The article discusses new data regarding the actual number of deaths that occurred in India during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in 2021, which saw a significant increase due to the Delta wave. The report highlights how the official death toll from COVID-19 is vastly understated when compared to the registered deaths and estimates provided by various statistical systems in the country.

Summary:

• Recent data from India’s Civil Registration System (CRS) indicates that there were approximately 21 lakh more deaths registered in 2021 compared to 2020, coinciding with the Delta variant surge in the pandemic.
• The official COVID-19 death toll for 2021, reported as 3.32 lakh, is significantly lower than the CRS figures, suggesting a huge undercount of actual deaths.
• The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that 47 lakh excess deaths occurred in India during 2020 and 2021, which is nearly ten times more than India’s official record for the same period (4.8 lakh).
• According to data from the Sample Registration System (SRS) and the Medical Certificate on Cause of Death (MCCD) for 2021, the actual number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 is notably higher than officially reported.
• The CRS data indicates about 1.02 crore deaths were registered in India in 2021, a marked increase from the approximately 81.15 lakh in 2020.
• This excess of registered deaths raises questions about the accuracy of official COVID-19 death figures, hinting at a potential underreporting by at least fivefold.
• The observed increase in total registered deaths suggests that the difference between actual and registered deaths is narrowing, providing stronger grounds for estimating the COVID-19 death toll.
• Data indicates that in 2020, registered deaths were 81.15 lakh, with a calculated 88.21 lakh deaths when adjusting for registration rates, suggesting underreported COVID-19 deaths, as only 1.48 lakh were recorded at the time.
• It is highlighted that around 23% of deaths were medically certified, showing again that cases attributed to COVID-19 may be significantly higher if all registered deaths were certified.
• The article concludes that the realistic estimate of COVID-19 deaths in India is likely in the range of at least 20 lakh rather than the official five lakh, which indicates prior assessments might overestimate excess deaths.

Important Sentences:

• "About 21 lakh more deaths were registered in 2021, six times the official Indian COVID-19 death toll for that year (3.32 lakh)."
• "WHO estimated about 47 lakh excess deaths in India in 2020 and 2021, almost ten times the official figure."
• The 1.02 crore deaths registered in 2021 are considered a close approximation of actual deaths that year.
• "India's official COVID-19 death figures were an undercount by at least five times."
• "The difference between actual deaths and registered deaths is narrowing."
• "Excess deaths in the country for 2020 and 2021 were likely in the range of 21-22 lakh and not 47 lakh."
• "Only about 23% of registered deaths in the country are medically certified."
• "The realistic assessment shows COVID-19 death count in India is likely closer to 20 lakh, rather than the official 5 lakh."

This summary provides a concise overview of the critical findings regarding the mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic in India and emphasizes the significant discrepancies between official numbers and actual registered deaths.

In response to rising tensions with Pakistan, the Indian government has granted the Chief of Army Staff the authority to mobilize Territorial Army personnel for support of the regular army. The notification, issued by the Department of Military Affairs on May 6, 2025, will be in effect from February 10, 2025, to February 9, 2028.

Key highlights of the news article include:

• The Chief of Army Staff is empowered under Rule 33 of the Territorial Army Rule 1948 to call upon officers and personnel of the Territorial Army.
• These personnel will be mobilized to provide essential guard services or to augment regular army forces as required.
• A total of 14 out of the existing 32 Territorial Army Infantry Battalions are designated for potential deployment across various military commands, including Southern, Eastern, Western, Central, Northern, and South Western Command.
• Financial provisions for the deployment of these units will need to be available in the budget or sourced from re-appropriations of internal budget savings.
• The costs for units mobilized at the request of other ministries outside the Ministry of Defence will not be charged to the Defence budget but to the requesting ministries.
• The current strength of the Territorial Army is around 50,000 personnel, which consists of 65 Departmental units linked to organizations like Railways and ONGC and includes Non-Departmental Infantry Battalions along with various specialized units.
• Additionally, a Composite Eco Task Force is being established in Allahabad as part of the National Mission for Clean Ganga initiative, focused on ecological preservation and afforestation efforts in challenging areas.

