2 nabbed for allegedly attempting to incite riots, arrest cowshed owner by throwing meat before holi
Ghaziabad: The Ghaziabad Police have arrested two individuals for allegedly throwing meat into a neighboring cowshed and conspiring to incite riots and arrest the cowshed owner.
According to reports, the arrested accused identified as Yogendra Chaudhary and Shivam, hatched a conspiracy to incite riots before Holi by spreading false information of cow slaughter at Gaushala to Hindu Rakshadal, and orchestrated the incident in an attempt to frame the cowshed owner and create unrest ahead of Holi.
According to the police, the case revolves around two cowsheds owned by relatives, Nandkishore and his brother-in-law. Nandkishore’s daughter, Chhaya, planned the act with her friend Yogesh, who works at HCL. She got eight kilograms of beef and threw it into her uncle’s cowshed to make it look like cow slaughter had taken place. After that, she and the accused informed members of the Hindu Raksha Dal, planning to create a dispute and get her uncle arrested.
Ghaziabad Police has arrested Yogendra Chaudhary and Shivam, who had hatched a conspiracy to incite riots before Holi by giving false information of cow slaughter at Goushala to Hindu Rakshadal.
— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) March 18, 2025
Interestingly, There were two Cowdheds. Both owned by Relatives ( Saala - Bahnoi).… pic.twitter.com/fWxTTSSfPv
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.
Elon Musk's X sues union government over alleged censorship and IT Act violations
Bengaluru(PTI): Social media giant 'X' (formerly Twitter), owned by US billionaire Elon Musk, has filed a lawsuit in the Karnataka High Court against Government of India, challenging what it called unlawful content regulation and arbitrary censorship.
It raised concerns over the Centre's interpretation of the Information Technology (IT) Act, particularly its use of Section 79(3)(b), which 'X' argues violates Supreme Court rulings and undermines free expression online.
The lawsuit alleged the government is using the said section to create a parallel content-blocking mechanism, bypassing the structured legal process outlined in Section 69A.
'X' claimed this approach contradicts the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in the Shreya Singhal case, which established that content can only be blocked through a proper judicial process or the legally defined route under Section 69A.
According to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B), Section 79(3)(b) mandates online platforms to remove illegal content when directed by either a court order or a government notification.
If a platform fails to comply within 36 hours, it risks losing its safe harbor protection under Section 79(1) and could be held accountable under various laws, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
However, X has contested this interpretation, arguing that the provision does not grant the government independent authority to block content.
Instead, it accused authorities of misusing the law to impose arbitrary censorship without following due process.
Under Section 69A of the IT Act, the government has the power to block public access to digital content if it is deemed a threat to national security, sovereignty, or public order. However, this process is regulated by the 2009 Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, which require a structured review process before blocking decisions are made.
'X' has argued that instead of following these procedures, the government is using Section 79(3)(b) as a shortcut, allowing content to be removed without the necessary scrutiny. The platform sees this as a direct violation of legal safeguards meant to prevent arbitrary censorship.
Another major point in the social media platform's legal challenge is its opposition to the government's Sahyog portal.
Created by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs, this platform was designed to streamline takedown requests under Section 79(3)(b) and facilitate direct communication between social media platforms and law enforcement agencies.
However, 'X' has refused to onboard an employee onto the Sahyog portal, claiming it acts as a "censorship tool" that pressures platforms to remove content without proper legal review.
The lawsuit argues that this is yet another attempt by the government to control online discourse without judicial oversight.
