Full list of Chinese apps banned in India: TikTok and 58 other apps

News Network
June 30, 2020

New Delhi, Jun 30: In a huge blow to popular apps such as TikTok, the Indian government has banned as many as 59 apps that are owned by Chinese companies. The latest announcement comes close on the heels of a rumour of the same, which was termed a hoax by the government. A press release by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has listed 59 apps that will be blocked on internet and non-internet served devices in India, citing reasons that these apps "are engaged in activities prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, the security of state and public order."

Government of India's orders follow the tensions rampant at the Indo-China border after some Indian soldiers were martyred at the Galwan river valley. Ever since the incident, there has been an uproar on social media urging boycott of anything that is related to China, including smartphone brands and apps. While there has been no announcement for the Chinese smartphone brands, the government has immediately blocked as many as 59 apps in India. This means they will not function in India, in addition to their discontinuation on both Google Play Store and App Store at large.

Here are the 59 Chinese apps that have been blocked by the Indian government:

1.            TikTok

2.            Shareit

3.            Kwai

4.            UC Browser

5.            Baidu map

6.            Shein

7.            Clash of Kings

8.            DU battery saver

9.            Helo

10.          Likee

11.          YouCam makeup

12.          Mi Community

13.          CM Brower

14.          Virus Cleaner

15.          APUS Browser

16.          ROMWE

17.          Club Factory

18.          Newsdog

19.          Beauty Plus

20.          WeChat

21.          UC News

22.          QQ Mail

23.          Weibo

24.          Xender

25.          QQ Music

26.          QQ Newsfeed

27.          Bigo Live

28.          SelfieCity

29.          Mail Master

30.          Parallel Space

31.          Mi Video Call - Xiaomi

32.          WeSync

33.          ES File Explorer

34.          Viva Video - QU Video Inc

35.          Meitu

36.          Vigo Video

37.          New Video Status

38.          DU Recorder

39.          Vault- Hide

40.          Cache Cleaner DU App studio

41.          DU Cleaner

42.          DU Browser

43.          Hago Play With New Friends

44.          Cam Scanner

45.          Clean Master - Cheetah Mobile

46.          Wonder Camera

47.          Photo Wonder

48.          QQ Player

49.          We Meet

50.          Sweet Selfie

51.          Baidu Translate

52.          Vmate

53.          QQ International

54.          QQ Security Center

55.          QQ Launcher

56.          U Video

57.          V fly Status Video

58.          Mobile Legends

59.          DU Privacy

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.