Rohit Raghu

Nation always first 🇮🇳
Proud Indian

[Rahul Shivshankar @RShivshankar]

AI-NARCHY IN THE NAME OF GEN-Z?
A crucial twist in the Delhi Police “misconduct” video at JANTAR MANTAR.
THE “CCTV EVIDENCE” WAS AI-GENERATED: POLICE
What was being circulated as CCTV footage showing a senior Delhi Police officer inappropriately touching a woman was allegedly FABRICATED using AI.

Police have arrested 24-year-old Nadeem Ahmed, who runs a YouTube channel called “News Aiyna”.
Police say he had multiple AI tools, has admitted creating the video to show Delhi Police in a bad light, and that sections relating to riots have now been added to the FIR.
The probe is now widening: Was he acting alone? Was there funding? Was he being handled by someone else? Was this pre-planned?
In this case, the police were not caught on camera. THE POLICE WERE FRAMED BY A FAKE CAMERA.

[Kanchan Gupta 🇮🇳 @KanchanGupta]

Once an AAPiya always an AAPiya.

[कुशल मेहरा @kushal_mehra]

I silently watch the entire SIR and EC discussion, and I'm horrified by how little most journalists know about how government works and what the Election Commission does. I have kind of given up on explaining things beyond a point. People live in their own imaginary world.

[Rohit Raghu @RaghuRohit11]

@RishiAgrawal_ @CricCrazyJohns Agree

[Rishi Agrawal @RishiAgrawal_]

@CricCrazyJohns Should've been :-
3 Tests
5 ODIs
3 T20s

[Rohit Raghu @RaghuRohit11]

Arey 3 test matches khel lo na bhai kyaa jaata hai aap logon ka?!?!?! Har baar 2 test ki series rakhna pa raha hai in dusre boards ki vajah se!

[Johns. @CricCrazyJohns]

🚨 INDIA WILL TOUR WEST INDIES IN JULY & AUGUST 2027. [Santokie from Caribbean Cricket Podcast]

- 2 Tests. ✅
- 5 T20Is. ✅
- 3 ODIs. ✅

[Moana @ladynationalist]

mujhe ek baat samjh nahi aa rahi Modi ji aur Mota bhai chup kyu baithe hai ? sabak kyu nahi sikha rahe in bdwon ko ?

[maithun @Being_Humor]

Instagram is suddenly full of reels brutally mocking CJP and its leaders.

CJP is also losing followers on Instagram.

Most likely, the reports of CJP protesters attacking Delhi Police and CISF personnel with a knife have made people distance themselves from CJP.

[कुशल मेहरा @kushal_mehra]

The revolution will come and will fuck with your mind in so many ways that you will be left without a brain.

[Lotus Awakened @SaffronOnX]

@ECISVEEP Guyssss , Let's ratio Pappu
Let him show the Power of Core BJP Voters😉🔥

[Election Commission of India @ECISVEEP]

Fact Check

❌The statement made in this post is misleading

✅1) The order for SIR in Bihar issued on 24 June 2025 was issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission. This order has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 27 May 2026

✅2) In its Press Note No. 120 dated 26 September 2026, in Point 1(iii), ECI has stated that, "The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court."

#ECIFactCheck

[Rahul @indicrealist]

ECI never lied.

ECI had stated that the "declaration to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the SC", not any "modification".

CJI Surya Kant has ONLY said that the SC has not approved ANY modified version of Form 6 used for inclusion of names in electoral rolls during the SIR.

The CJI never said that the ECI had indeed used a modified Form 6 for the SIR.

This is in line with the ECI's argument that seeking additional documentation as Annexure-D declaration doesn't amount to "modification".

Read alongside with SC's July 2026 verdict, this actually stands as a vindication of any violation by ECI or CEC Gyanesh Kumar.

Congress ₹2 IT celliyas should take ₹1 crash course in basic english comprehension. Lol. 🤡😂

[Varun Kumar Rana @VarunKrRana]

No wonder she accepted a fake Harvard professorship over email without checking anything 🤣🤣

[Rohit Raghu @RaghuRohit11]

Classic obfuscation tactics to fool the public by oppn. Hope no one falls for it!

