Why are bond yields rising?Bond yields are climbing due to a combination of rising crude oil prices and a weakening rupee, both of which add to inflationary pressures. India’s 10-year benchmark yield has risen to around 7% from 6.68% a month ago. Crude oil prices have surged to $115–$120 per barrel, and with India importing nearly 85% of its oil needs, higher prices feed directly into domestic inflation through increased transportation and production costs. At the same time, the rupee has depreciated to around 95 against the US dollar, making imports more expensive. In such an environment, investors demand higher yields to compensate for inflation and currency risks. Tightening liquidity conditions and expectations of higher interest rates further push bond prices lower and yields higher. When bond prices fall, yields rise and vice versa.Impact of rising yields on debt MFsThe impact varies depending on the type of fund and the maturity of securities it holds. Long-duration funds, such as gilt and long-term bond funds, are the most affected. These funds invest in bonds with longer maturities, making them more sensitive to interest rate movements. Even a small rise in yields can lead to sharper price declines, resulting in noticeable short-term losses. Short-duration funds, such as liquid, ultra-short, and low-duration funds, are far less impacted. Since they invest in short-maturity instruments, price fluctuations are limited. As older securities mature, these funds are able to invest in newer bonds offering higher interest rates, which gradually improves their returns. According to Value Research data, values of long-duration funds have shrunk about 2.5% over the past three months. Gilt funds are down around 1.4%, while dynamic bond funds have seen relatively limited declines of about 0.4% over the same period.What should investors do?Investors in long duration or gilt funds should avoid panic selling if their investment horizon is 3–5 years. Over time, accrual income and potential yield softening can help offset interim losses. For investors with a shorter time horizon, such as less than a year, liquid and ultra-short duration funds are more suitable. These funds carry lower interest rate risk and offer relatively stable returns. Investors looking to benefit from potential capital appreciation in gilt funds should wait for clearer signs of stability in crude oil prices.

You don’t have permission to access “http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/top-court-orders-probe-into-firms-linked-to-arunachal-chief-minister-pema-khandu-s-family-11316583” on this server.

Reference #18.c4f5d217.1775459766.890f4ae6

https://errors.edgesuite.net/18.c4f5d217.1775459766.890f4ae6

Kolkata Knight Riders’ captain Ajinkya Rahane (AP Photo/Rafiq Maqbool)

With Kolkata Knight Riders enduring a tough start to IPL 2026, Ajinkya Rahane has found himself under increasing scrutiny following defeats to Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad. Rahane began the season on a positive note with a fluent 67 off 40 balls against Mumbai Indians, but his effort came in a losing cause as KKR failed to defend a strong total. In the next game, which also marked his 200th IPL appearance, he struggled for rhythm during a chase, managing just 8 off 10 balls against SRH. The criticism around his captaincy has also been fuelled by off-field moments, including his remark on Cameron Green not bowling, where he said the question should be directed to Cricket Australia. Rahane later pushed back at critics, defending his intent and pointing to his improved strike rate in recent seasons. Amid the noise, veteran spinner Ravichandran Ashwin has stepped in to back Rahane, offering a strong endorsement of his leadership. “Honestly, I was reading a lot about Ajinkya Rahane, but he is a very good person, a very good human being. I have played under his captaincy and I am telling you, no bowler will get a more supportive captain. He is very supportive and a very calm captain. If he cannot get the best out of a bowler, then I don’t know who can.” While defending Rahane, Ashwin made it clear that KKR’s struggles are not solely down to captaincy. Instead, he pointed to tactical limitations, particularly in the bowling department. “He can maybe do one thing — use Sunil Narine in the powerplay and give Varun Chakravarthy a break, then bring him after the powerplay. If he does well, then confidence will come back. But that’s all he can do. What else can he do? He cannot go and bowl himself.” Ashwin also highlighted the complications around match-ups, especially against left-handers, suggesting that avoiding certain bowlers could create further imbalance. “He can also maybe avoid giving him the ball against left-handers. But if you avoid him against left-handers, then who will bowl? Sunil Narine will bowl from one end, but who will bowl from the other? So there are a lot of problems in KKR.” He added that if Cameron Green starts contributing with the ball, it could ease some of the burden on the attack. With two defeats in their opening matches, KKR are already under pressure early in the season. Ashwin’s comments underline that while Rahane remains under the spotlight, the issues within the side run deeper than just leadership concerns.

