Doordarshan sparks row with ‘Gaddar’ poster featuring Kharge, Imran Masood, Arshad Madani
New Delhi, May 8: The Congress party has launched a sharp attack against public broadcaster Doordarshan for promoting a prime-time debate programme using a controversial poster that labelled several prominent figures—including Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Lok Sabha MP Imran Masood, and Islamic scholar Arshad Madani—as “gaddar” (traitors). The party called the move insulting, divisive, and unacceptable during a time of national crisis, demanding an immediate apology from Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw.
The outrage began after Doordarshan anchor Ashok Shrivastava shared a promotional poster on social media platform X (formerly Twitter) on May 6. The graphic included the faces of Kharge, Masood, and Madani with the caption: “India is ready but how many traitors are in the House?” This was in reference to Shrivastava’s debate show aired on Doordarshan, a government-funded broadcaster that is expected to maintain neutrality and uphold public service broadcasting standards.
Congress leaders strongly objected to the tone and content of the promotion, questioning how a national broadcaster could resort to such provocative and polarising messaging, especially when the country is facing security challenges.
“Unacceptable and Dangerous,” Says Congress
Reacting strongly, Congress general secretary (organisation) K.C. Venugopal said, “The kind of pathetic, insulting and dangerous narrative being run by Doordarshan is unacceptable. Labelling Kharge-ji and MP Imran Masood-ji as ‘gaddar’ is extremely divisive and completely out of place as we face a national crisis.”
Venugopal also pointed out that the Congress president has been working closely with the government and security forces since the Pahalgam terror attack. “We are together with the government at this critical juncture. It should ensure no such scurrilous message is sent out from its official or unofficial channels. Minister @AshwiniVaishnaw must extend an unconditional apology immediately,” he said in a post on X.
Targeting of Muslim Leaders Raises Concerns
What has further raised eyebrows is the inclusion of Islamic scholar Arshad Madani in the same graphic. Madani is the principal of the prestigious Darul Uloom Deoband and is a respected religious figure. Critics have asked how a public service broadcaster could justify grouping opposition political leaders and religious scholars under a label that questions their loyalty to the country.
Several users on social media, along with opposition leaders, highlighted that the visuals and captions used in the promotion were not only inflammatory but also carried communal undertones.
Manickam Tagore Also Demands Apology
Echoing Venugopal’s concerns, Lok Sabha MP from Tamil Nadu Manickam Tagore said, “Calling Leader of Opposition @kharge ji and Lok Sabha colleague @ImranMasood ‘Gaddar’ on Doordarshan is disgraceful & divisive. Congress stands with the nation in this crisis. Reel minister @AshwiniVaishnaw must apologise unconditionally.”
Criticism Over Use of Public Platform for Political Gimmicks
Political observers and media experts have also raised concerns over the editorial independence of Doordarshan. “This is not just about one show or one anchor,” said a senior media analyst. “The question is whether a taxpayer-funded broadcaster can be allowed to run such political propaganda. When opposition leaders and respected religious figures are openly vilified on government platforms, it’s a serious blow to democratic discourse.”
There has been no official response yet from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting or from Doordarshan regarding the controversy.
As the outrage grows, many have demanded clarity on who approved the visuals and messaging for the programme. Opposition parties say this episode reflects a growing trend of weaponising state media to discredit dissenting voices and minority communities, even during times of national security concerns.
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.
CJI calls for 'unified judicial policy', use of technology to converge practices across courts
Jaisalmer (PTI): Pushing for a "unified judicial policy", Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said technology can help align standards and practices across courts, creating a "seamless experience" for citizens, regardless of their location.
He said high courts -- due to the federal structure -- have had their own practices and technological capacities, and "regional barriers" can be broken down with technology to create a more unified judicial ecosystem.
Delivering the keynote address at the West Zone Regional Conference in Jaisalmer, Kant proposed the idea of a "national judicial ecosystem" and called for an overhaul of India's judicial system with the integration of technology.
"Today, as technology reduces geographical barriers and enables convergence, it invites us to think of justice not as regional systems operating in parallel, but as one national ecosystem with shared standards, seamless interfaces, and coordinated goals," he said.
He emphasised how the role of technology in the judiciary has evolved over time.
"Technology is no longer merely an administrative convenience. It has evolved into a constitutional instrument that strengthens equality before the law, expands access to justice, and enhances institutional efficiency," he said, highlighting how digital tools can bridge gaps in the judicial system.
Kant pointed out that technology enables the judiciary to overcome the limitations of physical distance and bureaucratic hurdles.
"It allows the judiciary to transcend physical barriers and bureaucratic rigidities to deliver outcomes that are timely, transparent and principled," he said, adding that the effective use of technology can modernise the delivery of justice and make it more accessible to citizens across the country.
The CJI called for implementing a "unified judicial policy".
He said India's judicial system has long been shaped by its federal structure, and different high courts have their own practices and technological capacities.
"India's vast diversity has led to different high courts evolving their own practices, administrative priorities and technological capacities. This variation, though natural in a federal democracy, has resulted in uneven experiences for litigants across the country," he said.
Kant underscored that predictability is crucial for building trust in the judicial system.
"A core expectation citizens place upon the courts is predictability," he said, adding that citizens should not only expect fair treatment but also consistency in how cases are handled across the country.
He pointed to the potential of technology in improving predictability.
"Technology enables us to track systemic delays and make problems visible rather than concealed," he said.
By identifying areas where delays occur, such as in bail matters or cases involving certain types of disputes, courts can take targeted action to address these issues and improve efficiency, Kant said.
The CJI explained that data-driven tools could identify the reasons behind delays or bottlenecks, allowing for faster, more focused solutions.
"Technology enables prioritisation by flagging sensitive case categories, monitoring pendency in real time and ensuring transparent listing protocols," he said.
Justice Surya Kant also discussed the importance of prioritising urgent cases where delays could result in significant harm. He highlighted his recent administrative order that ensures urgent cases, such as bail petitions or habeas corpus cases, are listed within two days of curing defects.
"Where delay causes deep harm, the system must respond with urgency," he stated, explaining that technology can help courts identify and expedite such cases.
Kant also raised the issue of the clarity of judicial decisions.
He noted that many litigants, despite winning cases, often struggle to understand the terms of their judgment due to complex legal language.
"Although the orders had gone in their favour, they remained unsure of what relief they had actually secured because the language was too technical, vague or evasive to understand," he said.
He advocated for more uniformity in how judgments are written.
"A unified judicial approach must therefore extend to how we communicate outcomes," he said.
The CJI also discussed the role of AI and digital tools in improving case management. He pointed to the potential of AI-based research assistants and digital case management systems to streamline judicial processes.
"Emerging technological tools are now capable of performing once-unthinkable functions. They can highlight missing precedent references, cluster similar legal questions, and simplify factual narration," he said, explaining how these technologies can help judges make more consistent decisions.
He also highlighted tools like the National Judicial Data Grid and e-courts, which are already helping to standardise processes like case filings and tracking.
Kant reiterated that the integration of technology into the judicial process is not just about improving efficiency but about upholding the integrity of the system and strengthening public trust.
"The measure of innovation is not the complexity of the software we deploy, but the simplicity with which a citizen understands the outcome of their case and believes that justice has been served," he said.
