PhD at @Cambridge_uni, MSc at @UniOfOxford. Interested in tech, criminal justice, and decolonisation. Lawyer, researcher, investigative legal journalist.
The allegations levelled against Advocate Rohin Bhatt are extremely serious. It is brave of Raghavi to come forward publicly against him. Since this came to light, several others have also spoken up, not only in solidarity, but by sharing their own “personal experiences” and by saying how “unsurprised” they are by these allegations. This points to a disturbing pattern of behaviour on Bhatt’s part, which makes Raghavi’s claims even more serious and credible.
Bhatt’s behaviour is unacceptable in any civilised society, MORE SO given his public posturing as a flag-bearer of queer rights. I am sorry for what Raghavi has to go through. No one should ever have been subjected to this.
At the same time, Bhatt must respond. In any case, regardless of what he says, the safety and dignity of every human being, not just those belonging to the queer community, remains our shared responsibility. The least one expects is a fellow member treats their own with respect and care. Bhatt has failed on these very basic grounds. I hope he reflects seriously on his behaviour and repents.
It’s not for classicist mockery, it’s for seeking accountability for allegations of intentional lying on election affidavit which amounts to an electoral offence - and that too by the highest elected official of the land. Anish completely lost the plot here.
The education of a PM - or indeed any elected official - has little to do with how well they govern.
Calls for PM Modi to show his degree are rooted in a conception of politics that is inherently classist. Disagree with him on his ideology, his failed policies - not his degree.
Even before the Data Protection Act has been notified, it is being used to deny information related to PM Modi’s degree. Is this why the RTI law was amended through the Data Protection Act? Destroying people’s right to know in the name of data protection! #DelhiUniversity
The #NITIAayog has recommended that the Department of Science and Technology cut its ‘core grant support’ for State Science and Technology Councils and pare them down to ‘project-based support,’ @neutranino ✍️
https://t.co/rsBlZJsIQQ
"These two provisions are to be read disjunctively, meaning that the presence of a dowry demand is not a prerequisite for establishing cruelty under the Section,"