The Evening Wrap: Sri Lankan PM Mahinda Rajapaksa sends his resignation to President

Sri Lanka’s Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa resigned on Monday, his office said, hours after his supporters brutally assaulted peaceful anti-government protesters amid a worsening economic crisis in the island. “The PM sent his letter of resignation to the President about two hours ago. I don’t know if it has been accepted,” Prime Minister’s media secretary Rohan Welivita told The Hindu. Should the President accept it, the Cabinet will stand dissolved as per Sri Lanka’s constitution. It would demand the formation of a new, interim government under President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who remains in office despite mounting calls for his resignation, as citizens protest his “failed” crisis response. Earlier on Monday morning, hundreds gathered at Temple Trees, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s official residence. They chanted slogans expressing support to their beleaguered leader who, along with his younger brother President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, is at the centre of anti-government protests in the island that is facing a grave economic crash, marked by acute food, fuel and cooking gas shortages. “I am prepared to make any sacrifice for the people,” Mahinda told his supporters, hours before pro-government groups triggered violence, first outside the PM’s home and later at the sea-side tent city ‘Gota go gama’ or ‘Gota go village’ set up by demonstrators a month ago. Police unleashed tear gas and water cannons after tensions escalated but were unable to prevent the violence. Mahinda made the remarks a day after visiting a famed Buddhist temple in Anuradhapura, where a group of protesters lined the road and booed as he passed by — a scene that was, until recently, unthinkable in any Sinhala-speaking area in the island, where the ethnic majority has hailed him as “war victor”, since his government defeated the LTTE in 2009. In a related incident, a legislator from Sri Lanka’s ruling party shot dead an anti-government protester and then took his own life during a confrontation outside the capital, police said Monday. Amarakeerthi Athukorala opened fire and critically wounded two people blocking his car in the town of Nittambuwa, police said, adding that one of the victims died of his injuries. “The MP fled the scene and took refuge at a nearby building,” a police official told AFP by telephone. “Thousands surrounded the building and he then took his own life with his revolver.” SC refuses to stay anti-encroachment drives in Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh, Sangam Vihar The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere or stay the anti-encroachment drives by the municipal authorities in Shaheen Bagh and Sangham Vihar areas of Delhi on the basis of a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist). A Bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, however, told the municipal authorities to follow the law and issue prior notice before “removing structures”. Though the court would definitely intervene in case of unauthorised demolitions, it said it cannot be expected to protect illegal encroachments on public roads and pavements from “routine drives”. The court questioned the CPI(M)‘s locus standi in the matter. “Why have you come here? Why have the affected people not come?” Justice Rao asked senior advocate P.S. Surendranath and advocate Subhash Chandran, for the party. The court made it clear that it would not be reduced to a platform for political parties. “We will definitely interfere if there is any violation of law, but will not step on anticipations raised by a political party... This is not a platform for political parties,” Justice Rao observed. The Bench asked the party why it had come straight to the Supreme Court without approaching the Delhi High Court first. “Why can’t you go to the Delhi High Court? How can you say that the High Court is refusing to hear... This is not correct... This is just too much,” Justice Rao addressed Surendranath. The court asked whether the party wanted to withdraw its case and approach an “appropriate forum”, namely the High Court, or whether the apex court should dismiss the case on merits. “We definitely want to protect lives and livelihoods, but not like this,” Justice Rao said, referring to the party’s petition. The CPI(M) chose to withdraw its petition with liberty to approach the High Court. The court refused Surendranath’s plea to halt the drive at least for the next two days. “Not at your [CPI-M] behest,” Justice Rao shot back. Surendranath said the court had issued status quo in the Jahangirpuri demolition case. This was a similar case and it could be tagged and heard along with the Jahangirpuri case. The court clarified that it had stopped the Jahangirpuri demolition because buildings were being demolished. During the hearing, Surendranath submitted that the party had not filed the petition out of party interest but out of public interest. He said bulldozers were used to demolish structures of residents, mostly belonging to the economically poor category, without giving them any prior notice. “They were not even given breathing time,” he stated. He further said the hawkers’ union had also approached the court for relief. “Do hawkers also have structures and buildings? They just have platforms,” Justice Rao asked. Surendranath said petty traders were also bearing the brunt of bulldozers. The court said it cannot intervene in all demolitions. “We have