the draft legislation was anti-women, The Hindu reported.

Women constitute 90% of the MGNREGA workforce in states like Kerala, he noted.

As per the bill, the governments in the North East states, Himalayan states (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) and the Union Territories with Legislature (Jammu and Kashmir) will contribute to 10% of the scheme’s funding.

The Centre will bear all costs in Union Territories that do not have a legislature.

The proposed legislation retains the provision that a person is entitled to a daily unemployment allowance if work is not provided within 15 days of applying under the scheme. The cost of the allowance will be borne by the state governments.

State employment scheme to be named after Gandhi: Mamata

Later on Thursday, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that the removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s name from MGNREGA filled her with “deep shame” and added that she would rename a similar employment scheme in the state after him.

“Are we now forgetting even the Father of the Nation?” the Trinamool Congress chief asked. “We have therefore decided to rename our Karmashree scheme after Mahatma Gandhi.”

The scheme was launched in 2024 by the state government to provide at least 50 days of employment to job card holder households in a financial year through works implemented by different departments.

She added: “We seek nothing except respect. And if some do not know how to honour Mahatma Gandhi, we will demonstrate what true respect means.”

“The removal of Gandhiji’s name fills me with deep shame. A Bill has been introduced that removes the name of Mahatma Gandhi from MGNREGA. Are we now forgetting even the Father of the Nation? We have therefore decided to rename our Karmashree scheme after Mahatma Gandhi. We seek… pic.twitter.com/JjBqdSRrq3

— All India Trinamool Congress (@AITCofficial) December 18, 2025

Also read:

• BJP chief ministers wanted MGNREGA to include farm work. Modi government’s bill goes another way
• ‘A bill to destroy MGNREGA’: Why experts fear the worst from new job guarantee bill

The Lok Sabha on Wednesday passed the 2025 Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Bill, which aims to open up the civil nuclear sector to private operators.

The bill was passed despite demands by several Opposition parties to refer the proposed legislation to a parliamentary panel, The Hindu reported.

The bill will need to be cleared by the Rajya Sabha before it is sent for presidential assent.

The draft legislation proposes to grant licenses to private companies, joint ventures and government companies to construct, own, operate or decommission nuclear power plants or reactors, the Hindustan Times reported.

Other proposed provisions included the removal of a clause in the 2010 Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act that allows the operator of a nuclear power plant to file legal proceedings against suppliers if their equipment was found to have been in an accident.

In 2008, the Bharatiya Janata Party had moved a no-confidence motion against the erstwhile United Progressive Alliance government citing, among other things, the absence of such a provision.

However, after the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act was passed in 2010, this provision was believed to be a reason for the lack of foreign participation in the country’s nuclear sector despite the Indo-US nuclear deal.

The bill passed by the Lok Sabha on Wednesday also introduces a tiered system of payouts by operators in case of accidents, in which the liability of an operator will depend on the thermal power capacity of the nuclear plant.

The 2010 law established a flat maximum liability for operators at Rs 1,500 crore.

The bill aims to boost investments in the nuclear power sector to help India achieve its target of 100 gigawatt of nuclear power capacity by 2047, the Hindustan Times reported.

During a debate on the bill, Congress MP Manish Tewari asked if it was a “coincidence” that a law enabling private sector participation in the nuclear sector coincided with interest expressed by the “conglomerate house…Adani” in November to enter the nuclear sector, The Hindu reported.

Samajwadi Party MP Aditya Yadav accused the Union government of introducing the bill by “sacrificing the old laws…that kept public interest first” as it was faced with a “dollar that has crossed Rs 90” and “unable to attract foreign investment”, the newspaper reported.

The Rajya Sabha on Wednesday passed a bill to raise foreign direct investment in the insurance sector to 100% from 74%.

The 2025 Sabka Bima Sabki Raksha Amendment of Insurance Laws Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday. The bill seeks to amend the 1938 Insurance Act, the 1956 Life Insurance Corporation Act and the 1999 Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act.

It allows the merger of non-insurance companies with insurance firms, and provides for the establishment of a Policyholders’ Education and Protection Fund to protect the interests of policyholders.

Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, during a debate on the bill, said that the amendments would allow foreign companies to bring in more capital in the insurance sector, PTI reported.

The opening of the sector has helped in increasing penetration of insurance in the country, Sitharaman said, adding that there was “scope for more”. It would also lead to the creation of more jobs, she added.

The Bharatiya Janata Party leader said that the increase in the foreign direct investment limit would pave the way for more foreign companies to enter the Indian market, the news agency reported. In many cases, foreign firms do not find local joint venture partners because of several reasons, she added.

With more companies, the competition will increase, leading to a drop in premiums, Sitharaman said.

Rejecting allegations by the Opposition that the Union government was in a haste to pass the bill, the minister said that consultations for it had taken place for nearly two years, PTI reported.

Opposing the bill in the Upper House, Congress MP Shaktisinh Gohil said that the increase in foreign direct investment had earlier been opposed by senior BJP leaders such as late Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley, The Indian Express reported.

The BJP’s election manifesto for the 2014 Lok Sabha polls had also said that it would not allow foreign direct investment in the insurance sector, Gohil added.

Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale said that no private insurer would be interested in a low premium, high risk rural market where protections were provided through government insurance schemes, the newspaper reported.

Noting that such schemes would be hampered if foreign players enter, Gokhale added the current profits of the state-owned Life Insurance Corporation came from its large market share but private companies were likely to enter with predatory pricing.

Opposition members also criticised the use of Hindi words in the title of the bill.

A demand by the Opposition to send the bill to a parliamentary panel was rejected.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India has alleged that Pranav Adani, the nephew of billionaire businessman Gautam Adani, violated insider trading norms by sharing with his brothers-in-law price-sensitive information about the Adani Group’s open offer to acquire shares of NDTV, the Economic Times reported on Wednesday.

The market regulator sent a show cause notice on October 15 to Pranav Adani, his brothers-in-law Kunal and Nrupal Shah, and father-in-law Dhanpal Shah in the matter. Kunal and Nrupal Shah are the sons-in-law of Pranav Adani’s uncles, Vasant and Vinod Adani.

Pranav Adani is the director of Adani Enterprises, the flagship company of the conglomerate headed by Gautam Adani.

SEBI alleged in the notice that calls exchanged among Pranav Adani and Kunal, Nrupal and Dhanpal Shah showed that they had communicated frequently during the unpublished price sensitive information, or UPSI, period, according to the Economic Times.

SEBI regulations prohibit company insiders from sharing unpublished price sensitive information with any outside entities. Using sensitive information that is not available to the public at large to deal in shares is insider trading, which is a criminal offence.

The Adani Group acquired majority stakes in NDTV on December 30, 2022, after it acquired a 27.26% equity stake in the media firm from co-founders Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy.

Over four months earlier – on August 23, 2022 – the manager of the Adani Group’s open offer, JM Financial, had informed stock exchanges after the close of the day’s trading about a public announcement pertaining to NDTV.

The announcement said that Vishvapradhan Commercial Private Limited, along with AMG Media Networks Limited and Adani Enterprises, would acquire up to 26% of the share of capital of NDTV from public shareholders.

SEBI said in its notice that as the announcement was made after close of trading on a market day, it remained unpublished price sensitive information until the development was disseminated through stock exchanges, the Economic Times reported.

When markets reopened on August 24, 2022, the shares of NDTV rose sharply in value, opening about 2.5% higher than the previous day’s close and ending nearly 5% on the National Stock Exchange.

SEBI said that the announcement on August 23, 2022 “materially affected the price of the scrip of NDTV upon coming into the public domain”, the newspaper quoted the notice as saying.

According to SEBI, Kunal Shah bought shares of NDTV several times during the UPSI period, some of these instances being in the weeks and days leading up to JM Financial’s announcement.

On August 8, 2022 his purchases accounted for close to 9% of the total trading volume in the stock on the National Stock Exchange, which the market regulator described as significant, the Economic Times reported.

SEBI alleged that the trades by Kunal Shah led to profits of Rs 52.89 lakh, and that Nrupal and Dhanpal Shah also earned unlawful profits of Rs 52.7 lakh and Rs 32.6 lakh.

The regulatory body has initiated proceedings to determine if penalties should be imposed on Pranav Adani, Kunal, Nrupal and Dhanpal Shah for violating insider trading regulations.

The Economic Times sent email queries to SEBI, the Adani Group and Kunal, Nrupal and Dhanpal Shah seeking their stands, but did not receive responses.

Adani Group’s acquisition of NDTV stake

On August 23, AMG Media Networks Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Adani Enterprises, bought 100% of the equity stakes in Vishvapradhan Commercial Private Limited for Rs 113.74 crore.

Later in the month, the Adani Group announced that it will acquire a 29.18% stake in NDTV through Vishvapradhan Commercial Private Limited. NDTV had then said that the takeover was done without the consent or any sort of notice served to Radhika Roy and Prannoy Roy.

The acquisition was possible as Vishvapradhan Commercial Private Limited had given a loan of Rs 403.85 crore to NDTV in 2009.

According to the terms of the loan, the company held the right to exercise its warrants and convert the loan amount into equity shares – which it did after being bought by the Adani Group.

Also read:

NDTV: How Adani acquired a firm controlled by an Ambani aide to launch a hostile take-over bid

The Bombay High Court and several other courts in Mumbai were evacuated on Thursday after bomb threats were received via email, The Hindu reported.

Bomb disposal squads and security agencies inspected the premises.

Later in the day, the authorities confirmed that no explosives had been found and declared all the locations safe.

