झारखंड अपनी 25वीं वर्षगांठ मना रहा है, लेकिन झारखंड आंदोलन के सपने पहले से कहीं ज़्यादा दूर हैं। इस अवसर पर, झारखंड जनाधिकार महासभा सभी राजनीतिक दलों के नेताओं को संबोधित करते हुए वक्तव्य जारी कर रही है। यह वक्तव्य वर्तमान स्थिति के लिए राजनीतिक वर्ग को ज़िम्मेदार ठहराता है और राजनीतिक नेताओं से अपने तौर-तरीके सुधारने की अपील करता है।
सभी पार्टियों के विधायक और राजनीतिक नेतागण,
झारखंड की 25वीं सालगिरह के मौके पर, हम आपको यह बताने के लिए लिख रहे हैं कि हम आपके काम से कितने निराश हैं, और आपसे अपील करते हैं कि आप अपने तरीके सुधारें।
झारखंड का बनना एक लंबे संघर्ष का नतीजा था। सभी समुदायों के जनहितैषी लोगों ने इस आंदोलन में अहम भूमिका निभाई। कई लोगों ने इसके लिए अपनी जान कुर्बान कर दी। उनका सपना था कि झारखंड बनने से इस इलाके के आदिवासी-मूलवासी अपने मूल्यों के अनुसार विकास कर पाएंगे – आज़ादी, समानता, दोस्ती और प्रकृति के साथ तालमेल के मूल्य। झारखंड की आज़ादी से बाहरी लोगों के शोषण का भी अंत होना था।
पच्चीस साल बाद, यह सपना मात्र बन के रह गया है। इसमें कोई शक नहीं कि झारखंड में ज़्यादातर लोग आज पच्चीस साल पहले के मुकाबले थोड़ी बेहतर स्थिति में हैं। लेकिन लाखों लोग आज भी घोर गरीबी में जी रहे हैं। और झारखंड वैसा नहीं है जैसा उसे होना चाहिए था। छोटानागपुर और संथाल परगना की खूबसूरत सभ्यता खत्म होने के खतरे में है क्योंकि ताकतवर कंपनियाँ इसकी ज़मीन, खनिज और दूसरे प्राकृतिक संसाधनों पर नज़र गड़ाए हुए हैं। झारखंड के आज़ाद और स्वाभिमानी किसान मज़दूर बन रहे हैं और बदहाल शहरों की ओर जा रहे हैं। जल्द ही, झारखंड का अनोखापन खतम हो जाएगा और बाकी भारत से अलग शायद ही कुछ बचेगा, सिवाय इसके कि यह ज़्यादा गरीब होगा।
आप, झारखंड के राजनीतिक नेता, इसके लिए मुख्य रूप से ज़िम्मेदार हैं। झारखंड आंदोलन के दिग्गजों से प्रेरणा और सीख लेने और आम लोगों के लिए काम करने के बजाय, आपने खुद को अमीर बनाने के लिए शोषकों के साथ हाथ मिला लिया है। आप स्थानीय लोगों की कीमत पर झारखंड के कीमती संसाधनों को लालची कंपनियों और व्यापारियों को बेच रहे हैं। आपने सार्वजनिक शिक्षा व्यवस्था को बर्बाद होने दिया है, जिससे लाखों युवाओं को प्रवासी मज़दूर बनने पर मजबूर होना पड़ा है। आपने भ्रष्ट ठेकेदारों के साथ मिलकर नरेगा को लूटा है, जिससे लाखों लोगों से उनके काम का अधिकार छीन लिया गया है। पच्चीस सालों में, आप PESA के लिए नियम बनाने में नाकाम रहे हैं। आपने CNT-SPT एक्ट और वन अधिकार अधिनियम का घोर उल्लंघन होने दिया है। आपने बड़े-बड़े ठेकाओं से खूब पैसा कमाया है, जबकि पीने का पानी, नाली और फुटपाथ जैसी बुनियादी सुविधाएँ हर जगह, यहाँ तक कि रांची में भी गायब हैं।
आप में से कुछ लोगों ने झारखंड के लोगों को बाँटा भी है और अपनी ताकत बढ़ाने के लिए उन्हें एक-दूसरे के खिलाफ भड़काया है। “धन नहीं, एकता सही ” झारखंड संघर्ष के लोकप्रिय नारों में से एक था। आज इस एकता का बहुत कम हिस्सा बचा है। जब लोग आपस में लड़ते हैं तो शोषण करने वालों की मौज हो जाती है।
जब तक राजनैतिक नेता अपना तरीका नहीं बदलते, तब तक हालात सुधरने की उम्मीद नहीं है। हम आप में से कुछ लोगों को पहले से ही अपना साथी मानते हैं, और दूसरों से भी हमें कुछ उम्मीद है। लेकिन अगर आप सब ने अपना रवैया नहीं सुधारा, तो कहीं ऐसा न हो कि आप पूर्ण रूप से नकार दिए जायें। हम उम्मीद कर रहे हैं कि नेतृत्व की एक नई पीढ़ी सामने आएगी, जिसमें ऐसे पुरुष और औरतें होंगी जो लोगों के हितों को दिल से समझते हैं। हम पहले से ही आप में से कुछ लोगों को उनमें गिनते हैं, लेकिन ज्यादा नहीं। अपनी तरफ से, हम अपने तरीके से बदलाव के लिए काम करते रहेंगे।
महासभा और अन्य संगठन मिलकर 15 नवंबर 2025 को बिरसा समाधि स्थल, कोकर, रांची से सैनिक बाज़ार तक एक “झारखंडी एकता यात्रा” का आयोजन करेंगे ताकि लोगों को झारखंड आंदोलन के सपनों की याद दिलाई जा सके।
The seizure of the city of El Fashir in North Darfur by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has given us some horrific images. On 26–27 October 2025, after an 18-month siege, RSF forces overran the city that had been the last major stronghold of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) in Darfur.
Sudanese medical and rights groups, including the Sudan Doctors Network, have accused the RSF of committing massacres, mass detentions, and attacks on hospitals.
Sudan’s transition to democracy began with extraordinary hope and ended in blood. In April 2019, a broad civilian uprising toppled Omar al-Bashir, whose 30-year dictatorship had left behind a legacy of repression, corruption, and civil war. The revolution’s slogan — “Freedom, peace, and justice” — became a unifying cry for a nation long divided by region, ethnicity, and class.
