Bengaluru woman groped, beaten, dragged on road after rejecting man’s advances
Bengaluru: A 21-year-old woman was allegedly assaulted in broad daylight in Bengaluru after she rejected repeated relationship advances from a man she had met through social media. The incident, which was captured on CCTV, took place on December 22 around 3.20 pm, NDTV reported.
According to police, the accused, identified as Naveen Kumar, had been in contact with the woman after connecting with her on Instagram earlier this year. While they initially remained in touch through calls and messages, the man reportedly began pressuring her to enter into a relationship, which she refused.
On the day of the incident, the footage shows the woman standing beside a scooty, believed to be an online ride, when the accused arrives at the spot in a car. He is seen taking her purse and checking it before moving towards her and groping her.
The man then repeatedly hits the woman on her head and back and drags her along the road. Despite the presence of two to three bystanders at the scene, no one intervened to help the victim.
The victim later approached the police and filed a complaint. Based on her statement, an FIR was registered, and Naveen Kumar was taken into custody. Police said further investigation is underway.
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.
Supreme Court strikes down Trump's sweeping tariffs, upending central plank of economic agenda
Washington (AP): The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's far-reaching global tariffs on Friday, handing him a significant loss on an issue crucial to his economic agenda.
The 6-3 decision centres on tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs he levied on nearly every other country.
It's the first major piece of Trump's broad agenda to come squarely before the nation's highest court, which he helped shape with the appointments of three conservative jurists in his first term.
The majority found that the Constitution “very clearly” gives Congress the power to impose taxes, which include tariffs. “The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful,” Kavanaugh wrote in the dissent.
The majority did not address whether companies could get refunded for the billions they have collectively paid in tariffs. Many companies, including the big-box warehouse chain Costco, have already lined up for refunds in court, and Kavanaugh noted the process could be complicated.
“The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers. But that process is likely to be a mess,' as was acknowledged at oral argument,” he wrote.
The tariffs decision doesn't stop Trump from imposing duties under other laws. While those have more limitations on the speed and severity of Trump's actions, top administration officials have said they expect to keep the tariff framework in place under other authorities.
The Supreme Court ruling comes despite a series of short-term wins on the court's emergency docket that have allowed Trump to push ahead with extraordinary flexes of executive power on issues ranging from high-profile firings to major federal funding cuts.
The Republican president has been vocal about the case, calling it one of the most important in US history and saying a ruling against him would be an economic body blow to the country. But legal opposition crossed the political spectrum, including libertarian and pro-business groups that are typically aligned with the GOP. Polling has found tariffs aren't broadly popular with the public, amid wider voter concern about affordability.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to levy tariffs. But the Trump administration argued that a 1977 law allowing the president to regulate importation during emergencies also allows him to set tariffs. Other presidents have used the law dozens of times, often to impose sanctions, but Trump was the first president to invoke it for import taxes.
Trump set what he called "reciprocal" tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to address trade deficits that he declared a national emergency. Those came after he imposed duties on Canada, China and Mexico, ostensibly to address a drug trafficking emergency.
A series of lawsuits followed, including a case from a dozen largely Democratic-leaning states and others from small businesses selling everything from plumbing supplies to educational toys to women's cycling apparel.
The challengers argued the emergency powers law doesn't even mention tariffs and Trump's use of it fails several legal tests, including one that doomed then-President Joe Biden's USD 500 billion student loan forgiveness program.
The economic impact of Trump's tariffs has been estimated at some USD 3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The Treasury has collected more than USD 133 billion from the import taxes the president has imposed under the emergency powers law, federal data from December shows.
