The Supreme Court on Friday refused to grant bail to BRS leader K Kavitha, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the Delhi excise tax scam case.

Delhi Excise Policy Case: BRS leader K Kavitha On Friday, bail was denied by the Supreme Court in the alleged Delhi excise policy “scam” case. The Supreme Court noted that it cannot circumvent the protocol for any person and must maintain uniformity.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, MM Sundresh and Bela M Trivedi told K Kavitha to approach the court, citing the practice of the Supreme Court and that the protocol cannot be circumvented by anyone.

On Kavitha’s plea challenging the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the top court issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED), asking the agency to file a response within six weeks.

“The petition challenging the provisions will raise the pending cases,” the bench told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of Kavitha.

Sibal said initially that people are arrested on the basis of a clear statement.

The court said it would not comment on the merits of the case at this time.

Kavitha has moved the Supreme Court challenging her arrest by the ED in connection with the Delhi excise policy case.

Kavitha, member of Telangana Legislative Council and daughter of former state Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao, was arrested on March 15 and remanded in ED custody till March 23.

(With PTI inputs)

The British Embassy in Moscow was today forced to issue an official statement confirming that King Charles III is still alive, after Russian media claimed he had died.

A host of Russian news sites and their associated social media accounts reported earlier today that the king had died at the age of 75 due to cancer complications, citing unnamed “media” sources in an unexplained flurry of messages.

It came after an image of a patently false statement from ‘Buckingham Palace’ reporting Charles’ ‘unexpected death’ was circulated on social media.

“King Charles III of Great Britain has died at the age of 75, according to media reports,” Russian news channel Sputnik reported.

‘There is no information about this on the royal family’s website or in the British media.’

Minutes later, their stories were updated after they were forced to climb down following reports that the king was indeed not dead.

The British Embassy in Moscow then furiously posted to X: ‘Reports of the death of King Charles III of Great Britain are fake!’

The British Embassy in Kiev followed shortly afterwards with a statement saying: ‘We would like to inform you that the news of the death of King Charles III is fake.’

Several prominent media outlets reported on the fake news, but it was not immediately clear whether they had made a mistake or whether Vladimir Putin’s propaganda machine was directly behind it.

The sick stunt involving the monarch followed criticism in Britain and other Western countries over Vladimir Putin’s “victory” in a “rigged” presidential election.

The British Embassy’s Telegram channel posted a message in Russian to emphasize that the reports were fake.

“Reports of the death of King Charles III of Great Britain are fake,” the announcement said, shortly after the British embassy in Ukraine issued a similar message.

The first media outlets to publish the false report were RIA, Sputnik, Readkovka and Mash – staunchly pro-Putin channels – but they all later corrected their stories.

Mashmedia wrote: ‘British King Charles III has died, Buckingham Palace reports. Elizabeth II’s son took the throne less than a year ago; the coronation took place on May 6, 2023. He was 75 years old.’

It was updated to say ‘the message turned out to be fake’ and added: ‘Let’s not forget that he was diagnosed with cancer a few months ago.’

But the newspaper later stated: ‘The fake news about Charles III’s death spread quickly and was just as quickly debunked.

‘The King of Great Britain is alive and going about his business. At least that’s what Buckingham Palace says.‘

Even Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, joined the fray, writing: “London looks pathetic.”

Pro-Kremlin BAZA online media reported: ‘The Russian media reported the death of British King Charles III with reference to a document allegedly published by Buckingham Palace.

‘The screenshot of the message about the death of Charles III turned out to be fake.’

The false palace announcement was dated today and read: “The king died unexpectedly yesterday afternoon.”

Independent outlet Meduza stated: ‘A number of media and Telegram outlets reported the death of British King Charles III – citing a false statement from Buckingham Palace.

“A screenshot of the statement, which became a news source, is provided in particular by the channel BAZA Telegram.

“This statement is not on the royal family’s website or social networks.”

Russian state news channel RIA Novosti corrected its earlier report and admitted it was based on “rumors,” stating: “The Buckingham Palace press service denied RIA Novosti rumors about the death of King Charles III.

“He continues to conduct official and private business.

“Information about Charles’ death appeared some time ago in many Russian sources. The basis for this was a certain message, the authorship of which was attributed to Buckingham Palace and which apparently turned out to be false.’

State news agency TASS reported that the story was fake.

The Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the Kremlin’s own newspaper published by Putin’s government, wrote: ‘King Charles III continues to conduct work and private affairs, Buckingham Palace said.

“Previously, many Telegram channels published unverified and false information about the monarch’s death.”

MailOnline has contacted Buckingham Palace for comment.

The White House denied on Tuesday that President Biden had drawn any “red line” for Israel in his campaign against Hamas in Gaza, but warned again that Israel should not attack the city of Rafah, the southernmost city in the enclave, without protection for more than a million people take shelter there.

