同桌的你

Toaster Starring Rajkummar Rao And Sanya Malhotra Set For Mid-April Release_我的网站

A |     Netflix has officially announced its upcoming original film, Toaster, a dark comedy based on the unexpected chaos after a cancelled wedding. Directed by Vivek Das Chaudhary, the film is scheduled to premiere on the streaming platform on April 15, 2026. The story explores a situation where a wedding is called off after gifts have already been exchanged. The plot begins with a petty fixation on a specific gift, a toaster, and follows a simple miser (Rajkummar Rao) as his pursuit to recover the item leads to ridiculous and escalating chaos and drama. The film marks a professional milestone for Patralekhaa, as it is the first production under her and Rajkummar Rao’s banner, Kampa Film. The project stars Rajkummar Rao and Sanya Malhotra, supported by an ensemble including Archana Puran Singh, Abhishek Banerjee, Farah Khan, Upendra Limaye, Vinod Rawat, Jitendra Joshi, and Seema Pahwa.           About the production, Patralekhaa, producer of Kampa Film, said, “Stepping into production with Kampa Film has been an incredibly meaningful milestone for us, and beginning this journey with Netflix, who have consistently championed distinctive and unconventional stories makes it even more special. Toaster immediately stood out because it finds humour in the most unexpected places, and the moment we read it, we knew it was a story we wanted to bring to life.”                                                                 View this post on Instagram          A post shared by Netflix India (@netflix_in)               Ruchikaa Kapoor Sheikh, Director of Original Films, Netflix India, mentioned that the film aligns with the platform's focus on inventive storytelling and emerging talent. She said, “Toaster is a quirky dark comedy that begins with a simple miser whose life spirals into complete mayhem in pursuit of getting back his toaster. It’s the kind of inventive storytelling we love to champion at Netflix. With Vivek Das Chaudhary making his directorial debut and Patralekhaa & Raj stepping into the producer’s role for the first time with Kampa Film, the project reflects our continued focus on championing emerging talent behind the camera while bringing an exciting burst of fresh creative energy.”           The film's story and screenplay are credited to Parveez Shaikh, with Akshat Ghildial and Anagh Mukerjee also serving as screenwriters. Akshat Ghildial has also penned the dialogues. Toaster will be available for streaming on Netflix from April 15.Also Read: Toaster Teaser: Rajkummar Rao and Sanya Malhotra promise chaos and laughs。    New Delhi, Oct 13 (UNI) One of the judges in the Supreme Court bench, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, differed with the view of his colleague, Justice Hemant Gupta on many issues.

Justice Dhulia said that asking a pre university schoolgirl to take off her hijab at her school gate, is an invasion on her privacy and dignity.

"Asking a pre university schoolgirl to take off her hijab at her school gate, is an invasion on her privacy and dignity. It is an attack on their dignity, and then ultimately it is a denial to them of secular education. These are clearly violative of Article 19(1)(a), Article 21, and Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India," Justice Dhulia said, in his verdict.

"Under our Constitutional scheme, wearing a hijab should be simply a matter of Choice. It may or may not be a matter of essential religious practice, but it still is, a matter of conscience, belief, and expression. If she wants to wear hijab, even inside her class room, she cannot be stopped, if it is worn as a matter of her choice, as it may be the only way her conservative family will permit her to go to school, and in those cases, her hijab is her ticket to education," Justice Dhulia said, in his verdict.

Justice Dhulia even went onto say that the unfortunate fallout of the hijab restriction would be that we would have denied education to a girl child. A girl child for whom it is still not easy to reach her school gate.This case here, therefore, has also to be seen in the perspective of the challenges already faced by a girl child in reaching her school.

"The question this Court would put before itself is also whether we are making the life of a girl child any better by denying her education merely because she wears a hijab!," Justice Dhulia questioned?

Our Constitution has visualised a just society and it is for this reason that the first virtue that is secures for the citizens is ‘Justice’ which is the first of our Preambular promises, he said.

On the other hand, the judge heading the bench of the Supreme Court, Justice Hemant Gupta, differed with the view of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and said that the Government (Karnataka) Order cannot be said to be contrary to the State goal of promoting literacy and education as mandated under the Constitution.

"Article 21A is not applicable as all the students are over 14 years of age. The students have a right to education under Article 21, but not of insisting on wearing something additional to the uniform, in a secular school, as a part of their religion," Justice Gupta, heading the bench of the Top Court said.

"Secularism applicable to all citizens. Permitting one religious community to wear religious symbols would be antithesis of secularism. Govt Order can't be said to be against secularism or objective of Karnataka Education Act," Justice Gupta in his 133-page, out of 209-page, verdict said.

"It can't be said that State is restricting the access to education to the girl students through such an Order. The Government Order only ensures that the uniform prescribed is adhered to by the students and it cannot be said that State is restricting the access to education to the girl students through such an Order, Justice Gupta said.

He went on to say that the Act itself contemplates providing of opportunities and facilities in a healthy manner and maintaining the dignity of childhood and youth so that there is no moral or material abandonment. "The uniform for the students has been prescribed so that there is no distinction between the students coming from diverse background and that each student grows in an environment of equality, fairness and equal opportunities," Justice Gupta said.

The uniform is an equalizer of inequalities. Therefore, prescribing uniform for children at an impressionable age is not only important but has a salutary effect on the mental development of the child to grow in the environment of oneness, he said.

Justice Gupta, find that the following 11 questions arise for consideration in the present appeals:

Whether the appeals should be heard along with Kantaru Rajeevaru (Right to Religion) and/or should the present appeals be referred to the Constitution Bench.?

Whether the State Government could delegate its decision to implement the wearing of uniform by the College Development Committee or the Board of Management or otherwise on headscarves is ex facie violative of Section 143 of the Act?

What is ambit and scope of the right to freedom of ‘conscience’ and ‘religion’ under Article 25? What is the ambit and scope of essential religious practices under Article 25 of the Constitution?

UNI SM BAV GNK。

B |

Current article:http://druppbf.zhouangnaoguangsundianzhenmou.cfd/list_t853oot/038g1vp.html

Published on:18:09:30