Rupee stood firm on Monday, gaining 33 paise to reach 92.85 against the US dollar in early trade. This follows intervention by the Reserve Bank of India, as the bank stepped in to support the currency. The RBI tightened norms to curb speculative positions and capped banks’ net open positions at $100 million, even as global developments continued to pose risks. The currency opened weak in the interbank foreign exchange market, at 93.13 against the greenback but strengthened as trading progressed, touching 92.85. The gain comes after a strong showing in the previous session on Thursday, when the currency surged 152 paise to close at 93.18, one of its sharpest single-day rises in recent years, following a series of steps by the central bank to tighten rules in the onshore forward market. Markets were shut on Friday for Good Friday. The RBI’s decision to cap banks’ net open positions at $100 million is seen as part of a broader effort to limit speculative bets, with traders indicating that the impact of these measures is beginning to reflect in the rupee’s movement. Despite the uptick, underlying pressures remain. Forex market participants pointed to continued foreign capital outflows, a strengthening US dollar, and firm crude oil prices as factors weighing on the domestic currency. Heightened geopolitical uncertainty has added to the cautious sentiment. Tensions on the global front intensified after US President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran, setting a deadline until Tuesday to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and cautioning that non-compliance could trigger attacks on its power infrastructure. Offering a near-term outlook, CR Forex Advisors MD Amit Pabari said, “On one side, RBI’s actions are clearly working. As banks continue to unwind dollar positions ahead of the April 10 deadline, the rupee may strengthen further toward the 91.50–92.00 range.” He also flagged the risks ahead, saying that persistent geopolitical tensions and elevated oil prices could once again strain India’s macroeconomic indicators. “In that scenario, the rupee may find it difficult to sustain gains and could move back toward the 94.00 levels after stabilizing at lower levels. But the bigger picture remains clear volatility is here to stay,” he said. Elsewhere, the dollar index, which tracks the US currency against a basket of six major currencies, edged up 0.14 per cent to 100.17. Brent crude futures were also higher, rising 0.66% to $109.75 per barrel. Domestic equity markets opened on a weak note, with the Sensex down 270.13 points at 73,049.42, while the Nifty slipped 93.60 points to 22,619.50. Data from the exchanges showed that foreign institutional investors remained net sellers on Thursday, offloading equities worth Rs 9,931.13 crore.

You don’t have permission to access “http://www.ndtv.com/health/as-menstrual-health-challenges-persist-homeopathy-can-be-sustainable-care-option-experts-11314108” on this server.

