An action-packed 2017 for Indian Parliament

Karnataka Health Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao reminded that V D Savarkar was not against cow slaughter as he himself was non-veg eater, PTI reported on Thursday.

"As a Brahmin he was eating meat, and he was openly propagating eating meat," said the minister at an event in Bengaluru.

Reacting to Gundu Rao's claim, BJP MP Anurag Thakur called Congress a "factory of lies" as he warned that India won't tolerate any disrespect towards Savarkar.

"By disrespecting Veer Savarkar they have shown that they don't respect freedom fighters. During the Congress government, Sardar Bhagat Singh was termed a separatist in textbooks...By making those who want to break the nation join the congress party, Rahul Gandhi is taking forward the ideology of 'tukde tukde' and he is a 'modern Jinnah' who speaks ill of the country abroad...," he said.

Meanwhile, a court in Maharashtra's Nashik district summoned Congress MP Rahul Gandhi earlier this week in a defamation case filed against him for his alleged objectionable remarks against the Hindutva ideologue.

The complainant, who is the director of an NGO, claimed he watched a press conference addressed by Gandhi in Hingoli and also a speech made by the Congress leader in November 2022.

He alleged that Gandhi, on the two occasions, by his words and visual representations knowingly harmed the reputation of Veer Savarkar and also tried to defame the latter's image in the society.

According to the complainant, Gandhi said "Savarkar is BJP and RSS jin" which was defamatory in nature.

Bengaluru: The Karnataka Food Safety and Quality Department has issued an urgent warning following the discovery of potentially cancer-causing chemicals in cakes sold by certain bakeries across the state.

Recent tests conducted by the department revealed that some cake samples, particularly those with vibrant colors, contain harmful synthetic coloring agents such as Allura Red, a substance known to pose health risks. The findings have raised concerns about the use of artificial colors in bakery products, especially given their potential link to cancer and other serious health conditions.

"We routinely test various food products, and this time, our officials noticed unusually dark-colored cakes on the market," said Srinivas K, Commissioner of Food Safety for Karnataka. "Upon testing, we found that a few cakes contained Allura Red, a synthetic dye associated with health risks."

The use of artificial colors, especially in popular cakes like red velvet and pineapple varieties, is widespread as it attracts customers, particularly children. However, many bakers prefer using natural, safer alternatives, while some opt for synthetic dyes to enhance the cake's visual appeal.

"Most bakeries use permissible, natural colors that are safe for consumption. Unfortunately, a few are resorting to synthetic dyes just to make their cakes more attractive," said a bakery owner from Electronic City, speaking anonymously.

Medical experts are warning that consuming synthetic colors can lead to numerous health issues, including asthma and allergic reactions.

"Some of these artificial dyes are carcinogenic, and prolonged exposure could have serious consequences, especially for children and young adults," cautioned Dr. Vandana G, a private medical practitioner.

While the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) confirms that only a limited number of samples tested positive for harmful colors, legal action is being taken against the violators.

"There is no need for widespread panic or halting production. We are closely monitoring the situation, and only a few bakeries were found to be non-compliant. Rest assured, appropriate legal measures are underway," assured an FSSAI official. 

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today closed proceedings against Karnataka High Court Judge Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, following his public apology for controversial comments made during court sessions. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, leading a five-judge bench, stated that the decision was made in the interest of justice and the dignity of the judiciary.

Justice Srishananda during a recent court hearing. Justice Srishananda, while addressing a landlord-tenant dispute, referred to a Muslim-majority area in Bengaluru as "Pakistan" and made a misogynistic comment involving a woman lawyer. His comments, which went viral on social media, prompted the Supreme Court to seek a report from the Karnataka High Court, which was submitted shortly after the incident.

"No one can call any part of territory of India as 'Pakistan'," Chief Justice Chandrachud said. "It is fundamentally against the territorial integrity of the nation. The answer to sunlight is more sunlight and not to suppress what happens in court. The answer is not to close it down."

The Supreme Court had taken up the case on its own and had sought a report from the Karnataka High Court over the controversial remarks. A five-judge bench led by CJI Chandrachud, along with Justices S Khanna, B R Gavai, S Kant, and H Roy, had on September 20 expressed the need for establishing clear guidelines for constitutional court judges regarding their remarks in court. 

"Casual observational may indicate personal biases especially when perceived to be directed at a certain gender or community. Thus one must be wary of making patriarchal or misogynistic comments. We express our serious concern about observations on a certain gender or a community and such observations are liable to be construed in a negative light. We hope and trust that the responsibilities entrusted to all stakeholders are discharged without bias and caution," CJI Chandrachud said today. 

The Supreme Court bench said that when social media plays an active role in monitoring and amplifying courtroom proceedings, there is an urgency to ensure judicial commentary aligns with the decorum expected from courts of law.

Videos of Justice Srishanananda were viral on social media.

In one video, he refers to a Muslim-dominated locality in Bengaluru as "Pakistan" and in another video he was seen making objectionable comments against a woman lawyer. In the second incident, Justice Srishanananda can be heard telling the woman lawyer that she seemed to know a lot about the "opposition party", so much so that she might be able to reveal the colour of their undergarments.