Every inch of Pak territory within BrahMos range, Operation Sindoor was only a trailer: Rajnath
Lucknow (PTI): Every inch of Pakistan's territory lies within range of BrahMos and what happened during Operation Sindoor was just a trailer, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said here on Saturday, in a stern warning to Pakistan.
The operation proved that victory has become a habit for India, he said.
The Union minister, along with Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, flagged off the first batch of BrahMos missiles manufactured at the BrahMos Aerospace unit in Sarojini Nagar here.
Singh described BrahMos as a symbol of India's rising strength.
"BrahMos is not just a missile, it is proof of India's strategic confidence. From the Army to the Navy and the Air Force, it has become a key pillar of our defence forces," he said.
He asserted that India's defence capabilities now serve as a powerful deterrent.
"Every inch of Pakistan's territory lies within range of BrahMos. What happened during Operation Sindoor was just a trailer. It made Pakistan realise that if India could create Pakistan, then if the time comes... I need not say more, you all are wise enough," he said.
Operation Sindoor proved that "victory is not just a small incident for us but it has become a habit", he added.
Hailing Operation Sindoor, Singh said it instilled a new confidence among Indians and proved BrahMos' effectiveness to the world.
"Maintaining this confidence is now our collective responsibility," he said.
"The entire world now recognises India's capability. BrahMos has strengthened our belief that India can turn its dreams into reality," he said.
Under Operation Sindoor, Indian defence forces targeted terror infrastructure and defence installations in Pakistan in May, following an attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam on April 22 that claimed 26 lives.
Indigenously developed BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles were used by India to destroy Pakistan's air bases during the operation.
On the manufacturing of BrahMos at the Lucknow unit, Singh said the project symbolises India's growing confidence and capability in defence manufacturing.
"Lucknow is not just my parliamentary constituency, it resides in my soul. Today, it has become a city of technology and industry, apart from culture and tradition.
"The successful production of BrahMos missiles here shows that what was once a dream has now become a reality. The project represents patience, hard work and determination," he said.
Chief Minister Adityanath said it is a proud moment for Uttar Pradesh and a reflection of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's 'Make in India' vision.
"Under the Defence Industrial Corridor, Uttar Pradesh is emerging as a major hub of indigenous defence manufacturing. The BrahMos unit is a shining example of that," he said.
"With a missile like BrahMos, India is now not only able to meet its own security needs but also those of its allies in the world," he said.
The CM said his government is committed to supporting projects which strengthen national security and create new employment opportunities and technical expertise in the region.
According to an official statement, Saturday's event is not only a milestone for the Uttar Pradesh Defence Industrial Corridor (UPDIC) but will also provide new energy to India's resolve to achieve self-reliance in defence manufacturing.
Inaugurated on May 11, the state-of-the-art BrahMos Aerospace unit houses all modern facilities for missile integration, testing and final quality checks. After successful testing, the missiles are prepared for deployment by the Indian armed forces.
Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak, Minister Nand Gopal Gupta Nandi and various officials were present on the occasion.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
K’taka HC asks Centre to examine broadcasts, digital content on media trial against actor Darshan
Bengaluru (PTI): The High Court of Karnataka has directed the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to examine broadcasts and digital content related to Kannada actor Darshan in connection with the Renukaswamy murder case.
It has also asked them to take necessary action if any violations of the rules are found.
Darshan and his friend, actress Pavithra Gowda, are among the 17 accused in the Renukaswamy murder case. He is currently lodged in jail under judicial custody.
“Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (Ministries) are directed to forthwith examine the impugned broadcasts and digital content relating to the petitioner and the subject crime. Upon being satisfied that the same are violative of Rule 6 of the Programme Code framed under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, they shall take immediate action in accordance with Sections 19 and 20 of the Act,” Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said in his order dated April 30, while partly allowing the petition.
“This may include regulating, suspending, prohibiting, or directing discontinuance of such telecast, broadcast, streaming, or dissemination, pending inquiry and final consideration of the complaint,” he added.
Darshan, in his petition, had claimed that he is aggrieved by a sustained and targeted media campaign in connection with the murder case.
He said that despite the trial being at a nascent stage, various television channels and digital platforms have indulged in media-driven adjudication, disseminating speculative narratives, selectively leaked materials, and unverified allegations, thereby shaping public perception and impairing the petitioner’s right to a fair trial.
Despite judicial interdictions, the petitioner alleged that the media continues to telecast content in violation of statutory provisions and binding court orders.
The court said the material placed on record, particularly the clippings produced, unfortunately, depicts a disturbing trend wherein the broadcast media has gone to the extent of recreating courtroom proceedings, with only the face of the presiding judge masked, while the faces of the accused and counsel are openly displayed.
Such programmes are telecast on every date of hearing, thereby converting pending judicial proceedings into a form of public spectacle, it said.
The judge said, “This Court cannot but observe that such conduct amounts to a calculated media-driven adjudication, fostering a parallel narrative and engendering prejudicial pre-trial publicity. The continued telecast of such content, in the teeth of subsisting injunction orders, reflects a blatant disregard for judicial authority and contributes to the creation of a ‘carnival atmosphere of justice.’”
By virtually staging courtroom scenes and projecting selective narratives, the media not only risks subverting due process but also erodes adjudicatory neutrality, impairing the petitioner’s right to a fair trial, he said.
The court further said that the material on record discloses violations of the Programme Code under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, the Contempt of Courts Act, and the Information Technology Act and Rules.
“The material on record discloses prima facie violations of statutory provisions and judicial orders. The ongoing media narrative poses a serious threat to the petitioner’s right to a fair trial under Article 21,” it said.
“Freedom of speech is a cherished constitutional value; however, when it degenerates into media-driven adjudication, it ceases to be a safeguard of democracy and becomes a threat to it,” the judge said.
“The press is a watchdog, but when it assumes the role of judge, jury, and executioner, the rule of law stands imperilled. Courts cannot permit the course of justice to be overshadowed by the glare of studio lights,” he added.
The court has also asked the ministries to examine the necessity of prohibition of broadcast, suspension or revocation of permissions or licences, imposition of penalties, and initiation of such further statutory proceedings as are permissible in law; to conduct an inquiry into the alleged violations of the Programme Code and pass appropriate orders.
It has directed them to file a compliance report before the court within twelve weeks.
The judge also stated that liberty is reserved to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, if so advised.
