𝗣𝗨𝗡𝗘 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗔𝗖𝗔𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗬
前往频道在 Telegram
फक्त 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗚𝗥𝗔𝗠𝗠𝗔𝗥 या घटकाला समर्पित एकमेव चॅनेल. 𝗔 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗡𝗘𝗟 𝗕𝗬 𝗦𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗔𝗗 𝗞𝗛𝗘𝗗𝗞𝗔𝗥, (𝗔 𝗦𝗜𝗫 𝗧𝗜𝗠𝗘𝗦 𝗨𝗣𝗦𝗖 𝗖𝗗𝗦 𝗖𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗥) Owner and admin @SharadKhedkar Ref books -: Pal and Suri, Wren and Martin.
显示更多📈 Telegram 频道 𝗣𝗨𝗡𝗘 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗔𝗖𝗔𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗬 的分析概览
频道 𝗣𝗨𝗡𝗘 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗔𝗖𝗔𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗬 (@puneenglishacademy) 马拉地语 语言赛道中的 是活跃参与者。目前社区聚集了 15 809 名订阅者，在 教育 类别中位列第 12 640，并在 印度 地区排名第 26 084 位。
📊 受众指标与增长动态
自 невідомо 创建以来，项目保持高速增长，吸引了 15 809 名订阅者。
根据 25 八月, 2026 的最新数据，频道保持稳定运转。过去 30 天订阅人数变化为 354，过去 24 小时变化为 -7，整体触达仍然可观。
- 认证状态： 未认证
- 互动率 (ER)： 平均受众互动率为 16.26%。内容发布后 24 小时内通常能获得 11.45% 的反应，占订阅者总量。
- 帖子覆盖： 每篇帖子平均可获得 2 571 次浏览，首日通常累积 1 810 次浏览。
- 互动与反馈： 受众积极参与，单帖平均反应数为 7。
📝 描述与内容策略
作者将该频道定位为表达主观观点的平台：
“फक्त 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗚𝗥𝗔𝗠𝗠𝗔𝗥 या घटकाला समर्पित एकमेव चॅनेल. 𝗔 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗡𝗘𝗟 𝗕𝗬 𝗦𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗔𝗗 𝗞𝗛𝗘𝗗𝗞𝗔𝗥, (𝗔 𝗦𝗜𝗫 𝗧𝗜𝗠𝗘𝗦 𝗨𝗣𝗦𝗖 𝗖𝗗𝗦 𝗖𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗥)
Owner and admin @SharadKhedkar
Ref books -: Pal and Suri, Wren and Martin...”
凭借高频更新（最新数据采集于 26 八月, 2026），频道始终保持新鲜度与高覆盖。分析显示受众积极互动，使其成为 教育 类别中的关键影响点。
15 809
订阅者
-724 小时
+257 天
+35430 天
数据加载中...
吸引订阅者
八月 '26
八月 '26
+258
在0个频道中
七月 '26
+1 346
在5个频道中
Get PRO
六月 '26
+189
在2个频道中
Get PRO
五月 '26
+297
在3个频道中
Get PRO
四月 '26
+822
在9个频道中
Get PRO
三月 '26
+1 178
在17个频道中
Get PRO
二月 '26
+396
在2个频道中
Get PRO
一月 '26
+557
在0个频道中
Get PRO
十二月 '25
+29
在1个频道中
Get PRO
十一月 '25
+159
在0个频道中
Get PRO
十月 '25
+11
在0个频道中
Get PRO
九月 '25
+19
在1个频道中
Get PRO
八月 '25
+19
在0个频道中
Get PRO
七月 '25
+63
在0个频道中
Get PRO
六月 '25
+189
在2个频道中
Get PRO
五月 '25
+134
在4个频道中
Get PRO
四月 '25
+120
在1个频道中
Get PRO
三月 '25
+168
在0个频道中
Get PRO
二月 '25
+640
在2个频道中
Get PRO
一月 '25
+8
在0个频道中
Get PRO
十二月 '24
+10
在0个频道中
Get PRO
十一月 '24
+2
在0个频道中
Get PRO
十月 '24
+15
在0个频道中
Get PRO
九月 '24
+50
在3个频道中
Get PRO
八月 '24
+64
在4个频道中
Get PRO
七月 '24
+3
在1个频道中
Get PRO
六月 '24
+2
在1个频道中
Get PRO
五月 '24
+11
在1个频道中
Get PRO
四月 '24
+4
在1个频道中
Get PRO
三月 '24
+269
在9个频道中
Get PRO
二月 '24
+349
在4个频道中
Get PRO
一月 '24
+523
在5个频道中
Get PRO
十二月 '23
+449
在46个频道中
Get PRO
十一月 '23
+1 181
在101个频道中
Get PRO
十月 '23
+1 480
在74个频道中
Get PRO
九月 '23
+2 096
在0个频道中
Get PRO
八月 '23
+2 532
在0个频道中
Get PRO
七月 '23
+3 627
在0个频道中
Get PRO
六月 '23
+1 286
在0个频道中
Get PRO
五月 '23
+407
在0个频道中
Get PRO
四月 '23
+329
在0个频道中
| 日期 | 订阅者增长 | 提及 | 频道 | |
| 26 八月 | +1 | |||
| 25 八月 | 0 | |||
| 24 八月 | +1 | |||
| 23 八月 | +9 | |||
| 22 八月 | +8 | |||
| 21 八月 | +8 | |||
| 20 八月 | +3 | |||
| 19 八月 | +10 | |||
| 18 八月 | +7 | |||
| 17 八月 | +7 | |||
| 16 八月 | +13 | |||
| 15 八月 | 0 | |||
| 14 八月 | +1 | |||
| 13 八月 | +8 | |||
| 12 八月 | +2 | |||
| 11 八月 | +8 | |||
| 10 八月 | +12 | |||
| 09 八月 | +41 | |||
| 08 八月 | +16 | |||
| 07 八月 | +7 | |||
| 06 八月 | +15 | |||
| 05 八月 | +15 | |||
| 04 八月 | +7 | |||
| 03 八月 | +4 | |||
| 02 八月 | +34 | |||
| 01 八月 | +21 |
频道帖子
| 2 |  आजचे #theeditorial | 1 301 |
| 3 |  आजचे #theeditorial | 1 147 |
| 4 |  आजची #thenews | 1 088 |
| 5 |  没有文字... | 1 109 |
| 6 | Choose the word opposite in meaning to “Enervate” | 1 207 |
| 7 | His jejune analysis failed to address the complexities of the issue.
