Ankita Kumari from Munger eloped from her home to marry Mohammad Arzoo in 2021 after falling in love with him. She married him against her family's wishes. When her family filed a complaint, Ankita gave a statement in court expressing her wish to live with Arzoo. Recently, at around 11:30 PM, Ankita called her mother, Draupadi Devi. Ankita was crying on the phone and saying that she was being beaten and feared for her life. She pleaded with her mother to take her back home. Her mother reassured Ankita that she would come to take her home. But before that could happen, the family received devastating news. At around 2 AM, Mohammad Arzoo called and informed them that Ankita had died by hanging. Her family was left shocked by the news. Her mother rejected the claim that her daughter had died by suicide and claimed that Ankita had been murdered and that her death had been made to look like a suicide. According to Ankita's mother, her daughter was harassed for dowry, pressured to convert to Islam, and faced opposition when she wanted to visit a Durga temple during Durga Puja. Her mother is seeking justice for her daughter. Police is investigating the case.

Today, Farooq Abdullah said in his speech in Baramulla – "Have the courage to fight, or you will be wiped out, and your identity will disappear. Our neighbour Pakistan is protecting us, otherwise Delhi's intentions are not good." Farooq is just like his father Sheikh Abdullah. Sheikh changed the names of thousands of villages in J&K from their native names to new Islamic names. He delivered communal speeches in various mosques in Kashmir. He also referred to Kashmiri Pandits as "mukhbir" (informants) of the Indian govt. The difference is that Sheikh Abdullah pursued his agenda openly during his time, whereas Farooq Abdullah appears to be playing a far more calculated and strategic game. Every now and then, Farooq reveals his true colours. What seems to bother some Kashmiri politicians today is that the situation on the ground in Kashmir has changed significantly. Stone-pelting by local youths, the use of petrol bombs, the burning of schools, and violent street clashes, which were once common in Kashmir valley are no longer a regular features.

1) France is burning. 2) Italy is witnessing clashes, looting. 3) Belgium is witnessing violence. 4) Albania is experiencing violent confrontations. Meanwhile, UN experts are worried about how India handles protests. But have UN experts also taken note of protesters openly calling for India to turn into Bangladesh? One of the lead protesters even stated - "Bangladesh showed us the way". There is global chaos, Europe is burning, but India is the one getting lectured. Are UN experts waiting for India to burn too?

I watched Prahaar today, a movie based on the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks and the court proceedings involving terrorist Ajmal Kasab. Honestly, I am quite disappointed with the way certain important facts have been completely left out, while others have been inaccurately portrayed. The film goes into considerable detail about the court proceedings, but somehow misses some of the most important aspects of the case. First, the red thread and the fake ID card with a Hindu name. The film completely leaves out this part of the story. In reality, Kasab told the magistrate about the red thread (kalawa) tied around his wrist and the use of a fake identity. The Supreme Court judgment also mentions that his fake ID card carried the name Samir Chaudhary. These were not insignificant details. According to Kasab’s confession, the attackers were given Hindu identities and made to wear sacred threads as part of a deliberate plan. The plan was to make the attack appear as a Hindu terror attack, yet the film completely leaves out this crucial aspect of the case. How can you make a film that claims to cover the court proceedings in detail and completely leave out such a crucial part of the case? Second, the portrayal of Kasab’s remorse. The film seems to portray Kasab as someone who is deeply regretful, troubled by his actions, and experiencing remorse towards the end. But the Supreme Court judgment explicitly states that Ajmal Kasab showed no remorse for his terrorist acts and had told the magistrate that he had absolutely no regret for what he had done. If a filmmaker is making a film based on real events, why not present the facts as they are? People who have followed the case and read about the actual proceedings will notice these discrepancies. I genuinely went into this film expecting a more accurate and complete portrayal of the case. Instead, I came away disappointed. When the truth is already documented in court records, there should be no hesitation in presenting it. When you selectively erase facts and manufacture emotions, you are not telling a story, you are selling a narrative.