The city’s commissioner of police told The Indian Express that the threat had been issued over email to several courts and banks.

There was “no need to panic”, he added.

The threats targeted the High Court as well as the magistrate courts in Bandra, Andheri and Esplanade, according to The Hindu.

#WATCH | Bombay High Court Evacuated After Receiving #BombThreat

🎥@vssalman007 #MumbaiNews #Maharashtra pic.twitter.com/n0CxJDnAu0

— Free Press Journal (@fpjindia) December 18, 2025

An internal message circulated by the Bombay Bar Association and the Advocates’ Association of Western India said that hearings in the High Court would resume at 3 pm once the police had completed their safety checks, Bar and Bench reported.

It is unclear whether proceedings have resumed.

In an internal communication issued at the chief justice’s instructions, judges were asked to vacate their benches while security measures were carried out.

A first information report will be filed against unidentified persons responsible for the threats, a police officer told The Indian Express.

In September, similar threats were sent to the High Court, but were later confirmed to be hoaxes.

The number of schools covered under the Pradhan Mantri Poshan Shakti Nirman scheme to give students mid-day meals declined from 11.1 lakh in 2020-’21 to 10.3 lakh in 2024-’25, the Union government told Parliament on Wednesday.

This marks a reduction of 84,453 schools over five years.

The centrally-sponsored scheme is aimed at providing nutritious meals to students enrolled in government and aided schools.

The sharpest fall occurred between 2020-’21 and 2021-’22, when coverage declined by 35,574 schools, from 11.1 lakh to 10.8 lakh, said Minister of State for Education Jayant Chaudhary in response to a query from Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh.

The number fell to 10.7 lakh in 2022-’23, down by 7,604 schools, and slipped further to 10.6 lakh in 2023-’24 – a dip of 9,509 schools.

It declined in 2024-’25 to 10.3 lakh, marking a reduction of 31,766 schools in a year, showed the data provided by the Union Ministry of Education.

Uttar Pradesh saw the steepest decline, with the number of schools covered under the scheme falling from 1.6 lakh in 2020-’21 to 1.4 lakh in 2024-’25. This meant that 25,361 schools lost coverage over five years.

Following this was Madhya Pradesh, where the number of schools covered under the scheme fell from 1.1 lakh to over 88,000 schools in the same period. Assam saw a drop from 53,427 to 44,106 schools in five years, which was a reduction of 9,321.

In his reply, Chaudhary noted that the “overall responsibility” to provide meals to children under the scheme lay with state governments and Union Territories.

“Under the scheme, meals are served to children for an average of 220 days per year,” the minister said. “Under the scheme, against the enrolment of 11 crore students on an average 8.5 crore students are availing hot cooked meals on daily basis in more than 10.35 lakh schools in all states/UTs.”

Chaudhary also said that three cases of food contamination, food poisoning and substandard meal quality were reported during 2025-’26. “All the children reported ill during these incidents were treated and discharged from hospital and no casualty was reported,” he said.

In April, the Union government raised the material cost for midday meals under the scheme from Rs 6.1 to Rs 6.7 per student per day for kindergarten and Class 1 to Class 5, the Hindustan Times reported.

It also increased the cost from Rs 9.2 to Rs 10.1 for Class 6 to Class 8.

In 2024-’25, the Union government had allocated Rs 12,467.3 crore to the scheme, the newspaper reported. This amount was later revised to Rs 10,000 crore. However, only Rs 5,421.9 crore had been spent by February 2025.

For 2025-’26, Rs 12,500 crore has been allocated in the Union Budget for the scheme, according to the newspaper.

Decline in government schools

Earlier this month, data presented in Parliament also showed that there was steady decline in the number of government schools in country in the last six years, The Wire reported. The number of schools with zero or less than 10 student enrolments have also increased.

The number of government schools fell from 10.3 lakh in 2019-’20 to 10.1 lakh in 2024-’25, the news portal quoted Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan as saying on December 1.

The sharpest decline in this period was seen in Madhya Pradesh, Odisha and Jammu and Kashmir, The Wire reported.

In 2024-’25, the states with the highest number of school closures were Bihar at 1,890, Himachal Pradesh at 492 and Karnataka at 462. In the same period, the states with the highest number of low-enrolment schools were West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, according to the news portal.

A cricket match between India and South Africa on Wednesday was called off because of dense fog in Lucknow.

The fourth Twenty20 International match at the Ekana Stadium was abandoned without a ball being bowled.

The toss was scheduled for 6.30 pm but never took place despite several pitch inspections by match officials. At 9.30 pm, the umpires called off the match.

It was the penultimate match of the five-match series that India leads 2-1. The final match will take place in Ahmedabad on Friday.

The Board for Control of Cricket in India said that the match had been abandoned “due to excessive fog” that made playing conditions unsafe.

‘Smog, not fog’, say Opposition leaders

However, fans and politicians said on social media that the poor visibility was because of air pollution.

Uttar Pradesh’s former Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav said that Delhi’s pollution "has now reached Lucknow”.

“That is why the international cricket match scheduled to be held in Lucknow is not taking place,” he said. “Actually, the reason for this is not fog, but smog.”

Yadav added: “The parks that we had built for Lucknow’s pure air, the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] government wants to ruin them too by organising investment events there. BJP members are neither kin to humans nor to the environment.”

“Cover your face because you are in Lucknow,” the Opposition leader said.

Congress leader Shashi Tharoor said that “thanks to dense smog pervasive in most north Indian cities”, the visibility was too poor to permit a game of cricket. “They should have scheduled the game in Thiruvananthapuram, where AQI [Air Quality Index] is about 68 right now!” he said on social media.

Tharoor is the MP from Kerala’s Thiruvananthapuram.

Indian player Hardik Pandya was seen wearing a face mask at the stadium. Players went through their pre-match practice at the venue before moving indoors, AFP reported.

The Air Quality Index in Lucknow at 7 pm, when the match would have been underway, was 410, according to AQI.in.

According to data from the Sameer application, which provides updates published by the Central Pollution Control Board, the average AQI in Lucknow on Wednesday stood at 171.

An index value between 401 and 450 indicates “severe” air pollution. An AQI in the “severe” category signifies hazardous pollution levels that can pose serious risks even to healthy individuals. The AQI value between 101 and 200 indicates “moderate” air quality.

When asked about the high air pollution, BCCI Vice President Rajeev Shukla told The New Indian Express the board will address the problem before finalising the itinerary in future. But “fog is a major issue” in northern India during winters, he was quoted as having added.

This is not the first time that poor air quality has hampered a cricket match in India.

In December 2017, a Test match between India and Sri Lanka in December was interrupted because of poor air quality in the national capital. Sri Lankan players had complained of vomiting.

ESPN Cricinfo had quoted Nic Pothas, the Sri Lankan coach at the time, as saying that high levels of pollution in Delhi “is well documented”.

“They had got extremely high at one point, we had players coming off the field and vomiting,” he said. “There were oxygen things in the dressing room. It is not normal for players to suffer in that way while playing the game. From our point of view, it has to be stated that it is a very very unique case.”

The Union government on Thursday introduced in Parliament the 2025 Securities Markets Code Bill to replace three laws related to the regulation of securities markets.

The proposed law will replace the 1992 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, the 1956 Securities Contracts Regulation Act and the 1996 Depositories Act.

Speaking in the Lok Sabha, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman proposed referring the bill to the standing committee for scrutiny.

The proposal came after Congress MP Manish Tiwari and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s Arun Nehru opposed the bill at the introduction stage, describing it as a “case of excessive delegation of power”.

Sitharaman said that the objections could be discussed later as the government was referring the bill to the standing committee.

Krishna Prasad Tenneti, chairing the proceedings, said that the Lok Sabha speaker will decide on the matter.

According to the Union government, the new legislation “rationalises and consolidates the existing provisions and provides a modern regulatory framework for investor protection and capital mobilisation at a scale commensurate with the emerging needs of the fast-growing Indian economy”.

It would also require members of the Securities and Exchange Board of India to disclose all “direct and indirect” interests while participating in decision-making processes of the markets regulator.

This came against the backdrop of allegations raised in August 2024 against Madhabi Puri Buch, the SEBI chairperson at the time, that she and her husband, Dhaval Buch, had “hidden stakes” in offshore entities tied to stock price manipulation and money laundering by the Adani Group. Madhabi Buch and Dhaval Buch denied the allegations.

The proposed law will also prohibit the chairperson and members of the board from accepting any employment under the Centre or state governments for one year after leaving office, except with the prior approval from the Union government.

It will also prohibits them from accepting an appointment with a securities markets service provider or a market participant, or any person associated with securities markets, for a year.

The law would also prohibit an investigation or inspection “for default or contravention” of any provisions of the code, or its rules and regulations, after eight years have passed from the date of the default or contravention.

However, the board may order a probe even if the eight-year period has elapsed in cases where a matter is referred to it by an investigating agency, or if the panel is of the view that the default or contravention may have a “systemic impact” on the securities markets.

The proposed legislation has a provision to prohibit board members from directly or indirectly committing acts of market abuse, such as insider trading and using devices, schemes or artifices to defraud investors in the securities markets.

It also has provisions to bar persons from dealing in securities while in possession of material or non-public information, or communicating such material or non-public information to others in a manner that contravenes the provisions of the code.

It bars persons from publishing false or misleading information relating to securities with the intent of artificially inflating, depressing or causing fluctuation in their prices.

The proposed legislation prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years for market abuse.

The bill proposed to bring the offence of “market abuse” under the Schedule of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. This means that the Enforcement Directorate can initiate investigations under the anti-money laundering law against persons who are accused in such cases.