not given any licence to people who have violated the law by encroaching into public space to come here... Anyway, you go to the High Court,” it said. Turning to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the municipal authorities of Delhi, Justice Rao asked, “When you take up such activities, why don’t you go according to the law and give them notice? We are telling you not to remove structures without issuing notice”. Mehta said the petition was full of “misrepresentations” intended to create a “political hype” that one particular community is being targeted. “I would like to inform Your Lordships that these are routine drives to remove encroachments. In such cases, the statute does not require us to give prior notice... The High Court itself had directed us to remove encroachments in Delhi... Such a drive was carried out in central Delhi. When drive starts, hawkers remove themselves...” the Solicitor General submitted. “Whatever had to be cleared were already cleared before the case was mentioned today... They just want headlines”, he said. Surendranath asked, “If only hawkers’ platforms are being removed, why do they have to use bulldozers?” Advocate Nizam Pasha, for the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, mentioned that it had filed an intervention application in the Jahangirpuri case seeking to stop demolitions across the country. Earlier in the day, the North Delhi Municipal Corporation filed an affidavit contending that the Jahangirpuri drive was given a communal colour. The corporation claimed it was “blatant falsehood” on the part of the petitioners to claim that houses were demolished. It said it was necessary for the authorities to continue with clearing drives as status quo orders from the court gave encroachers an impetus to re-occupy public areas. Lakhimpur Kheri incident might not have occurred had Union Minister Ajay Mishra not threatened farmers: Allahabad HC The Lakhimpur Kheri incident of last October, in which eight persons including four farmers were killed, might not have taken place had Union Minister Ajay Mishra Teni not made utterances threatening local farmers with expulsion, the Allahabad High Court has said. The court made the observation while rejecting the bail pleas of four co-accused of prime accused Ashish Mishra, the Minister’s son, in the killing of four farmers and one journalist on October 3, 2021 in Tikonia. The court said there was “overwhelming evidence” against each of the four accused Sumit Jaiswal, Ankit Das, Shishpal and Lavkush. While rejecting the bail application of Ankit Das, the grandson of former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Babu Banarasi Das, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed, “Political persons holding high offices should make public utterances in a decent language considering repercussions in society. They should not make irresponsible statements as they are required to conduct themselves befitting their status and dignity of high office which they hold.” The court further said, “As submitted, this incident might not have taken place if the Union Minister of State for Home had not made alleged utterances as has been pointed out in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Investigating Agency and also mentioned in the charge sheet.” Justice Singh said: “Several innocent lives would not have got lost in a most cruel, diabolic, barbaric, gruesome and inhuman manner allegedly by his very promising son and other accused.” On September 25, 2021 while warning protesting farmers to “mend themselves” or else he would not take more than two minutes to “mend them himself”, Mishra had reminded them of his past record before he was elected a public representative and said that he did “not run from any challenge.” It was this statement that allegedly triggered the protests by farmers on October 3, a day when he had organised a wrestling contest in his ancestral village of Banveerpur. The court also wondered that when Section 144 was clamped in the area, why was the wrestling competition not cancelled. “The law makers cannot be seen to be law violaters. This court cannot believe that it would not have been within the knowledge the Deputy Chief Minister of the State (Keshav Prasad Maurya) that in the area provisions of Section 144 Cr.P.C. were clamped and, any assembly or gathering was prohibited. Despite this, the wrestling competition was organised and the Union Minister of State for Home and the Deputy Chief Minister decided to be present as chief guest etc. in the event,” the court said. Sedition law needs to be reconsidered: Centre tells Supreme Court The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Monday informed the Supreme Court of its decision to “re-examine” and “re-consider” the sedition law in the background of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s belief that the nation should work harder to shed “colonial baggage”, including outdated laws, while celebrating 75 years of Independence under the banner of ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’. “The Government of India, being fully cognisant of various views being expressed on the subject of sedition and also having considered the concerns of civil liberties and human rights, while committed to maintain and protect the sovereignty and integrity of this great nation, has decided to re-examine and re-consider the provisions of Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code, which can only be done before the competent forum,” a seven-paragraph affidavit said. The Home Ministry urged the court to wait