Booking platforms halt new offerings to Turkey, Azerbaijan; advise against 'non-essential' travel
New Delhi, May 9 (PTI): Amid escalating tensions with Pakistan, various online booking platforms on Friday announced suspension of new travel offerings to countries, including Turkey and Azerbaijan for their "support" to Pakistan and advised customers to avoid "non-essential" travel to these destinations, while urging Indians to exercise "utmost caution" before planning trips to sensitive regions.
Cox & Kings said it has decided to temporarily pause all new travel offerings to Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Turkey.
"In light of recent developments, we have decided to pause all new travel offerings to Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, and Turkey. This decision is driven by our commitment to uphold principles that matter deeply to us and the people of our country. We also advise Indian travellers to exercise discretion and avoid any non-essential travel to these destinations until there is greater clarity and alignment in the broader geopolitical environment," said Karan Agarwal, Director, Cox & Kings.
"Travel Advisory - Following the Pahalgam attack and escalating tensions between India & Pakistan, travellers are urged to stay aware. As Turkey & Azerbaijan have shown support for Pakistan, we strongly recommend visiting only if absolutely necessary," EaseMyTrip said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, on Thursday evening.
EaseMyTrip Founder and Chairman Nishant Pitti also took to X, saying he was "deeply concerned" by the recent developments and advising all its customers to exercise utmost caution and stay updated on official travel advisories before planning trips to sensitive regions.
Travomint said the company has suspended the sale of all travel packages to Turkey and Azerbaijan to support Indians' call for boycotting these two countries.
"Due to the escalating tensions with Pakistan and countries like Turkey and Azerbaijan supporting it, we at Travomint have taken a firm and responsible stand. We have decided to support the Indians' call for boycotting Turkey and Azerbaijan. With immediate effect, Travomint has suspended the sale of all travel packages to these countries," Travomint Chairman and CEO Alok K Singh said in a statement.
In addition to this, he said, no cancellation fees will be charged on existing bookings to Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Emergency flight bookings will be available in case of any emergency or urgent need, Singh said.
Meanwhile, Vice President of Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Association of India (FHRAI) and Hotel And Restaurant Association (Western India) - HRAWI spokesperson Pradeep Shetty shared that there have been cancellations for hotels in states including Rajasthan, Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir, among others.
"There are cancellations... We are observing the situation closely," he told PTI.
India on Wednesday carried out strikes on nine sites in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Pakistan, marking its deepest strikes inside Pakistan in decades, in retaliation for a deadly terrorist attack two weeks before. Thereafter, Pakistan attempted to unleash drones and missiles at Indian military targets in more than a dozen cities and towns, many of them home to air force bases. The Indian Army said the attacks were "effectively repulsed".
Travel Advisory!!!
— EaseMyTrip.com (@EaseMyTrip) May 8, 2025
Following the Pahalgam attack and escalating tensions between India & Pakistan, travellers are urged to stay aware.
As Turkey & Azerbaijan have shown support for Pakistan, we strongly recommend visiting only if absolutely necessary.
Stay informed. Travel… pic.twitter.com/gmdieqjyFH
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.
SC quashes proceedings against woman's in-laws, says no specific act attributed to them
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday quashed criminal proceedings against three in-laws of a woman who had got a police complaint lodged alleging dowry-related harassment, saying the FIR does not attribute any specific act of threat or cruelty to the accused.
The court said the prosecution has also failed to provide any cogent evidence to establish an overt act or intention on the part of the accused in-laws in the alleged second marriage of the husband.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the woman, challenging a November 2024 order of the Kerala High Court.
The high court had refused to quash the proceedings arising out of an FIR lodged in 2016 in the southern state on a complaint from the woman against her husband and the three in-laws.
The woman, who got married in 2007, had alleged that she was subjected to dowry-related harassment from the inception of her marriage and her husband married another woman in May 2013 by suppressing the fact that he was already married.
"At the outset, it is to be noted that the gravamen of the complaint lies against the accused-husband. Specific allegations regarding physical assault, demand of dowry and mental torture have been made against him pertaining to specific dates and incidents," the top court said.
It noted that the allegations against the three in-laws were less serious than active involvement and were mostly about them being present or encouraging the harassment meted out by the husband.
The bench observed that the FIR does not attribute any specific act of demand, threat or physical assault on any identifiable occasion to the complainant's father-in-law and mother-in-law.
It said the sister-in-law was alleged to have received money to buy a flat from the proceeds of the sale of gold, but "no specific act of cruelty or coercion on her part has been alleged".
"In all three instances, the allegations consist of general statements of presence and encouragement rather than specific acts that individually constitute the offence of cruelty under section 498A (husband or his relative subjecting a married woman to cruelty) of the IPC," the bench said.
Regarding the allegations under section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the bench referred to an earlier verdict of the top court and said it was held that in order to bring home the charge, the complainant was required to prima facie prove an overt act or omission of the accused in the second marriage ceremony.
Section 494 of the IPC deals with the offence of marrying again during the lifetime of a husband or a wife.
"While it has been alleged that the accused-appellants were aware of the second marriage, mere knowledge that an act is being or has been committed by another person does not, by itself, establish the requisite common intention," the bench said.
It said there was no allegation to suggest that the three in-laws actively participated in, facilitated or encouraged the solemnisation of the second marriage of the complainant's husband.
While allowing the appeal, the bench set aside the high court order and quashed the proceedings against the three.