Bill risks diluting SEBI’s autonomy, says Opposition

Congress has raised concerns over the proposed bill.

“The proposed bill risks diluting SEBI’s regulatory autonomy, weakening its ability to protect investors against fraud and market manipulation through fragmented oversight,” said Syed Naseer Hussain, Rajya Sabha MP from the party.

He added: “It also reduces compliance burdens which may favour large corporates and institutional investors, disadvantaging small and retail participants who lack resources to navigate the new framework.”

The Supreme Court Bar Association and the Union government on Tuesday told the top court that they will submit joint suggestions on preventing incidents such as the attack on former Chief Justice BR Gavai, reported Live Law.

The guidelines would also include suggestions on media reporting of such incidents, advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the association, told a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.

On October 6, advocate Rakesh Kishore allegedly tried to throw a shoe at Gavai, the chief justice at the time, and accused him of having insulted Hinduism. Kishore said he was angered by Gavai’s remarks about the restoration of a beheaded idol of the Hindu deity Vishnu, and on the Supreme Court judgement holding punitive demolitions as unconstitutional.

Despite the interruption, Gavai remained calm, instructed the court to proceed, and later described the event as a “forgotten chapter”.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court Bar Association filed a petition seeking criminal contempt proceedings against Kishore.

During a hearing on October 16, the court said that it was better to let the attack “die a natural death” rather than fuel its “monetisation” on social media.

On October 27, Kant and Bagchi said the court was not inclined to initiate contempt action against Kishore, noting that Gavai himself had earlier refused to pursue the matter against the advocate.

During the hearing on Tuesday, Singh told the bench that while the association had drafted a set of guidelines, it will add the Union government as a party in the case.

“So that either it can be incorporated in the IT Rules or the Supreme Court rules,” Live Law quoted Singh as saying. “We are thinking of your lordships incorporating it somewhere, so that there is some responsibility on media houses and social media platforms to ensure that these kinds of materials are not propagated.”

Appearing for the Union government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed with the proposal.

Singh had told the court on October 27 that while Gavai had initially decided not to press charges against Kishore, the advocate later gave interviews to the media, boasting about his act and vowing to repeat it.

“This whole thing is being glorified,” said Singh. “The court has sufficient powers to ensure it does not happen again.”

Singh argued that the pardon given by Gavai was in his individual capacity, adding that this could not bind the institution.

“People are making jokes about this,” he was quoted as saying. “If he does not express remorse, send him to jail from here only.”

Singh also claimed that Kishore had become “emboldened” because the chief justice had let him go.

Telangana Assembly Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar on Wednesday dismissed the disqualification petitions against five of the 10 MLAs who defected from the Bharat Rashtra Samithi to the ruling Congress after the 2023 state elections, reported The Hindu.

The speaker passed the order citing a lack of evidence, according to The Indian Express. He held that the MLAs remain affiliated to the Bharat Rashtra Samithi.

Those who were granted relief are Alhambra MLA Tellam Venkat Rao, Gadwal MLA Bandla Krishnamohan Reddy, Rajendranagar MLA T Prakash Goud, Patancheru MLA Gudem Mahipal Reddy and Serilingampally MLA Arekapudi Gandhi.

The petitions against Kale Yadaiah, Pocharam Srinivas Reddy, Sanjay Kumar, Danam Nagender and Kadiyam Srihari are yet to be decided.

The Bharat Rashtra Samithi had appealed to the speaker to disqualify the 10 MLAs in March 2024 and April 2024.

After the order on Wednesday, Bharat Rashtra Samithi Working President KT Rama Rao alleged that the speaker was “obeying the directions” of Chief Minister Revanth Reddy.

“It is a cruel joke in democracy,” Rao was quoted as saying. “He [speaker] seems to be acting because, as the chief minister himself, on the floor of the Assembly said, nothing will happen to the MLAs who have defected. The speaker is also obeying his directions and dictums.”

Rao said that his party will challenge the decision in the court.

On July 31, the Supreme Court directed the speaker to decide within three months on the disqualification of the 10 MLAs.

If political defections are not curbed, it has the potential to disrupt democracy, the court had said.

The bench had also set aside a Telangana High Court ruling that courts cannot impose a time limit on the speaker to decide on disqualification pleas.

On November 17, the court issued a contempt notice against the speaker for not taking a call on the pleas.

On July 5, Jaipur commercial court judge Dinesh Kumar Gupta ruled that an Adani-led firm earned more than Rs 1,400 crore in transportation charges at the cost of a Rajasthan government-owned company.

The same day, the state’s Bharatiya Janata Party government issued an order removing him from the post. Commercial court judges are appointed by state governments in concurrence with the High Court.

The Rajasthan High Court followed up the same day by transferring Gupta to Beawar district, 200 km from the state capital.

Two weeks later, the high court stayed Gupta’s order that imposed a Rs 50-lakh fine on the Adani-led firm and directed the Rajasthan government to request the Comptroller and Auditor General to audit the deal between the state and the conglomerate.

The order removing Gupta was issued by the state government’s Law and Legal Affairs Department. It said that the judge was being repatriated to the High Court so that he could be posted elsewhere.

The same day, the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court ordered Gupta’s transfer to a district court in Beawar.

Scroll sent questions to the Rajasthan government’s Law and Legal Affairs Department and the High Court registrar asking why Gupta had been moved out of the commercial court and about the timing of his removal. The questions remain unanswered at the time of publication. This story will be updated if there is a response.

Contacted on phone, the judge declined to comment on his transfer.

Also read: Adani-led firm charged Rajasthan PSU over Rs 1,400 crore it wasn’t entitled to: Jaipur court

The dispute

Gupta’s judgement, which now stands stayed by the high court, brought rare scrutiny to one of India’s most contentious mining contracts.

In 2007, the coal ministry allocated a coal block in Chhattisgarh’s Hasdeo Arand forest to Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, a state government-owned electricity generating firm.

The allocation was meant to give the firm direct access to coal for its thermal power plants.

But the firm entered into a joint venture with the Adani Group, in which the private conglomerate had the majority stake of 74%, and outsourced mining operations to it.

The contract signed by the Rajasthan firm and the Adani-led joint venture mandated that the coal mined from Chhattisgarh would be transported to Rajasthan by rail. For this, the Adani-led joint venture was to construct railway sidings, or side tracks to connect the mine to the main railway corridor.

Mining commenced in 2013 but the railway sidings were not built until several years later. The two firms agreed to engage a transport agency to move coal by road from the mine to the railway stations until the sidings were laid. The original contract between the firms, called the Coal Mining and Delivery Agreement, did not mention road transport.

The Adani-led joint venture billed the Rajasthan firm the cost incurred on transporting coal by road. This came to more than Rs 1,400 crore.

The Rajasthan firm paid the road transportation charges. But in 2018, when the Adani-led joint venture demanded that it also pay interest on account of delayed payments, the firm refused.

In 2020, the matter landed in the commercial court of Jaipur – the Adani-led joint venture filed the petition. But commercial court judge Dinesh Gupta ruled in favour of the Rajasthan firm.

The order

In his judgement, Gupta noted that according to the contract, it was the responsibility of the Adani-led joint venture “to build, construct and develop the railway siding from mine head up to the nearest connecting railway line”.

Since it had failed to do so, the judgement said, the Adani-led venture should “have suffered at least the burden of road transportation charges for its own default”.

Instead, the court noted, the company had claimed transportation costs of more than Rs 1,400 crore and further sought to gain additional “profit by avoiding interest burden for such cost”.

The order directed Adani-led joint venture, Parsa Kente Collieries Limited, to pay a fine of Rs 50 lakh. It also asked the state government to request the Comptroller and Auditor General to audit the deal between the two entities.

The High Court stayed Gupta’s order on July 18. Since then, hearings have continued in the matter. The next hearing is scheduled for the last week of January 2026.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday modified its August order, which barred coercive action against the owners of diesel vehicles older than 10 years and of petrol vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi-National Capital Region, reported Live Law.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi said that vehicles with Bharat Stage-III or lower emission standards can be subjected to enforcement action, including impounding, according to Bar and Bench.

In 2018, the Supreme Court banned diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi as part of efforts to curb air pollution. The ban came into effect on July 1.

Under the directive, the end-of-life vehicles would not be allowed to refuel. To enforce the ban, automatic number plate recognition cameras were installed at nearly 350 petrol pumps across the national capital to detect such vehicles.

In an interim order on August 12, the Supreme Court said that no action should be taken against older vehicles, while hearing a petition by the Delhi government.

The Bharatiya Janata Party government had described the ban on older vehicles as “arbitrary” and contended that the 2018 order had caused practical hardships to a large number of people in Delhi.

It also submitted that there are now stricter pollution control measures in place, such as the enhanced coverage of the Pollution-Under-Control certificate system and implementation of Bharat Stage-VI standards.

The order on Wednesday came on an application by the Commission for Air Quality Management, which said that the blanket protection had made it difficult for state authorities to act against higher-polluting vehicles, reported Bar and Bench.

The commission told the court that of the nearly 2.3 crore vehicles on the roads of Delhi-NCR, about 37% run on BS-III or older regimes. They emit between 2.5 and 31 times more particulate matter compared to models compliant with BS-IV and above standards, it added.

Also read: Delhi’s failure to act against the biggest source of its air pollution – vehicles

Pollution-control plan a ‘total failure’: SC

The Supreme Court on Wednesday also told the Commission for Air Quality Management that the pollution control plans in place in Delhi and National Capital Region were a “total failure”, reported the Hindustan Times.

