New video by T-Series on YouTube

Fauji 2: Naina Bole (Song) | Ankita Lokhande | Shreyas Puranik | Pratibha S | Prashant | Sandeep S
Love finds its way in the most unexpected places... even in the disciplined life of a cadet! Naina Bole is a soulful melody that captures the innocent yet intense emotions of young cadets as they find themselves enchanted by their graceful dance teacher, played by the stunning Ankita Lokhande. A mesmerizing composition by Shreyas Puranik and lyrics penned by Shreyas Puranik and Prashant Ingole, this song beautifully expresses how unspoken words are conveyed through the language of the eyes. The soulful voice of Pratibha Singh Baghel adds a magical touch to this heartwarming tale of admiration, longing, and unsaid feelings. Presenting the "Naina Bole (Song)" From Fauji 2. #Fauji2 #Jahaan #AnkitaLokhande Audio Credits: Singer: Pratibha Singh Baghel Composer: Shreyas Puranik Lyrics: Shreyas Puranik & Prashant Ingole Mixing & Mastering: Tosief Shaikh Music Arranged By: Saajid Salaam Recorded at: Studio 504 – Rahul Sharma Music Label - T-Series Video Credits: Producer, Creative Director & Concept: Sandeep Singh Director: Nishant Chandra Shekhar Creative Head: Sameer Hallim DOP: Neeshank Vikas Mathure Editor: Rahul Om Reniwal Actors: Aashish Bhardwaj, Utkarsh Kohli, Rudra Soni, Amardeep Singh Phogat, Niel Satpuda, Suvansh Dhar, Priyanshu Rajguru, Ayaan Manchanda, Maansi, Sushmita Bhandari, Diana, Ayushi Upadhyay Di Colorist: Ajit Singh (Raj Studios) Download Song Beat: https://bit.ly/3Cjh24R ___________________________________ Enjoy & stay connected with us! 👉 Subscribe to T-Series: https://youtube.com/tseries 👉 Like us on Facebook: https://ift.tt/sPUcb58 👉 Follow us on X: https://twitter.com/tseries 👉 Follow us on Instagram: https://ift.tt/trEoDhj

View on YouTube

Comments

Trump's Attempt to Unilaterally Control State and Local Funding is Dangerous, Dumb, and Undemocratic

The Trump administration has not been subtle in its desire to use federal funding for political punishment. Whether threatening to cut off grants to sanctuary cities, to block financial assistance to states that push back against the president’s demands, or to freeze all federal grants and loans for social services across the country, Trump and his allies want us to believe they can wield the federal budget like a weapon. The reality is that the administration’s ability to withhold or condition funding is far more limited than they let on. The Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law stand firmly in the way of this brazen abuse of presidential power. Trump’s Attempted Funding Freeze? Blocked Immediately A week into his second administration, Trump attempted to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans that fund a vast array of critical services already approved by Congress. If allowed to go into effect, this unprecedented and far-reaching...

Documents Reveal Confusion and Lack of Training in Texas Execution

As Texas seeks to execute Carl Buntion today and Melissa Lucio next week, it is worth reflecting on the grave and irreversible failures that occurred when the state executed Quintin Jones on May 19, 2021. For the first time in its history — and in violation of a federal court’s directive and the Texas Administrative Code — Texas excluded the media from witnessing the state’s execution of Quintin Jones. In the months that followed, Texas executed two additional people without providing any assurance that the underlying dysfunction causing errors at Mr. Jones’ execution were addressed. This is particularly concerning given that Texas has executed far more people than any other state and has botched numerous executions. The First Amendment guarantees the public and the press have a right to observe executions. Media access to executions is a critical form of public oversight as the government exerts its power to end a human life. Consistent with Texas policy, two reporters travelled t...

The Supreme Court Declined a Protestors' Rights Case. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a case, Mckesson v. Doe , that could have affirmed that the First Amendment protects protest organizers from being held liable for illegal actions committed by others present that organizers did not direct or intend. The high court’s decision to not hear the case at this time left in place an opinion by the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, that said a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others based on nothing more than a showing of negligence. Across the country, many people have expressed concern about how the Supreme Court’s decision not to review, or hear, the case at this stage could impact the right to protest. The ACLU, which asked the court to take up the case, breaks down what the court’s denial of review means. What Happened in Mckesson v. Doe? The case, Mckesson v. Doe , was brought by a police officer against DeRay Mckesson , a prominent civil rights activi...

Search This Blog