After Bashir’s ouster, a fragile power-sharing arrangement was formed between the military and the civilian coalition known as the Forces of Freedom and Change (FFC). That arrangement, formalised in the 2019 Constitutional Declaration, promised a transitional government leading to elections. But beneath the surface, the military never ceded real power.
The two dominant armed entities — General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo’s (known as Hemedti) Rapid Support Forces (RSF) — both sought to control the state’s future, its gold wealth, and its foreign partnerships.
By late 2021, the transition had effectively collapsed. In October of that year, Burhan and Hemedti staged a coup, dissolving the civilian government and arresting Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok. What followed was a return to military rule disguised as “stabilisation.”
Efforts to revive the transition faltered as mistrust between the SAF and RSF deepened, particularly over plans to integrate the RSF into the regular army. The disagreement was less about structure than supremacy: who would control Sudan’s economy, foreign policy, and post-Bashir order.
In April 2023, tensions exploded into open war in Khartoum, then spread rapidly to Darfur and other regions — derailing Sudan’s democratic dream and plunging millions back into the nightmare they had risked everything to escape.
The Darfur Genocide
The events unfolding in El Fashir evoke grim memories of the early 2000s, when Darfur became synonymous with ethnic cleansing and state-sponsored terror.
The RSF, born out of the infamous Janjaweed militias that orchestrated the first Darfur genocide, has reverted to its original logic of ethnic warfare. Reports from survivors describe house-to-house searches, the targeting of non-Arab communities such as the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa, and the systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Some of the verified images and videos emerging from El Fashir and other parts of Darfur in late 2025 are among the most disturbing to have surfaced since the start of Sudan’s civil war. Although access to the region is severely restricted, visual evidence has filtered out through humanitarian workers, local journalists, and satellite verification groups like Amnesty International’s Crisis Evidence Lab and BBC Verify.
The International Backers
Several foreign powers have played active roles in Sudan’s war, each pursuing distinct economic and strategic objectives.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been the most significant external supporter of the RSF. Its involvement is motivated by access to Sudan’s gold resources and a desire to expand its influence in the Horn of Africa. The RSF controls major gold mines in Darfur, and much of that gold is exported through the UAE into the international bullion market.
The Sudanese Armed Forces have received assistance from Iran, Turkey, Egypt, and Qatar — each maintaining their own stake in the conflict. Turkey and Qatar, for example, invested heavily in Sudan during the Bashir era, particularly in agriculture and port infrastructure, which they now hope to protect.
The war has extracted an enormous toll, with more than 150,000 killed and another 522,000 children dead due to malnutrition. It has also displaced 8.8 million people, while 3.5 million have been made refugees.
With both parties to the civil war having consolidated their hold in various regions across the country, the people have continued to suffer.
Dubai: Literature enthusiasts from India and Dubai gathered at the India Club for a memorable evening with celebrated author and journalist Rasheed Kidwai. The engaging session was part of The Write Circle series — a prestigious initiative of the Prabha Khaitan Foundation that brings eminent authors, poets, and thought leaders to global audiences.
The event began with a warm and graceful welcome address by Kajal Sagar, the Ehsaas Woman of Dubai. The evening’s conversation was skilfully moderated by Madiha Saidi, also an Ehsaas Woman of Dubai, who guided the audience through Rasheed Kidwai’s remarkable literary and journalistic journey.
A noted author, political commentator, and columnist, Rasheed Kidwai is known for his insightful analysis of India’s political landscape and the intersection of cinema and power. His acclaimed books — Neta Abhineta: Bollywood Star Power in Indian Politics and House of Scindias — have been widely praised for their depth of research and engaging narratives that bridge the worlds of governance and glamour.
An Insightful Dialogue on Politics, Cinema, and Power
The conversation delved deep into House of Scindias and Neta Abhineta, as Kidwai shared fascinating insights and lesser-known anecdotes about India’s top political figures and film personalities, offering a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the corridors of power and celebrity.
Saidi’s incisive questions explored the complex relationship between Indian cinema and politics, and the challenges of reporting on influential public figures. Kidwai, known for his sharp political analysis and candid storytelling, kept the audience engaged with his trademark wit and depth of observation.
“The relationship between Bollywood and politics is an abiding one,” Kidwai observed. “Film stars from across the country have joined politics, won elections, and held important positions in government. At the Centre, Shatrughan Sinha, Sunil Dutt, Vinod Khanna, and Smriti Irani went on to become Union ministers. Kirron Kher and Paresh Rawal entered the Lok Sabha through the BJP, while Raj Babbar once headed the Uttar Pradesh Congress unit. Even Amitabh Bachchan served as a Congress MP from 1984 to 1986 and was a close aide of Rajiv Gandhi. Film icons such as Rajesh Khanna, Govinda, Jaya Bachchan, Jaya Prada, Dharmendra, and Hema Malini have all played a role in central politics — each with varying impact.”
Rasheed Kidwai with his wife Dr Farah Kidwai (in Saree) and other family members at the India Club in Dubai | Arranged
Cinema as a Unifying Force in Indian Society
Expanding on this theme, Kidwai reflected,
“At another level, this phenomenon highlights political parties’ inability to find credible leaders as candidates. The BJP, Trinamool Congress, Shiv Sena, and the Congress have all relied on reel-life heroes to further their political causes. Meanwhile, actors seek longevity and relevance in public life through electoral politics. In a country as diverse as India — divided by ethnicity, class, caste, religion, and language — cinema acts as a unifying and popularity-driving force. Film stars often provide a more consensual and likable alternative to conventional politicians, carrying an aura that inspires admiration and connects instantly with the masses.”
His reflections offered the audience a thoughtful understanding of how celebrity culture and electoral politics intersect in modern India.
A Celebration of Literature, Conversation, and Ideas
The Write Circle series, an initiative of the Prabha Khaitan Foundation, continues to promote literature, cultural dialogue, and meaningful exchange among global audiences. The Dubai edition once again proved how storytelling and reflective dialogue can bridge continents, languages, and ideas.
The evening concluded with an interactive Q&A session, where participants posed thought-provoking questions about political journalism, celebrity influence, and the evolving nature of India’s democracy. The discussion left the audience both informed and inspired — marking yet another successful and memorable chapter of The Write Circle in Dubai.
The programme was graced by several distinguished citizens of Dubai from diverse walks of life, including Shree Vasu Dada Shroff, Naved Saidi, Yasar Khan, and many others.