Stating that air pollution had become an “annual feature”, it directed the commission to formulate a comprehensive long-term plan to address the crisis, according to Bar and Bench.

The commission was directed to focus on the areas of urban mobility, cleaner industry and energy and stubble burning.

The bench asked the commission to plan modes and manners of incentivising farmers to stop stubble burning and use the residue of crops for other purposes.

Further, the commission was told to ensure that construction activities are regulated and the provision of alternative employment when construction work is halted due to pollution-control curbs.

The Supreme Court also called for increasing the green cover in Delhi.

The Commission for Air Quality Management manages the Graded Response Action Plan, a set of incremental anti-pollution measures that are triggered to prevent further worsening of air quality once it reaches a certain threshold in the Delhi-NCR region.

AQI in Delhi

This came as Delhi’s air quality remained in the “very poor” category on Thursday.

The national capital’s average Air Quality Index stood at 358 at 7.05 am, according to data from the Sameer application, which provides hourly updates published by the Central Pollution Control Board.

Four of the city’s 40 monitoring stations recorded AQI readings above 400, while 32 showed readings above 300.

Delhi’s air quality had worsened sharply in the past week. The city’s average AQI rose from 307 on December 11 to 349 on December 12 and 431 on December 13, before touching 461 on December 14.

An index value between 301 and 400 indicates “very poor” air. Between 401 and 450 indicates “severe” air pollution, while anything above the 450 threshold is termed “severe plus”.

An AQI in the “severe” and “severe plus” categories signifies hazardous pollution levels that can pose serious risks even to healthy individuals.

The deterioration in the air quality was attributed to unfavourable weather conditions, including very low wind speeds caused by a western disturbance.

Stage 4 restrictions of the Graded Response Action Plan have been imposed in Delhi and the National Capital Region.

The region has been recording air quality in the “poor” or worse categories since mid-October.

Air quality deteriorates sharply in the winter months in Delhi, which is often ranked the world’s most polluted capital. Stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana, vehicular pollution, along with the lighting of firecrackers during Diwali, falling temperatures, decreased wind speeds and emissions from industries and coal-fired plants contribute to the problem.

Also read: Why air quality numbers in Delhi vary widely

A group of seven chief ministers, four of them from the Bharatiya Janata Party and its allies, had in 2020 recommended expanding the scope of the rural employment guarantee programme to include more agriculture-related work.

But ignoring their recommendation, the Modi government has instead introduced a bill to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.

The Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission Gramin, or VB-G RAM G Bill, 2025, economist Jean Dreze said, “is all set to destroy MGNREGA in the guise of revamping it as a new scheme”.

Passed in 2005, MGNREGA legally binds the government to provide 100 days of work every year to any rural household that demands it. VB-G RAM G Bill, 2025, does away with this guarantee.

It also institutes a 60-day pause on work during the agricultural season. The government has argued that this will “facilitate adequate farm-labour availability during peak agricultural seasons”.

But the provision stands in stark contrast to what the panel of chief ministers had recommended in 2020.

The sub-group was formed in 2018 under the aegis of the Niti Aayog at the initiative of Prime Minister Narendra Modi for “policy coordination between the agriculture sector and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme”.

It was meant to address concerns “about the rising cost of production in agriculture” – reflecting the view that NREGA had given farm workers greater bargaining power to demand higher wages during sowing and harvesting seasons, thus, leading to a higher cost of production for farmers.

The sub-group, however, concluded that NREGA had not caused “any adverse effect on farmers’ income in the medium to long run despite rise in real wages in rural India at national level”. It also pointed out that there had been “near stagnation in real rural wages over the last 3 to 4 years”.

The group’s deliberations

The sub-group met only once in July 2018. In the meeting, Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath suggested “ways to utilise the fund of MGNREGS in all stages from pre-sowing to post harvest”. He proposed that “the additional cost to farmers during the sowing season” be covered under the job guarantee scheme.

Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar concurred with Adityanath’s view. “There may be a need to broaden the policy to extend the benefit to small and marginal farmers for the work they do on their farms,” he said. He proposed that “the benefit must cover tenant farmers as well”, adding that any changes be made after consultation with states and “deeper thought”.

The final report of the sub-group, submitted in 2020, however, made a more cautious recommendation.

It said that while paying workers through NREGA funds for labour done on individual farms may be beneficial for rural welfare, it will lead to a huge financial burden on the government.

Instead, it suggested that NREGA funds be used to boost farm productivity by adding more agricultural activities to the works permitted under the Act.

In a U-turn, the Modi government, in its latest bill directs states to halt rural employment work during the sowing and harvest seasons. It states, “All authorities responsible for planning, sanctioning or executing works under this Act shall ensure that all works are undertaken only outside the notified peak agricultural seasons.”

The convenor of the chief ministers’ panel was Shivraj Singh Chouhan, then chief minister of Madhya Pradesh. He had called for a study to analyse the prospects of integrating agriculture and NREGA and for regional workshops to gather views from farmers’ and workers’ representatives.

Now as Union Agriculture Minister, he is in charge of tabling the VB-G RAM G bill in Parliament. It not only contradicts the group’s key recommendations, but the Opposition and civil society groups have also pointed out that it was introduced abruptly without any consultation.

‘False conflict’

The report by the chief ministers’ sub-group was not the first instance of a government-led committee calling for the integration of NREGA and agriculture.

A 2015 task force for eliminating poverty in India, also created by the Prime Minister, and led by then NITI Aayog vice chairman Arvind Panagariya, had called for using NREGA funds to pay farmers during peak seasons.

A paper authored by Panagariya argued that farmers were experiencing acute shortages of labour during the peak agricultural season. “It would be worthwhile to consider a reform to address this shortage such that farmers are allowed to hire MGNREGA workers with them paying the bulk of the wage (for example, 75 per cent) and MGNREGA covering the remainder,” it said.

Parliamentary records show the government did not accept the task force’s recommendations.

The idea of paying farm workers through NREGA funds and the 60-day blackout period under the proposed bill have been criticised by grassroots activists, researchers and economists on similar grounds.

They point out that the rural employment guarantee programme aimed not only to provide a safety net to workers but also dismantle feudalism in rural areas by giving workers greater bargaining power.

“MGNREGA destroyed the dependence of labourers on landlords,” said Chakradhar Buddha, a researcher with LibTech India, a coalition that works to improve public service delivery. “But this bill effectively destroys that privilege for at least two months.”

Rajendran Narayanan, who teaches economics at the Azim Premji University, said that the 60-day blackout period “is trying to pit workers and agricultural labourers against farmers”. He said it was “creating an artificial conflict”.

Buddha made a similar argument in a 2018 piece he had co-authored with Diego Maiorano, a senior assistant professor at the University of Naples. Criticising the proposal to cover farm labour costs using NREGA funds, the piece noted: “Farmers most acutely hit by the decades-long agricultural crisis tend to own small or medium-size plots of land and rely mostly on family labour. Paying for their labour will make little difference for them.”

With the Modi government introducing a more radical change than the 2018 chief ministers’ recommendation, NREGA workers groups have responded sharply. The NREGA Sangharsh Morcha, in a statement, said: “Workers, especially women workers, in need and willing to work, will now be legally deprived of work for at least two months.”

“The Union Government is seeking to dismantle a historic rights-based legislation and reduce the right to work to a discretionary dole,” the Morcha’s statement added.

The Enforcement Directorate on Tuesday arrested Saumya Chaurasia, who was a deputy chief secretary during the tenure of the previous Congress government in Chhattisgarh, in connection with an alleged liquor scam that took place between 2019 and 2022, The Indian Express reported.

The counsel for the central agency, Saurabh Kumar Pandey, told the newspaper that Chaurasia will be produced before a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court in Raipur, after which further details of her alleged role will be placed on record.

The Chhattisgarh Anti-Corruption Bureau registered a first information report in the alleged liquor scam in January 2024 based on the Enforcement Directorate’s complaints.

The bureau alleged that a syndicate of bureaucrats and politicians during the tenure of former Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel ran a parallel excise department, under which liquor was sold without any revenue going to the state exchequer.

The FIR accused 70 persons of involvement in the alleged scam, including former state Excise Minister Kawasi Lakhma, Special Secretary Arun Pati Tripathi and Indian Administrative Service officer Anil Tuteja.

They have been charged with corruption, cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.

In September, the Enforcement Directorate arrested former chief minister Bhupesh Baghel’s son, Chaitanya Baghel, in connection with the case.

In a chargesheet, the agency alleged that Chaitanya Baghel was the “controller and ultimate authority” of an “organised liquor syndicate” in the state and had personally handled about Rs 1,000 crore generated from the alleged scam.

In March, searches were conducted in 14 locations in Durg district linked to Chaitanya Baghel.

Chaurasia, a state administrative service officer who served as deputy chief secretary to Bhupesh Baghel, was earlier arrested by the ED in December 2022 in an alleged Rs 540-crore coal scam case. She was granted bail by the Supreme Court in May.

After the Bharatiya Janata Party came to power in the state in 2023, Chhattisgarh’s Anti-Corruption Bureau in 2024 booked Chaurasia in three cases, including one related to disproportionate assets.

The Union government on Wednesday clarified that content on over-the-top video streaming platforms remains outside the purview of the Central Board of Film Certification, but is regulated under the 2021 Information Technology Rules.

“The Code of Ethics requires OTT platforms to avoid publishing content prohibited by law and undertake age-based classification of content as per the guidelines in the Rules,” the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said.