[Rahul Shivshankar @RShivshankar]

The ecosystem is being mischievous. The facts are:
SC DIDN'T APPROVE THE MODIFIED FORM 6. BUT SC DID UPHOLD ECI'S RESIDUAL AUTHORITY TO ADAPT THE DOCUMENTATION FRAMEWORK FOR SIR.
This is the distinction ECOSYSTEM is deliberately blurring.

Yes, the Supreme Court has now clarified that it did not specifically approve the later-modified Form 6.

But the May 27, 2026 order (ATTACHED BELOW) expressly held in context of Form 6 that ECI “retains a degree of residual authority” to formulate a documentation framework suited to an SIR.
The only condition the SC put on that power is that it CANNOT be arbitrary.
So, today's clarification does not establish that the ECI had no power to adapt the documentation framework.
Nor does it establish that CEC Gyanesh Kumar “lied”.

[Rahul Shivshankar @RShivshankar]

The ecosystem is being mischievous. The facts are:
SC DIDN'T APPROVE THE MODIFIED FORM 6. BUT SC DID UPHOLD ECI'S RESIDUAL AUTHORITY TO ADAPT THE DOCUMENTATION FRAMEWORK FOR SIR.
This is the distinction ECOSYSTEM is deliberately blurring.

Yes, the Supreme Court has now clarified that it did not specifically approve the later-modified Form 6.

But the May 27, 2026 order (ATTACHED BELOW) expressly held in context of Form 6 that ECI “retains a degree of residual authority” to formulate a documentation framework suited to an SIR.
The only condition the SC put on that power is that it CANNOT be arbitrary.
So, today's clarification does not establish that the ECI had no power to adapt the documentation framework.
Nor does it establish that CEC Gyanesh Kumar “lied”.

[Mr Sinha @Mrsinha]

Let’s be precise about what the CJI said: CJI Surya Kant only observed that the Supreme Court had NOT approved any modified version of Form 6 for inclusion of electors during SIR.

He did NOT say that ECI had used a modified Form 6.

That distinction is crucial. ECI’s stand is that Form 6 was never modified; Annexure-D was an additional declaration sought during SIR and did not alter Form 6

[Viktor @desishitposterr]

@priyankac19 it was upheld by EC.

[Riccha Dwivedi @RicchaDwivedi]

And just like that, the sexual harrassment complaints against a JNU professor have vanished in thin air. Did it not happen or sexual abuse by people belonging to their side of the political spectrum should be outright dismissed?

[NDTV @ndtv]

#BREAKING | "Can't Pass Orders On Newspaper Report": Chief Justice On Top Poll Body Officer Row

[ANI @ANI]

#WATCH | Delhi: On SC judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan's views on citizens' right to vote, Former Judge at the Uttarakhand High Court, Lokpal Singh, says, "As far as intensive revision of votes is concerned, it is a normal process. The Election Commission of India is engaged in this process throughout the year for adding or deleting the names of the voters... intensive revisions should be done. So far as gross deletion of names is concerned, it is the ECI that can see it better. It's always easy to say that thousands of votes have been deleted. But when the people and the population of the particular states... Bihar and West Bengal, both the states are adjoining Bangladesh. Infiltration cannot be denied. So many fake votes are there. If the ECI, after verification, has deleted the names of so many persons, and those persons who have not come—for them, so many institutions are coming forward saying, 'Yes, a bulk of voters have been deleted in Bihar or West Bengal.' I feel that no one can deny the infiltration from West Bengal... So, a change of govt is one part. I feel that no one should blame the Central govt, saying that due to their intervention in West Bengal, the regime has changed..."

On Justice Nariman's remarks, he says, "Justice Nariman is a jurist of this country. I have a great respect for Justice Nariman. But so far as the statement of the election of West Bengal is concerned, I do not agree with Justice Nariman. 90 lakhs were deleted... now you have been watching the news that after the elections, so many persons traveled from West Bengal to Bangladesh. Can anyone question this? Can anyone find out from where they came and why they are returning to Bangladesh? If they were citizens of India, they should not have traveled from West Bengal to Bangladesh, so I do not have any agreement with Justice Nariman on this point..."