The World Cinema Project has restored, among other films, Titas Ekti Nodir Naam by Ritwik Ghatak. Martin Scorsese, the revered Hollywood film-maker who is also the founder of the project, didn’t know much about Ritwik Ghatak, who made the film in 1972-73, until recently. He quite candidly admits that he knew little about Indian cinema outside of Satyajit Ray and Bollywood. When he finally came across Ghatak, though, Scorsese saw “an extremely refined vision of cinema” and films that were “thematically dense and layered”.
Many film-watchers in India are no more likely to have encountered Ghatak—although that is only partly their fault. Ray had famously said, in 1989, to a French journalist in a broadcast interview, “We have a fairly backward audience here, I must say, in spite of the film society movement and all that. If you consider the larger audience, it is a backward audience, an unsophisticated audience.”
Ray was lashing out at the audience’s, and critics’, response to Devi, his film with a very young Sharmila Tagore as the lead actress. One of his true masterpieces, the film is about a young woman who is interpreted (perhaps not the right word for it) as an avatar of goddess Kali by her father-in-law, and the unsavoury reverberations of it. Ray said, “It [the film] dealt with religious dogmatism, it didn’t attack religion as such; it attacked dogmatism, the extreme form of religion… But people [are] writing in the papers that ‘Oh, because Mr Ray is not a Hindu, he is a Brahmo, he is making such films against Hinduism’ and all that. But they are stupid people, you can’t take them into account.”
What, then, of the socially, politically, morally, and much-elsely conscious cinema of Ghatak?
Yet, in this, his centenary year, I have discovered to my great joy over the past many months of working on Unmechanical: Ritwik Ghatak in 50 Fragments as its editor, an anthology of essays just published by Westland Books, that his work has its audience and is finding new viewers—and its place in Indian and world cinema.
Ritwik Ghatak’s Raw Genius: The Rebel Voice of Bengali Cinema
Ghatak was usually less polished in his demeanour than Ray was, just rawer; perhaps that could be said about their cinema too. If he embarked on a diatribe against Bengali cinema-watchers, Ghatak would probably have dealt in the language of the streets. I say probably, but by all accounts, that’s exactly what he used to do.
Drunk much of time in the last fifteen years of his fifty-year-long life and out of work for large swathes in that period—he didn’t make a full-length film between 1962 and 1972-73, though he did make some short films and documentaries. He was vice-principal at the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) in Poona (now Pune) — Ghatak was disillusioned with what we often refer to with the all-encompassing word — ‘system’, and wasn’t shy of giving vent to his frustration.
Partition, Politics, and Pain: The Forces That Shaped Ghatak’s Cinema
His films attacked the very class of Bengalis he belonged to, the middle-class bhadralok, which was—and remains—the chief patron of the arts.
An unusually creative and sensitive young person, it appears that Ghatak could have had his pick of careers, coming as he did from a well-off family. But the times made the man: as a teenager, he lived through World War II, the struggle for independence, the Great Bengal Famine, the many communal riots, and, finally, the freedom and Partition of India, followed by more riots and killings and the refugee crisis.
From the writings of his twin, Pratiti, we find that even in his early teens, he was spending a lot of time with labourers and workers of various hues, and around the time of independence, taking active part in civil society initiatives that brought him closer and closer to the marginalised, and causing him to be disillusioned with the world of the urban elite. His ideas first burst through in writing—poetry and short stories—and then theatre, and finally cinema, as is well documented, in order to converse and communicate with more and more people.
That was the primary impulse, to speak to people, but, of course, he had the artist’s quest for recognition too. Letters to his wife Surama, when he was working at Filmistan Studios in Bombay, briefly, in the mid-1950s, speak of the fame he had hoped to find along the way.
From Idealism to Isolation: The Making and Unmaking of Ritwik Ghatak
And therein lies the unravelling of Ghatak.
His first film, Nagarik, made in 1952, went unreleased till after his death in 1976. Why? Because he had had his differences with the Communist Party of India (and the Indian People’s Theatre Association) he belonged to, and was expelled. And, from what I have picked up from various people I have spoken to, members of that party prevented the film from getting a release.
A similar fate befell Subarnarekha, made in 1962 but only released in 1965, because of issues with the censors. Apparently they objected to the film’s climax in which the drunk protagonist walks into the quarters of his sister, who has turned to prostitution, in the dead of night, prompting the sister to kill herself. It’s a gut punch of a scene in a magnificent film.
Komal Gandhar, made just before Subarnarekha in 1961, did get released on schedule, but only in limited theatres. It was scuppered by forces—it’s impossible for me to say who was chiefly responsible, though I have heard it said it was the Communist Party again—that played the pettiest of tricks: planting people in the audience in theatres that would laugh at gritty or emotional scenes and howl at the lighter moments.
By all accounts, Ghatak didn’t start out being the man he became—bitter, an alcoholic—when still only in his thirties. He was an idealist, a man full of ideas.
Yes, he wanted recognition, not necessarily a lot of money. Yet, from the early 1950s all the way to the time of his death in the mid-1970s, he also deliberately kicked every chance at success out of his path. To put it simply, he sought glory, but not by compromising. He wanted to do his work, his way, and only his way, and wanted the world to accept him for it.
Art, Conviction, and Conflict: The Price of Staying True
Does that suggest entitlement?
Or, naïveté?
Who knows?
Q: But what if the audience doesn’t accept the artist, or the artist’s worldview? What should the artist do—stay firm in his/her convictions or think about their worldview based on what the audience tells them? Where does the independence of the artist end?
A: An artist must always remain firm in their convictions.
The Q&A above is translated from an interview published posthumously in Ritwik: Nijer Kothay, Nijer Lekhay.
“I had a chance and made the film. It was fun all the way through—it is still fun while it is grossing exactly nothing at the box office.”
This is about Ajantrik (1958). Another colossal failure at the box office, but now regarded as an all-time global classic. But, then, as Safdar Hashmi said of him:
“Far from being a rebel protesting against ‘constraints’ within the cultural movement, Ritwik, unlike many erstwhile luminaries of the progressive cultural movement, never wavered in his pursuit of a medium and a message that is true to the people and carries on their struggles in the artistic sphere, he never placed his art at the disposal of commercial cinema or fell prey to the attractions of glamour and riches. In his films, he used no populist elements, the shortcuts to popularity resorted to by so many of our so-called ‘radical’ film-makers these days.”