This move by the Indian government indicates an urgent response to security concerns and reinforces the importance of the Territorial Army in national defense strategy. The decision to utilize the Territorial Army reflects a proactive approach in ensuring military readiness and support in times of escalating tensions.

The news article discusses a significant development regarding Justice Yashwant Varma, a judge of the Allahabad High Court, who is at the center of allegations involving cash found at his residence. Here’s a comprehensive summary of the key points:

Summary:

• A three-member inquiry panel has substantiated allegations that cash was discovered at Justice Yashwant Varma's residence, prompting Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to request Justice Varma's resignation.
• Justice Varma declined to resign, leading the CJI to escalate the matter to higher authorities, including President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. CJI Khanna recommended initiating the removal process for Justice Varma.
• The official communication included the inquiry panel's report and Justice Varma's response, following the In-House Procedure.
• The inquiry committee, established on March 22, comprised notable judges: Justice Sheel Nagu from the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Justice G.S. Sandhawalia from the Himachal Pradesh High Court, and Justice Anu Sivaraman from the Karnataka High Court. The committee was formed in response to allegations of cash recovery, notably linked to a fire incident at Justice Varma’s residence.
• Justice Varma had taken his oath as a judge of the Allahabad High Court on April 5. After the panel submitted its findings, CJI Khanna shared the report with Varma on May 4, offering him the option of resignation.

Important Sentences:

• Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna sought Justice Yashwant Varma's resignation after a panel found allegations of cash at his residence credible.
• Justice Varma refused to resign, prompting the CJI to recommend his removal to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
• CJI Khanna forwarded the inquiry committee’s report and Varma’s response in accordance with the In-House Procedure.
• The inquiry panel was formed consisting of judges from various high courts following allegations stemming from a fire at Varma’s residence.
• Justice Varma took the oath of office as a judge on April 5 and received the report from CJI Khanna on May 4, with an option to resign.

This situation reflects ongoing scrutiny regarding judicial conduct and the mechanisms for addressing allegations of misconduct within the Indian judiciary.

The Supreme Court of India recently expressed strong disapproval of BJP MP Nishikant Dubey's comments regarding the court and its Chief Justice, labeling them as "highly irresponsible," "ludicrous," and "absurd." However, the court chose not to proceed with contempt proceedings against Dubey. The remarks in question had suggested that Parliament should close down if the Supreme Court assumed legislative powers, and Dubey went so far as to imply that the Chief Justice was responsible for all civil wars in the country.

Key points from the Supreme Court's response include:

• The court maintained that Dubey's statements had the potential to "scandalize and lower the authority" of the court and obstruct the administration of justice.
• Emphasizing the supremacy of the Constitution in India's democracy, the court noted that it is the highest authority over the legislature, executive, and judiciary.
• The Supreme Court had faced criticism recently for its rulings related to Waqf law and for suggesting timelines for the President's approval of legislative bills.
• Dubey’s comments suggested malintent towards the Chief Justice, with the court remarking that there was a "clear intent to impute motives."
• The Supreme Court recognized that while judicial criticism is permissible, any distortion that undermines public confidence in the judiciary should not be overlooked.
• The court stressed that while they reserve the ability to initiate contempt proceedings, discretion is applied in such matters, and not every instance warrants punitive measures.
• The Supreme Court reiterated that all branches of government are bound by the Constitution and reiterated its authority to conduct judicial reviews.

In closing, the court refrained from immediate action but warned that any attempts to propagate communal hatred or hate speech would be decisively addressed.

Important Points:

• The Supreme Court criticized Nishikant Dubey's remarks as irresponsible and absurd but did not initiate contempt proceedings.
• The court emphasized the supremacy of the Constitution above all government branches.
• Recent decisions by the Supreme Court were controversial, drawing public criticism.
• Dubey stated Parliament should close if the Supreme Court makes laws, and targeted the Chief Justice with grave accusations.
• While recognizing freedom of criticism, the court warned against statements that could distort public confidence in judicial authority.
• It stated that ensuring the integrity of the judiciary is essential and that hate speech would face stringent actions.

