Laddu row: Karnataka govt instructs temples to use only home brand ''Nandini'' ghee
Bengaluru (PTI): With Tirupati Laddu row snowballing into a major controversy, Karnataka government on Friday issued a circular instructing all temples coming under the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Department, to maintain quality in 'prasada' prepared there.
The temples have also been asked to only use the Nandini brand ghee of the Karnataka Milk Federation (KMF) at the temples.
"It is hereby instructed that at all notified temples that come under the Karnataka State Religious Endowment Department to only use Nandini ghee compulsorily for 'sevas' (services), lamps, preparation of all kinds of prasadas, and at 'Dasoha Bhavans' (where food is served)," the circular said.
It said, "It is instructed to maintain quality in prasada at the temples."
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD), which manages the super-rich Sri Venkateswara Swamy temple on Friday revealed it has come across sub-standard ghee and presence of lard in samples tested for quality, echoing claims first made by Andhra Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu two days ago.
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.
Bombay High Court strikes down Centre's plan to set up Fact-Check Unit
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has struck down the central government's plan to establish a fact-checking unit (FCU) under the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2023. The decision comes in response to a petition filed by standup comedian Kunal Kamra, challenging the constitutional validity of the Centre's move.
Justice A.S. Chandurkar, delivering the final verdict, declared that the proposed IT Amendment Rules violated key provisions of the Indian Constitution, namely Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), and 19(1)(g) (right to profession).
“I have considered the matter extensively. The impugned rules are violative of Articles 14, 19, and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India,” Justice Chandurkar said in his judgment. He further remarked that terms like "fake, false, and misleading" in the IT Rules were "vague" and lacked a clear definition, making them unconstitutional.
This judgment followed a split verdict issued by a division bench of the Bombay High Court in January. The bench, consisting of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale, was divided in their opinions. While Justice Patel ruled that the IT Rules amounted to censorship and struck them down, Justice Gokhale upheld the rules, arguing that they did not pose a "chilling effect" on free speech, as the petitioners had claimed.
The matter was then referred to a third judge, leading to today's decision. The Supreme Court had previously stayed the Centre's notification that would have made the fact-checking unit operational, stating that the government could not proceed until the Bombay High Court ruled on the case.
Kunal Kamra and other petitioners had argued that the amendments posed unreasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression. They contended that the provisions would lead to government-led censorship, effectively granting the government unchecked powers to determine what constitutes 'truth' online. The petitioners further claimed that such powers would turn the government into "prosecutor, judge, and executioner" in matters of online content.
With the Bombay High Court’s ruling, the Centre's move to create fact-checking units has been effectively halted, reaffirming the importance of protecting freedom of speech and expression in the digital space.
