Gold prices soar by Rs 840 in biggest single-day gain this year

December 2, 2014

New Delhi, Dec 2: Posting this year's biggest single-day rise of Rs 840, gold today regained the Rs 27,000 per ten gram level after a gap of over one month in the national capital, tracking rebounds in global markets.gold

In addition, pick-up in domestic demand from jewellers and retailers for the wedding season also buoyed sentiment.

After losing Rs 730 in last six sessions after the RBI eased imports curbs by scrapping 80:20 scheme, gold staged a strong comeback by rising Rs 840 to close at Rs 27,040 per ten grams, a level last seen on October 30.

Silver also recorded a significant gain of Rs 2,700 to Rs 37,000 per kg on increased offtake by industrial units and coin makers.

Sentiment bolstered after gold surged by 3.69 per cent, its biggest gain since September 19, to USD 1,218.10 an ounce in New York yesterday, as rebound in crude price revived demand for the precious metal as stores of value, bullion traders said.

Globally, silver also surged 7.3 per cent to USD 16.69 an ounce yesterday, the highest gain since September 2013.

Besides, rising domestic demand from jewellers and retailers for the ongoing wedding season too influenced precious metal prices, they said.

In Delhi, gold of 99.9 and 99.5 per cent purity zoomed up by Rs 840 each to Rs 27,040 and Rs 26,840 per ten grams respectively.

Sovereign moved up by Rs 100 to Rs 23,700 per piece of eight gram.

Following gold, silver ready spurted by Rs 2,700 to Rs 37,000 per kg and weekly-based delivery by Rs 2,420 to Rs 36,340 per kg.

Silver coins recovered sharply by Rs 3,000 to Rs 61,000 for buying and Rs 62,000 for selling of 100 pieces.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 16,2020

Lucknow, Jan 16: The drive initiated by Uttar Pradesh's Yogi Adityanath government to identify non-Muslim immigrants in the state seems to have run into rough weather.

In Pilibhit, where the maximum number of about 35,000 illegal immigrants has been identified, it has now been found that information is being sought by the state government on an unverified document. A large number of families from Bangladesh settled here several decades ago.

The survey began last month even before the bill was notified. Moreover, the feedback email on the questionnaire is a Gmail ID -- [email protected] -- which is not a government server.

It is not known how the state government is drawing up the lists without having the verification criteria.

After the report was put up by a news website, Home Department officials feigned complete ignorance about the issue.

A spokesman said: "This was an unofficial and preliminary exercise to assess the number of illegal migrants in the state. The document is meant to collect basic beneficiary information. No list of potential beneficiaries has yet been sent to Delhi."

The document has eight columns asking for name, father's name, place of stay in India, and where did they come from and when. It does not mention any requirement of proof, or documents.

It also asks for a description of the kind of atrocities they faced, presumably in their home country.

The District Magistrate of Pilibhit claimed they are checking documents of the refugees, but denied any knowledge of the unsigned document.

The CAA is meant to benefit Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who came to India before December 31, 2014. The statement of purposes of the Act adds that it is meant to benefit those fleeing religious persecution from the above countries.

Comments

Abdullah
 - 
Thursday, 16 Jan 2020

Yogi is unfit to be CM as he does not know what he speaks and does.   Its unfortunate that we are such idiot as CM.    Instead of CAA we need PAA (Politician amendment act).    We need age limit of politicians to be fixed to 65 or maximum 70 years and any one coming in politics to be free from any bad doing.   No rapists/murders/looters/decoits should be allowed to contest election.   Presently 90 percent of the politicians have bad record.  Few are rapists, murders, having spent jail term etc.    

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
April 24,2020

New Delhi, Apr 24: The Jamia Coordination Committee (JCC) on Friday accused Delhi Police of framing two of its members - Meeran Haider, Safoora Zargar, along with student leader Umar Khalid, as part of "an imaginary conspiracy behind the recent North East Delhi riots".

While Haider was arrested on April 2, Zargar was taken in custody on April 10 for their alleged involvement in fuelling the riots.

"These arrests by the police have little ground, and the charges seem to have no rhyme or reason. Safoora was even granted bail in the case she was initially arrested in, following which she was arrested and had heavier charges placed against her," the JCC said in a statement.

Meeran, Safoora and Umar have been charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), which allows curbing of fundamental rights in order to protect the sovereignty of India. The JCC, however, claimed that in this case, the Act is being used to suppress their voices.

"This Act has been used against many activists working to protect constitutional morality, a list which now includes members of the JCC, a wholly constitutionalist collective of students and alumni," the JCC said, defending its members.

JCC maintained it had no role in Delhi riots, but apprehended that more people will be arrested by the Delhi Police as part of its conspiracy against students and protestors.

"It is almost certain that more protesters will be framed and arrested in the conspiracy invented by the Delhi Police. JCC reiterates that it played no part in the riots, and this fact will be proved before any court of law," it said in a statement.

It also demanded political parties, and university administration take a stand for the two accused JCC members and student leader Umar Khalid.

The JCC came into existence after a violent face-off between Delhi Police and unruly anti-CAA protestors left Jamia Millia Islamia vandalised. It was after this, that a group of students from the Jamia Millia formed it to decide upon the future course of actions in protest against the CAA and the police action.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 16,2020

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".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.