Overall, the Supreme Court's response reflects a balance of upholding its authority while acknowledging the need for scrutiny and public discourse in a democratic society.

The Roman Catholic Church has elected Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost as the new Pope, taking the name Pope Leo XIV. This historic decision marks him as the first American pope, succeeding Pope Francis following his death. The announcement came amid joyous celebrations in St. Peter’s Square, where white smoke billowed from the Sistine Chapel, signaling the conclusion of the papal conclave.

Key Details:

• Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost was elected the 267th pope after two days of deliberations in the conclave.
• He received 89 out of 133 votes from the College of Cardinals.
• Prevost emphasized his message of peace and the importance of unity in his inaugural remarks.
• He expressed gratitude to his fellow cardinals for their support and urged followers to "move forward, without fear."
• His election follows a period of hesitance within the Vatican regarding the selection of an American pope due to the U.S.'s global influence and secular culture.
• Born in Chicago, Prevost was made a cardinal by Pope Francis in 2023 and served in the Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops, which has a significant role in appointing bishops worldwide.
• Before his Vatican role, he was the Bishop of Chiclayo in Peru and led the Augustinian order, gaining substantial leadership experience.
• The election occurred shortly after the death of Pope Francis, who was the first Latin American pope and had led for 12 years, promoting modernization within the Church.
• There was a divide among cardinals prior to the conclave regarding the future direction of the Church: some favored continuing Pope Francis' progressive policies, while others advocated for traditional values.

Pope Leo XIV's selection comes at a pivotal time for the Church as it faces varying opinions on its future direction, balancing modernity with tradition.

Former Minister and BJP leader, Gali Janardhana Reddy, has been disqualified from the Legislative Assembly following his conviction in a court case related to illegal mining activities. The decision was made by the Principal Special Judge for CBI cases in Hyderabad, with the disqualification taking effect from May 6, 2025. This ruling is in accordance with Article 191(1)(e) of the Indian Constitution and Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Key points from the news article:

• Gali Janardhana Reddy has been disqualified from the Legislative Assembly after being convicted by the court.
• His disqualification is effective from May 6, 2025, as per constitutional provisions.
• The disqualification will last for six years unless his conviction is overturned by a higher court.
• A CBI Special Court sentenced him to seven years of imprisonment in relation to an illegal mining case.
• The case has been ongoing for approximately 16 years, indicating the longevity and complexity of the legal proceedings.
• Reddy was convicted alongside his relative B.V. Srinivas Reddy, the managing director of Obulapuram Mining Corporation.

This development highlights ongoing legal issues surrounding corruption and illegal activities in the mining sector, with significant implications for political representation and accountability in India.

The Supreme Court of India recently reinforced the importance of the right to a fair trial, particularly regarding cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court ruled that defendants are entitled to access not only the documents that the prosecution intends to use against them but also those that the prosecution has chosen not to rely upon. This decision arose during a review of a Delhi High Court ruling, which maintained that only documents intended for use by the prosecution need to be shared with defendants.

Key points from the ruling include:

• Right to Information: The Supreme Court emphasized that accused individuals have a right to know about all materials in the investigative custody, even if those materials are not being used as evidence by the prosecution.

• Fair Trial Assurance: Highlighting Article 21 of the Constitution, the court underscored that a fair trial includes the right to defend oneself, which necessitates access to all relevant documents, including those not relied upon by the prosecution.

• Document Disclosure: The court directed that the following must be provided to the accused:

  • Statements of the complainant and witnesses documented by the Special Judge prior to taking cognizance.
  • Documents, including statements produced under Section 50 of the PMLA, up to the date the court takes cognizance.
  • Documents in supplementary complaints.
  • All documents not relied upon by the prosecution.