“The president has made no statements, pronouncements or announcements,” said Jake Sullivan, the president’s national security adviser, referring to an interview Mr. Biden gave over the weekend in which he was asked if he had a “red line” on Israel. must not cross each other in the prosecution of the war.

In the interview with MSNBC, Mr. Biden reprimanded Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel over the rising number of civilian casualties in Gaza, saying that “he needs to pay more attention to the innocent lives being lost” and that “he is hurting Israel more than helping Israel.”

Mr. Netanyahu later dismissed the claim as “wrong,” and on Tuesday he again defended Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties. In a video call with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobby group based in Washington commonly referred to as AIPAC, he said Israel’s allies “cannot say that you support Israel’s goal of destroying Hamas and then turn against Israel to reschedule if necessary.” the actions necessary to achieve that goal.”

While seeking to increase pressure on Mr Netanyahu, Mr Biden has insisted that US support for Israel will remain steadfast. Mr. Sullivan, who met with the Israeli ambassador, Michael Herzog, on Tuesday, declined to discuss reports that if Israel were to proceed with the Rafah operation, Mr. Biden could impose restrictions on how Israel can use the weapons that the United States supplies to the country.

“We are not going to engage in hypotheticals about what will happen, and the reports purporting to describe the president’s thinking are uninformed speculation,” Mr. Sullivan said.

But he reiterated Mr. Biden’s position that Israel should not attack Rafah without explaining how it would protect civilians who have taken refuge there.

The president believes there is a path to long-term stability and security for Israel, Mr. Sullivan said, but “that path does not lie in storming Rafah, home to 1.3 million people, in the absence of a credible plan to tackle the problems. with the population there. And again, as things stand right now, we haven’t seen what that plan is yet.”

For his part, Netanyahu vowed to attack Hamas again in Rafah on Tuesday, despite warnings from the United States and other countries that a ground offensive there would have disastrous consequences for the city’s civilians.

“To win this war we must destroy the remaining Hamas battalions in Rafah,” Mr Netanyahu said said. “If not, Hamas will regroup, rearm and retake Gaza, and we’ll be back to square one. And that is an intolerable threat that we cannot accept.”

More than a million Palestinians have fled fighting in other parts of the Gaza Strip – Many of them obeying Israeli directives to move south for their safety – have crammed into temporary, often squalid shelters in Rafah, on the border with Egypt. People there and aid workers have described worsening crises of hunger, disease and desperate conditions, and Israel’s allies have increasingly urged the country to scale back its military campaign and allow more aid into Gaza.

Israeli officials have said they are developing a plan to evacuate civilians from Rafah, and Mr. Netanyahu said on Tuesday: “We will finish the job in Rafah while allowing the civilian population to stay out of harm’s way.”

While tensions between Mr. Biden and Mr. Netanyahu have become increasingly public, analysts have wondered for months whether Israel can achieve its goal of rooting out Hamas. In a report released Monday, but written before the latest tensions between U.S. and Israeli officials, U.S. intelligence analysts expressed doubts about the feasibility of that goal.

“Israel will likely face continued armed resistance from Hamas for years to come, and the military will struggle to neutralize Hamas’s underground infrastructure, which allows insurgents to hide, gain strength and surprise Israeli forces,” he said. the report.

Natalie Barr has addressed rumors of tension behind the scenes at Sunrise and a reported ‘feud’ between herself and Melissa Doyle.

The TV presenter, 55, has firmly dismissed any claims that there is bad blood between herself and former Sunrise presenter Melissa, 54.

Speaking about Stellar’s Something To Talk About podcastshe said she normally tries to ‘ignore’ rumors of any tension in the Seven breakfast show.

She insisted she had never witnessed ‘catfights’ on the TV show Seven Breakfast and denied any tension between herself and Melissa.

She said: ‘I actually got along with everyone. I don’t remember any cat fights in the Sunrise office, whatever a cat fight is, I don’t remember any!’

Natalie also shut down the claim that she felt ‘overlooked’ when Sam Armytage replaced Melissa as co-host of Sunrise in 2013, despite filling in on the show herself.

Natalie – who replaced Sam when she stepped down in 2021 – said she never thought she would be able to do the job at the time and was delighted with Sam’s appointment.

When asked about the rumors, she explained, “I remember going to dinner with the show boss and Sam, right after she announced it, having a glass of wine and saying, ‘Cheers, you’re the best person for this job and I really believe that.”

“I didn’t think I was ready for the job, hand on my heart, I didn’t think I could do the job at the time. “I thought Sam was the best person for the job, and she was at the time,” she continued.

“It’s strange that no one believes you when you say things like that, because you can’t say it enough.”

