Trump Says Modi Told Him, 'Sir, May I See You Please; India Needed Lobbyist to Reach White House; JNU Students to Face New Witch-hunt; CJI Shocker in Mahmudabad Free Speech Case
A newsletter from The Wire | Founded by Sidharth Bhatia, Siddharth Varadarajan, Sushant Singh, Seema Chishti, MK Venu, Pratik Kanjilal and Tanweer Alam | Contributing writer: Kalrav Joshi, with additional inputs by Anirudh SK
If you like our work and want to support us, then do subscribe. Sign up with your email address by clicking on this link and choose the FREE subscription plan. Do not choose the paid options on that page because Stripe – the payment gateway for Substack, which hosts The India Cable – does not process payments for Indian nonprofits.Our newsletter is paywalled but once a week we lift the paywall so newcomers can sample our content. To take out a fresh paid subscription or to renew your existing monthly or annual subscription, please click on the special payment page we have created – https://rzp.io/rzp/the-india-cable.Snapshot of the day
January 6, 2026
Siddharth Varadarajan
Underscoring the questionable nature of the Supreme Court’s decision to deny bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam yesterday, another bench ruled today that an individual’s right to a speedy trial – and to bail in the face of prolonged pre-trial detention – was not affected by the gravity of the offence he was charged with.
Disposing of a petition filed by a businessman accused of various serious offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, a bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sanjay Kumar cited the 2024 precedent of Javed Gulam Nabi Sheikh v Maharashtra (2004) – which said the “prolonged incarceration of an undertrial, without commencement or reasonable progress of trial, effectively converts pre-trial detention into a form of punishment” – and ordered him released on bail. The businessman had been in jail for a year and a half.
Yesterday, the bench headed by Justice Aravind Kumar engaged in tortuous legal calisthenics to justify the continued detention of Khalid and Imam, both of whom have already spent over five years in jail. Several newspaper editorials have called out the bench for its flawed order (See Opeds section below). Here is senior advocate Dushyant Dave speaking about why he believes their ruling was “completely wrong”:
To be filed under ‘Passing the Buck, Jurisprudence of’: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has asked the Haryana government to display ‘one time magnanimity’ towards Ashoka University Ali Khan Mahmudabad and not grant sanction for prosecution. The request suggests Mahmudabad has actually done something wrong, which he has hasn’t, and does not augur well for the right to free speech in India. Just to recall, the professor had scolded the Narendra Modi government in a social media post for its divisive, sectarian policies towards Muslims, prompting the Haryana police to file two far-fetched criminal cases against him.
A Trump campaign veteran coordinated Indian diplomatic meetings, flagged social media posts and tracked trade talks – showing the central role of a lobbying firm in India-US interactions during a tense period in 2025,
