Will you apologise now? Netizens ask news anchor Sushant Sinha for giving clean chit to Anil Masih
Anil Masih admitted in SC of tampering with ballot papers in Chandigarh mayoral polls
New Delhi: In what turned out to be major development on Monday regarding the alleged ballot paper tampering during last month's Chandigarh mayoral election, Times Now Navbharat news anchor Sushant Sinha has found himself in the spotlight. Sinha, who also runs a YouTube channel, had staunchly defended the Chandigarh returning officer, Anil Masih, in the face of damning accusations.
Masih had been accused of putting marks on Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and Congress votes, a claim that gained traction when CCTV footage surfaced, seemingly showing Masih tampering with ballot papers. Sinha, however, had come to Masih's defense, suggesting that the video portrayed a routine electoral process rather than intentional tampering. He insinuated that the opposition, particularly the BJP's rivals, was manipulating the narrative to their advantage.
The tables have now turned as Anil Masih has admitted to adding a mark on eight cast ballots that he later declared invalid. These marked ballots played a crucial role in the victory of the now-resigned BJP mayor, Manoj Sonkar.
Masih attempted to justify his actions by claiming that he marked ballots that were already defaced by councillors during the voting process. According to Masih, these additional marks were meant to differentiate the ballots and prevent confusion.
However, the Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, rebuffed Masih's defense, pointing out that the rules did not provide for such additional markings on ballot papers. The bench emphasized that Masih's interference with the election process warranted prosecution.
The Supreme Court has now taken matters into its own hands, deciding to personally examine the ballots on Tuesday, February 20. The bench ordered the production of the ballot papers, currently in the custody of the registrar general of the Punjab and Haryana high court, for this purpose. Furthermore, the presiding officer, Anil Masih, has been directed to be present during the hearing.
In the wake of this development, social media users were quick to criticize Sushant Sinha for his earlier defense of Masih, particularly as the Supreme Court's actions were seen as a sharp rebuke to what has been dubbed 'Godi Media.' Sinha's initial support for Masih, now proven misguided, has drawn widespread condemnation on various social media platforms, with users questioning if Sinha will come out publicly to apologise for his actions of giving clean chit to Masih.
This guy @SushantBSinha defended Chandigarh returning officer when the whole world saw him putting marks on AAP & Congress votes.
— Amock (@Politics_2022_) February 19, 2024
Today, Anil Masih has accepted his fault and agreed that he cheated.
Will Sushant Sinha apologize for his B&D behavior?#ChandigarhMayorElection pic.twitter.com/nlz4hgvf0Q
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.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