Reference #18.cdf5d217.1775454516.e8ebb55e

https://errors.edgesuite.net/18.cdf5d217.1775454516.e8ebb55e

AMBERNATH: Industrial units in the MIDC belts of Ambernath and Dombivli are incurring losses exceeding Rs 1,000 crore per month cumulatively as the West Asia conflict disrupts gas supply and raw material availability, severely affecting production. Nearly 50% of companies at Anand Nagar MIDC and 30% in Dombivli MIDC have been impacted due to shortages of chemicals, PNG and other essential inputs. The crisis has also triggered worker migration, further worsening the situation, industry representatives said.The Ambernath MIDC region houses around 2,000 companies, including nearly 400 chemical units. The Additional Ambernath MIDC area alone has 1,400 companies. Together, these industrial belts provide employment to over one lakh families. Officials said the conflict’s effect has been particularly felt by engineering, chemical, textile, confectionery and pharmaceutical units. PNG is crucial for these units. Umesh Tayade, president of the Additional Ambernath Manufacturers Association (AAMA), said PNG supply has been reduced by 50%. “Units are being forced to either cut production or procure additional gas at almost double the cost,” he said.Also, several industrial canteens have shut due to a lack of commercial LPG supply, while rising food prices at local eateries have made daily meals unaffordable. A large number of workers, particularly from UP and Bihar, rely on commercial gas for cooking. Due to shortages and rising costs, 20-25% of the workforce has returned to their native places. As a result, many companies have reported a 40-50% drop in output. Investment activity in the MIDC region has slowed, leaving entrepreneurs struggling to sustain operations.The industry body AAMA has written to the state government seeking relief measures, including subsidies, reduced loan interest rates, a six-month extension for GST payments, and easier access to diesel for industrial use. Tayade said, “There is no clarity on how long the conflict will continue. Industrial units in Ambernath alone have suffered total losses of over Rs 500 crore. In such a situation, govt support and relaxations are essential for our survival.“Kalyan-Ambernath Manufacturers Association president Deven Soni said efforts are being made to ensure food for workers. Prashant Ghorpade, vice-president of the association, said rising input costs – particularly for chemicals – have increased production costs, leading to a drop of nearly 30% in output in Dombivli MIDCs which he said have suffered over Rs 500 crore in total losses.

Virat Kohli and Sarfaraz Khan (Agency Image)

A small but telling moment involving Virat Kohli and Sarfaraz Khan caught the eye during Royal Challengers Bengaluru’s dominant win over Chennai Super Kings at the Chinnaswamy. As Sarfaraz walked back after a blazing knock, Kohli called out to him amid the noise of the crowd. When the CSK batter turned around, Kohli applauded and gave him a thumbs-up, acknowledging an innings that briefly brought life into an otherwise struggling chase. Sarfaraz had taken charge when CSK were in deep trouble. Reduced to 30 for 3 inside the first three overs while chasing 251, the visitors were staring at an early collapse. It was then that he counterattacked with intent, finding boundaries consistently and racing to a 25-ball fifty. His effort helped CSK reach 77 by the end of the powerplay, offering a glimmer of hope. However, the momentum did not last long. Sarfaraz was dismissed on the first ball after the powerplay, stumped off Krunal Pandya by Jitesh Sharma, ending a crucial stand just when CSK needed him to carry on. Earlier in the evening, RCB had set up the match with a commanding batting display. Kohli and Phil Salt gave them a steady start before Devdutt Padikkal took charge with a fluent half-century. The innings then exploded at the death, with skipper Rajat Patidar and Tim David unleashing a relentless assault, adding 99 runs in just 35 balls to propel RCB to 250 for 3. In response, CSK never fully recovered from the early blows delivered by Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Jacob Duffy. Contributions from Prashant Veer and Jamie Overton helped them cross 200, but the target remained well out of reach as they were bowled out for 207 in 19.4 overs, slumping to their third straight defeat. While RCB sealed a comprehensive 43-run win, it was Kohli’s gesture towards Sarfaraz that stood out, a moment of appreciation in the middle of a high-intensity contest.

Did India’s deadliest air disaster in decades begin with a mechanical failure, seconds before the fuel switches cutoff? A deep-dive into the central unresolved question of the Air India flight 171 Ahmedabad accident inquiry.MUMBAI: On the afternoon of June 12, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner lifted off runway 23 at the Ahmedabad airport, bound for London Gatwick with 242 people aboard. Thirty-two seconds later, the aircraft was falling. By 1:39:05 pm, one of the pilots had transmitted a desperate Mayday, Mayday, Mayday call before the aircraft struck the BJ Medical College hostel complex, 1.6 km from the departure end of the runway. Two hundred and forty-one people died. One passenger survived.In the months that followed, a narrative took hold in certain sections of the international and domestic media and in online aviation forums that the accident was caused by a deliberate act. That the Pilot-in-Command of Air India 171 had, for reasons unknown, reached across the centre pedestal and moved both fuel control switches from RUN to CUTOFF during the initial climb, starving both engines of fuel and causing the crash. The theory took-off, it was simple to grasp and seemed to connect the dots.There was one problem, the official investigation had not said that. But it did not say otherwise, either. The deadline for submission of final report is June 12. Three months before the deadline an Indian pilots’ organisation has formally raised a technical question that cuts to the very foundation of that suicide-narrative.The question is: Did the Ram Air Turbine deploy before the fuel control switches moved?

