Sidhu acquitted in road rage case
New Delhi, May 15: In a big relief to former cricketer and Punjab Tourism Minister Navjot Singh Sidhu, the Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted him from culpable homicide charges in a 30-year-old road rage case for which he was awarded three-year jail term.
A bench of Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul acquitted Sidhu of culpable homicide not amounting to murder charges, but convicted him for causing simple injury and imposed a fine of Rs 1,000 without any jail term.
The court also acquitted other accused, his cousin Rupinder Singh Sandhu, of all charges.
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.
NDTV’s senior editor calls Iran “terrorist regime” in ‘X’ post, deletes after backlash NDTV’s senior
NDTV’s senior executive editor, who covers foreign affairs, has drawn backlash after in an ‘X’ post he referred to Iran as a “terrorist regime.”
Following backlash the Journalist deleted the post.
This came at a time when India was in talks with the west asian country over passage of Indian oil tankers via the strategic ‘strait of hormuz.’
Meanwhile, tensions in the Middle East continued to escalate.
In the post, Kaul allegedly wrote, “#BREAKING: The Israeli army has launched a massive wave of attacks against the infrastructure of the Iranian terrorist regime across Iran.” The post has since been deleted.
Reacting to the post, netizens criticised and questioned journalistic neutrality.
Though the post was deleted, screengrabs of it continued circulating on social media platforms garnering criticism.
In a report, digital magazine Karvaan India highlighting critics’ concern reported that media ethicists have increasingly cautioned journalists, even when posting on social media in a personal capacity, their messages still reflect their professional roles and affiliations.
Critics warn that ignoring this distinction can compromise journalistic credibility and blur the line between reporting and personal commentary.
According to analysts cited by Karvaan India, the issue also involves significant diplomatic sensitivities.
Experts cited in the report also note that commentary from prominent Indian journalists during such conflicts can carry broader geopolitical implications, especially if it seems to align with the narrative of one side.
Reacting on the development, Author Salman Anees Soz criticised Kaul’s language and described the tweet stating that “it's shocking.”
In an ‘X’ post, he wrote, “It is shocking that a senior editor of a major Indian news organisation is describing the government of a country with which India has diplomatic relations as a ‘terrorist regime’. Journalists are expected to report, not act as spokespersons for one side in a war.”
In another post, Soz wrote, “If @ndtv reporters are calling Iran’s government a “terrorist regime”, then what the h*ll is our foreign minister doing talking to Iran’s Foreign Minister? Why did the Foreign Secretary express condolences at the Iranian embassy?.”
Several social media users also condemned the language used in the post.
“Israeli army but ‘Iranian terrorist regime.’ Aditya, could mistake you for a spokesperson of IDF rather than a journalist,” wrote a user.
“If you’re copy-pasting your headlines from somewhere, give them credit or just repost them. Because no Indian journalist outlet or government official is calling the Iranian regime a ‘terrorist regime’” wrote another user.
Another claimed, “Aditya Raj Kaul has been consistently referring to Iranian government as "terror regime" at least since 4th March.”
