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 Last Post

France’s final military withdrawal from Senegal closes an era in West Africa marked by colonial hangover, geopolitical missteps and the rise of rival powers like Russia and China.

France’s departure from its last permanent military base in West Africa—Camp Geille in Senegal— was a geopolitical funeral march. After six decades of military entrenchment across its former colonies, France’s final exit from Senegal symbolises not just the end of an era but a profound reckoning with its diminished standing in a region it once considered its pré carré.


General Pascal Ianni, France’s top military commander in Africa, insisted the exit marked a “new phase” in Franco-African military relations. It is more accurately read as a capitulation to the political and popular mood across West Africa, where post-colonial sentiment has hardened into full-blown rejection of foreign troops, especially those wearing French uniforms. President Bassirou Diomaye Faye of Senegal, elected earlier this year on a platform of sovereignty and pan-Africanism, made clear that foreign bases were incompatible with the republic’s dignity. The French departure, he implied, was non-negotiable.


The move follows a broader pattern. In Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, military juntas have not merely expelled French forces but have replaced them with Russian mercenaries from the Wagner Group (now operating under a new Kremlin-controlled umbrella). Ivory Coast and Chad saw their last French bases shuttered earlier this year. What remains is a skeleton presence in Gabon and a training detachment in Côte d’Ivoire—pale shadows of France’s once expansive African garrison.


This withdrawal is the culmination of years of diplomatic inertia and military overreach. France’s once-popular counterterrorism operations—first in Mali with Operation Serval and later with the broader Operation Barkhane—began with fanfare but ended in ignominy. Perceived by locals as colonial meddling and marked by limited tangible success, French troops became symbols of both occupation and impotence. Terrorist violence did not ebb; civilian trust in Paris evaporated.


The geopolitical consequences of this exodus are significant. France’s absence has created a power vacuum, swiftly being filled by Russia, which sees Africa as fertile ground for influence, arms deals, and resource extraction. The Central African Republic is already a Wagner-run fiefdom in all but name. Burkina Faso and Mali now openly parade Russian armoured vehicles and advisors. In Niger, the junta that toppled President Mohamed Bazoum—a Western ally—immediately turned its gaze toward Moscow. China, too, is deepening its military and infrastructural ties in the region, though with less theatre than the Kremlin.


By contrast, France’s pivot to a more “flexible partnership model” (as Colonel Guillaume Vernet described it) sounds less like a strategy than an admission of defeat. The promise to offer training and “targeted support” assumes African nations still want such assistance from Paris. Many do not. Even the usually measured Senegalese military, once a key partner in West African peacekeeping, now insists that defence autonomy trumps foreign help.


Yet it would be hasty to see this solely through the prism of France’s failures. The withdrawal also reflects the transformation of African politics. Senegal’s new leadership joins a growing wave of pan-Africanist sentiment, particularly among younger voters. They want not just the trappings of sovereignty but its substance—military, economic and political. This aligns with broader BRICS-aligned rhetoric that pits the Global South against the neocolonial West.


Still, sovereignty has its price. Russia’s support comes with strings—opaque mining contracts, mercenaries with poor human rights records, and alignment with autocratic tendencies. France may be gone, but African nations now risk trading one master for another, especially if the West fails to offer viable alternatives. The United States, too, has scaled down its military presence in places like Niger. If democratic governance continues to erode in the Sahel, no amount of sovereignty will prevent the region’s slide into armed instability.


France’s military pullout is in a sense, the beginning of a new, more uncertain geopolitical story in which Africa is no longer just a theatre for European power projection but an active, if fragmented, actor in its own right.


Comments


bottom of page