What is a Ram Air Turbine?

It is Boeing 787’s emergency power system, the absolute last resort that comes to the aid of pilots when every other electrical power generation on the aircraft has stopped. In aviation, everyone calls it the RAT. It’s a small wind turbine that deploys automatically after a complete power failure. It can be deployed manually as well. RAT lives in a small compartment in the under belly of the aircraft, folded away, and in the normal course of events it stays there for the entire life of the plane. When deployed, its small propeller swings out into the airstream. The propeller spins in the wind, drives a hydraulic pump and a generator which keeps just enough of the flight controls alive for the crew to have a fighting chance at landing the aircraft. It’s a bellwether of sorts signalling a catastrophic emergency, if it is visible it means something has gone very badly wrong with the aircraft.Going back to the core question asked by pilots’ body, if the RAT deployed first and the fuel switches moved after that, it would mean the aircraft had already lost electrical power before anyone touched anything, that the emergency had begun on its own, independent of any crew action, and that the fuel switch movements recorded seconds later were not the cause of the disaster but a consequence of the technical problem. The suicide theory won’t hold ground because it would mean the two pilots died trying to save 241 people from the doings of an errant aircraft. On that fateful day, Air India B787’s RAT deployed just as the aircraft lifted off, even before the aircraft could cross the airport boundary wall, said the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB)’s preliminary report. A larger proof of early RAT deployment also sits in the very same preliminary report that was used to drive the suicide narrative.

The evidence as recorded by AAIB

There is a crucial photograph in the preliminary report. It appears on page 14 of the 15 paged report, the investigators seem to have included that picture almost as an afterthought. It is a CCTV frame, slightly grainy the way airport security footage always is, showing Air India VT-ANB just after it has lifted off runway 23. The aircraft looks normal, it is climbing. The landing gear is still down. Just behind the landing gear, on the underside of the fuselage, circled in the report with a small annotation is the RAT, already deployed, a device that should never be visible on a healthy aircraft, let alone in the first few seconds after lift-off. The RAT already extended, the report notes this and moves on.To know what happened first, the RAT deployment or the fuel switches moved to CUTOFF, it is essential to study in seconds the timeline after the B787 lift-off. The AAIB preliminary report establishes the following sequence taken from data recorded in a black box, the ‘Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorder’ (EAFR) of the Boeing 787-8 involved:

Immediately thereafter, the report states, Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF, one after another, with a time gap of approximately one second.Then comes the most interpreted line in the report. “In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so.” The report thereafter speaks about the above-mentioned CCTV footage. “RAT getting deployed during the initial climb immediately after lift-off. “

(report gives timings in UTC)

The four-second window. why it matters?

At first glance, the AAIB timeline appears straightforward: fuel switches moved at approximately 1:38:42 pm; RAT began supplying hydraulic power at 1:38:47 pm, four seconds later.Using the timeline, the chronology of events the AAIB report implied is: first, the engines starved (either because a pilot manually cut off the fuel to both engines or because the aircraft cut off the fuel without input from pilot, an uncommanded fuel switch cutoff, a technical glitch) and second, the RAT deployed as a consequence.But the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP), in two letters, dated March 12, addressed to the AAIB director general has identified what it describes a technical discrepancy at the heart of this sequence of events, a discrepancy that has significant implications for the entire causal chain.