Or consider what versatile Bengali actor Anil Chatterjee said about Meghe Dhaka Tara (1960): “The distributor, Mahendra Gupta, had suggested a different ending to the film: the sister should survive, and she would return home with her brother. Ritwikda shot that ending. But he told me, ‘This ending will not be used, I will shoot an alternate ending. This film must end in tragedy. The sister must die. She can’t survive.’ He didn’t compromise.”
He really didn’t. What happened instead, though, was steady deterioration, of his health, his relationships, even perhaps his work. Jukti, Tokko aar Goppo, his final film, can be thought of as a classic, a film so different from anything ever made, at least in India; it is autobiographical, raw and abrasive, a comment and a statement more than anything else. Of the film, Safdar Hashmi writes:
“In 1974, in a state of ill-health and near nervous breakdown, he completed his last film, Jukti, Tokko aar Goppo, a film so daring in its complete disregard of the very language and grammar of cinema he had mastered and developed that it is difficult to understand how it achieves its intense intimacy with the audience. It is as if the characters step out of the screen to talk to you and you are forced to respond to them, to react very sharply for or against them. The central character, played by Ritwik himself, parodies his real life in such a way that it compels the audience to reflect and criticise him. Perhaps that is just what Ritwik had been struggling to do through cinema all his life. Ironically, perhaps he wanted to see whether it could be achieved only through a conscious rejection of much of what has come to be accepted as the language of cinema.”
I get what he’s saying of the film, but I don’t agree.
The writer and poet Nabarun Bhattacharya says about Jukti, Tokko aar Goppo:
“When the film was made, and we watched it, I couldn’t understand it at all. In fact, I had a raging row with Ritwik about it. I remember telling him, ‘Enough is enough! You think you can do whatever you want and everyone has to sit and watch it? I can’t accept that you will walk to the camera lens and pour alcohol on it as a defence of your alcoholism.’ He conceded defeat at the time. He said so. He finished by quoting Shakespeare: ‘Then mum’s the word.’”
“But I have been astounded each time I have watched the film since, the modernity of it is incredible. Just watch it. See the heights he has reached, see where each image has travelled. And that film talked about every political issue in Bengal, and even in the rest of the world, at the time. This epic quality of Ritwik’s framing motivates me every day. Every day some new prostitutes are born, and every other day, their elder brothers reach them at night, drunk. But only Ritwik could have captured this in such a bold sequence.”
Photo courtesy: NFDC – National Film Archive of India
My view is of a piece with Nabarun’s first impression. It was self-indulgent. It was entitled. It was roguish.
Knowing he wasn’t going to get better, knowing that he was going to die sooner rather than later—as his conversations with niece Aroma Dutta tell us—did Ritwik plan his swansong thus?
I will do what I want, with the National Film Development Corporation’s money at that, and you have to watch it.
Who can say?
What we can say with some certainty and conviction, though, is that this was a man who truly believed in the sanctity and relevance of his art and of his thoughts and theories. He did nothing he didn’t believe in.
Ritwik Ghatak’s Legacy: Shunned Then, Celebrated Now
He was willing to shun work, suffer deeply and waste away till he got a chance to do what he did. Lesser mortals would have compromised, taken the path more travelled. But here we stand today: this man, fifty years after his death, is more relevant than ever.
A giant of world cinema.
Shunned in his lifetime, proven right at the end of it all.
[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Taj Mahal, regarded as one of the Seven Wonders of the World, is one of the major markers of India on the world map. It is a poem in marble; Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore described it as “a drop of tear on the cheek of time.” Its beauty and fascination as a symbol of love are remarkable. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and is maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). A marvel in marble, its replicas have often been given as gifts to visiting heads of state.
Since it was constructed by the Mughal ruler Shah Jahan in memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, it has been an eyesore to the Hindu right wing. Though its history has been settled by the ASI—and even the Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma said in 2017, during the Modi regime, that it was not a Shiva temple—the controversies are deliberately raised time and again by right-wing leaders and ideologues to boost communal divides. The ASI has repeatedly clarified that it is a mausoleum, not a temple.
Right-Wing Attempts to Rewrite History
The first major controversy around it was created when Yogi Adityanath became the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. His tourism department published a booklet about sites of tourist attraction in the state, but it did not mention the Taj as one of them, despite nearly 12,000 visitors being attracted to this marvel daily. The monument draws 23% of all tourists to India. When questioned, Adityanath retorted that the Taj does not reflect Indian culture.
Now, another film by Paresh Rawal is set to be released. Its trailer shows that as the dome of the Taj is lifted, Lord Shiva appears. The forthcoming film, The Taj Story, as it appears from its trailer, is an attempt to propagate the idea that the Taj is Tejo Mahalaya, a Shiva temple that was converted into a tomb by Shah Jahan.
The argument of the film is that the Taj was a Hindu temple—Tejo Mahalaya—built in the 4th century (later revised to the 11th century) and converted into a mausoleum by the Mughal ruler Shah Jahan. The claim that it was a 4th-century temple was first put forward by a lawyer, PN Oak. Historian Ruchika Sharma has rubbished Oak’s theory on the basis of historical evidence: “Oak, who did not know Farsi, perhaps missed this vital detail that refutes his theory of the Taj being a reused 4th-century palace.” Historians such as Giles Tillotson have also challenged Oak’s theory, asserting that “the technical know-how to create a building with the structural form of the Taj simply did not exist in pre-Mughal India.”
The mystery of the 21 empty rooms at the bottom was also clarified by the ASI. Architecturally, they were built to provide stability to the structure and are used for maintenance purposes. This clarification, too, came during the Modi regime.
Once the 4th-century theory did not work, Oak revised it, claiming that it was a 12th-century temple. Sharma notes, “Yet, Oak armed himself with make-believe and propaganda and petitioned the Supreme Court of India in July 2000, claiming that the Taj was constructed by Raja Paramar Dev’s chief minister Salakshan in the 12th century and was therefore a Hindu structure, Tejo Mahalaya, and not made by the Mughals.”
Oak went up to the Supreme Court to make his point, but the highest court rebuffed his fantasy, which was bereft of historical evidence. His main arguments were based on the architectural aspects of the tomb—the dome at the top, the inverted lotus, and the 21 empty rooms at the bottom. Similarly, later, one Amarnath Mishra approached the Allahabad High Court, petitioning that it was built by the Chandela king Parmardi, but this was also dismissed by the court in 2005.
