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.

Sham Democracy

Myanmar’s junta prepares for an election that is likely to be rigged amid civil war and authoritarian consolidation.

The generals in Naypyidaw are attempting a sleight of hand. Recently, Myanmar’s junta chief, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, theatrically declared the end of the emergency rule imposed since the February 2021 coup and signalled a December election. This, he proclaimed, marks “the second chapter” in the country’s journey. But it is a chapter written by the same authors who torched the last manuscript of democracy, and it is likely to end with the military even more entrenched than before.


The announcement is part of a larger ruse to rebrand the military’s de facto rule in civilian garb. Since the coup that toppled Aung San Suu Kyi’s democratically elected government, Myanmar has descended into a violent and fragmented civil war. The junta has lost vast swathes of territory to ethnic militias and a burgeoning resistance, yet it clings to the illusion of control through electoral theatre.


Min Aung Hlaing now occupies both the positions of armed forces chief and acting president. The December election, touted by junta mouthpieces as a transition to multi-party democracy, is more likely to be a rubber-stamp exercise.


Indeed, the prerequisites for a legitimate vote in form of press freedom, universal suffrage and civil liberties are conspicuously absent. In their place, the junta has crafted an atmosphere of fear: new draconian laws threaten up to ten years’ imprisonment for anyone attempting to “destroy a part of the electoral process.” Yet even the preparatory census failed to reach 19 million of the country’s 51 million people, underscoring the logistical farce.


The opposition, including lawmakers from the ousted National League for Democracy (NLD), has pledged to boycott it. Suu Kyi remains imprisoned, along with much of the NLD’s senior leadership, having been handed a slew of convictions designed to eliminate her from public life. The political landscape has been sterilised of any real challenge to military rule.


The junta’s endgame is not the restoration of democracy but its reinvention under military tutelage.


For much of its post-independence history, the country has been under military rule, whether directly or cloaked in constitutional manipulation. The 2008 constitution, drafted by the generals, guarantees the army a quarter of parliamentary seats and control over key ministries. The 2021 coup was sparked by the military’s unfounded allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 election, which the NLD won in a landslide.


The upcoming vote may seek to reanimate the model of the military-aligned Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) ruling under a quasi-civilian façade. The difference now is that the resistance is fiercer and more decentralised. Ethnic armed organisations (EAOs), along with the People’s Defence Forces (PDFs), have significantly eroded the junta’s reach in the north, west, and southeast. Any move to impose elections in these territories risks further inflaming hostilities. Already, the junta has resorted to offering cash rewards to rebels willing to surrender.


International response has ranged from cautious to complicit. China, Myanmar’s powerful neighbour and biggest investor, issued a bland statement supporting “resolution through political means under the constitutional and legal framework” — code for tolerating the junta’s roadmap so long as it protects Chinese investments and prevents Western influence. Beijing’s interest lies not in Myanmar’s democratic flourishing but in a stable buffer zone and access to the Indian Ocean.


ASEAN, the regional bloc, has offered a five-point peace plan that has largely been ignored. Western sanctions have failed to dislodge the generals or materially degrade their capacity to wage war. Meanwhile, arms continue to flow through networks in Russia, China, and North Korea. The civil war is increasingly internationalised, even as its victims remain largely voiceless on the world stage.


To many in Myanmar, especially the youth who took to the streets in 2021 and have since joined the armed resistance, the electoral pantomime represents a betrayal. It is designed not to heal the country but to ensconce a junta incapable of governing by consent. Elections can lend legitimacy when institutions are strong and freedoms respected. In Myanmar, they have been used to crush what remains of both.

Comments


bottom of page