top of page

By:

Dr. Abhilash Dawre

19 March 2025 at 5:18:41 pm

Eleven killed in van accident

Thane: In a tragic accident that claimed 11 lives within moments, a passenger van collided head-on with a cement mixer on the Kalyan–Ahilyanagar National Highway near Rayate village in Kalyan taluka, leaving the entire Thane district shaken. The impact was so severe that all passengers in the van died on the spot, turning multiple families’ lives upside down.   The accident took place on a bridge over the Ulhas River. The van was completely crushed, reduced to a mangled heap of metal. Despite...

Eleven killed in van accident

Thane: In a tragic accident that claimed 11 lives within moments, a passenger van collided head-on with a cement mixer on the Kalyan–Ahilyanagar National Highway near Rayate village in Kalyan taluka, leaving the entire Thane district shaken. The impact was so severe that all passengers in the van died on the spot, turning multiple families’ lives upside down.   The accident took place on a bridge over the Ulhas River. The van was completely crushed, reduced to a mangled heap of metal. Despite immediate rescue attempts by local villagers, not a single life could be saved.   While speaking to, ‘The Perfect Voice’ , Thane Civil Surgeon Dr. Kailash Pawar confirmed that all 11 victims died on the spot. The bodies were subsequently shifted to the rural hospital in Goveli for post-mortem examinations. Heart-wrenching scenes were witnessed at the hospital as a large number of relatives gathered, grieving the sudden and tragic loss of their loved ones.   Out of the deceased, nine have been identified while two remain unidentified. The victims include eight men and three women. Identified individuals include  1) Prashant alias Bablu Rupesh Chandane - 21 years, Devgaon, Murbad. 2) Bhushan Ghorpade - 49 years, Andheri, Mumbai; Revenue Assistant at the Tehsildar Office, Murbad. 3) Jija Govinda Kembari - 50 years, Tembhare, Murbad. 4) Ananta Pawar - Sakhare, Murbad. 5) Deepak Gavali - Resident of Kalyan. 6) Ganpat Jainu Madhe - 32 years, Devaralwadi, Murbad. 7) Sneha Mohpe - approximately 22 years, Narayangaon, Murbad. 8) Mansi Mohpe - approximately 20 years, Narayangaon, Murbad. 9) Prathamesh Mohpe - approximately 17 years, Narayangaon, Murbad.   The tragedy has left behind grieving families, unanswered questions, and renewed concerns over road safety on this highway.   Three siblings among killed What began as a simple journey ended in unimaginable tragedy. Three siblings who had left home saying, “We’ll be back in a few days, Mom,” lost their lives in the horrific accident near Rayate bridge, leaving their mother devastated and alone. Sneha Mohpe (22), Mansi Mohpe (20), and Prathamesh Mohpe (17), residents of Diva, were among the 11 victims of the crash. The three were raised single-handedly by their mother, Anjana Mohpe, after their father passed away seven years ago. Despite financial hardships, Anjana Mohpe worked tirelessly in household jobs to educate her children and build a better future for them. The siblings were studying in Diva and Thane and had recently left for Parhe village in Murbad taluka to visit their uncle during college holidays.   However, fate had other plans. Their journey ended abruptly when the passenger van they were travelling in collided head-on with a cement mixer near Rayate bridge, killing all on board instantly.

Sacred Attire

Updated: Jan 30, 2025

The Siddhivinayak Temple Trust’s recent decision to implement a dress code prohibiting short skirts, torn jeans and other revealing attire is a necessary move to uphold the sanctity of religious spaces. Temples are spiritual spaces where devotees seek solace, offer prayers, and connect with the divine. Temples are not mere tourist attractions but sacred sanctuaries. The least that visitors can do is dress accordingly.


The Jagannath temple in Puri, Odisha, and the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan have already implemented similar rules, reflecting a growing recognition that religious spaces require a modicum of decorum. In the case of Siddhivinayak, the temple attracts thousands of devotees daily, many of whom have expressed discomfort over attire that they feel clashes with the temple’s spiritual ambience.


Few would question the need for decorum in a courtroom, a government office, or even an upscale restaurant. Yet, when religious institutions enforce dress codes to preserve their sanctity, a chorus of indignation often rises in the name of personal freedom, with such ‘critics’ arguing that such rules reflect moral policing or an imposition of traditionalist values.

But this argument confuses religious sanctity with public space liberalism. No one is being compelled to enter the temple, and those who do should respect the customs that govern it. Even in non-Hindu religious spaces, dress codes are the norm. One does not enter a gurdwara without covering their head, nor a mosque or church dressed in attire deemed unsuitable for prayer. The sanctity of a religious institution should not be sacrificed at the altar of modern whims.


To dismiss this as an encroachment on personal liberties is to misunderstand the nature of such spaces. Religious sites operate under different expectations than public thoroughfares or commercial hubs. They are designed for reflection, devotion, and ritual. While Indian society has rightly evolved towards greater personal freedom in many spheres, faith-based institutions must be allowed to maintain traditions that are integral to their identity. The temple trust has made it clear that its goal is not to impose regressive restrictions but to ensure that all visitors feel comfortable and that the sanctity of the temple is upheld.


Moreover, the argument that religious sites must remain entirely open-ended in their dress codes simply does not hold water. Many of the people who object to these restrictions would scarcely question the need for appropriate attire at a formal event or while meeting a dignitary. The principle is the same -respect for the setting dictates the mode of dress. Those who seek to frame this as a battle between liberalism and conservatism fail to grasp that such measures are about propriety, not repression.


In an era where the lines between cultural expression and decorum are increasingly blurred, it is worth remembering that not every rule is an infringement on liberty. If people can abide by dress codes in secular spaces, they should extend the same courtesy to places of worship.

Comments


bottom of page