Natalie admitted that she even “hesitated” to take on the hosting job when Sam left years later in 2021, revealing that she “had to be talked into it” because she was “nervous.”

“When Sam left, I hesitated even then. “I don’t know if it’s something in my DNA that made it difficult for me to raise my hand,” she said.

“When the boss called me and said, ‘Do you want it?’ We were talking about the issue and he stopped me and said, “It sounds like you don’t want this job. You sound like you’re talking yourself out of it’.

“Something hit me and I got a cold sweat and I was um-ing and ah-ing, and he said, ‘It’s okay. I’ve had jobs like this where I was nervous and doubting myself. You can still always do the work.”

“And I thought, maybe it’s okay. Maybe I can do it. But I had to be talked about it then.

‘So I sat at my desk and watched two women do it brilliantly, and I still doubt myself. I don’t know if it’s a woman thing. I know it’s for me, but that’s honestly how I felt.”

Natalie admitted that it took her about a year before she felt completely comfortable due to her nerves.

She has now become a household name on the show and recently gave an insight into her daily routine during filming.

Earlier this week, she appeared in a video on the show’s official Instagram page to detail her average day.

Natalie shared she gets out of bed every morning at 2:45 am to present the highly rated program.

She went on to explain that she gets breakfast delivered to her every day on set, but admitted that sometimes they are too busy to eat right away.

‘We get breakfast brought to the set… and then we were so busy that we didn’t have time to eat it at 6:30, so I ate it at 7:30 in the morning… so cold eggs, ‘ she said .

Natalie admitted that she is not a fan of cooking meals and prefers to “bake anything sweet… cookies, slices, cakes, I would eat sweets all day if I could.”

She also shared that her favorite meal is ‘pancakes’ while her guilty pleasure is Caramilk chocolate.

“I could eat a whole log, I’m not kidding, and a pretty big log at that,” she admitted.

Andy Cohen has rejected the claims against him Real Housewives of New York City alum By Leah McSweeney court case.

“The allegations against Andy are completely false,” a representative for the 55-year-old Cohen said The Hollywood Reporter on Wednesday, February 28.

This is evident from court documents obtained by THRMcSweeney named Bravo, NBC/Universal, production house Shed Media U and producers Johannes Paparazzo, Lisa Shannon And Darren Ward in her application dated Tuesday, February 27. In the lawsuit, the reality star claims the network deliberately played a role in her battle with alcoholism. The lawsuit also targets Cohen, accusing him of being a favorite of those who party with him.

“[Cohen] engaged in cocaine use with “housewives” and other Bravolebrities he employs” and “rewards housewives with whom he uses cocaine with more favorable treatment and edits,” the documents said, according to the newspaper.

In the lawsuit, McSweeney says Bravo had a “rotten workplace culture that was uniquely dependent on pressuring its employees to consume alcohol.” She claims that she told producers before her first season that she had been sober for 30 days and was working to maintain her sobriety, but that she was pressured to drink all three seasons she appeared on the show and claims that producers “took revenge on her when she wanted to.” maintain sobriety, and willfully failed to provide reasonable accommodations that would assist her in maintaining sobriety and performance.

While filming abroad in Thailand, McSweeney claims her rights were violated when she was not allowed to seek care for her addiction problems and was denied proper transportation to Alcoholics Anonymous meetings during filming after she was told that participating would be ‘no problem’. She also claims she was mentally manipulated to get better ratings.

McSweeney joined the RHONY released in 2019 for two seasons, followed by Peacock’s third season of The Real Housewives: Ultimate Girls Tripwhich was filmed in 2022 and aired a year later.

On Tuesday, Bravolebrity opened up about the lawsuit on social media, calling it a “story” she never thought she would tell.

“I was actually terrified to speak about it and was warned not to,” she wrote via Instagram hours after the charges were filed. “Your favorite Bravo shows are run by people who create a dangerous work environment, encourage substance abuse to create artificial drama, and cynically prey on the vulnerabilities of their employees.”

She continues: “Much more will emerge when those involved are questioned under oath. Today I take back my reality. The reckless and diabolical way in which the people at the top drool over the misfortunes and misfortunes of the women, myself included, is disturbing. It is a workplace culture where toxicity, alcoholism and pain are not only expected, but encouraged and facilitated. That is something I absolutely did not sign up for and would never endorse.”

McSweeney noted that there is “nothing more important” than her sobriety, adding that without it she would “lose everything.”

“I have been very transparent about my addiction and recovery,” she continued. “However, there are personal things in the trial that I have never wanted to reveal for fear of being judged and shamed, but I am now at a point in my life where I feel strong enough to withstand whatever comes my way comes.”