• Defensive Rights: The ruling affirms the right of the accused to lead evidence by producing documents and examining witnesses, indicating that such rights can be exercised at any point designated for the defense.

• Limitations on Requests: The court clarified that the prosecution or a third party can decline the accused's request for document production only on specific grounds as noted in Section 232(3) of the CrPC, which includes instances where the request may be viewed as frivolous or obstructive to justice.

This verdict aims to enhance transparency in trials under the PMLA, ensuring that defendants are adequately equipped to mount their defenses, thereby reinforcing judicial fairness within the legal framework.

Overall, this ruling is a significant affirmation of the legal principles surrounding the rights of accused individuals, thereby promoting a comprehensive and balanced criminal justice process in India.

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) has introduced a cashless treatment scheme designed to assist road accident victims during the critical "golden hour" after an injury. This initiative follows a recent reprimand from the Supreme Court to the government regarding the delayed implementation of a cashless treatment framework under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Summary:

1. Introduction of the Scheme:

   • The Cashless Treatment of Road Accident Victims Scheme, 2025, has been enacted, effective May 5, 2025.
   • Accident victims are entitled to cashless treatment up to Rs 1.5 lakh at designated hospitals.

2. Details of the Scheme:

   • Aimed at victims with no insurance; they will receive free treatment up to Rs 1.5 lakh during the golden hour, defined as the first hour following a traumatic injury.
   • The treatment at designated hospitals must commence immediately upon the victim’s arrival, whereas care at non-designated hospitals will only be for stabilization purposes.

3. Implementation and Management:

   • The State Road Safety Council will act as the nodal agency, working alongside the National Health Authority (NHA).
   • This agency will also oversee hospital designation and treatment payment processes under the scheme.

4. Payment Process:

   • After a victim is discharged, designated hospitals must file treatment claims through a designated portal, which the State Health Agency will review for approval.
   • The decision on claims, whether in full or partial, will be documented and made available to the hospitals.

5. Monitoring and Oversight:

   • A steering committee will be established to oversee the scheme's implementation, headed by the Secretary of MoRTH and CEO of NHA.
   • The committee will convene semi-annually and has the authority to gather information from various stakeholders to enhance monitoring.

6. Increasing Road Accidents:

   • Road accidents in India have risen, with 4.80 lakh incidents and 1.72 lakh fatalities reported in 2023, marking increases of 4.2% in accidents and 2.6% in fatalities compared to 2022 data.

7. Supreme Court Scrutiny:

   • The Supreme Court criticized the MoRTH for its inaction regarding the scheme's notification, stressing the importance of timely medical treatment in preventing deaths from road accidents.

Key Points:

• Cashless treatment for road accident victims up to Rs 1.5 lakh for a maximum of seven days post-accident.
• Immediate treatment mandated at designated hospitals upon victim arrival.
• State Road Safety Council designated as the managing body, collaborating with the National Health Authority.
• Claim process requires hospitals to submit treatment documentation post-discharge for payment approval.
• Significant rise in road accidents and fatalities emphasizes the need for the scheme.
• Supreme Court's involvement highlights urgency and necessity for swift implementation to save lives.

The scheme aims to mitigate the consequences of increasing road accidents by providing timely medical assistance, aiming to reduce fatalities by making emergency treatment financially accessible to all accident victims.

The news article discusses the Indian government's increased vigilance regarding misleading content circulating on social media platforms related to Operation Sindoor, particularly in the wake of recent tensions following the Pahalgam terror attack. Key government agencies, including the Ministries of Information Technology and Information & Broadcasting, are actively monitoring social media for misinformation and taking steps to mitigate its spread.