till the government completes the exercise of reconsideration of the law before the “appropriate forum”. The affidavit has been filed just a few days after the government submitted a note in the Supreme Court supporting a 60-year-old Supreme Court judgment upholding the validity of the sedition law. The government note had urged the court to accept its 1962 verdict on sedition law as a “binding precedent”. The Centre had advised a case-to-case examination of the abuse of sedition law instead of upending it entirely. Attorney General of India K.K. Venugopal, called in to assist the apex court in the capacity of his office, too had upheld the six-decade-old case law as the “last word on the law of sedition”. Giving an insight into its rather radical shifting of position, the Ministry on Monday referred to the “clear and unequivocal” views expressed by the Prime Minister in favour of “protection of civil liberties, respect for human rights and giving meaning to the constitutionally cherished freedoms by the people of the country”. “He (Prime Minister) has repeatedly said that one of India’s strengths is the diverse thought streams that beautifully flourish in our country,” the affidavit, filed through the Ministry’s Additional Secretary Mrityunjay Kumar Narayan, pointed out. The affidavit referred to the Prime Minister’s push to shed the colonial load. “The Honourable Prime Minister believes that at a time when our nation is marking ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’ (75 years since Independence), we need to, as a nation, work even harder to shed colonial baggage that has passed its utility, which includes outdated colonial laws and practices,” the government affidavit noted. The affidavit drew attention to how the government got rid of offences which created “mindless hindrances” to people and had scrapped 1,500 outmoded laws since 2014-15. “This is an ongoing process,” the Ministry assured, “These were laws and compliances which reeked of a colonial mindset and thus have no place in today’s India.” The government acknowledged the concerns raised in the public domain about the application and abuse of the sedition law. It said that while everyone agreed on the need for laws to protect “legitimate State interest” and sovereignty and integrity of India from divisive offences and Acts meant to destabilise the government established by law, the Union could not ignore the divergence of opinion about Section 124A expressed by jurists, academicians, intellectuals and citizens in general. The affidavit, in a way, mirrors the oral remarks made by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana in 2021. The CJI had asked the government in open court whether it was “still necessary to retain this colonial law which the British used to suppress Gandhi, Tilak etc., even after 75 years of Independence?” The case is listed on May 10 before the three-judge Bench led by the CJI, which is scheduled to examine whether the clutch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the sedition law need to be referred to a Constitution Bench of five or seven judges. Specially-abled child barred from boarding flight: IndiGo CEO offers regrets, says staff took best possible decision in difficult situation IndiGo CEO on May 9 offered his regrets on the incident that happened at the Ranchi airport on Saturday wherein a specially-abled child was barred from boarding his flight to Hyderabad as he was in “a state of panic”. “Having reviewed all aspects of this incident, we as an organisation are of the view that we made the best possible decision under difficult circumstances,” IndiGo CEO Ronojoy Dutta said in a statement. Throughout the check-in and boarding process our intent of course was to carry the family. However, at the boarding area the teenager was visibly in panic, he mentioned. While providing courteous and compassionate service to our customers is of paramount importance to us, the airport staff, in line with the safety guidelines, were forced to make a difficult decision as to whether this commotion would carry forward aboard the aircraft, the CEO stated. “We recognise too well that parents who dedicate their lives to the caring of physically-challenged persons are the true heroes of our society,” he noted. “We offer our sincere regrets to the affected family for the unfortunate experience and as a small token of our appreciation of their lifelong dedication would like to offer to purchase an electric wheelchair for their son,” he added. As the boy was prohibited from boarding the airline’s Ranchi-Hyderabad flight on Saturday, his parents — who were with him — also decided to not enter the plane. In Brief Saudi Arabia’s octogenarian monarch Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud underwent medical tests on May 8, state-run media reported, just weeks after he had the battery of his pacemaker changed. The monarch’s health is closely watched because he holds absolute power in the kingdom. King Salman has appointed his 36-year-old son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as his successor, though he has also already empowered him to lead day-to-day affairs. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow [logo] The Evening Wrap 09 MAY 2022 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Sri Lankan PM Mahinda Rajapaksa sends his resignation to President; ruling party MP dies in clashes   [Sri Lanka’s Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa resigned on Monday]( his office said, hours after his supporters brutally assaulted peaceful anti-government protesters amid a worsening economic crisis in the island. “The PM sent his letter of resignation to the President about two hours ago. I don’t know if it has been accepted,” Prime Minister’s media secretary Rohan Welivita told The Hindu. Should the President accept it, the Cabinet will stand dissolved as per Sri Lanka’s constitution. It would demand the formation of a new, interim government under President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who remains in office despite mounting calls for his resignation, as citizens protest his “failed” crisis response. Earlier on Monday morning, hundreds gathered at Temple Trees, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s official residence. They chanted slogans expressing support to their beleaguered leader who, along with his younger brother President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, is at the centre of anti-government protests in the island that is facing a grave economic crash, marked by acute food, fuel and cooking gas shortages. “I am prepared to make any sacrifice for the people,” Mahinda told his supporters, hours before pro-government groups triggered violence, first outside the PM’s home and later at the sea-side tent city ‘Gota go gama’ or ‘Gota go village’ set up by demonstrators a month ago. Police unleashed tear gas and water cannons after tensions escalated but were unable to prevent the violence. Mahinda made the remarks a day after visiting a famed Buddhist temple in Anuradhapura, where a group of protesters lined the road and booed as he passed by — a scene that was, until recently, unthinkable in any Sinhala-speaking area in the island, where the ethnic majority has hailed him as “war victor”, since his government defeated the LTTE in 2009. [In a related incident, a legislator from Sri Lanka’s ruling party shot dead an anti-government protester]( and then took his own life during a confrontation outside the capital, police said Monday. Amarakeerthi Athukorala opened fire and critically wounded two people blocking his car in the town of Nittambuwa, police said, adding that one of the victims died of his injuries. “The MP fled the scene and took refuge at a nearby building,” a police official told AFP by telephone. “Thousands surrounded the building and he then took his own life with his revolver.” SC refuses to stay anti-encroachment drives in Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh, Sangam Vihar The [Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere or stay the anti-encroachment drives]( by the municipal authorities in Shaheen Bagh and Sangham Vihar areas of Delhi on the basis of a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist). A Bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, however, told the municipal authorities to follow the law and issue prior notice before “removing structures”. Though the court would definitely intervene in case of unauthorised demolitions, it said it cannot be expected to protect illegal encroachments on public roads and pavements from “routine drives”. The court questioned the CPI(M)‘s locus standi in the matter. “Why have you come here? Why have the affected people not come?” Justice Rao asked senior advocate P.S. Surendranath and advocate Subhash Chandran, for the party. The court made it clear that it would not be reduced to a platform for political parties. “We will definitely interfere if there is any violation of law, but will not step on anticipations raised by a political party... This is not a platform for political parties,” Justice Rao observed. The Bench asked the party why it had come straight to the Supreme Court without approaching the Delhi High Court first. “Why can’t you go to the Delhi High Court? How can you say that the High Court is refusing to hear... This is not correct... This is just too much,” Justice Rao addressed Surendranath. The court asked whether the party wanted to withdraw its case and approach an “appropriate forum”, namely the High Court, or whether the apex court should dismiss the case on merits. “We definitely want to protect lives and livelihoods, but not like this,” Justice Rao said, referring to the party’s petition. The CPI(M) chose to withdraw its petition with liberty to approach the High Court. The court refused Surendranath’s plea to halt the drive at least for the next two days. “Not at your [CPI-M] behest,” Justice Rao shot back. Surendranath said the court had issued status quo in the Jahangirpuri demolition case. This was a similar case and it could be tagged and heard along with the Jahangirpuri case. The court clarified that it had stopped the Jahangirpuri demolition because buildings were being demolished. During the hearing, Surendranath submitted that the party had not filed the petition out of party interest but out of public interest. He said bulldozers were used to demolish structures of residents, mostly belonging to the economically poor category, without giving them any prior notice. “They were not even given breathing time,” he stated. He further said the hawkers’ union had also approached the court for relief. “Do hawkers also have structures and buildings? They just have platforms,” Justice Rao asked. Surendranath said petty traders were also bearing the brunt of bulldozers. The court said it cannot intervene in all demolitions. “We have not given any licence to people who have violated the law by encroaching into public space to come here... Anyway, you go to the High Court,” it said. Turning to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the municipal authorities of Delhi, Justice Rao asked, “When