top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

YouTuber challenges FIR, LoC in HC

Mumbai : The Bombay High Court issued notice to the state government on a petition filed by UK-based medico and YouTuber, Dr. Sangram Patil, seeking to quash a Mumbai Police FIR and revoking a Look Out Circular in a criminal case lodged against him, on Thursday.   Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe, who heard the matter with preliminary submissions from both sides, sought a response from the state government and posted the matter for Feb. 4.   Maharashtra Advocate-General Milind Sathe informed the court...

YouTuber challenges FIR, LoC in HC

Mumbai : The Bombay High Court issued notice to the state government on a petition filed by UK-based medico and YouTuber, Dr. Sangram Patil, seeking to quash a Mumbai Police FIR and revoking a Look Out Circular in a criminal case lodged against him, on Thursday.   Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe, who heard the matter with preliminary submissions from both sides, sought a response from the state government and posted the matter for Feb. 4.   Maharashtra Advocate-General Milind Sathe informed the court that the state would file its reply within a week in the matter.   Indian-origin Dr. Patil, hailing from Jalgaon, is facing a criminal case here for posting allegedly objectionable content involving Bharatiya Janata Party leaders on social media.   After his posts on a FB page, ‘Shehar Vikas Aghadi’, a Mumbai BJP media cell functionary lodged a criminal complaint following which the NM Joshi Marg Police registered a FIR (Dec. 18, 2025) and subsequently issued a LoC against Dr. Patil, restricting his travels.   The complainant Nikhil Bhamre filed the complaint in December 2025, contending that Dr. Patil on Dec. 14 posted offensive content intended to spread ‘disinformation and falsehoods’ about the BJP and its leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi.   Among others, the police invoked BNSS Sec. 353(2) that attracts a 3-year jail term for publishing or circulating statements or rumours through electronic media with intent to promote enmity or hatred between communities.   Based on the FIR, Dr. Patil was detained and questioned for 15 hours when he arrived with his wife from London at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport (Jan. 10), and again prevented from returning to Manchester, UK on Jan. 19 in view of the ongoing investigations.   On Wednesday (Jan. 21) Dr. Patil recorded his statement before the Mumbai Police and now he has moved the high court. Besides seeking quashing of the FIR and the LoC, he has sought removal of his name from the database imposing restrictions on his international travels.   Through his Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola, the medico has sought interim relief in the form of a stay on further probe by Crime Branch-III and coercive action, restraint on filing any charge-sheet during the pendency of the petition and permission to go back to the UK.   Pasbola submitted to the court that Dr. Patil had voluntarily travelled from the UK to India and was unaware of the FIR when he landed here. Sathe argued that Patil had appeared in connection with other posts and was not fully cooperating with the investigators.

Europe’s Nuclear Awakening

With America in retreat, Germany and France seek to fortify Europe’s nuclear deterrence.

Germany

Germany’s likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, is not known for radical departures in foreign policy. Yet his recent remarks about expanding France’s nuclear umbrella to the rest of Europe reflect the most consequential shift in European security since the end of the Cold War. The continent finds itself at a precarious juncture. With U.S. President Donald Trump openly questioning NATO’s future, Europe must now decide whether it can rely on Washington’s nuclear shield or if it must forge its own.


In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio, Merz stressed on the need to become stronger together in nuclear deterrence in Europe. His comments came just days after French President Emmanuel Macron pledged to open a debate on extending France’s nuclear deterrent to other European nations. For decades, Europe’s nuclear security has rested on America’s commitment to its NATO allies. Now, Trump’s second presidency has unsettled that foundation.


During the Cold War, the American nuclear umbrella, backed by the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, provided Europe with strategic stability. France and Britain, Western Europe’s only nuclear powers, maintained their arsenals as a national prerogative rather than a collective security mechanism. The idea of a shared European nuclear deterrent never gained traction, largely due to German reluctance. Berlin’s historical aversion to military assertiveness and its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ensured that Germany would not seek nuclear weapons of its own.


But with Trump’s foreign policy pivot, Europe faces an uncomfortable reality - an American president who has threatened to abandon NATO allies unwilling to meet their financial obligations.


Merz’s position remains cautious. He insists that any discussions on European nuclear deterrence must “complement the American nuclear umbrella, which we of course want to maintain.” Yet his acknowledgment that Germany cannot rely indefinitely on U.S. protection signals a historic shift in thinking within the German establishment. The far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has long argued for Germany to acquire its own nuclear weapons, a prospect still unthinkable for mainstream politicians. However, even centrists now recognize that Europe can no longer afford strategic complacency.


Macron has long positioned himself as a champion of European sovereignty. In 2020, he had proposed a strategic dialogue on Europe’s nuclear future, arguing that France’s arsenal could serve broader European security interests. His calls were largely met with polite dismissal in Berlin. Today, the mood has changed. Merz’s openness to discussions suggests that a consensus is forming in Germany’s political mainstream: Europe must assume greater responsibility for its own defence.


Yet any effort to build a European nuclear deterrent will require delicate diplomacy. France’s nuclear doctrine is fiercely independent, designed to serve French interests first. Extending its nuclear umbrella would mean entangling Paris in the defence of countries beyond its borders, something French leaders have traditionally resisted. Moreover, Britain, now outside the European Union, maintains its own independent nuclear arsenal and has not signalled enthusiasm for nuclear-sharing arrangements with the continent.


A Franco-German-British framework would be the logical nucleus of a European deterrent, but London’s reluctance and Paris’s caution complicate matters. However, the more Washington wavers, the stronger the case for Europe to develop an alternative deterrence mechanism.

A serious European nuclear initiative would come at an enormous financial and political cost. France’s arsenal is modest compared to America’s: it possesses around 300 nuclear warheads. Expanding its reach would require massive investment in missile systems, warhead production and delivery mechanisms. Germany, still constrained by post-war pacifism, would have to make an unprecedented leap in its defence spending and strategic doctrine.


Berlin has already taken tentative steps. Merz’s CDU/CSU bloc is in coalition negotiations with the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), and both parties have signalled support for a major increase in defence spending. This marks a dramatic shift from Germany’s traditional reluctance to invest in hard power. However, building a credible nuclear deterrent will require long-term commitments and a fundamental reassessment of European security priorities. Either way, the days of European strategic passivity are coming to an end.

Comments


bottom of page