Summary:

• The Indian government is monitoring social media for misleading content related to Operation Sindoor.
• Authorities have urged social media platforms to block unlawful materials and are on high alert after facing numerous cyberattacks.
• Critical infrastructures, including the Power Ministry and financial institutions, are also on heightened surveillance after DDoS attacks were reported.
• Misinformation has flooded platforms like X (formerly Twitter) concerning strikes on sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).
• During a recent meeting of government officials, it was confirmed that there had been various unfounded claims circulating online, necessitating stringent checks on social media content.
• The government is prepared to use legal measures to tackle the evolving disinformation landscape.
• Fake visuals and claims, including a fabricated story about an Indian Rafale jet being shot down, have been widely shared, which the Press Information Bureau clarified were old and unrelated images.
• The government has encouraged users to verify information through official channels rather than relying on unverified social media content.
• Following the Pahalgam attack, the government banned 16 Pakistani YouTube channels, including major news outlets, for spreading sensitive and inaccurate narratives.

Important Points:

• The ministries are "constantly monitoring" social media for misleading posts about Operation Sindoor.
• Agencies responsible for critical infrastructure are on “high alert” following multiple cyberattacks.
• DDoS attacks have been noted but contained; vigilance will be maintained against future attempts.
• Social media platforms have experienced misinformation about Indian military operations, including false images and claims of downed aircraft.
• The government has advised the public to check facts through official sources.
• A legal crackdown on Pakistani YouTube channels has occurred due to disseminating false, communal content.

This summary reflects the government's proactive stance on managing misinformation and ensuring national security amidst ongoing tensions and cyber threats.

A new legislative proposal in the U.S. known as the App Store Freedom Act aims to enhance competition within the mobile app market by allowing users to download and install third-party app stores on their devices. Introduced by Republican Representative Kat Cammack, the bill targets large app store operators, defined as those with over 100 million users in the U.S. Its main objectives are to safeguard consumers and developers against monopolistic practices by major companies like Apple and Google.

Key highlights of the App Store Freedom Act include:

• Promotion of Competition: The legislation seeks to "promote competition and protect consumers and developers in the mobile app marketplace."

• Targeted Operators: It applies specifically to large app store operators, defined as having over 100 million users in the U.S.

• Background Context: The introduction of the bill follows recent changes in regulations after a significant antitrust ruling in the Epic vs. Apple case, which forced Apple to allow developers to redirect users to third-party payment systems for in-app purchases.

• Consumer and Developer Protections: Cammack criticized dominant app stores for controlling customer data and limiting choices, claiming this leads to increased prices and stifled innovation. The act aims to counter these anti-competitive practices.

• Requirements for Compliance: Should the bill pass into law, Apple and Google would need to provide developers with "equal access to interfaces, features, and development tools without cost or discrimination." Additionally, users would have the right to remove or hide pre-installed applications on their devices.

• Penalties for Non-Compliance: The bill stipulates potential penalties from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), including civil fines of up to $1 million for each violation.

• International Context: Similar legislative efforts have also been initiated by the European Union with the Digital Markets Act (DMA), requiring companies like Apple to allow downloads of third-party app stores and enable users to select default applications, resulting in compliance changes by Google.

This new bill represents a significant step in challenging the current policies and practices of major app store providers, potentially reshaping the mobile application landscape in favor of increased flexibility for users and developers.

Important Sentences:

• A new bill called the App Store Freedom Act could require Apple and Google to allow third-party app stores.
• It aims to "promote competition and protect consumers and developers."
• The bill targets "large app store operators" with over 100 million U.S. users.
• This legislation follows a major ruling in the Epic vs. Apple antitrust case.
• Cammack argues that dominant app stores control customer data and limit user options.
• Apple and Google would need to provide equal access to development tools and allow users to remove pre-installed apps.
• Non-compliance could lead to penalties from the FTC of up to $1 million for each violation.
• Similar legislation was introduced in the EU with the Digital Markets Act, compelling compliance changes from Google.

The news article reports on extensive civil defence mock drills named "Operation Abhyas" being conducted across multiple districts in India, aimed at preparing the populace for emergency situations in light of rising tensions with Pakistan following India's Operation Sindoor. Various towns and cities across the country, including major regions like Delhi, Mumbai, Pune, and others, are participating in these drills to enhance readiness and awareness among citizens regarding potential attacks and other emergencies.