In a written reply in the Lok Sabha, Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting L Murugan said streaming platforms instead have to follow a three-tier compliance and grievance redressal mechanism.

This includes self-regulation by the publishers as the first tier, followed by oversight by a self-regulatory body constituted by publishers or their association at the second level.

At the third level, the content is subject to oversight by the Union government’s “Inter-Departmental Committee”, consisting of representatives from the ministries of Information and Broadcasting, Women and Child Development, Law and Justice, Home Affairs, Electronics and Information Technology and External Affairs, among others.

In February, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting had warned over-the-top platforms against streaming “content that is prohibited by law” following a controversy over sexually explicit comments on a comedy talent show, India’s Got Latent.

The notification stated that it had received complaints about the “spread of obscene, pornographic and vulgar content by certain publishers of OTT platforms and social media”.

However, the government did not specify the content it was referring to.

The platforms were also directed to ensure age-based content classification and implement self-regulation in line with the 2021 IT Rules.

Also read:

• Explainer: Why India’s new rules for social media, news sites are anti-democratic, unconstitutional
• Four reasons to be worried about India’s new IT rules that are supposed to regulate Big Tech

India summoned Bangladesh High Commissioner M Riaz Hamidullah to express its concerns about the activities of “extremist elements” ahead of a protest march to the Indian mission in Dhaka. The march, called by a group named the July Oikyo Mancho, demanded that former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina be extradited from India.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said it “completely rejects the false narrative sought to be created by extremist elements regarding certain recent events in Bangladesh”.

India urged the interim government in Dhaka headed by Muhammad Yunus to ensure the safety of foreign missions and posts in Bangladesh.

On Sunday, Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs had summoned Indian High Commissioner Pranay Verma to express its “serious concern” about alleged statements made by Hasina, who resigned as prime minister and fled to India in August 2024 after protests against her government. Read on.

The Union government told Parliament that 335 “Left-wing extremists” had been killed in 2025. Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai said that 2,167 others had surrendered 942 Left-wing extremists had been arrested this year.

Since 2014, it said, 1,841 such persons had been killed, over 16,000 had been arrested and 9,588 had surrendered.

The Union government has vowed to end Maoism by March 31, 2026.

In the course of the Centre’s anti-Maoist offensive this year, key Maoist leader Madvi Hidma was killed, while Vikas Nagpure alias Anant and Mallojula Venugopal Rao, alias Bhupathi had surrendered.

Civil liberties groups and Opposition parties have also questioned some of the killings of alleged Maoists, alleging that they constitute “fake encounters”. Read on.

The Delhi government announced a compensation of Rs 10,000 for construction workers who are out of work due to pollution-related curbs. The payment would be made only to workers registered with the government, said state Labour Minister Kapil Mishra.

The compensation scheme would exclude workers employed in hospitals, departments involved in pollution control, the fire department and other essential services.

Delhi has been under Stage 4 of the Graded Response Action Plan since Saturday, which mandates a complete halt on construction activities for both public and private projects. Read on.

Coastal cities may no longer offer escape from air pollution

Pakistan extended the closure of its airspace to Indian airlines and aircraft by another month, till January 23. The airspace was first closed to Indian airlines on April 24, two days after the April 22 attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam.

India responded on April 30 by closing its airspace to Pakistani airlines and aircraft. Since then, both countries have extended the restrictions periodically.

While Indian and Pakistani airlines are barred from using each other’s airspace, both airspaces remain open to overflights by airlines from other countries. Read on.

If you haven’t already, sign up for our Daily Brief newsletter.

India on Wednesday summoned Bangladesh High Commissioner M Riaz Hamidullah to express concerns about the activities of “extremist elements” ahead of a protest march to the Indian mission in Dhaka.

The march was called by a group named the July Oikyo Mancho to demand that deposed Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina be extradited to the country from India, The Hindu reported.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said on Wednesday that it “completely rejects the false narrative sought to be created by extremist elements regarding certain recent events in Bangladesh'“.

It added: “It is unfortunate that the interim government has neither conducted a thorough investigation nor shared meaningful evidence with India regarding the incidents.”

The foreign ministry said that India has friendly relations with the people of the Bangladesh that are rooted in the country’s liberation struggle. “We are in favour of peace and stability in Bangladesh and have consistently called for free, fair, inclusive and credible elections, conducted in a peaceful atmosphere,” it said.

India urged the interim government in Dhaka headed by Muhammad Yunus to ensure the safety of foreign missions and posts in Bangladesh.

The July Oikyo Mancho called for the march to the Indian mission in Dhaka at 3 pm on Wednesday to seek the “return of Fascist Hasina, and other murderers”, The Hindu reported.

The developments also came in the backdrop of a speech by Hasnat Abdullah, the leader of the National Citizen Party in Bangladesh, in which he warned of isolating India’s northeastern states and sheltering separatist groups if Bangladesh were to be destabilised, The Indian Express reported.

The Bangladeshi high commissioner was summoned a day after both countries marked Vijay Diwas to commemorate India’s victory in the 1971 war and Bangladesh’s liberation.

On Sunday, Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs had summoned Indian High Commissioner Pranay Verma to express its “serious concern” about alleged statements made by Hasina.

It also reiterated its demand for her “expeditious extradition”.

Dhaka alleged that Hasina, who fled to India in August 2024 after protests in her country, had made “incendiary” remarks that were inciting her supporters to carry out “terrorist” attacks to “thwart” the parliamentary elections scheduled for February in Bangladesh.

Later in the day, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said that New Delhi “categorically rejects” the assertions made by Bangladesh’s interim government led by Yunus.

Hasina resigned as prime minister and fled to India on August 5, 2024, after weeks of widespread student-led protests against her Awami League government. She had been in power for 16 years.

Yunus, a Nobel laureate economist, took over as chief adviser of the interim government three days after Hasina resigned.

Bangladesh has been seeking her repatriation since the fall of her government. The demand became a formal request after Hasina and former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal were sentenced to death by the country’s International Crimes Tribunal on November 17.

The tribunal found Hasina guilty of crimes against humanity for the deadly crackdown on the protests.

Hasina had described the tribunal as biased and politically motivated, and denied ordering security forces to fire on protesters.

The Union government on Tuesday told Parliament that 335 “Left-wing extremists” had been killed, while 2,167 others had surrendered in 2025.

Additionally, 942 Left-wing extremists had been arrested this year, Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai told the Lok Sabha.

Overall 1,841 such persons had been killed, over 16,000 had been arrested, while 9,588 others had surrendered since 2014.

Rai was answering questions posed by Bharatiya Janata Party MPs Darshan Singh Choudhary, Haribhai Patel and Mahesh Kashyap.

The minister said that since 2014-’15, Rs 3,523.4 crore had been released for operations against Left-wing extremism in the country. The funds were allocated for training security forces, rehabilitating surrendered cadres and giving compensation to the families of those killed in Left-wing extremist violence.

The Union government has vowed to end Maoism by March 31, 2026.

In October, the Union home ministry said that the number of districts across states affected by “Left-wing extremism” has come down to 11 from 18 in March.

In 2025, the number of “most affected” districts has also come down from six to three, it added. These are Bijapur, Sukma and Narayanpur in Chhattisgarh.

In the course of the Centre’s anti-Maoist offensive this year, key Maoist leaders like Madvi Hidma have been killed, while others like Vikas Nagpure alias Anant and Mallojula Venugopal Rao, alias Bhupathi have surrendered.

A report by Malini Subramaniam for Scroll on Hidma’s killing noted that in the Andhra Pradesh village closest to where Hidma was killed, no one heard gunfire.

She had earlier reported that while many of those killed in Chhattisgarh’s Bastar region in 2024 were declared by the police to be reward-carrying Maoists, several families dispute the claim. The families claim that the persons killed were civilians.

Civil liberties groups and Opposition parties have also questioned some of these killings, alleging that they constitute “fake encounters”.

Also read: In Andhra village closest to where Maoist commander Hidma was killed, no one heard gunfire

Pakistan has extended the closure of its airspace to Indian airlines and aircraft by another month till January 23, according to a fresh notice to airmen issued by the country’s aviation authorities, PTI reported.

The airspace was first closed to Indian airlines on April 24, two days after the April 22 attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir.

The initial ban, imposed for one month, barred Indian-registered aircraft and aircraft operated, owned or leased by Indian airlines from overflying Pakistani airspace, The Indian Express reported.

India responded on April 30 by closing its airspace to Pakistani airlines and aircraft.

Since then, both countries have extended the restrictions periodically.

While Indian and Pakistani airlines are barred from using each other’s airspace, both airspaces remain open to overflights by airlines from other countries.

Pakistan issued the latest extension a week before its previous notice is set to expire on November 24.

India’s reciprocal ban on Pakistani aircraft is also set to expire on November 24.

The prolonged closure has significantly affected flight operations, The Indian Express reported. Around 800 weekly flights operated by Indian airlines have been impacted, particularly those flying from North India to destinations in West Asia, Europe, the United Kingdom and eastern North America, the newspaper reported.

These flights have been forced to take longer routes, increasing journey times by anywhere between 15 minutes and several hours, depending on the destination.

The diversions have also led to higher fuel consumption and increased complexity in crew and flight scheduling, contributing to increased operational costs for airlines.

Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan on Wednesday refused to apologise for his remark that India had been “completely defeated” on the first day of Operation Sindoor in May, reported ANI.

A row had erupted on Tuesday after Chavan claimed that “Indian aircraft were shot down” in the “half-hour aerial engagement that took place on May 7”, reported India Today.

