Ordinance for death penalty for rape of children approved

Jan 24: India’s economy appears to be shaking off a slump, as activity in the services and manufacturing sectors expanded for a second straight month in December.

The needle on a gauge measuring so-called animal spirits signaled the economy may be taking a turn for the better, as five of the eight high-frequency indicators tracked by Bloomberg News came in stronger last month. The dial was last at the current position in August.

“Animal spirits” is a term coined by British economist John Maynard Keynes to refer to investors’ confidence in taking action, and the gauge uses the three-month weighted average to smooth out volatility in the single-month numbers.

The nascent recovery would need a helping hand, with expectations building that Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman will provide some stimulus when she presents the budget Feb. 1. Official forecasts show the economy is set to expand at 5% in the year ending March 2020 -- the weakest pace in more than a decade.

Here are the details of the dashboard:

Business Activity

The dominant services index rose to the highest level in five months in December as improving new work orders helped boost activity. The seasonally adjusted Markit India Services PMI index climbed to 53.3 from 52.7 in November, helping post a strong end to the calendar year.

India’s manufacturing PMI also rose -- to 52.7 from 51.2 a month ago -- boosted by the fastest increase in new orders since July. A reading above 50 means expansion while anything below that signals contraction.

The uptick in business confidence was accompanied by a rise in inflationary pressures, the survey showed. That trend may keep monetary policy makers from resuming interest-rate cuts anytime soon, leaving most of the heavy-lifting to boost growth with the government.

“The relative stability in macro indicators over the past two months suggests that the worst is behind, but the recovery is likely to be prolonged,” said Teresa John, an economist at Nirmal Bang Equities Pvt. in Mumbai. “Still, sluggish growth and rising inflation indicate that India may well remain in stagflation for most of 2020.”

Exports

Exports remained a laggard, falling 1.8% in December from a year ago. The drag was mainly because of a fall in export of engineering goods, which constitute a third of India’s non-oil exports.

Capital goods imports continued to contract and was lower by 16.5% year-on-year in December after a 22% drop in November. This was the seventh consecutive month of continuous decline, underscoring the weakness in the capex cycle, according to IDFC First Bank.

Consumer Activity

Weakness in demand for passenger vehicles persisted, with local sales falling 1.2% in December from a year ago, according to the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers. That capped the worst yearly passenger vehicle sales on record. A Nielsen study on demand for fast-moving consumer goods showed volume growth dropped to 3.5% in the last quarter of 2019 from 3.9% in the same period of 2018.

Funding conditions held out hope, showing considerable improvement in December, according to the Citi India Financial Conditions Index. Credit growth remained tardy though, with demand for loans rising at a slower 7.1% pace from a year ago compared with a nearly 8% growth in November.

Industrial Activity

Industrial output rose for the first time in four months in November. The pick up was broad-based, led by mining, manufacturing and electricity. Mining and manufacturing, in particular, posted a second month of sequential growth. Production of consumer goods also rose after a few months of contraction.

The index of eight core infrastructure industries, which feeds into the index of industrial production, however, declined 1.5% in November from a year ago -- the fourth straight month of contraction. That was on account of shrinking production of electricity, steel, coal, natural gas and crude oil. Both the core sector and industrial output numbers are reported with a one-month lag.

New Delhi, Mar 6: After Yes Bank was placed under moratorium, digital payments were impacted as PhonePe, which depends on the cash-strapped lender for its transactions, could not operate.

It can be noted that the bank's own net banking facilities have not been operational since last evening. Other fintech operators who rely on Yes Bank to settle their transactions are also down.  “We sincerely regret the long outage. Our partner bank (Yes Bank) was placed under moratorium by RBI. Entire team's been working all night to get services back up asap (as soon as possible),” the app's chief executive Sameer Nigam tweeted early in the morning.

PhonePe, one of the country's largest digital payment platforms, is dependent on Yes Bank to process its transactions.

He added that the app hopes to be live in a “few hours”.

Yes Bank placed under a moratorium Thursday evening, with the RBI capping deposit withdrawals at Rs 50,000 per account for a month and superseding its board.

Yes Bank will not be able to grant or renew any loan or advance, make any investment, incur any liability or agree to disburse any payment.

For the next month, Yes Bank will led by the RBI-appointed administrator Prashant Kumar, an ex-chief financial officer of SBI.

He added that the app - one of the most popular interfaces for UPI transactions - hopes to be live in a “few hours”.

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".