Here jejune means ... | 1 149 |
| 8 | His argument was so specious that it initially appeared convincing, but collapsed under scrutiny.
Here, specious means: | 1 188 |
| 9 | Choose the word opposite in meaning to “Soporific” | 1 279 |
| 10 | Choose the word nearest in meaning to “Lachrymose” | 1 313 |
| 11 | उद्या - परवा गट क मुख्य 2025 चा लिपिक पदाचा निकाल जाहीर होईल.
...आणि लक्षात घ्या 25 डिसेंबर 2026 ला गट क मुख्य 2026 झाल्यावर फेब्रुवारी मध्ये त्याचाही निकाल जाहीर होईल. त्यावेळी list मध्ये नाव नसेल तर स्वतः ला कसं माफ करणार?
युद्ध तो करना पडेगा पार्थ!❤️ | 2 366 |
| 12 | One word for you all.
Every will be fine! ❤️ | 2 684 |
| 13 | यहा सब शांती शांती हैं. .....🤣🤣🤣
असं झालंय सध्या 🤣🤣🤣 | 3 003 |
| 14 | 🤞🤞🤞 | 3 040 |
| 15 | आयुष्यात आपल्या एका निकालावर बरंच काही अवलंबून असतं. ... | 3 053 |
| 16 | आयोग files uploading ची प्रायोरिटी चुकवतंय 🤣🤣
आधी लिपिक यायला पाहिजे 🤣🤣 | 3 109 |
| 17 | जाहिरात क्रमांक ०१४/२०२६ महाराष्ट्र गट क सेवा मुख्य परीक्षा २०२५ - तांत्रिक सहायक संवर्गाचा निकाल आयोगाच्या संकेतस्थळावर प्रसिध्द करण्यात आला आहे.
https://mpsc.gov.in/results_merit_list/14#
https://mpsc.gov.in/results_final_recomm_list/15#
https://mpsc.gov.in/announcement_and_circular/4 | 2 389 |
| 18 | लिपिक येऊ द्या म्हणावं 😄🤣 | 3 079 |
| 19 | जाहिरात क्रमांक ११८/२०२५ महाराष्ट्र गट क सेवा मुख्य परीक्षा २०२४ - उद्योग निरीक्षक - प्रतीक्षा यादीतून शिफारसप्राप्त उमेदवारांची यादी आयोगाच्या संकेतस्थळावर प्रसिध्द करण्यात आली आहे.
https://mpsc.gov.in/results_recomm_waiting_list/16
https://mpsc.gov.in/announcement_and_circular/4 | 2 288 |
| 20 | Vande Mataram and the right to dissent
The 2026 amendment protects Vande Mataram from being stopped or disrupted, but does not make singing it compulsory or prescribe all six stanzas; the Supreme Court’s Bijoe Emmanuel judgment protects an individual’s right to remain silent when participation conflicts with freedom of conscience
Parliament has given Vande Mataram the same criminal-law protection long enjoyed by the national anthem. But a closer look at the Constituent Assembly’s own reasoning, the actual text of the new law, and the Supreme Court’s judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) suggests that the position is far less settled and far more protective of individual conscience than the political rhetoric around the amendment implies.
Why it was not the anthem
The question of India’s national anthem was left open for nearly the entire life of the Constituent Assembly. It was finally settled not by a vote, but by a presidential statement on January 24, 1950, at the Assembly’s last sitting, when Dr. Rajendra Prasad declared that Jana Gana Mana would be the National Anthem of India, and that Vande Mataram, “which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it.”