“If any aircraft had taken off from Gwalior, Bathinda or Sirsa, there was a high probability of being shot down by Pakistan, which is why the Air Force was fully grounded,” claimed the former chief minister of Maharashtra.

It was unclear what information Chavan’s claim was based on.

He also said that there was “not even a one-km movement” of the Army during the four-day military conflict.

“Whatever happened over two or three days was only an aerial war and missile warfare,” he was quoted as saying by India Today. “In the future too, wars will be fought in the same way.”

Chavan asked if there was a need to maintain an Army of 12 lakh soldiers “or can we make them do some other work”.

The Bharatiya Janata Party criticised Chavan for the comments, saying that the Congress “hates the Indian armed forces”.

Union minister Giriraj Singh said that “no one has the right to insult the valour of the armed forces”.

“Those who do so can never think of the nation’s interest,” Singh was quoted as saying by ANI. “It has become Congress’ habit to insult the Armed Forces.”

BJP Spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla said in a social media post that “insulting the Army is Congress’ identity”.

On Wednesday, Chavan said he would not apologise for his statement as the Constitution gives him the right to ask questions.

“Why will I apologise?” he asked. “It is out of the question.”

#WATCH | Pune | On his statement claiming India was defeated on day one of Operation Sindoor, Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan says, "Why will I apologise? It is out of the question. The Constitution gives me the right to ask questions..." pic.twitter.com/Idnp7nL63M

— ANI (@ANI) December 17, 2025

The four-day conflict

Tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad escalated on May 7 when the Indian military carried out strikes – codenamed Operation Sindoor – on what it claimed were terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

The strikes were in response to the Pahalgam terror attack, which killed 26 persons on April 22.

On May 10, the two sides reached an “understanding” to halt firing.

Pakistan has claimed that it shot down Indian fighter jets during air-to-air combat. The claims made by Islamabad have not been independently verified.

India has acknowledged suffering aircraft losses during the initial phase of the conflict, but has not disclosed the number of planes lost.

On October 3, the Indian Air Force chief said that Pakistan’s claims of having shot down Indian aircraft were meant to “save their reputation” domestically.

The Indian Air Force has also said that it downed five Pakistani aircraft of the F-16 and JF-17 classes during the conflict.

In August, Indian Air Force Chief AP Singh had said that one large Pakistani aircraft, which was either an electronic intelligence plane or an airborne early warning system, was also shot down.

This followed the Indian military’s claim on May 12, two days after the ceasefire, that the Pakistan Air Force had lost “a few” aircraft.

While Islamabad has not commented on losing any of its aircraft, it has acknowledged that several of its airbases were struck by India during the hostilities.

Accusing the Narendra Modi government of creating a monopoly or duopoly in every sector, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Wednesday called for putting the reins of India’s economy in the hands of micro, small and medium enterprises.

“Monopoly or duopoly is a curse for India – and the Modi government has been doing exactly this in every sector, every industry,” Gandhi said in a post on his WhatsApp channel.

The leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha stated that he recently met a delegation of small and medium-sized ice cream manufacturers.

“Talking to them and listening to their problems made it clear that the government is determined to destroy small businesses for the benefit of its favoured industrialists,” added Gandhi.

He noted that there are “thousands of small ice cream manufacturers” in the country, employing “millions of people”. Their customers are the poor and lower-middle-class families, the Congress leader said.

Gandhi alleged that the Goods and Services Tax system is so complex that its burden “becomes unbearable” on MSMEs.

“This is why a special ‘composition scheme’ was created for small businesses, but the BJP government deliberately excluded ice cream from this scheme,” he said.

The GST system took effect in July 2017, replacing several indirect taxes such as the Value Added Tax and the Central Excise Duty.

Under the composition schemes, businesses with a turnover of less than Rs 1.5 crore can pay GST at a fixed rate.

“This story is being repeated in every sector,” the Congress leader claimed. “Only the prime minister’s favoured monopolists, who fund the BJP, survive – and in return, they receive a complete monopoly over the market.”

Gandhi said that putting the reins of India’s economy “firmly in the hands of MSMEs” will ensure that young citizens get jobs, “the public gets affordable and quality options, and small businesses can become equal partners in the country’s progress”.

Gandhi had questioned the government on the creation of monopolies on December 5 as well, in the context of large-scale disruptions in the operations of the airline IndiGo.

“Once again, it’s ordinary Indians who pay the price - in delays, cancellations and helplessness,” Gandhi said on social media. “India deserves fair competition in every sector, not match-fixing monopolies.”

IndiGo crisis

Air travel had been severely affected earlier this month, when a shortage of pilots and crew forced IndiGo to cancel or delay hundreds of flights. The disruption also pushed fares to unusually high levels on several routes.

The disruptions began amid the rollout of stricter work hour norms introduced in November. The revised rostering norms, issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation in January 2024 after concerns about pilot fatigue, were meant to take effect on June 1.

However, airlines asked for delayed implementation because of staffing shortages and operational challenges, and the key changes were eventually introduced on November 1.

The new rules required longer weekly rest, restricted night landings, extended the definition of night hours and limited consecutive night duties.

IndiGo used to operate about 2,300 flights daily and holds about 60% of India’s domestic civil aviation market, making it the country’s largest airline.

The India-Bangladesh border recorded the highest number of infiltration attempts and arrests among the country’s land borders, the Union home ministry told the Lok Sabha on Tuesday.

In a written reply to a question by West Bengal MPs from Trinamool Congress Jagdish Chandra Barma Basunia and Sharmila Sarkar, Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai shared year-wise data on infiltration attempts and arrests along India’s borders with Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and Myanmar.

The data showed that 1,104 infiltration attempts were detected along the 4,096.70-km India-Bangladesh border between January and November, while 2,556 persons were arrested for allegedly attempting to enter India without documents during the same period.

Since 2014, security agencies have detected more than 8,500 infiltration attempts across India’s borders and arrested over 20,800 infiltrators, with the India-Bangladesh border accounting for the bulk of these cases.

Between 2014 and 2024, more than 7,528 infiltration attempts and 18,851 arrests were recorded along the Bangladesh border alone, the reply said.

The reply also stated that since 2014, no infiltration cases have been reported along the India-China border.

Along the 2,289.66-km India-Pakistan border, around 420 infiltration attempts have been detected since 2014, with about 560 arrests have been reported.

The 1,643-km India-Myanmar border recorded more than 290 infiltration attempts and nearly 1,150 arrests during the same period, while the India-Nepal and India-Bhutan borders together saw close to 160 infiltration attempts and around 260 arrests.

Delhi Labour Minister Kapil Mishra on Wednesday announced a compensation of Rs 10,000 for construction workers who are out of work due to the curbs imposed as part of pollution control measures in the national capital.

As of Wednesday, Stage IV of the Graded Response Action Plan was in force in Delhi. GRAP is a set of incremental anti-pollution measures that are triggered to prevent further worsening of air quality once it reaches a certain threshold in the Delhi-NCR region.

From Stage III onwards, GRAP mandates a ban on non-essential construction work and the closure of stone crushers and mining activities. Stage IV includes additional restrictions, such as a complete halt on construction activities for both public and private projects.

On Wednesday, Mishra said that Stage III was in place for 16 days and that workers affected by the restrictions during this period would receive Rs 10,000 as compensation.

“Similarly, workers will be awarded compensation for the days Stage IV remains in place,” he said, adding that the benefit would be extended only to workers registered with the government.

Press Conference at Delhi Secretariat.
Delhi Labour department advisory issued.
Compensation for registered and verified Labourers.
50 percent work force to be operating at work place, with exceptions to essential services.https://t.co/qzQfJ5iVOG

— Kapil Mishra (@KapilMishra_IND) December 17, 2025

He added that the registration process was ongoing.

The compensation scheme would exclude workers employed in hospitals, departments involved in pollution control, the fire department and other essential services.

Mishra also said that all government and private institutions in Delhi must ensure that 50% of their staff work from home from Thursday or face action.

Delhi AQI

Delhi’s air quality remained in the “very poor” category on Wednesday, with the city’s average Air Quality Index recorded at 328 at 1.05 pm, according to data from the Sameer application.

Thirty of the city’s 40 monitoring stations recorded “very poor” air quality, showed the application, which provides hourly updates from the Central Pollution Control Board. Data for one monitoring station was not available at the time.

The average AQI on Tuesday stood at 354, also in the “very poor” category, marking a marginal improvement from Monday, when air quality had deteriorated to the “severe plus” category with an average AQI of 427.

Delhi’s air quality had worsened sharply over the past week. The city’s average AQI rose from 307 on Thursday to 349 on Friday and 431 on Saturday, before touching 461 on Sunday.

An index value between 301 and 400 indicates “very poor” air. Between 401 and 450 indicates “severe” air pollution, while anything above the 450 threshold is termed “severe plus”.

An AQI in the “severe” and “severe plus” categories signifies hazardous pollution levels that can pose serious risks even to healthy individuals.

The deterioration in the air quality was attributed to unfavourable weather conditions, including very low wind speeds caused by a western disturbance.

Delhi-NCR has been recording air quality in the “poor” or worse categories since mid-October.

Air quality deteriorates sharply in the winter months in Delhi, which is often ranked the world’s most polluted capital. Stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana, vehicular pollution, along with the lighting of firecrackers during Diwali, falling temperatures, decreased wind speeds and emissions from industries and coal-fired plants contribute to the problem.