From PN Oak to Today’s Propaganda Films
There are detailed and impeccable historical accounts available about the construction of the Taj. Travelers Peter Mundy and Jean-Baptiste Tavernier mention that during their visit to India, they learned of Shah Jahan’s grief and his determination to build a grand structure in memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal. Shah Jahan made elaborate plans, involving several architects—the chief architect being Ustad Ahmad Lahori, a Muslim, and one of his major associates a Hindu architect. Badshah Nama, the biography of Shah Jahan, provides a detailed account of the entire process and the group of people who planned and executed it.
The land chosen for the Taj had belonged to Raja Jai Singh. There are two versions of how it was acquired: one says that it was procured by giving due compensation; the other mentions that Raja Jai Singh gifted it to the emperor, as they were on friendly terms. The architecture of the Taj reflects the syncretic traditions that prevailed at the time. The double-dome structures were introduced by Mughal architects—examples include the Red Fort and Humayun’s Tomb. Earlier Hindu temples had triangular superstructures. Later, domes were also introduced in temples. Architecture is never an exclusive process; the mixture of architectural styles is part of the evolution of civilizations.
Nearly twenty thousand artisans were hired for the construction. As the Mughal administration had a dedicated construction division, the magnificent structures of North India were not sudden miracles. The rumor that the workers’ hands were cut off is baseless—there is no source to substantiate it. The account books and documents from Shah Jahan’s time clearly record detailed expenditures incurred in building the Taj, including the cost of Makrana marble and wages paid to workers. Some prevalent Hindu motifs were incorporated into the design, as Hindu architects and workers were also part of the construction process.
In a lighter vein, one should mention PN Oak’s fertile yet banal imagination, which placed the roots of all world civilizations in Hindu culture. For him, Christianity was Krishna Niti; Vatican came from Vatika; and Rome from Ram! Despite such superficial claims devoid of any historical evidence, he kept publishing books and pamphlets, which were circulated in RSS shakhas to propagate his theories until they became part of popular social understanding.
A Political Project Masquerading as History
Most of the points raised by the upcoming film (as seen in its trailer) about the Taj Mahal were clarified more than a decade ago. The revival of these falsehoods is a political move intended to serve the Hindu nationalist agenda by spreading hate against Mughal rulers—and by extension, today’s Muslims.
This film is yet another propaganda project in a series that includes The Kashmir Files, The Bengal Files, The Kerala Story, and others—each aimed at intensifying right-wing propaganda. The Taj Story will likely be yet another tool for divisiveness and hate that continues to dominate contemporary India.
Kolkata: “In many colleges and universities, students and even teachers are unaware of who Fazlul Huq truly was,” said Sabir Ahmed of the Pratichi Institute and Know Your Neighbour initiative, as Bengal’s iconic Coffee House resonated with reflection and resolve on Sunday. “We will include Sher-e-Bangla’s life and contributions in our outreach activities to ensure greater public awareness of his vision and work,” he added.
The occasion was the 152nd birth anniversary of Sher-e-Bangla Abul Kasem Fazlul Huq, Bengal’s legendary statesman and people’s leader, organized by the Bhumiputra Unnayan Morcha of India (BHUMI) in the historic “Boichitra” hall of the Indian Coffee House on College Street. The programme drew an audience of social workers, educators, writers, students, researchers, and journalists, and was gracefully moderated by Dr. Abu Sayed Ahmed.
The event began with floral tributes to Sher-e-Bangla’s portrait, followed by impassioned discussions on his life, vision, and his far-reaching role in Bengal’s political, educational, and social awakening.
“The Partition of Bengal Was Not the Fault of Muslims”
Retired teacher and essayist Alimuzzaman delivered a thought-provoking address, revisiting the 1940 Lahore Resolution and the complex politics surrounding the partition of Bengal. He argued that Fazlul Huq’s call for autonomy in Muslim-majority provinces stemmed from the principles of political justice, not separatism.
“The Lahore Resolution was distorted by the politics of its time,” he said. “The partition of Bengal was not the fault of Muslims but the consequence of the upper-caste Hindu leadership’s unwillingness to accept a Muslim-majority Bengal and their desire for dominance through division.”
Drawing parallels with the present, Alimuzzaman added, “Even today, poor Muslim workers in Bengal are branded as ‘Bangladeshis’ and subjected to humiliation. Sher-e-Bangla dedicated his entire life to uplifting such marginalized communities, fighting for their dignity and rightful place in society.”
Fazlul Huq’s Early Life: “Education Was a Right, Not a Privilege”
Renowned doctor Kazi Mohit shared two defining anecdotes from Fazlul Huq’s youth that revealed his determination and egalitarian spirit.
He narrated how a young Huq, upon learning that sitting on the front bench required passing a test, immediately asked to take it—and passed the same day. Later, during his Presidency College years, Huq was told that Muslims were weak in mathematics. He took it as a challenge and topped his class within six months.
“These stories show how deeply he believed that education was not a privilege for a few but a right for all—an idea that shaped his educational reforms as Education Minister of undivided Bengal,” said Dr. Mohit, whose words drew warm applause from the audience.
“Fighting Brahminical Domination, Standing with the Working Class”
Essayist Gautam Ray rejected the communal label often attached to Fazlul Huq, stressing that “advocating for one’s community’s rights does not make one communal.”
Advocate Shamim Ahmed placed Huq’s ideology in the context of today’s India. “What the BJP and RSS seek today is a revival of Brahminical domination, while Fazlul Huq envisioned the liberation of the working class. He fought for those whose lives are now being made unbearable by such forces,” he said, earning nods from the audience.
“Politics of Emancipation, Not Power”
At the end, Dr. Ramiz Raja, convenor of BHUMI, reflected on Sher-e-Bangla’s enduring relevance: “Fazlul Huq’s politics were the politics of emancipation. His lifelong struggle on behalf of farmers, laborers, and the marginalized continues to inspire us. He proved that the essence of politics lies in human development.”
Other distinguished speakers—Dr. Suranjan Midde, Dr. Nurul Islam, and Jane Alam—added intellectual depth with their insights into Huq’s social and educational philosophy.
The commemoration ended with a collective pledge to uphold Sher-e-Bangla’s principles of equality, justice, and inclusive progress, with organizers vowing to celebrate his legacy on an even larger scale next year.
Delhi: In a detailed letter addressed to the Department of Cardiology, GB Pant Hospital, Dr. Rishu Sinha has pleaded for humane consideration of her husband’s situation. “He has been suffering from sleep deprivation, burnout, exploitation, and humiliation due to 36-hour continued duty causing mental and physical tiredness,” she wrote, adding that the nature of work assigned to him was “minimal” and “unsuitable for his course.”
