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.

The Bundeswehr Reawakens

As Trump’s America shuns European entanglements, Germany rearms to stand up to the Russian bear.

Europe’s long holiday from history is over. With Donald Trump making noises about washing his hands off NATO, the transatlantic security architecture that protected the continent for nearly 80 years has begun to fracture since the beginning of the mercurial US President’s second innings. Into this breach Friedrich Merz, Germany’s chancellor, has declared that his country will build “Europe’s strongest conventional army.”


Germany’s decision to rearm carries uncomfortable historical baggage. But history is no longer a reason for paralysis. Rather, it is a reminder of what happens when Europe fails to deter aggression. From Ukraine to the Baltics, the continent faces a grinding war, fraying alliances and the possible return of raw power politics. In that context, Berlin’s shift cannot be interpreted as bellicosity as in the 1930s.


For decades, Germany benefited from the ‘Pax Americana.’ The United States paid for Europe’s security, and Germany, with its skilled workforce and export machine, reaped the peace dividend. Defence budgets shrank. Conscription ended in 2011. The Bundeswehr hollowed out. Military readiness became an afterthought.


The result has been a wealthy, influential Germany that preferred diplomacy to deterrence and whose foreign policy posture was defined more by energy deals with Vladimir Putin’s Russia than by strategic responsibility.


That era is now dead with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Trump’s disdain for NATO has shattered the illusion that America will always show up. This has left Germany to do what many of its neighbours have long demanded: take responsibility for European defence, and pay for it.


Berlin currently spends about $68 billion annually on defence (roughly 2 percent of its GDP), finally meeting NATO’s minimum threshold. Now it aims to go further, investing hundreds of billions in modernising the Bundeswehr with more air defences, tanks, ships, drones and a domestic arms industry capable of supporting Europe’s strategic autonomy.


Europe’s 20th century was defined by German militarism. Yet today’s Germany is embedded in multilateral institutions, governed by constitutional checks and fundamentally committed to democratic norms. It is not tanks but timidity that has defined Berlin’s posture in recent decades.


Moreover, the balance of power has shifted. The United Kingdom, long a military heavyweight, has shrunk its forces. France, though willing, cannot sustain continental deterrence alone. The United States, distracted by China and riven by internal division, is no longer the dependable hegemon of the past. Europe must build its own shield and Germany is the only country with the industrial base, fiscal headroom and political heft to anchor it.


Markets have responded with enthusiasm. Rheinmetall, Germany’s biggest arms manufacturer, has seen its shares soar. Investors see the continent’s security challenges as structural, not cyclical. A long-term rearmament is inevitable.


Merz, often seen as a grey technocrat, has surprised many by grasping the scale of this historical inflection. His recent encounter with President Trump on the eve of the D-Day anniversary where he reminded the American leader that June 6th marked not defeat but liberation was a deft moment of statesmanship. “We know what we owe you,” he told Trump, while arguing that America must not abandon Ukraine. That blend of realism and resolve is precisely what Europe needs.


The Bundeswehr of tomorrow will not resemble the Wehrmacht of the past. It will serve under NATO command, with allies’ consent and democratic oversight. Nor will it be built for conquest. It is not Germany’s will to power that motivates this buildup, but Europe’s will to survive.


Strategic independence is no longer a slogan today. If America’s commitment to the alliance is now conditional, then Europe must learn to defend itself. Germany’s pivot, however belated, is the beginning of that reckoning.


For too long, Europe has asked what Germany might do if it ever remembered its strength. The question now is what Europe would do without it. In a world growing more dangerous by the day, the return of German hard power will have to be perceived as no threat but a lifeline.

Comments


bottom of page