An Unknown Person Threw Bomb At BJP Office In Tamil Nadu
An unknown person threw a bomb at the BJP office in Tamil Nadu. The party condemned the state government, saying – this is a failure of law and order.
An unknown person hurled a petrol bomb at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) office in Tamil Nadu at around 1 am on Thursday. So far, there has been no report of any casualties in this attack.
BJP’s Karate Tyagarajan said, “A petrol bomb was hurled at BJP office at 1 am today, we strongly condemn this incident.
He reached here after informing the police. A similar incident happened 15 years back also, we condemn the Tamil Nadu government, this is a serious failure of law and order.
Speaking to the news agency, the BJP leader said, a similar incident happened 15 years ago with the role of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). We condemn the state.
Role of Tamil Nadu government in this incident. Thiagarajan said, “We have also informed the police… The BJP cadre is not afraid of such attacks.
Earlier in the day, an unidentified person had allegedly hurled a petrol bomb at the BJP office at around 1 pm.
Karnataka High Court sends hijab case to a larger bench, ban on a demonstration outside schools, colleges, and educational institutions in Bengaluru
A single bench of the Karnataka High Court has referred the hijab case to the Chief Justice and urged him to refer it to a larger bench.
There is a political boil in the state regarding this dispute. Several people have been arrested for violent protests in different parts of the state.
Demonstrations around schools, colleges, and all types of educational institutions have been banned for two weeks in Bengaluru.
Due to the three-day holiday, there is silence outside the educational institutions of the state.
Justice Krishna S. of the High Court, hearing a petition by five girl students of Government Pre-University (PU) College, Udupi, against the ban on wearing hijab in class.
Dixit on Wednesday referred the matter to the Chief Justice. He was hearing the matter since Tuesday.
He said that the matter raises some constitutional questions of fundamental importance in view of certain aspects of private law. Therefore, the matter should be heard on a larger bench.