McSweeney’s trial comes a week later Real Housewives of Beverly Hills alum Brandi Glanville made sexual harassment claims against Cohen. Glanville’s legal team sent a letter to NBCUniversal, Shed Media and Shed’s parent company Warner Bros. Discovery, in which they alleged that Cohen told Glanville he wanted to “sleep with another Bravo star” while he was “thinking” about her.

According to the note, Cohen invited Glanville to watch him have sex via FaceTime. The letter also claimed that Glanville felt “trapped” and “disgusted” by Cohen’s “abuse of power” as he was her “boss” at the time. (Glanville appeared in seasons 3 through 5 of RHOBH as the lead and as a guest star in seasons 6, 9 and 10. She returned for seasons 2 and 5 of UGT in 2022 and 2024.)

Cohen then responded to Glanville’s claims, claiming that he and Below deck star Kate Chastain were “joking” when they sent the video in question.

“It was definitely meant as a joke, and it was clear from Brandi’s reaction that she was in on the joke,” he wrote via X on February 22. “That said, it was completely inappropriate and I apologize.”

A former Labor senator whose political career was ended by a firestorm over his links to a Chinese businessman has categorically denied he is the mysterious figure who Australia’s spy boss claims has ‘sold out their country’.

Ex-NSW senator Sam Dastyari sensationally left politics in 2017 amid intense scrutiny over his links to Chinese property developer and political donor Huang Xiangmo.

Mr Dastyari – who has always insisted he is a patriotic Australian – was branded a “Beijing schmuck” by the tabloids after it emerged he accepted money from Chinese donors.

He had Mr. Huang pay a $5,000 legal bill for him while he was an elected senator, and forwarded a $1,670 travel bill to a company linked to the Chinese government.

Mr Dastyari admitted meeting Mr Huang but denied any wrongdoing at the meeting where he allegedly told Mr Huang his phones were being tapped.

In the years since Mr Dastyari resigned from parliament, Mr Huang has been banned from entering Australia and had both his Australian passport and permanent residency revoked, on the recommendation of ASIO.

On Wednesday evening, ASIO chief Mike Burgess made a historic speech in which he said a now former unnamed politician had allegedly ‘sold out his country’ to an overseas power.

“This politician betrayed his country, his party and former colleagues to advance the interests of the foreign regime,” Burgess said.

He declined to name the person, only giving indications that the person involved was a former politician, that the incident took place several years ago, and he doubted the unnamed politician would do it again.

Mr Dastyari refuted the speculations that have erupted on social media in recent hours. He told Daily Mail Australia the incident had “zero to do with me” and there was no misconduct.

“I’m not going to comment on anything,” he added.

It comes as Alex Turnbull, the son of former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, revealed to news.com.au he was targeted by suspected Chinese agents over an infrastructure project – and reported it to spy agencies.

His father was prime minister at the time. “It was just so brutal,” he told the news website. He did not make it clear in the interview exactly which infrastructure project he was referring to.

Only in 2018 were new laws introduced to combat foreign interference.

What else is known about the politician is that “at one point the former politician even suggested bringing a relative of a prime minister into the spies’ orbit,” Burgess said.

‘Fortunately that plot did not go ahead, but other plans did. Personally, I don’t think they will be stupid enough to repeat what they have done in the past so that the problem has been neutralized and damage has been done in some areas.’

The ASIO chief said the politician involved had severed ties with the foreign service and does not pose a threat to national security, adding that foreign spies posed as advisers, headhunters, local government officials, academics and think tank researchers, and claimed to be from to be from fictional companies such as Data 31.’

Mr Burgess’s comments have sparked an uproar in Canberra and beyond, with politicians past and present claiming their reputations have been clouded by the speculation.

Opposition Senate Leader Simon Birmingham called on Home Secretary Claire O’Neil to “come forward and provide that information – as much as she possibly can.”

“It is up to the Home Secretary to use the protection and privileges of Parliament, perhaps to be able to do that,” he said.

Mr Birmingham said providing such clarity would ‘prevent that kind of vilification against all serving or all former politicians’.

‘There is clearly a great deal of public interest in this issue. This public interest deserves to be discussed as transparently as possible.

He clarified that he does not know who the person involved in the incident is, but added: “Many questions will be asked, especially given some of the highly publicized stories in the past about certain former MPs, their departure of this Parliament and the like.’

Opposition leader Peter Dutton is equally keen for the person involved to be named.

“It’s basically quite rough [be] then smeared former politicians [Burgess is] talking about one person, and the problem is that if he doesn’t name it, there’s a cloud hanging over everyone else,” Mr Dutton said.

“I think it’s unfair to a lot of former MPs who are patriotic, as 99.9 percent on both sides are, and if there’s anyone they’ve identified who isn’t, then quite frankly that person should be ostracized and shamed .’