The FIP’s argument rests on RAT manufacturer’s documentation

The pilots’ body draws the AAIB’s attention to page 288 of the “Boeing 787 Electrical System Familiarisation” training manual published by Hamilton Sundstrand, now Collins Aerospace, a unit of RTX Corporation, the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of the B787 RAT system. The document states plainly that the RAT deployment signal is generated 10 seconds after complete loss of electrical supply. Then on page 292 of the same document, it states each Bus Power Control Unit (BPCU) independently requests RAT deployment 15 seconds after either continuous loss of power.To reiterate, the document published by the RAT manufacturer has two trigger thresholds, 10 seconds and 15 seconds, depending on the specific logic pathway activated. After the trigger, the small door that keeps RAT encased in the aircraft belly opens, the small propeller juts out and extends into the air stream to spin and generate power, all of which would take another handful of seconds.That is where the discrepancy is located because the AAIB preliminary report records the elapsed time between the second fuel cutoff switch movement at 1:38:43 pm and RAT hydraulic power supply at 1:38:47 pm as four seconds.The core argument made by the pilots’ body is this: AAIB report states RAT deployed four seconds after power failed, but the equipment manufacturer puts a time of 10-15 seconds for RAT to deploy after power failure. According to the manufacturer’s own system documentation, the RAT on a Boeing 787 cannot begin supplying hydraulic power just four seconds after losing electrical supply.The technical implication is this: if the RAT system’s own design logic requires 10 to 15 seconds to trigger from electrical loss, and the preliminary report records only a 4-second gap between fuel cutoff and RAT hydraulic output, then the RAT may have been triggered by a condition that preceded the fuel cutoff events and not followed them.Something may have gone wrong with the aircraft’s electrical system before the fuel switches moved.

The CCTV evidence and the second fip letter

The FIP’s second letter to the AAIB sent on the same date raises a separate but related line of inquiry rooted in visual evidence.Four sequential photographic frames extracted from CCTV footage obtained from Ahmedabad airport show a small dark object appearing and progressively increasing in size on the aircraft’s underbelly, at the location corresponding to the RAT door, states the FIP letter. This sequence begins while the aircraft is still rolling on the runway, before the fuel control switches could have moved, since the black box data confirms those switches transitioned only after the aircraft was airborne and had reached 180 knots.“The sequence from Frame 1 to Frame 4 appears consistent with RAT door opening and/or RAT deployment while the aircraft is rolling on the runway,” the letter states, highlighting those last few words in a bold font.The FIP letter requested that the AAIB formally correlate this visual sequence with the EAFR-black box timeline. It also suggested that a flight simulator reconstruction be conducted with time-synchronised overlay of the photographic sequence, under two scenarios: an electrical failure leading to automatic RAT deployment, and manual selection of fuel control switches to CUTOFF by the flight crew.“The purpose of the above exercise is to ascertain whether the root cause relates to a technical failure or to deliberate pilot action,” said the FIP letter. It then requests that the Final AAIB report be released only after this simulator evaluation is completed and formally recorded. The deadline for final report release is June 12, 2026.

What the preliminary report does and does not say

The AAIB preliminary report is a factual document, all preliminary reports under UN’s International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 13 conventions are required to carry technical facts and data from black boxes. Under the ICAO provisions, a report should not apportion blame.But the AAIB preliminary report’s structure and language is not neutral. Several details have fed the media narrative of deliberate pilot action.The AAIB report notes that the co-pilot was ‘Pilot Flying’ and the Pilot-in-command was ‘Pilot Monitoring’ for the said flight. The report records the cockpit voice recorder exchange in which one pilot denies cutting off fuel. It paraphrases the conversation. It also offers no analysis of what that exchange means or whether there was any other conversation after that question and answer sequence. It records the transition of fuel switches to CUTOFF “immediately” after the aircraft reached maximum recorded airspeed, without discussing what action, by the man or machine, may have caused those switches to move. One can always argue that these details will be revealed in the final report, the preliminary report comes a month after the accident and so it is too early to put out conclusive arguments.The AAIB report separately notes a detail. A US Federation Aviation Administration’s Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin issued in December 2018 regarding the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature on Boeing aircraft, based on reports from 737 operators that switches had been installed with the locking feature disengaged. The AAIB notes that this bulletin was advisory and not mandatory, that Air India had not carried out the suggested inspections on VT-ANB. It also notes that there has been no defect reported pertaining to the fuel control switch since 2023 on VT-ANB. The throttle control module was replaced on VT-ANB in 2019 and in 2023.The report does not pursue this thread further, but its presence in the preliminary findings is notable. The locking feature exists precisely to prevent inadvertent movement of fuel control switches. If that feature was compromised on VT-ANB, it could have been worn, disengaged, or otherwise degraded, then switches that should have required deliberate and purposeful action to move could theoretically have moved without deliberate action.