Summary:

• Operation Abhyas Initiation: The mock drills, termed 'Operation Abhyas', are occurring in 244 districts across India, focusing on civil defence readiness following the retaliatory Operation Sindoor against Pakistan after a recent terror attack in Pahalgam that claimed 26 lives.

• Key Drill Locations and Scenarios:

  • Major cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, and Bengaluru are engaged in simulated hostile scenarios such as air raids, urban fire emergencies, search and rescue operations, and casualty evacuations.
  • In Pune, six different locations hosted simulated bombing attacks, emergency evacuation protocols, and testing of control room preparedness.

• Public Preparedness:

  • Alerts activated by sirens instruct the public to seek shelter, stay indoors, and follow safety protocols like turning off gas and electricity.
  • Drills aim to raise awareness and train citizens on how to respond to emergencies effectively, with a focus on maintaining calm during potentially panic-inducing situations.

• Specific Drill Highlights:

  • In Delhi, drills occurred at 55 sites, including major marketplaces and transport hubs, involving over 1,000 emergency response personnel.
  • Cities such as Rajasthan carried out scenarios involving mock airstrikes and police station attacks to assess emergency responses.
  • Similar drills were executed in places like Tripura and Odisha, showcasing their disaster response through scenarios like earthquake rescues.

• Systematic Approach:

  • The drills feature systematic notifications to citizens and coordination among local law enforcement, fire services, and medical responders.
  • Local officials emphasize limited public alarm and ensure residents understand the drills' purpose as precautionary measures.

• Regulations and Rules: Each drill follows specific guidelines established by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), including halting vehicular movement and ceasing electrical usage during blackout periods.

• Rationale Behind Drills: The focus on these drills arises from the evolving geopolitical landscape where complex threats are perceived. The expectation is that public familiarity with emergency procedures will be crucial for national security.

Important Sentences:

• A nationwide civil defence mock drill, 'Operation Abhyas', is being conducted in 244 districts of India in response to heightened tensions with Pakistan.
• The drills simulate hostile scenarios, including air raids, urban fires, and emergency evacuations, to prepare citizens for potential attacks.
• In key cities, including Delhi and Pune, numerous emergency response personnel are involved in these large-scale exercises.
• Alerts through sirens prompt the public to seek immediate shelter and turn off electrical appliances.
• The National Disaster Management Authority emphasizes the need for public readiness amidst complex new threats.
• Mock drills are seen as essential for arming citizens with knowledge of emergency protocols in case of attacks.

Overall, Operation Abhyas aims to strengthen civil defence mechanisms and promote community awareness and preparedness, highlighting India's proactive approach to enhancing security amid escalating regional tensions.

On May 7, 2025, the Indian government announced the extension of Praveen Sood's tenure as the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for an additional year, following his initial two-year appointment that began on May 25, 2023. The decision was reached during a meeting of the selection committee led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with other members including Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi.

Key Points from the Article:

• The tenure of CBI Director Praveen Sood has been extended by one year.
• Sood's original two-year term began on May 25, 2023.
• The decision to extend his tenure was made by a selection committee chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
• The committee also included Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of Opposition.
• The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) approved this extension based on the committee's recommendations.
• Praveen Sood is a 1986-batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer from Karnataka.
• Prior to his appointment as CBI director, he served as the Director General of Police (DGP) in Karnataka.
• Sood was born in Kangra district, Himachal Pradesh, in 1964 and joined the IPS at age 22.
• He holds degrees in civil engineering from IIT Delhi, as well as a post-graduate degree from IIM Bengaluru and the Maxwell School of Governance at Syracuse University, New York.
• He is recognized for his hands-on approach to high-profile investigations involving significant individuals and complex inter-state and international matters.
• Sood has contributed to technological advancements such as the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) and the Interoperable Criminal Justice System (ICJS) in Karnataka, working closely with the judiciary.

This extension reflects Sood's commitment and effectiveness in leading the CBI, particularly in complex investigations and embracing technology to improve the efficiency of criminal justice systems.