AAP MLA Somnath Bharti's wife complains of domestic violence, DCW serves notice

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

New Delhi, Jul 16: With India's economic growth sputtering, the Reserve Bank of India was expected to maintain a rate-cutting cycle, but an uptick in near-term inflation could give the central bank's Monetary Policy Committee reason to pause for now.

Having cut its key lending rate by an aggressive 115 basis points (bps) in 2020, on top of 135 bps cuts in 2019, the RBI so far has had little success in spurring credit growth amid varying degrees of lockdowns across India.

Some economists and market insiders argue it may be prudent for the MPC, the policy committee, to hold its fire when it meets early next month.

"It's probably too early to administer a demand stimulus. The RBI still has room to cut rates, but we probably want to be more cautious of the timing," said Venkat Pasupuleti, portfolio manager at Dalton Investments.

"Maybe they should wait a quarter to see how things pan out once the lockdown situation is eased further."

Market participants have factored in at least a 25 bps rate cut by the MPC on August 6 while analysts are predicting a total 50-75 bps cuts over the rest of the fiscal year that runs to March 31.

The spike in the retail inflation rate above the RBI's mandated 2%-4% target range is another reason for the central bank to take a breather, analysts say.

Annual retail inflation rose to 6.09% in June, compared to 5.84% in March and sharply above a 5.30% median forecast in a Reuters poll of economists.

Rahul Bajoria, an economist at Barclays, said the spike in both consumer and wholesale prices "could lead to a tempering in enthusiasm for material front-loaded policy support from here on."

Almost all economists however agreed the RBI cannot move away from its accommodative stance or call an end to the rate cutting cycle just yet.

India's economy grew at 3.1% in the March quarter - an eight year low - and some economists have predicted a contraction of more than 20% in the June quarter and a contraction of up to 5% in the fiscal year.

"Even in the event of a pause, we think the RBI and MPC would want to hold out the promise of more cuts," said A. Prasanna, economist with ICICI Securities.

RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das said in a recent speech the need of the hour is to restore confidence, preserve financial stability, revive growth and recover stronger, suggesting inflation concerns are unlikely to deter the downward trajectory for rates too soon.

"The August policy decision would boil down to a judgment call over whether RBI can maintain easy monetary and financial conditions without the aid of a token rate cut," Prasanna said. 

New Delhi, Jan 18: The Supreme Court Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking conferment of 'Bharat Ratna' on Mahatma Gandhi saying that people hold the father of the nation in “high esteem”, beyond any formal recognition.

A bench, comprising Chief Justice S A Bobde and justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant, however asked petitioner Anil Dutta Sharma to give representation to the central government in this regard.

“Mahatma Gandhi is the father of nation and people hold him in high esteem, beyond any formal recognition,” the bench said.

The issue of directing the government to award Bharat Ratna to the father of the nation was not a “justiciable issue”, it said.

The bench however said that it agreed with the sentiments of the petitioner for granting official decoration to Mahatma Gandhi.

Disposing of the petition, the top court said, “We will allow you to give a representation to the Centre in this regard.”

Sharma, in his PIL, had sought a direction to the government to give “official decoration” to Mahatma Gandhi to honour him for the contribution to the nation.