New Delhi: As farmers’ protest intensified on Thursday after the Ghazipur Magistrate ordered the farmers to vacate the public spaces, Twitter users in India started tweeting with a hashtag calling out Prime Minister Narendra Modi to be a coward.

The hashtag #मोदी_कायर_है went trending on Twitter in India on Thursday evening as farmers and other activists anticipated police action later at night to vacate the farmers from protesting sites at the Ghazipur border.

The reports of police action were fuelled by the fact that farmers’ leader Rakesh Tikait along with Yogendra Yadav and others were booked under UAPA.

ALSO READ: Dhanya Rajendran slays Arnab Goswami, Republic TV after it sends legal notice to her website

The users called out on Narendra Modi referring to him as “Kayar” (Hindi word for Coward). The hashtag was soon trending on the micro-blogging site with nearly three lakh tweets at the time of posting of this report.

The users also expressed their support to Rakesh Tikait, hailing him for his courage and steadiness for the cause of farmers. Reports across social media platforms also suggested that a heavy number of people were reaching at Ghazipur Border to support Tikait in what they termed as “crucial night”.

Tikait meanwhile made an announcement from the stage at the protesting site on Thursday night that they were ready to go to jail but not back to their homes and that the protest will continue.

Here are some of the tweets from the trending hashtag:

NOTE: The claims made in the tweets embedded below or the ideas presented in them are those solely of the users. Vartha Bharati does not guarantee the authenticity of any of the claims or does not necessarily endorse the ideas, views posted by any of the users.

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.



Bengaluru: The State Government has strongly defended its decision to grant one day of paid menstrual leave every month to women employees, telling the Karnataka High Court that the notification was issued in the larger interest of women and is legally sound. The Court, treating the matter as one of significant public importance, refused to stay the implementation of the order and adjourned the hearing to January 20.

The Labour Department’s November 20, 2025 notification was challenged by the Bangalore Hotels Association, Avirat Defence System, Facile Aerospace Technologies Ltd and Samos Technologies Ltd. Justice Jyoti Mulimani heard the petitions on Wednesday.

At the start of the hearing, the bench asked whether the State had filed its objections. Advocate General K. Shashikiran Shetty informed the Court that objections had been submitted and that copies would be provided to the petitioners.

Defending the notification, the Advocate General said the government had introduced a progressive measure aimed at women’s welfare, one that no other state in India had implemented so far. He told the Court that 72 objections were received and considered before finalising the notification. He argued that the government was empowered to frame such policy under Article 42 of the Constitution and noted that the Supreme Court and the Law Commission had earlier made recommendations in this direction.

ALSO READ: MP Brijesh Chowta urges centre to grant point of call status to Mangaluru airport

When the Court asked whether the notification applied to all sectors, the Advocate General replied in the affirmative. The bench observed that the matter required detailed hearing because of its wider public impact and decided to take it up in January. The Court added that petitioners may file their responses to the State’s objections before the next hearing.

Petitioners’ counsel B.K. Prashanth requested that the State be restrained from enforcing the order until the case is decided. The Advocate General responded that the government had already begun implementing the notification across all sectors.

Justice Mulimani noted that nothing would change between now and the next hearing and emphasised that the Court would consider all arguments thoroughly before issuing any direction. The bench then adjourned the matter to January 20 and asked petitioners to file any additional applications with copies to the State’s counsel.