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.

Tariffs and Tribulations

Trump’s trade wars promise pain today for a distant and uncertain gain.

Trump

Donald Trump’s latest broadside, sweeping tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, lands a punch in the gut to global markets and American consumers alike. The move, cloaked in the language of nationalism, fulminates against fentanyl, illegal immigration and economic injustice. The president, now fully unshackled in his second term, has declared a national emergency, citing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs of 25 percent on Canada and Mexico and 10 percent on China.


Trump’s protectionist crusade is not new. Higher tariffs on Canadian lumber and Chinese pharmaceuticals have invited swift retaliation. Mexico and Canada have announced countermeasures, while China plans to challenge the move at the WTO. The last tariff war (2018–19) drove up costs for U.S. firms and consumers, and history may repeat itself. Automakers like Volkswagen warn of supply chain disruptions, while energy producers brace for instability.


Trade wars are neither good nor easy to win. The 2018-2019 tariff battles resulted in higher costs for American businesses and consumers, with studies showing that the bulk of the financial burden fell on U.S. firms rather than foreign exporters.


For American households, the effects will be immediate. A new round of tariffs means higher costs on everything from household appliances to food. Trudeau’s retaliatory tariffs on $155 billion worth of U.S. goods including peanut butter, beer and wine will send ripple effects through the agricultural sector. Meanwhile, Mexican and Chinese countermeasures could squeeze American manufacturers, forcing them to pass costs onto consumers.


The prime justification for these tariffs is their purported link to the fentanyl crisis. The Trump administration insists that Mexico and Canada are complicit in the opioid epidemic, citing a “growing presence” of fentanyl production in both nations. Yet, experts in law enforcement and public health overwhelmingly disagree.


Critics disagree with the White House’s assertion that fentanyl has killed tens of millions of Americans. At the peak of the opioid crisis in 2022 and 2023, total overdose deaths, from all drugs combined, reached around 114,000 annually - a national tragedy, no doubt, but nowhere near the apocalyptic scale Trump describes.


Trump’s weaponization of emergency powers to enact these tariffs is already facing legal scrutiny. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act was never intended to be a trade cudgel. Beyond its domestic consequences, Trump’s tariff blitzkrieg is straining America’s global alliances at a precarious moment. The European Union has said it would respond firmly should Trump extend his tariff war across the Atlantic.


For India, the tariff war presents a complex scenario in form of both risks and opportunities in the evolving global trade landscape.


On the one hand, the disruptions in U.S.-China trade relations could allow India to position itself as an alternative manufacturing hub, particularly in sectors like pharmaceuticals, electronics, and textiles. Multinational companies looking to diversify supply chains away from China may consider India, especially given New Delhi’s efforts to incentivize domestic production under the Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme.


On the other hand, India could also suffer collateral damage. The global slowdown triggered by trade wars could dampen demand for Indian exports, particularly in sectors like IT services, auto components, and chemicals, where India depends on both China and the U.S. for raw materials and markets.


Trump has long accused India of being a “tariff king” and has previously targeted Indian exports. However, New Delhi has been taking steps to improve trade optics. Recent budgetary revisions have reduced peak customs duty rates from 150 percent to 70 percent, signalling an attempt to counter criticism from Washington.


While India has not been directly affected by the latest round of U.S. tariffs, its diplomatic strategy will be crucial. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has been strengthening ties with Washington, particularly on defence and technology cooperation. If Trump were to escalate tariff measures against other trading partners, India may seek bilateral exemptions or leverage its growing strategic partnership with the U.S. to negotiate trade-offs in sectors like semiconductors, clean energy and defence procurement.

Comments


bottom of page