That formula is worth reading carefully, because what it conspicuously does not do is make Vande Mataram the anthem or even a co-anthem. The Constitution, when it came into force two days later, contains no reference whatsoever to a “national song”. The status of Vande Mataram rests entirely on Dr. Prasad’s 1950 statement and on subsequent convention, and nothing more.
The reason for this restraint lies earlier, in the Indian National Congress’s own reckoning with the song in the 1930s. Vande Mataram’s later stanzas, rarely sung today, invoke the motherland in explicitly devotional, goddess-centred terms. In the context of the 1882 novel Anandamath, from which the song is drawn, some of its verses were also read as casting Muslims as adversaries. Objections from the Muslim League and others led the Congress Working Committee, in October 1937, to resolve that only the first two stanzas — pastoral, secular in imagery and free of any reference to a deity — would be sung at official gatherings.
That 1937 compromise is what Dr. Prasad’s Constituent Assembly statement inherited and preserved in 1950: full-throated reverence for the song’s role in the freedom struggle, but a deliberate decision to keep its more contentious, devotional verses out of India’s civic and constitutional life. It was not an oversight.
What the amendment says
The Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Bill, 2026, was introduced in the Rajya Sabha on July 24, 2026, and cleared both Houses within a week. The Rajya Sabha cleared it on July 29 and the Lok Sabha on July 30, each after only a brief discussion, with the Opposition, including the DMK and Congress, raising strong objections about the Bill being used to advance a particular cultural agenda and about the timing amid unrelated protests in the House. It received Presidential assent shortly after.
Given the speed and thinness of the debate, the Amendment — one of 12 Bills passed in a Monsoon Session in which, by Parliament’s own record, most legislation went through with barely any discussion — has had remarkably little parliamentary scrutiny for a law that touches on religious sentiment, free expression and criminal liability all at once.
What the Amendment actually does is narrower than the headlines suggest. It substitutes Section 3 of the 1971 Act with a provision that punishes two things, and only two things, in relation to both the national anthem and the national song: intentionally preventing their singing and causing disturbance to an assembly engaged in singing them. The punishment — up to three years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both, with a mandatory minimum of one year for repeat offenders — is now common to both compositions.
single most important precedent on the collision between compelled patriotic ritual and freedom of conscience.
Three siblings, Bijoe, Binu Mol and Bindu Emmanuel, practising Jehovah’s Witnesses, stood respectfully and silently while their schoolmates sang Jana Gana Mana during morning assembly. They did not sing themselves because their faith forbade what they understood as an act of worship of anyone or anything other than god. For this, they were expelled.
The Kerala High Court upheld the expulsion, holding that Article 51A’s fundamental duty to respect the national anthem overrode any claim under Articles 25 and 26, and that Jehovah’s Witnesses could not even invoke those protections.
The Supreme Court, in a judgment authored by Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, reversed the High Court in emphatic terms. The Bench held that compelling a person to join in singing despite a genuine, conscientiously held religious objection contravenes both Article 19(1)(a) — freedom of expression, which the court held extends to the freedom to remain silent — and Article 25(1), the guarantee of freedom of conscience.
Crucially, the court held that the fundamental duties enumerated under Article 51A cannot be used to cut down or override the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution; a duty to respect national symbols cannot, in law, be turned into a licence to punish sincere religious dissent. The court also read the 1971 Act itself as requiring nothing more than respectful conduct, not active participation from anyone present. It closed with the observation that the country’s tradition, philosophy and Constitution alike “practise tolerance,” urging that this not be diluted.
That ruling has never been overturned, and its logic transfers with full force to Vande Mataram, arguably with greater force, given that the song’s later verses are, unlike the anthem, addressed to specific deities. If the Supreme Court held that a Jehovah’s Witness could not be compelled to sing a secular anthem against conscience, the same protection must extend, a fortiori, to a citizen who objects to reciting verses that are, on their face, prayers to Hindu goddesses.
Legal position
Put together, the three strands here point to a single, clear conclusion.
First, the Constituent Assembly and the country’s founding leadership deliberately confined official recognition to the first two, secular stanzas of Vande Mataram. That is precisely why the fuller, devotional version was never made compulsory, then or since.
Second, the 2026 Amendment, whatever its political framing, imposes no textual obligation on any citizen to sing any particular version of the song, let alone all six stanzas. It penalises only the prevention or disturbance of a singing that is already taking place.
Third, and most importantly, even where the song, including its later stanzas, is sung, a citizen who chooses not to join in because doing so would offend their freedom of conscience under Article 25 is under no legal obligation to participate.
The law as laid down by the Supreme Court in Bijoe Emmanuel gives that citizen complete protection: standing respectfully, in silence, without disrupting others, is not an offence under this Act, was not an offence under the original 1971 Act, and cannot be made one merely by extending the statute to a new composition.
Citizens uneasy about the fuller version of Vande Mataram do not need to wait for a court to vindicate them after the fact. The law, correctly read, already protects them.
(Haris Beeran is a Rajya Sabha MP and a lawyer)
Article form The Hindu.
वाचून घ्या. Vocab share करतो थोड्या वेळात.
- शरद खेडकर
📞 7796060795 | 3 205 |
