Shows govt's intolerance, state of judiciary: Sibal on court denying bail to two ex-TISS studentsRajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal criticized the denial of anticipatory bail to two former Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) students, accusing the government and judiciary of intolerance. The students were denied bail after being charged with organizing an unauthorized campus event to honor deceased professor G N Saibaba and raising slogans supporting the release of jailed activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. A Mumbai court rejected their bail request, citing concerns over the slogans and materials linked to the banned CPI. Seven other students received pre-arrest bail due to cooperation with investigators. The incident occurred on October 12, 2025, during a gathering at TISS where students displayed 'Rest in Power' messages and demanded the release of undertrial prisoners. Police reported the complaint to the Trombay police station, which later transferred the case to the Crime Investigation Department.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the denial of bail as evidence of governmental intolerance and judicial overreach, aligning with left-leaning critiques of state control and suppression of dissent. The emphasis on the students' peaceful protest and the perceived politicization of the case reflects a leftward slan
Why factuality (90): The article closely mirrors the primary source document, providing accurate details about the arrests, the legal proceedings, and the background of the individuals involved. It clearly outlines the charges against the students and the court's rationale for denying bail. The information is comprehens
Why objectivity (60): The article adopts a critical stance toward the judicial system and government, using emotive language and implying a broader political narrative. This approach leans into a subjective interpretation rather than maintaining a neutral, balanced perspective.
Scroll.inIndependentCenterFactual 88Objective 859 days agoA former student of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Kamakhya Das, has applied for anticipatory bail in a case where he is accused of shouting slogans in support of jailed activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam during an event commemorating the death anniversary of GN Saibaba. The Mumbai court previously denied anticipatory bail to Das and his fellow student Abhirup Paul, leading to Paul's arrest. Das claims the allegations are false and based on 'untrue events,' arguing that no one at the event raised slogans for Khalid and Imam. The activists Khalid and Imam have been imprisoned since 2020 under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for alleged involvement in the 2020 Delhi riots. Additionally, Das and Paul were charged with possessing materials deemed to reflect Maoist ideology. The case highlights broader tensions around free speech, political activism, and the legal treatment of dissenting views in India.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the case objectively, detailing both the charges against the students and their defense arguments. It does not overtly favor either side but reports the legal proceedings and context surrounding the arrests. The framing remains balanced, focusing on the legal process rather than
Why factuality (88): This article accurately reflects the primary source document, detailing the incident, the FIR, the charges against the students, and the legal arguments. It includes specifics about the event, the individuals involved, and the legal process, maintaining consistency with the original report.
Why objectivity (85): The article maintains a balanced tone, presenting both the prosecution's allegations and the defense's arguments without taking a clear stance. It uses neutral language and avoids emotionally charged descriptions, keeping the focus on the facts and legal proceedings.
Scroll.inIndependentCenterFactual 88Objective 6513 days ago Ex-TISS student arrested for alleged slogans supporting Umar Khalid, Sharjeel ImamA former student of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Abhirup Paul, was arrested by Mumbai Police for allegedly chanting slogans in support of imprisoned activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Paul and another student had previously been denied anticipatory bail by a Mumbai court and were also accused of possessing materials linked to Maoist ideology. Paul appeared before a magistrate’s court, where police requested 10 days' custody, which was extended until Monday. Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam have been detained for over five years under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, facing charges related to the 2020 Delhi riots. Meanwhile, seven TISS students involved in a commemorative event honoring the late activist GN Saibaba were granted anticipatory bail earlier this month. Saibaba, who was acquitted in March 2024, passed away in October 2024 after being released. The court noted that while honoring Saibaba was not illegal, the association with Khalid and Imam and the materials found on the students' devices influenced the decision regarding bail.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information without overtly favoring any side. It reports on arrests and legal proceedings involving individuals associated with political activism and mentions legal actions taken by authorities. The tone remains neutral, providing background on both the accused and the
Why factuality (88): This article provides detailed information matching the primary source, including the names of the students, the legal process, and the background of G N Saibaba. It accurately reports the court's reasoning regarding the slogans and the materials found with the students. It also includes relevant de
Why objectivity (65): While the facts are well-reported, the article maintains a critical tone toward the government and judiciary, echoing the sentiment expressed by Kapil Sibal. This suggests a potential bias in interpreting the court's actions rather than a purely objective report.
The HinduIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 809 days agoThe Bombay High Court has granted protection from arrest to Kamakhya Prasad Das, a former student of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), who faces charges related to participating in an event commemorating GN Saibaba. Das and others were booked for raising slogans demanding the release of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who are currently on trial under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The high court ordered an adjournment of the case until August 31, providing Das temporary relief after a lower court had previously denied anticipatory bail to him and another student, Abhirup Paul. The lower court had ruled that while honoring Saibaba was not illegal, the students went beyond mere tribute by advocating for the release of individuals facing UAPA charges. The case, titled Kamakhiya Prasad Das v/s State of Maharashtra, will now proceed before the Bombay High Court.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the legal proceedings involving a student activist and the police's actions. It includes perspectives from both the accused and the lower court, without overtly favoring either side. The framing remains neutral, focusing on the legal arguments and judicial
Why factuality (85): The article aligns closely with the primary source document from Indian Express, reporting the same event involving the arrest of a former TISS student and the denial of anticipatory bail. It mentions the FIR filed by TISS, the charges against the students, and the legal arguments presented. However
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the information in a neutral tone, focusing on the legal proceedings and the arguments from both sides. However, it slightly leans towards the defense perspective by highlighting the students' claims and the rejection of the charges, though it does so without overt bias.
SC sets aside protection from arrest granted to Future Group director in GST caseThe Supreme Court of India overturned a decision by the Bombay High Court that had provided temporary protection from arrest to Sunil Biyani, a non-executive director of Future Group, in a Goods and Services Tax (GST) investigation. The Supreme Court ruled that the Bombay High Court could not grant such protection after determining that Biyani's request for anticipatory bail was premature. The court emphasized that GST authorities must inform individuals of the reasons for their potential arrest under Section 69 of the CGST Act, either in writing or via email. This ruling followed an appeal by the Indian government against the Bombay High Court's earlier order, which had found that no formal arrest order had yet been issued against Biyani. The case stems from Biyani's concerns over possible arrest related to a GST investigation, prompting him to seek anticipatory bail in February.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of a judicial ruling without overtly favoring any political side. It focuses on legal procedures and interpretations of GST laws, providing balanced information on the arguments presented by both the Supreme Court and the parties involved. There is no evident倾向
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the Supreme Court's decision to set aside the Bombay High Court's order regarding Sunil Biyani's protection from arrest in the GST case. It provides details about the legal provisions involved (Sections 69 and 70 of the CGST Act) and explains the reasoning behind the S
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the facts in a neutral tone, explaining both sides of the legal argument without apparent bias. However, it includes some subjective phrasing like 'impermissible' when describing the High Court's order, which may slightly influence the reader's perception.
Scroll.inIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 8015 days ago Two TISS students denied anticipatory bail for alleged slogans supporting Umar Khalid, Sharjeel ImamA Mumbai court denied anticipatory bail to two students from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISI) who were arrested for allegedly chanting slogans in support of jailed activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The students were also charged with possession of materials linked to Maoist ideology, including books referencing Mao Zedong and Lenin. While seven other participants in an event honoring the late activist GN Saibaba were granted anticipatory bail, the court cited the students' alleged involvement with Khalid and Imam, as well as the recovered materials, as reasons for denying bail. The court emphasized that students should respect the law. The students deny the allegations, claiming they were targeted based on false social media narratives, and argue that the materials found on their devices do not constitute Maoist ideology. The case remains ongoing, with the trial yet to begin.
Bias read (Center): While the article discusses legal proceedings involving politically sensitive figures and ideologies, it presents the court's decision and arguments from both sides without overtly favoring one perspective. The framing remains balanced, presenting the students' claims and the prosecution's stance, a
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the court's decision to deny anticipatory bail to two TISS students, aligning with the primary source document. It mentions the charges against the students, the acquittal of Saibaba, and the context of the UAPA case involving Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Minor discr
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the court's reasoning and the students' denial of the charges in a balanced manner. However, it uses phrases like 'booked for allegedly shouting slogans' which could imply a degree of bias, though it remains largely neutral.
The HinduIndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 6013 days ago Shows government’s intolerance, state of judiciary: Sibal on court denying bail to two ex-TISS studentsOn August 10, 2026, Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal criticized the denial of anticipatory bail to two former Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) students, stating it reflected governmental intolerance and judicial issues. The students, Kamakhya Das and Abhirup Paul, were denied bail after being accused of organizing an unauthorized campus gathering to honor deceased professor G.N. Saibaba and raising slogans supporting the release of jailed activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. While the court acknowledged that honoring Saibaba was not illegal, it expressed concerns over the slogans linked to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Seven other students received anticipatory bail due to cooperation with the investigation. The incident occurred on October 12, 2025, when students gathered without administrative approval, leading to a police complaint and subsequent CID investigation.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the denial of bail as indicative of governmental intolerance and judicial overreach, aligning with left-leaning critiques of state control and suppression of dissent. The emphasis on the students' peaceful protest and the legal justification provided by the court is presented in a
Why factuality (85): The article aligns closely with the primary source document, accurately reporting the denial of anticipatory bail to two ex-TISS students, the arrest of a 30-year-old former student, and the context of the event related to G N Saibaba's death anniversary. It mentions the legal proceedings, the charg
Why objectivity (60): The article frames the court's decision through the lens of Kapil Sibal's criticism, suggesting a biased view towards the government and judiciary. It uses emotionally charged language like 'shame' and implies a broader societal issue, rather than presenting a neutral analysis of the legal matter.
India
