Protesters from the region, including the families of the accused, are demanding a CBI probe, and contesting the J&K Police investigators’ chargesheet.
The launch of Amma Makkal Munetra Kazhagam comes weeks after actors Kamal Haasan and Rajinikanth took the political plunge and amid the continued political churn in Tamil Nadu.
Sidekicks are quintessential in Bollywood, and every few years, when a star or lead shines, a filmmaker reminds us that the person next to the hero is a key ingredient in the recipe.
SEBI probe concluded that purported loans and fund transfers were paid back in full and did not amount to deceptive market practices or unreported related party transactions.
While the IAF remains committed to the Tejas programme and has placed orders for 180 Tejas Mk1A, the force is eagerly waiting for the Tejas Mk 2 version.
Many really smart people now share the position that playing cricket with Pakistan is politically, strategically and morally wrong. It is just a poor appreciation of competitive sport.
The Hindu article is based on a logical inconsistency. CCTV footage could certainly confirm the presence; CCTV does not necessarily confirm the absence of an individual.
Let me point out the inconsistency
The proposition that “accused not being seen in the footage is sign of his absence” is acceptable ONLY when the proposition is allowed to IMPLY that entire area is covered by CCTV and every exam-taker would certainly be captured by CCTV.
But, then later saying that a proxy MIGHT HAVE BEEN USED without showing the footage of the proxy simply contradicts the IMPLICATION of the proposition” How? “Might have” implies doubt about everyone being captured and implies that there is chance of not being captured by CCTV.
Registrar can temporarily justify his use of “Might have” by ascribing to his ignorance. It’s expected of the registrar to identify and show who is the proxy in the footage. If he does not identify the proxy’s appearance in the footage , then his inference of absence of the accused’s non-appearance in the footage would become invalid.
It gave me goosebumps imagine how innocent child went through such horrying situation ,even if for second we believe she was not raped but she was murdered too brutally who killed her who kidnapped innocent do u have answer
Wow. I am actually impressed (and super surprised) that a one-sided biased entity like Print published something like this.
What is incredibly frustrating is this – a case so full of holes. Damn – the place does not even have a window (that you can close) generated so much mass hysteria, flamed up by the media irresponsibly. India gets written about in a poor light negatively, Hindu gods and goddesses vilified and defiled and everybody goes scott free. How unfair is that?
And people complain when we call the media biased and address people as sickular. About time MSM wakes up and smells the coffee and do their job responsibly.
Sarcasm apart, thank you for publishing this point of view. Please keep the articles and opinions balanced and please don’t be driven by a political agenda. The purpose of jounalism will be lost. It is so important that you guys have a semblance of unbiased reporting for a healthy democracy.
You have written an interesting article!
The Hindu article is based on a logical inconsistency. CCTV footage could certainly confirm the presence; CCTV does not necessarily confirm the absence of an individual.
Let me point out the inconsistency
The proposition that “accused not being seen in the footage is sign of his absence” is acceptable ONLY when the proposition is allowed to IMPLY that entire area is covered by CCTV and every exam-taker would certainly be captured by CCTV.
But, then later saying that a proxy MIGHT HAVE BEEN USED without showing the footage of the proxy simply contradicts the IMPLICATION of the proposition” How? “Might have” implies doubt about everyone being captured and implies that there is chance of not being captured by CCTV.
Registrar can temporarily justify his use of “Might have” by ascribing to his ignorance. It’s expected of the registrar to identify and show who is the proxy in the footage. If he does not identify the proxy’s appearance in the footage , then his inference of absence of the accused’s non-appearance in the footage would become invalid.
It gave me goosebumps imagine how innocent child went through such horrying situation ,even if for second we believe she was not raped but she was murdered too brutally who killed her who kidnapped innocent do u have answer
Wow. I am actually impressed (and super surprised) that a one-sided biased entity like Print published something like this.
What is incredibly frustrating is this – a case so full of holes. Damn – the place does not even have a window (that you can close) generated so much mass hysteria, flamed up by the media irresponsibly. India gets written about in a poor light negatively, Hindu gods and goddesses vilified and defiled and everybody goes scott free. How unfair is that?
And people complain when we call the media biased and address people as sickular. About time MSM wakes up and smells the coffee and do their job responsibly.
Sarcasm apart, thank you for publishing this point of view. Please keep the articles and opinions balanced and please don’t be driven by a political agenda. The purpose of jounalism will be lost. It is so important that you guys have a semblance of unbiased reporting for a healthy democracy.