you take up such activities, why don’t you go according to the law and give them notice? We are telling you not to remove structures without issuing notice”. Mehta said the petition was full of “misrepresentations” intended to create a “political hype” that one particular community is being targeted. “I would like to inform Your Lordships that these are routine drives to remove encroachments. In such cases, the statute does not require us to give prior notice... The High Court itself had directed us to remove encroachments in Delhi... Such a drive was carried out in central Delhi. When drive starts, hawkers remove themselves...” the Solicitor General submitted. “Whatever had to be cleared were already cleared before the case was mentioned today... They just want headlines”, he said. Surendranath asked, “If only hawkers’ platforms are being removed, why do they have to use bulldozers?” Advocate Nizam Pasha, for the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, mentioned that it had filed an intervention application in the Jahangirpuri case seeking to stop demolitions across the country. Earlier in the day, the North Delhi Municipal Corporation filed an affidavit contending that the Jahangirpuri drive was given a communal colour. The corporation claimed it was “blatant falsehood” on the part of the petitioners to claim that houses were demolished. It said it was necessary for the authorities to continue with clearing drives as status quo orders from the court gave encroachers an impetus to re-occupy public areas. Lakhimpur Kheri incident might not have occurred had Union Minister Ajay Mishra not threatened farmers: Allahabad HC The [Lakhimpur Kheri incident of last October, in which eight persons including four farmers were killed]( might not have taken place had Union Minister Ajay Mishra Teni not made utterances threatening local farmers with expulsion, the Allahabad High Court has said. The court made the observation while rejecting the bail pleas of four co-accused of prime accused Ashish Mishra, the Minister’s son, in the killing of four farmers and one journalist on October 3, 2021 in Tikonia. The court said there was “overwhelming evidence” against each of the four accused Sumit Jaiswal, Ankit Das, Shishpal and Lavkush. While rejecting the bail application of Ankit Das, the grandson of former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Babu Banarasi Das, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed, “Political persons holding high offices should make public utterances in a decent language considering repercussions in society. They should not make irresponsible statements as they are required to conduct themselves befitting their status and dignity of high office which they hold.” The court further said, “As submitted, this incident might not have taken place if the Union Minister of State for Home had not made alleged utterances as has been pointed out in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Investigating Agency and also mentioned in the charge sheet.” Justice Singh said: “Several innocent lives would not have got lost in a most cruel, diabolic, barbaric, gruesome and inhuman manner allegedly by his very promising son and other accused.” On September 25, 2021 while warning protesting farmers to “mend themselves” or else he would not take more than two minutes to “mend them himself”, Mishra had reminded them of his past record before he was elected a public representative and said that he did “not run from any challenge.” It was this statement that allegedly triggered the protests by farmers on October 3, a day when he had organised a wrestling contest in his ancestral village of Banveerpur. The court also wondered that when Section 144 was clamped in the area, why was the wrestling competition not cancelled. “The law makers cannot be seen to be law violaters. This court cannot believe that it would not have been within the knowledge the Deputy Chief Minister of the State (Keshav Prasad Maurya) that in the area provisions of Section 144 Cr.P.C. were clamped and, any assembly or gathering was prohibited. Despite this, the wrestling competition was organised and the Union Minister of State for Home and the Deputy Chief Minister decided to be present as chief guest etc. in the event,” the court said. Sedition law needs to be reconsidered: Centre tells Supreme Court The [Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Monday informed the Supreme Court of its decision to “re-examine” and “re-consider”]( the sedition law in the background of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s belief that the nation should work harder to shed “colonial baggage”, including outdated laws, while celebrating 75 years of Independence under the banner of ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’. “The Government of India, being fully cognisant of various views being expressed on the subject of sedition and also having considered the concerns of civil liberties and human rights, while committed to maintain and protect the sovereignty and integrity of this great nation, has decided to re-examine and re-consider the provisions of Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code, which can only be done before the competent forum,” a seven-paragraph affidavit said. The Home Ministry urged the court to wait till the government completes the exercise of reconsideration of the law before the “appropriate forum”. The affidavit has been filed just a few days after the government submitted a note in the Supreme Court supporting a 60-year-old Supreme Court judgment