Three possible readings

The discrepancy between the RAT OEM documentation and the AAIB’s recorded timeline can be put into three broad interpretations, said senior pilots.The first is that the timeline is accurate, and the 4-second gap reflects not automatic RAT deployment triggered by electrical loss, but manual RAT deployment, commanded by a crew member almost simultaneously with the fuel cutoff. Manual deployment bypasses the automatic trigger logic entirely. Under this reading, a crew member, perhaps recognising a sudden emergency, may have manually deployed the RAT even as the fuel switches were being moved, whether deliberately or as part of a panicked emergency response.The second is that there is a recording or synchronisation issue in the EAFR data. The FIP letter raises this possibility, asking the AAIB to clarify what specific EAFR parameter was used to determine the time when “RAT hydraulic pump began supplying hydraulic power,” and whether the Bureau has technically validated the parameter definitions, sampling resolution, and time-base synchronisation underlying the recorded 4-second interval. If the EAFR parameter captures the onset of electrical distress rather than the physical output of the RAT turbine, the apparent 4-second interval may represent an earlier trigger event, one that preceded the fuel switch movements.The third is the one the FIP is most explicitly gesturing toward without fully stating, that the electrical failure occurred before the fuel switches moved. That VT-ANB suffered a catastrophic loss of electrical power, from an as-yet unidentified cause, sometime during the initial climb before 1:38:42 pm; that this triggered the RAT deployment sequence. The recorded fuel switch movements were not the initiating event, it happened later, perhaps an inadvertent mechanical displacement caused by the power loss and its effects on cockpit systems, or a crew response to a total electrical failure whose cause they could not immediately identify. This reading would be consistent with the cockpit voice recording of one pilot denying that he moved the switches. It would also be consistent with the FIP’s reading of the CCTV frames showing RAT door movement while the aircraft was still on the runway.

What the AAIB must now answer

The FIP, in its March 2026 letters, has posed specific, technically documented questions to the AAIB that take on the sequencing issue. These questions deserve to be answered, clearly and on the record, in the final report.

Beyond these specific questions, the FIP has called for a flight simulator reconstruction using the actual photographic frame sequence overlaid on DFDR data, under both the electrical failure and deliberate-crew-action scenarios. Simulator reconstructions are standard tools of modern accident investigation. This is a case where the two scenarios produce fundamentally different moral and legal outcomes for the reputations of the dead crew and for the families of 241 victims.

The stakes of getting this wrong

If the investigation concludes that deliberate pilot action caused the crash without exhaustively ruling out a technical failure scenario the two dead pilots, who cannot speak for themselves, will carry a legacy of mass murder for the rest of recorded history. The airline, Boeing, the OEM, regulators, and the safety system as a whole will be insulated from scrutiny they may deserve. If there indeed is an undetected systemic failure in the B787’s electrical architecture or fuel control system, it will go unaddressed. That would mean the investigation failed in entirety because under ICAO norms aircraft investigations are carried out only and only to learn lessons, to prevent a repeat. The Federation of Indian Pilots has placed specific, technically documented, formally submitted evidence before the investigation authority. With that the question of whether the RAT deployed before or after the fuel control switches moved is now the most crucial one in this investigation. The final report of the Air India 171 Ahmedabad accident will be one of the most consequential aviation safety documents in the history of Indian civil aviation. Before it is published, the four-second question deserves a complete, transparent, and technically rigorous answer.