According to Dr. Sinha, the relentless and unregulated duty hours forced her husband — who had dreamt all his life of becoming a cardiologist — to take the extreme step of resigning. “I am worried that if his resignation is accepted without proper counselling, it may further harm his mental health,” she added in her letter.
Dr. Sinha had earlier filed two Right to Information (RTI) applications — No. GBP&H/R/2025/60034 dated 13.09.2025 and GBP&H/R/2025/60041 dated 12.10.2025 — seeking details about duty-hour regulations, the actual duties performed by her husband, and the hospital’s compliance with the 1992 Residency Rules issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Those directives clearly state that resident doctors must not work beyond 48 hours per week or 12 hours at a stretch.
However, she alleges that despite the RTIs falling under the “48-hour reply” category, the hospital has failed to respond. “It is unfortunate that institutions like GB Pant Hospital have no faith in the law of the land, as the 1992 rules are not followed and the RTI Act is not honoured at all,” her letter states.
Mental Health and Systemic Failure
The issue comes amid growing concern over the mental health of resident doctors across India. The National Task Force on Mental Health and Well-being of Medical Students (2024) — constituted by the National Medical Commission (NMC) — has warned that excessive working hours and toxic training environments are leading to alarming levels of depression, burnout, and even suicides among medical trainees.
The report recommends mandatory rest after night duties, monitoring of resident working hours, and access to psychological counselling — measures rarely enforced in most government hospitals.
In a 2024 petition, the Supreme Court also sought responses from the Centre, states, and the NMC over the “inhuman working hours” of resident doctors, asking why the 1992 rules were not being implemented.
‘Hospitals Must Be Held Accountable’
Dr. Sinha’s letter is not just a personal plea but a larger indictment of medical training culture in India. “GB Pant Hospital must take responsibility for the outcome of excessive duty hours and ensure the wellness of its students,” she writes. She has appealed to the administration to allow her husband a one-month “cooling period” with humanly working-hour duty and counselling before deciding on his resignation.
The Delhi Medical Association (DMA), responding to her letter, has reportedly raised concerns over the “inhumane working conditions” at GB Pant Hospital and urged the authorities to probe the matter.
Larger Picture: Resident Doctors and the Silent Crisis
Resident doctors form the backbone of India’s public health system — yet their training often doubles as bonded labour, with grueling 30–40-hour duties, no weekly offs, and little mental health support.
A recent survey by the Federation of All India Medical Associations (FAIMA) found that over 70 percent of resident doctors reported symptoms of burnout, while one in five admitted to having sought mental health help in the past year.
Experts have warned that such exploitative work conditions not only endanger young doctors’ lives but also compromise patient safety. “A fatigued doctor is a risk to themselves and their patients,” said a senior cardiologist from AIIMS, speaking on condition of anonymity.
[dropcap]H[/dropcap]ow much longer must Sarfaraz Khan, that relentless Mumbai mauler who feasted on 863 Ranji runs last season and etched a defiant 150 into Test lore, grovel before the BCCI’s selection cabal, only to be spat out like yesterday’s chew? Just days ago, on October 22, they unveiled the India A squad for South Africa—two unofficial Tests starting October 30—and there he was, absent again, a glaring void amid middling mediocrities handed lifelines he could only dream of. His cricket achievements speak for themselves.
International Cricket Achievements (2022-2025)
Sarfaraz Khan made his international debut in Test cricket in February 2024 and has since played exclusively in the format for India, featuring in 6 matches up to November 2024. He has not played ODIs or T20Is in this period. His overall Test record stands at 371 runs in 11 innings (1 not out) at an average of 37.10, with a highest score of 150, including 1 century and 3 half-centuries. Key highlights include:
Test Debut (3rd Test vs England, Rajkot, February 15-18, 2024): Scored 62 (66 balls, SR 93.94) in the first innings and an unbeaten 68 (72 balls, SR 94.44) in the second, registering twin fifties on debut—the fourth Indian to achieve this (after Dilawar Hussain, Sunil Gavaskar, and Shreyas Iyer). His second-innings knock formed a 158-run partnership with Yashasvi Jaiswal at a run rate of 6.53 per over, the highest for any Indian pair adding 150+ runs in a Test innings. This helped India declare at 430/4, setting a target of 557 and securing a record 434-run victory—the largest by runs in Indian Test history and second-largest against England.
Home Series vs Bangladesh (September 2024): Played both Tests, contributing steady middle-order support amid India’s 2-0 series win.
Home Series vs New Zealand (October-November 2024): 1st Test (Bengaluru): Scored a career-best 150, anchoring India’s batting in a drawn match.
Awards: Won the BCCI Best International Debut (Men) award for the 2023-24 season at the Naman Awards in February 2025.
He also played for India A in May 2025, scoring 92 against England Lions in Canterbury as part of preparations for the England tour.
Domestic Cricket Achievements (2022-2025)
Sarfaraz has been a prolific run-scorer in domestic cricket, particularly in the Ranji Trophy for Mumbai, amassing over 1,600 runs across the 2022-23 to 2024-25 seasons at an elite average. His first-class career stats up to October 2025: 55 matches, 4,685 runs at 65.98, with 16 centuries. He occasionally kept wickets in T20s.
Highlights
Ranji Trophy 2022-23: Scored 556 runs in limited matches at an average of 92.66, outperforming contemporaries like Karun Nair (690 runs at 40.58) and reinforcing his reputation as a middle-order enforcer.
IPL 2023 (Delhi Capitals): Played 4 matches as a middle-order batter and occasional keeper, scoring 62 runs at a strike rate of 141. His aggressive style (including quick cameos) added depth to DC’s lineup, though the team exited early.
Ranji Trophy 2023-24 (Truncated Season): Featured in 3 matches, scoring 200 runs (including an unbeaten 200+ vs Himachal Pradesh—his second successive double-century in the tournament) at an average of around 100. This form directly led to his Test call-up.
Ranji Trophy 2024-25: Emerged as Mumbai’s standout batter with 863 runs (4th-highest in the tournament), playing a pivotal role in their title-winning campaign. His consistency against spin (strike rate of 135 in domestic cricket) was crucial in key victories.