upholding the validity of the sedition law. The government note had urged the court to accept its 1962 verdict on sedition law as a “binding precedent”. The Centre had advised a case-to-case examination of the abuse of sedition law instead of upending it entirely. Attorney General of India K.K. Venugopal, called in to assist the apex court in the capacity of his office, too had upheld the six-decade-old case law as the “last word on the law of sedition”. Giving an insight into its rather radical shifting of position, the Ministry on Monday referred to the “clear and unequivocal” views expressed by the Prime Minister in favour of “protection of civil liberties, respect for human rights and giving meaning to the constitutionally cherished freedoms by the people of the country”. “He (Prime Minister) has repeatedly said that one of India’s strengths is the diverse thought streams that beautifully flourish in our country,” the affidavit, filed through the Ministry’s Additional Secretary Mrityunjay Kumar Narayan, pointed out. The affidavit referred to the Prime Minister’s push to shed the colonial load. “The Honourable Prime Minister believes that at a time when our nation is marking ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’ (75 years since Independence), we need to, as a nation, work even harder to shed colonial baggage that has passed its utility, which includes outdated colonial laws and practices,” the government affidavit noted. The affidavit drew attention to how the government got rid of offences which created “mindless hindrances” to people and had scrapped 1,500 outmoded laws since 2014-15. “This is an ongoing process,” the Ministry assured, “These were laws and compliances which reeked of a colonial mindset and thus have no place in today’s India.” The government acknowledged the concerns raised in the public domain about the application and abuse of the sedition law. It said that while everyone agreed on the need for laws to protect “legitimate State interest” and sovereignty and integrity of India from divisive offences and Acts meant to destabilise the government established by law, the Union could not ignore the divergence of opinion about Section 124A expressed by jurists, academicians, intellectuals and citizens in general. The affidavit, in a way, mirrors the oral remarks made by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana in 2021. The CJI had asked the government in open court whether it was “still necessary to retain this colonial law which the British used to suppress Gandhi, Tilak etc., even after 75 years of Independence?” The case is listed on May 10 before the three-judge Bench led by the CJI, which is scheduled to examine whether the clutch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the sedition law need to be referred to a Constitution Bench of five or seven judges. Specially-abled child barred from boarding flight: IndiGo CEO offers regrets, says staff took best possible decision in difficult situation [IndiGo CEO on May 9 offered his regrets on the incident that happened at the Ranchi airport]( Saturday wherein a specially-abled child was barred from boarding his flight to Hyderabad as he was in “a state of panic”. “Having reviewed all aspects of this incident, we as an organisation are of the view that we made the best possible decision under difficult circumstances,” IndiGo CEO Ronojoy Dutta said in a statement. Throughout the check-in and boarding process our intent of course was to carry the family. However, at the boarding area the teenager was visibly in panic, he mentioned. While providing courteous and compassionate service to our customers is of paramount importance to us, the airport staff, in line with the safety guidelines, were forced to make a difficult decision as to whether this commotion would carry forward aboard the aircraft, the CEO stated. “We recognise too well that parents who dedicate their lives to the caring of physically-challenged persons are the true heroes of our society,” he noted. “We offer our sincere regrets to the affected family for the unfortunate experience and as a small token of our appreciation of their lifelong dedication would like to offer to purchase an electric wheelchair for their son,” he added. As the boy was prohibited from boarding the airline’s Ranchi-Hyderabad flight on Saturday, his parents — who were with him — also decided to not enter the plane. In Brief Saudi Arabia’s octogenarian monarch Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud underwent medical tests on May 8, state-run media reported, just weeks after he had the battery of his pacemaker changed. The monarch’s health is closely watched because he holds absolute power in the kingdom. King Salman has appointed his 36-year-old son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as his successor, though he has also already empowered him to lead day-to-day affairs. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow  Today’s Top Picks [[Explained | The administrative services row between the Delhi and Central governments ] Explained | The administrative services row between the Delhi and Central governments]( [[Ukraine battles to hold eastern bastions as Russia prepares Victory Day parade] Ukraine battles to hold eastern bastions as Russia prepares Victory Day parade]( [[Landmine on Elon Musk’s path to Twitter buyout] Landmine on Elon Musk’s path to Twitter buyout]( [[Rough sea prompts closure of Karnataka’s first floating bridge] Rough sea prompts closure of Karnataka’s first floating bridge]( Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](