the news now

The world's news, cross-checked among reputable sources.

This is a new development in a story we have covered before · earlier coverage

Mumbai Police Deny Permission for Manoj Jarange Patil Hunger Strike

3 sources · India

Who reported this

  • The Hindu India · Centre-left · Kasturi & Sons (family-owned)
  • The Indian Express India · Centre · Indian Express Group (Goenka family)
  • Hindustan Times India · Centre-right · HT Media (KK Birla group)

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

Every source for this story reports from India.

Mumbai Police on Sunday denied permission for Maratha reservation activist Manoj Jarange Patil to hold an indefinite hunger strike at Azad Maidan starting September 19. In a six page refusal letter, police cited security concerns related to the Ganeshotsav festival and the potential for traffic and public order disruptions. Authorities also referenced previous protests led by Jarange Patil where crowds exceeded permitted limits and affected movement around the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus area.

Jarange Patil, whose hunger strike in Antarwali Sarati entered its 16th day on Sunday, responded by escalating his protest and announcing he would stop taking water, saline, and medical treatment. He accused the Maharashtra government of high handedness and dictatorship, questioning why the authorities presume rules will be violated before the agitation begins. He also alleged that there is a conspiracy to have him shot during his planned march to Mumbai, claiming that individuals linked to ruling parties might be sent to provoke violence. These allegations of a plot have not been independently verified.

The police decision follows a Friday ruling by the Bombay High Court, which declined to issue pre emptive directions to stop the march. The court stated that the state machinery is capable of handling such situations and noted that the right to protest is protected in a democracy. Jarange Patil has stated that his legal team will challenge the police order.

How each side framed it

Centre-left
The framing emphasized the activist's claims of conspiracy and the High Court's support for the right to protest.
Centre
The reporting focused primarily on the administrative action of the police denying permission.
Centre-right
The framing highlighted the specific security justifications provided by the police and the activist's history of non compliance.

Sources

100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.