Other Domestic (2025): Lost 17 kg in July 2025 to address fitness concerns after being unsold at the IPL 2025 auction. Scored 138 (114 balls) vs TNCA XI in a practice game and 92 for India A vs England Lions. In the ongoing Ranji 2025-26 (started October 2025), he opened the batting due to injuries but scored a duck vs Jammu & Kashmir—his first competitive match in months.
Sarfaraz’s journey reflects resilience, with his domestic dominance (seven centuries in 18 Ranji innings from 2021 to 2023) finally translating to international success in 2024. However, despite all his achievements, he was dropped for the 2024-25 Border-Gavaskar Trophy in Australia and the 2025 home series vs England. This isn’t oversight; it’s obstinacy bordering on sabotage. Desperate to appease the fitness police who hounded him after his IPL auction snub, Sarfaraz clawed off 17 kilograms in a grueling July overhaul, emerging leaner, hungrier, a testament to sacrifice that would make ascetics weep—yet the panel’s response? Crickets, louder than a dropped catch at Lord’s.Ravichandran Ashwin fumes at this “mystery,” Sunil Gavaskar thunders about injustice, and whispers of surname bias swirl like a poorly spun googly, but the selectors? Stone-faced, script-flipping robots churning out the same tired excuses, dooming a generational talent to domestic drudgery while they chase ghosts of consistency in far lesser mortals. Wake up, you myopic mandarins: Sarfaraz isn’t the problem—your blindered reign is, and it’s bleeding Indian cricket dry of its fire.
[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar has revealed the true intent of the Election Commission of India (ECI). It is now clear that their main objective is to strip ordinary people of their right to vote. Though it began in Bihar, this process is expected to spread across the country — with West Bengal, Assam, and Odisha being mentioned next. The people of Bihar have already begun resisting; our turn will come soon. We must understand what is happening — and prepare to fight back.
At first glance, one might think — what’s wrong if the electoral rolls are being corrected? Isn’t it good to make the voters’ list as accurate as possible? If it were truly that simple, there would be no reason for objection. But a closer look at the details — beyond what the Election Commission says — reveals a very different picture. So let us examine the issue carefully, point by point.
What Is “Special” About This Revision?
The SIR is not just an ordinary correction of the rolls. The voter list in Bihar had already been revised just a few months earlier. So why another hurried revision right before the elections — and that too when large parts of Bihar were reeling under floods?
The answer is that this is not a revision at all — it is a completely new voter list being created, aimed at selectively denying legitimate voters their rights.
Voting Rights and Constitutional Principles
According to India’s Constitution, every adult citizen has the right to vote, regardless of caste, religion, gender, or property. It is the duty of the Election Commission to ensure that every eligible citizen can exercise this right.
From the very beginning, India’s electoral process was inclusive. The first electoral roll of independent India was the largest in the world — it included everyone, irrespective of language, religion, caste, education, or wealth. The only condition was age — 21 years, later reduced to 18. Election officials would personally visit households to verify details and register voters.
While citizens could later apply on their own, the main responsibility to reach out and enrol people always lay with the Election Commission.
For the first time, however, that responsibility has been completely shifted onto the citizens themselves.
In Bihar, the process began on 24 June, and applicants were asked to submit forms by 25 July. The form required a recent photograph, signature, basic personal details, and proof of citizenship. Only those able to provide valid citizenship documents would have their names included in the final list.
Thus, the SIR effectively introduces the NRC (National Register of Citizens) process through the back door.
The 2003 Baseline and Its Consequences
Under the SIR, the Election Commission declared that anyone whose name appeared in the 2003 voter list would automatically be considered a citizen.
People were asked to submit a copy of their 2003 voter record with correct name and unchanged address — only then would their names be retained in the new list.
The Commission claimed this would cover most voters.
Let us examine what that means for Bihar:
Before the SIR, Bihar’s voter list had 7.89 crore (78.9 million) names. The 2003 list had 4.96 crore (49.6 million) names. The ECI claimed that only 2.93 crore (29.3 million) people — about 37% of total voters — would need to reapply with citizenship proof.
But in reality, many of the 4.96 crore people from 2003 have either passed away or permanently migrated to other states. The effective number from that list is now around 3.16 crore.
This means 4.73 crore (47.3 million) people — about 60% of current voters — would need to prove their citizenship afresh.
Three Categories of Documentation
Voters were divided into three groups for document submission:
a) Those born before 1 July 1987 (aged 38 or above): if not in the 2003 list, they must submit a birth certificate. b) Those born between 1 July 1987 and December 2003 (aged 22–38): must submit their own and either parent’s documents. c) Those born after 2003: must submit their own and both parents’ documents.
For groups (b) and (c), the parent’s name must appear in the 2003 voter list, along with the voter’s birth certificate.
It is easy to see that most people do not have such documents. Recognising this, the Election Commission released a list of 11 documents that could serve as proof of citizenship.
However, the list was described as “indicative but not exhaustive” — meaning the Commission could accept or reject other documents at will.
The Reality of Documentation in Bihar
Out of these 11 documents, six are practically useless in Bihar — either they don’t exist for most citizens or are extremely rare. That leaves only five usable documents.
Here is an estimate (The Indian Express, 2 July 2025, by Yogendra Yadav):
Birth certificate: ~2.8%
Passport: ~2.4%
Government job or pension ID: ~5%
Caste certificate: ~16%
Educational certificate (secondary or above): ~35%
Meanwhile, the documents that most people do possess were not accepted:
Voter ID: ~95%
Aadhaar: ~93%
Ration card: ~80%
In other words, only the relatively affluent or educated can provide the required documents. Even the educational certificate, the only widespread one among the accepted list, exposes deep inequalities. In India, access to education still depends heavily on caste, class, and gender.
Hence, the real targets of this process are economically weak, socially marginalised people — and especially women.
The Draft List and the Mass Deletions
When the draft voter list was released on 1 August, 65 lakh (6.5 million) names were missing. Many more were at risk of exclusion for failing to provide documents.
The draft list was published in such a non-analytical format that it was impossible to determine why these names were deleted.
After public outrage and a Supreme Court intervention, the Commission released the data in a slightly more analysable format — but only booth by booth, preventing consolidated analysis.
Despite this, independent analysts examined the lists and found shocking irregularities:
Thousands of duplicate entries;
Voters listed under non-existent addresses;
Living people marked as dead.
Facing growing criticism, the Supreme Court compelled the ECI to allow Aadhaar as a supporting document for inclusion.
But when the final list was published, the results were grim.