Also read: Coastal cities may no longer offer escape from air pollution

Six children suffering from thalassemia and undergoing blood transfusions at the district hospital in Madhya Pradesh’s Satna have tested positive for the human immunodeficiency virus, The Hindu quoted officials as saying on Tuesday.

The children are aged between three and 15 years, reported The Times of India. They had tested positive for HIV between January and May, but the matter came to light only recently.

Unidentified officials told The Times of India that contaminated blood transfusions were the source of infection in all cases, except one. The parents of one of the children were also found to be HIV-positive, PTI quoted Satna Collector Satish Kumar S as saying.

On Tuesday, the state government formed a panel to investigate the matter and directed it to submit a report within seven days.

Deputy Chief Minister Rajendra Shukla, who holds the health portfolio, told The Hindu that the government was investigating whether the blood transfusions took place in other hospitals or only in the government hospital.

The panel is headed by Satya Avadhiya, regional director of the Public Health and Medical Education Department’s Rewa division.

It includes Ruby Khan, deputy director of the State Blood Transfusion Council, Romesh Jain, a blood transfusion specialist at AIIMS in Bhopal, Seema Naved of the Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre, Sanjeev Jadon, a senior drug inspector of the Food and Drug Administration in Hoshangabad, and Priyanka Choubey, drug inspector in the same department in Bhopal.

Manoj Shukla, civil surgeon and in-charge chief medical and health officer of the district hospital, said that children suffering from thalassemia are at high risk of contracting HIV as they require blood transfusions regularly, reported The Hindu.

He added that the children were tested and their treatment was started immediately. The medical officer also claimed that the children are “fine now”.

He also said that the infection could have been caused not only through blood transfusions but also through intravenous injections or the use of contaminated syringes. He added that the district hospital’s blood bank follows “all protocols”, with blood issued for transfusion only after donors test negative for all ailments.

“But a chance remains that if a person is in the window period of very early stage of infection, then it is not detected in the tests,” The Hindu quoted Manoj Shukla as saying. “It only comes to fore after a few months.”

The incident in Satna was reported almost two months after five children suffering from thalassemia tested positive for HIV in Jharkhand’s Chaibasa.

The infections were detected during an investigation by a five-member medical team from Ranchi, which was sent after the family of a seven-year-old thalassemia patient alleged that the Sadar Hospital blood bank in Chaibasa had supplied HIV-infected blood for a transfusion.

Blood transfusion guidelines

Blood banks are supposed to follow guidelines issued by the National AIDS Control Organisation, which state that each unit of blood donated from a person must undergo a screening test to detect HIV and hepatitis. Elisa is the most commonly used test for this purpose.

However, if donors have been freshly infected with either HIV or hepatitis, their bodies may not have generated enough antibodies against the virus for them to be detected in screening tests.

The Elisa test can only detect antibodies against these viruses 45 days after the patient is infected. A more sensitive method – the nucleic acid amplification test – reduces the window period to 10-15 days. However, this too cannot totally eliminate the chances of missing out on identifying an infection.

Experts say most cases of blood transfusion-related infections are caused when such tests miss detecting infections, or tests are not carried altogether.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to Parliament on Justice Yashwant Varma’s petition challenging the legality of the committee constituted under the 1968 Judges Inquiry Act to look into the impeachment proceedings against him in an unaccounted cash row, Live Law reported.

Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih issued notice to the speaker as well as the secretariats of the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha. Varma had filed the petition anonymously as ‘X’, The Hindu reported.

The Allahabad High Court judge had sought to quash the Lok Sabha speaker’s decision to constitute a three-member judicial committee to investigate the allegations against him.

He argued that although the notices for his impeachment had been submitted both in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, Om Birla, the speaker in the Lower House, formed the committee unilaterally without waiting for the admission of the motion by the Upper House chairperson, Bar and Bench reported.

Birla also did not wait for the joint consultation with the chairperson, he said.

This was in “clear derogation” of the provisions of the Act, Varma alleged.

In response, the bench asked how the legal experts in Parliament had allowed this to happen.

“So many MPs and legal experts but no one pointed this out?” Bar and Bench quoted Datta as asking.

Unaccounted cash was allegedly recovered at Varma’s official residence in Delhi when emergency services responded to a fire there on March 14. He was a judge at the Delhi High Court at that time. The judge said he was in Bhopal when the cash was discovered and claimed that it did not belong to him or his family.

Amid the row, he was transferred to the Allahabad High Court.

A report of the in-house inquiry committee into the matter, released on May 3, concluded that there was “sufficient substance” in the charges against Varma. It held that the judge’s misconduct was “serious enough to call for initiation of proceedings for removal”.

To impeach a judge in Parliament, a removal motion is required to be signed by 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs. If the motion is admitted in both Houses, a three-member judicial committee investigates the matter. The Parliament votes on the impeachment if the committee finds misconduct. If the motion gets two-thirds of the votes, the president is advised to remove the judge.

On July 25, Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said that the decision to impeach Varma was unanimous and that 152 MPs from the ruling coalition and the Opposition parties had signed the motion.

There is consensus that the removal of Varma should be a joint effort, he had said, adding that the Lok Sabha will take up the proceedings before they move to the Rajya Sabha in line with the Judges Inquiry Act.

However, on August 12, the Lok Sabha speaker formed a three-member committee, comprising Supreme Court Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and advocate B Vasudeva Acharya, to look into the matter.

In November, the committee sought a written statement from Varma on the charges against him, according to Bar and Bench. In response, the judge sought authenticated copies of the motions before both the Houses in July and any orders passed consequent to them.

In his petition in the Supreme Court, Varma alleged that he had yet to receive a response to the communications addressed to the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, Bar and Bench reported.

The petition said that the judge had also informed the committee about his intention to challenge the actions of the Lok Sabha speaker.

The committee then asked him to submit his written response on January 12 and appear before it on January 24, Bar and Bench reported.

The case is likely to be heard again on January 7.

Earlier, Varma had also challenged the in-house committee report that indicted him in the matter, as well as the recommendation made by Sanjiv Khanna, who was the chief justice of India when the report was submitted to the president and the prime minister to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.

In August, the Supreme Court dismissed both the petitions.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Tuesday accepted the resignation of state Sports Minister Aroop Biswas following the alleged mismanagement that led to chaos at Kolkata’s Salt Lake Stadium during footballer Lionel Messi’s visit on December 13, India Today reported.

Biswas had requested to be relieved from his post, citing the need for an “unbiased investigation” into the incident, The Indian Express reported. In response, Banerjee said that she appreciated Biswas’ “sentiment and intention” to offer his resignation for the sake of an impartial inquiry.

“I think he is very much correct and until and unless the impartial inquiry is over, the sports department will be looked after by me for the time being,” the newspaper quoted the Trinamool Congress chief as saying in a statement.

Trinamool Congress Spokesperson Kunal Ghosh said that the chief minister would retain direct charge of the department for the time being, India Today reported. Biswas, who was also handling the energy portfolio, will continue as the state power minister.

Messi had been in the country until Monday for the three-day GOAT (Greatest of All Time) India Tour 2025. The footballer visited Kolkata, Hyderabad, Mumbai and Delhi for meet-and-greets, exhibition matches and interactions with Indian athletes.

He was accompanied by his Inter Miami teammate Luis Suárez and Argentine footballer Rodrigo De Paul.

At Salt Lake Stadium on December 13, the footballers’ convoy entered the venue at 11.30 am. However, as the footballers entered the stadium, 70 to 80 persons, including the organisers of the event, Biswas and representatives of football clubs, surrounded them.

The spectators on the stands were unable to see Messi, Suarez and Paul as the persons surrounding the footballers tried to take selfies and autographs from them. Messi was taken out of the stadium at about 11.52 am, before the chief minister and actor Shahrukh Khan arrived to greet him.

Subsequently, chaos ensued as angry spectators broke chairs in the stands and threw them on the field. Bottles were also thrown. The spectators broke the gates and entered the field in large numbers.

Temporary structures were overturned and some were even set on fire, prompting the police to resort to lathi-charge to control the crowd.

The personnel from the Rapid Action Force were deployed inside the stadium.

Following the incident, the organiser of the event in West Bengal, Satadru Dutta, was arrested for alleged mismanagement. He was denied bail and sent to 14-days police custody on Sunday.

Banerjee also said that a committee had been formed to inquire into the incident.

On Monday, Biswas wrote to the chief minister, saying that he wants to step aside as the sports minister “for an unbiased investigation” The Indian Express reported. He asked Banerjee to grant his request.

On Tuesday, the chief secretary’s office in a notice said that Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar, Bidhannagar Police Commissioner Mukesh Kumar and Principal Secretary of the Sports Department Rajesh Sinha had been issued show cause notices, ANI reported.

It added that departmental proceedings had also been initiated against Deputy Commissioner of Police Aneesh Sarkar “for his reported negligence in his duties and responsibilities on the day of the event”. He was suspended till the completion of the inquiry.

Dev Kumar Nandan, the chief executive officer of Vivekananda Yuva Bharati Krirangan (Salt Lake Stadium), was also removed from his post, ANI reported.

The Lok Sabha on Tuesday passed the 2025 Repealing and Amending Bill, which seeks to repeal 71 laws that the government says had become obsolete.

Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said that the legislation is aimed at scrapping outdated laws and correcting errors that had crept in during the law-making process, and removing discriminatory aspects of some Acts, The Hindu reported.

The changes seek to reverse the effects of colonisation, the minister said, adding that the legislation would contribute to the ease of living for citizens.

The minister noted that one outdated legislation was the 1925 Indian Succession Act, which says that a will prepared by a Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jain or Parsi must be probated, or have its validity established in court.

