Won't let Rahul Gandhi speak in parliament without an apology: BJP

Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Thursday visited the residence of 35-year-old Bharat Bhushan, in Mathikere, Bengaluru, who was shot dead in front of his family by terrorists in Pahalgam and paid his final respects.

Offering condolences on behalf of all Kannadigas to Bharat Bhushan, the Chief Minister said it is extremely unfortunate that a young, well-educated man like him became a victim of a terror strike.

He strongly condemned the attack as a barbaric and inhuman act.

To facilitate the safe return of Kannada-speaking individuals stranded in Kashmir and to bring back the mortal remains of the deceased, Labour Minister Santosh Lad and a team of officials were immediately dispatched. So far, 175 Kannadigas have been safely brought back to the state.

“It is the government’s duty to protect Kannadigas in difficult times,” the CM stated.

The Karnataka government has announced a compensation of Rs 10 lakh each to the families of the Kannadigas who lost their lives in the recent terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, he added.

“It is the government’s responsibility to completely eradicate terrorism. Our government extends full support to the Centre in eliminating terrorist activities in the country,” CM Siddaramaiah said.

“Killing innocent people in broad daylight and in front of their families is a heinous crime. Similar to the past Pulwama and Balakot incidents, this is a recurrence. Intelligence failure at the Central level may have contributed to this incident as well,” he observed.

The Chief Minister has directed officials to make necessary arrangements for conducting the final rites of Manjunath Rao and Bharat Bhushan with police honours.

The victims from Karnataka include Bharat Bhushan, Manjunath Rao, and Madhusudan (who had settled in Bengaluru, hailing from Andhra Pradesh). Minister for Transport Ramalinga Reddy has met Bharat Bhushan’s family in Bengaluru, while Minister for Education Madhu Bangarappa met Manjunath Rao’s family in Shivamogga and assured them of support. 

Regarding the terror attack in Kashmir, the Chief Minister said the Central government has already initiated certain measures, and the state government will extend complete support for further steps aimed at eliminating terrorism.

Bharat Bhushan had gone on a Kashmir trip with his wife, Dr Sujata, a paediatrician, and toddler son.

The family stated that the gang of terrorists approached him and asked his name. When Bharat told them his name without any fear. The terrorists then asked him to hand over his son to his wife, Sujata. Later, they had asked him whether he was a Hindu or a Muslim. When Bharat said he was a Hindu, he was shot dead.

A powerful explosion at Shahid Rajaee port in southern Iran has caused widespread damage and casualties, with emergency teams rushing to the scene to bring the situation under control.

According to the Hormozgan Emergency Department, at least 561 people were injured after a fuel tanker exploded for unknown reasons at Shahid Rajaee port in Hormozgan Province on Saturday, Tasnim News Agency reported.

The wounded were transferred to Hormozgan hospitals.

The director general of Hormozgan’s crisis management department said the explosion was extremely strong, but the cause has not yet been determined.

Initial reports indicate that the blast originated in an administrative building within the port complex. The blast was so intense that it completely destroyed the administrative building and severely damaged many vehicles.

Following the incident, all port operations were suspended as security and emergency teams worked to secure the area. Authorities immediately declared a state of emergency at hospitals across Bandar Abbas in preparation for possible mass casualties.

In a controversial statement that has sparked alarm among legal experts and constitutional scholars, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the judiciary for allegedly overstepping its bounds, particularly targeting the Supreme Court’s recent verdict that set deadlines for the President and Governors to act on Bills.

“We cannot have a situation where courts direct the President,” Mr. Dhankhar said, suggesting that the judiciary is interfering with the powers of the executive. He further described Article 142 of the Constitution — which empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary to do "complete justice" — as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”

This incendiary metaphor has drawn backlash for implying that judicial independence — a cornerstone of democracy — is somehow hostile or dangerous. Critics argue that such rhetoric undermines public trust in the judiciary and risks damaging the careful separation of powers between branches of government.

While addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President also referred to a serious incident involving a Delhi High Court judge, Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a large amount of cash was allegedly recovered in March. He questioned the delayed disclosure of the incident and criticized the absence of an FIR against the judge.

“An FIR in this country can be registered against anyone, any constitutional functionary, including the one before you... But if it is Judges, FIR cannot be straightaway registered. It has to be approved by the concerned in the Judiciary, but that is not given in the Constitution,” he argued.

He went on to question why judges, unlike the President and Governors, appear to enjoy immunity not explicitly provided in the Constitution.

“If the event had taken place at his house, the speed would have been an electronic rocket. Now it is not even a cattle cart,” he remarked, criticizing the pace of response and investigation.

Why These Remarks Are Dangerous

While scrutiny of public institutions is necessary in a democracy, the Vice President’s remarks are concerning for several reasons:

1.    Undermining Judicial Authority: By calling Article 142 a "nuclear missile," the Vice President risks portraying the judiciary as a threat rather than a guardian of constitutional rights.

2.    Challenging Separation of Powers: The suggestion that courts should not “direct” the President could erode judicial checks on executive inaction or overreach, especially when constitutional responsibilities are being delayed or ignored.

3.    Eroding Public Confidence: As the Vice President of India — also the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha — such statements carry institutional weight. Attacks on judicial legitimacy can embolden other political actors to disregard court rulings, weakening the rule of law.

4.    Threatening Judicial Independence: Implying that judges should be more easily prosecuted, without proper due process and internal accountability, could be seen as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.

5.    Fueling Distrust During Sensitive Times: At a moment when public trust in institutions is essential, these remarks may sow unnecessary suspicion and politicize judicial matters that require careful and independent handling.

The Vice President’s speech has ignited a vital conversation about accountability and judicial conduct. However, framing the judiciary as a rogue institution and questioning its constitutional powers without nuance is fraught with danger. Safeguarding democracy requires mutual respect and balance among all pillars of governance — executive, legislature, and judiciary. When this balance is disturbed through political rhetoric, it threatens not just institutions, but the very foundation of constitutional democracy.