Before SIR: 7.89 crore names
Draft deletions: 65 lakh
Final deletions: 3.66 lakh more
New additions: 21.53 lakh
Final count: 7.42 crore — 47 lakh fewer voters than before.
The share of adults on the voter list dropped from 97% to 90%. Bihar has about 8.22 crore adults, meaning around 80 lakh people are now left without voting rights.
Who Lost Their Right to Vote?
The excluded groups are mostly women, Muslims, Dalits, and migrant workers.
Historically, Bihar already had gender disparity in voter registration. In 2012, about 21 lakh women were missing from the rolls. By January 2025, that number had come down to 7 lakh.
After the SIR, it jumped again to 16 lakh.
Among those excluded from the draft list, 24.7% were Muslim; in the final list, that rose to 33%, even though Muslims constitute only 16.9% of Bihar’s population.
This shows the unconstitutional nature of the process — it effectively allocates voting rights based on gender, religion, and economic status, violating the core spirit of the Constitution.
Why, then, has the Supreme Court still not declared this process unconstitutional?
The Myth of Foreign Infiltrators
The BJP and its allies, along with the ECI, justified the SIR on the grounds of “removing infiltrators” — mainly Bangladeshis and Rohingyas.
What did they actually find?
Out of millions of voters, only 390 names were removed as “foreigners”. Of these, only 87 were Muslim. Even for these, the Commission has refused to provide any details.
The “Intensive” Nature of the Revision
The final Bihar voter list still contains:
Over 24,000 fake names,
5.2 lakh duplicate entries,
More than 51,000 entries without family linkage (no parent/spouse name),
Over 2 lakh fake addresses, and
24 lakh families with 10 or more voters each — which even the ECI flagged as “suspicious.”
In many cases, the final list was actually worse than the draft.
Thus, the slogan of “cleaning the rolls” or “removing illegal voters” was merely a pretext to systematically disenfranchise the poor and marginalised.
Political Control of the Election Commission
We must also recall the BJP government’s 2023 amendment to the appointment process of the Election Commission.
Previously, the selection committee consisted of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India.
The new law replaced the Chief Justice with a Union Minister nominated by the Prime Minister — currently Amit Shah.
This shows where the Commission’s loyalties now lie.
Additionally, new legal protection ensures that no civil or criminal cases can be filed against the Commission for actions taken “in the course of duty.”
Lack of Transparency
The investigative group Reporters’ Collective filed RTIs seeking all files, correspondence, and reports behind the 24 June 2025 announcement of the SIR — including any “independent appraisal committee” reports mentioned in the ECI’s affidavit to the Supreme Court.
The Commission refused to share any of these records.
Why such secrecy in an institution that claims to be transparent?
The ECI shouts about “clean voter rolls” but hides its own processes from public scrutiny.
Political Fallout in Bihar
Despite successfully manipulating past elections — including the 2024 Lok Sabha and state polls in Maharashtra and Haryana — the BJP-ECI alliance seems to be struggling in Bihar.
People have understood the conspiracy. The connection between the Election Commission and the BJP has become visible.
Huge crowds have gathered for the Voting Rights Marches led by Rahul Gandhi, Tejashwi Yadav, and Dipankar Bhattacharya, while BJP leaders have faced public anger.
In response, the BJP has tried three desperate tactics:
Spreading rumours that terrorists from Pakistan have entered Bihar.
Creating fake controversies by having their own people abuse Modi’s mother to spark outrage.
Deploying pliant media outlets to conduct fabricated “Mood of the Nation” surveys showing Modi as the “undisputed leader” and predicting a BJP wave in Bihar.
As ordinary people suffer under the corporate control of Adani and Ambani, the BJP grows ever more desperate to retain power.
India’s democratic institutions are collapsing one by one. The BJP has captured one institution after another — from the High Courts and the Supreme Court benches to the Election Commission.
The Special Intensive Revision is an unconstitutional, undemocratic process designed to rob the poor of their voting rights, and perhaps eventually, their citizenship itself.
Once that happens, people will lose even the basic power to change their government. They will be reduced to near-bonded subjects.
The democratic rights that Indians won through the freedom struggle are now in grave danger.
We certainly want those rights to expand — but first, we must protect what we have already achieved.
The Election Commission’s conspiracy and its collaboration with the BJP have now been exposed in Bihar. The BJP finds itself cornered there. The struggle continues.
What is needed now is greater unity among anti-BJP forces, more active involvement of the Left, and wider participation of all democracy- and freedom-loving citizens.
Delhi: When the fireworks faded this Diwali, Delhi woke to a choking haze. City monitors recorded a 24-hour average Air Quality Index (AQI) around 345–350, while PM₂.₅ spikes reached hundreds of µg/m³ (hourly peaks reported as high as 675 µg/m³ in parts of the city), levels many times above safe limits. These readings pushed large swathes of the capital into the “very poor” or “severe” categories, forcing schools to keep children indoors and sending thousands with respiratory problems to clinics.
Firecrackers, weather and lax enforcement
The immediate cause was the familiar one: fireworks during Diwali added a large pulse of fine particles to already poor winter air, and calm, cool weather trapped those pollutants near the ground. Although the Supreme Court allowed limited bursting of “green crackers” designed to emit fewer pollutants, reporting from multiple outlets found the rules widely ignored and enforcement patchy — so the intended benefit did not materialize.
How ordinary Delhiites are coping
People adapt in small ways: masks, air-purifiers, shortened outdoor routines, moving exercise indoors, and tracking AQI apps before stepping out. Street vendors cover wares, parents postpone children’s outdoor play, and clinics report higher cases of cough, asthma attacks and wheeze. Still, many cannot avoid outdoor exposure because of jobs or commutes.
Five-year snapshot (Diwali period: pre- and post-Diwali PM₂.₅; AQI notes)
Is Delhi the world’s most polluted city? Major global trackers (IQAir’s World Air Quality Report) repeatedly place Delhi among the top polluted cities and list it as one of the most polluted capital cities in recent years.
How dangerous is AQI ≈400 (or PM₂.₅ hundreds µg/m³)?
At those levels, even healthy adults can get throat irritation and cough; sensitive groups — children, older adults, people with heart or lung disease — face marked increases in asthma attacks, COPD exacerbations, hospitalisations and even short-term increases in mortality. WHO and public-health authorities warn that brief exposure to very high PM₂.₅ dramatically raises acute health risk for children and the elderly.