The provision did not apply to other communities, he added.

The legislation seeks to amend the Indian Succession Act to remove the requirement to obtain a validation of a will in court in some cases, the newspaper reported.

The Acts that the Repealing and Amending Bill seeks to remove include the 1886 Indian Tramways Act, the 1976 Levy Sugar Price Equalisation Fund Act and the 1988 Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Determination of Conditions of Service of Employees Act, The Hindu reported.

It seeks to amend the 1897 General Clauses Act and the 1908 Code of Civil Procedure to update terminologies for registered posts.

Additionally, the legislation will also amend the 2005 Disaster Management Act to rectify a drafting error.

Meghwal added that while 1,562 outdated Acts had been repealed since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power, 15 had been amended, The Indian Express reported.

Opposition questions Centre

Questioning the bill, Opposition parties said that even some laws passed recently were being repealed, The Indian Express reported.

Congress MP Dean Kuriakose said that some laws passed in the past two years were also being repealed. “What kind of drama is this?” the newspaper quoted Kuriakose as asking.

Under the Disaster Management Act, the bill sought to replace the word “prevention” with “preparation”, he added.

“What is the relevance?” the MP representing Kerala’s Idukki constituency asked. “Are we signalling that the state is giving up on prevention? The government is diluting prevention.”

Samajwadi Party MP Lalji Verma said that the Union government passes bills in a “bullet-train-type hurry”, The Indian Express reported.

“They changed the name of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act,” he added. “Many of these laws were brought in between 2016 and 2023. The minister should explain why they are outdated today.”

The Union government is expected to introduce the 2025 Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace the 2005 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.

The bill proposes to increase the number of guaranteed working days per year under the Act to 125 from 100 and to raise the states’ share of the costs to 40%. It also proposes that only the Union government should be allowed to notify rural areas in a state where the scheme will be implemented.

The Election Commission on Tuesday published the draft electoral rolls for West Bengal under the special intensive revision exercise, PTI reported.

The names of over 58 lakh voters have been removed from voter lists in the state as they either died, migrated outside the state or did not submit their enumeration forms.

With these deletions, West Bengal’s electoral rolls now have the names of 7,08,16,631 voters, as against 7,66,37,529 earlier, The Hindu reported.

Citizens can search for their names on the voter roll on the Election Commission of India’s portal eci.gov.in or the website of the West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer at ceowestbengal.wb.gov.in

Physical copies of the draft rolls will also be available with booth-level officers, who have been asked to remain present at polling stations on the day of publication.

Digital copies have also been shared with representatives of the state’s eight recognised political parties.

The Election Commission said the list of deleted names includes names that appeared in the January 2025 rolls but do not feature in the draft rolls prepared after the revision exercise, which ran from November 4 to December 11, PTI reported.

Last week, data released by the office of the chief electoral officer showed that over 24.1 lakh voters were marked as dead, 19.8 lakh as permanently shifted and 12.2 lakh as missing or untraceable at their registered addresses.

Another 1.38 lakh voters were identified as having duplicate entries, 1.8 lakh were classified as “ghost” voters, and more than 57,000 names were removed under other discrepancies detected during enumeration.

The Election Commission stressed that deletion from the draft roll is provisional, and that citizens can object to their names being removed from the list.

The ruling Trinamool Congress alleged a “joint conspiracy” by the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Election Commission, claiming that the prospect of “hearings for nearly two crore voters” amounted to an attempt to scare citizens, PTI reported.

“If anyone dares to snatch away Bengal’s democratic rights, Bengal will never stay silent,” the party said on social media. “We will resist, we will fight, and we will defeat Bangla-Birodhi BJP.”

West Bengal is expected to head for Assembly elections in the first half of 2026.

Besides West Bengal, the special intensive revision of electoral rolls is underway in 11 other states and Union Territories.

In Bihar, where the revision was completed ahead of the Assembly polls in November, at least 47 lakh voters were excluded from the final electoral roll published on September 30.

Concerns had been raised after the announcement in Bihar that the exercise could remove eligible voters from the roll. Several petitioners also moved the Supreme Court against it.

Also read: In Bengal, BJP faces growing anger of Hindu migrants over SIR

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday indicated verbally that it was inclined to allow Gautam Navlakha, one of 16 persons accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon case, to move to his home in Delhi until the trial commences, Live Law reported.

The bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Shyam Chandak, said that the 73-year-old journalist and activist is not a flight risk and has been complying with bail conditions, PTI reported.

Navlakha, who was granted bail in 2023, is currently required to remain in Mumbai and not leave the city without the trial court’s permission.

“Consider the fact that he is 73 years old and is away from his family,” Dangre told Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh. “He is not originally from Mumbai. Even the trial is yet to commence and his discharge application is pending.”

Dangre asked Singh what his position was if Navlakha assured that he would attend hearings from the National Investigation Agency office in Delhi and appear in Mumbai whenever required, Live Law reported.

Advocate Yug Chaudhary, appearing for Navlakha, told the court that he cannot afford to continue living in rented premises in Mumbai and should be allowed to return to his permanent residence in Delhi.

Chaudhary said his “client has become bankrupt” and assured that he would attend “each and every hearing”.

The bench noted that there was no indication that Navlakha was a flight risk and asked Singh to specify any additional conditions that should be imposed.

“A person, especially at this age, would be lost if he lives away from his family,” Live Law quoted Dangre as saying. “He may feel uprooted from his own society, relatives and friends.”

The matter was posted for further hearing on Wednesday after the additional solicitor general sought time to obtain instructions on additional conditions.

Navlakha, is among 16 academicians, activists and lawyers who have been charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for their alleged role in instigating caste violence at Bhima Koregaon near Pune in January 2018.

He was arrested in August 2018 and placed under house arrest in November 2022 after the Supreme Court granted his request to be shifted from jail on the grounds of ill health and poor facilities in prison.

In December 2023, the Bombay High Court granted him bail, which was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in May 2024, following which he was released.

The Bhima Koregaon case

The case is related to the violence that broke out in Bhima Koregaon village near Pune on January 1, 2018, a day after the Elgar Parishad conclave was organised to mark the 200th anniversary of the battle of Bhima Koregaon.

One person died in the violence and several others were injured.

Seven years on, the trial in the case is yet to begin. One person accused in the case, Jesuit priest Stan Swamy, died in prison in 2021.

When the Supreme Court in 2023 granted bail to two people accused in the case, it noted that the primary evidence cited by the National Investigation Agency – a batch of letters – was of “weak probative value or quality”. In addition, a digital forensics firm, Arsenal Consulting, concluded that false evidence had been planted on the laptops and devices of the accused.

One of the gunmen behind the mass shooting at Sydney’s Bondi Beach had links to Hyderabad, the Telangana Police said. Fifty-year-old Sajid Akram finished his Bachelor of Commerce in the city before migrating to Australia in November 1998 after marrying a woman of European origin, it said.

“Telangana Police has no adverse record against Sajid Akram during his stay in India prior to his departure in 1998,” the police said in a release. The factors that allegedly led to the radicalisation of Sajid Akram and his son Naveed did not seem to have any connection with India, it added.

Naveed Akram was born in Australia and is an Australian citizen, the police noted.

Fifteen people were killed on Tuesday when a shooting targeting a celebration of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah at Bondi Beach. Forty-two people were hospitalised, including five in critical condition. Sajid Akram was shot dead by police at the scene, while Naveed Akram was taken to hospital. Read more.

The Kerala government directed the organisers of the 2025 International Film Festival of Kerala to go ahead with its full screening schedule, including 14 films for which the Union government has not granted permission.

The Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry had earlier denied permission to screen 19 films, including four about Palestine.

The ministry later allowed five films, including two about Palestine, to be shown. No reasons had been provided for denying permission for the screenings, said an official of the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy, which reports to the state’s cultural affairs department.

State Minister for Cultural Affairs Saji Cherian directed the academy to screen all the films on the schedule of the event. He accused the Union government of adopting “an anti-democratic approach towards Kerala’s progressive art and cultural tradition”. Read on.

Gaurav Luthra and Saurabh Luthra, the co-owners of the Goa nightclub where a fire killed 25 people earlier this month, landed in Delhi after being deported from Thailand. The Goa Police was present at the Indira Gandhi International Airport to arrest them.

They are expected to be produced before a Delhi court, where the Goa Police will seek a transit remand to take them to Goa for further investigation, officials said.

The fire had erupted around midnight on December 7 in a club named Birch by Romeo Lane, located near Baga beach. Twenty staff members and five tourists were killed. A preliminary inquiry has said that “electric firecrackers” set off inside the premises triggered the fire.

The brothers were in the national capital when the blaze erupted. The Goa Police alleged that they had fled the country for Thailand hours after the fire broke out, a claim that the brothers denied. Read on.

Vehicles without a valid Pollution Under Control certificate will not be allowed to refuel at petrol pumps in Delhi from Thursday. The certificate indicates that a vehicle’s emissions are within pollution norms and are not harmful to the environment.

Delhi Environment Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa said that vehicle owners had been given one day to comply with the rule on the certificate.

Sirsa said that the air quality in Delhi remained better for nearly eight months this year compared to the same period last year due to sustained efforts by the Bharatiya Janata Party government over the past ten months.

The air quality in Delhi improved marginally to the “very poor” category on Tuesday from “severe plus” on Monday. Since December 13, Delhi and the adjoining National Capital Region have also been under Stage 4 restrictions under the Graded Response Action Plan to curb pollution. Read on.

If you haven’t already, sign up for our Daily Brief newsletter.