AD

Wednesday 15 March 2017

Monetary Policy Committee.

Monetary Policy Committee
The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (RBI Act) has been amended by the Finance Act, 2016,  to provide for a statutory and institutionalised framework for a Monetary Policy Committee, for maintaining price stability, while keeping in mind the objective of growth.
The Monetary Policy Committee would be entrusted with the task of fixing the benchmark policy rate (repo rate) required to contain inflation within the specified target level.
The meetings of the Monetary Policy Committee shall be held at least 4 times a year and it shall publish its decisions after each such meeting.
As per the provisions of the RBI Act, out of the six Members of Monetary Policy Committee, three Members will be from the RBI and the other three Members of MPC will be appointed by the Central Government.
The Monetary Policy Committee of RBI has the following composition, namely:-
  • Urjit Patel, The Governor of the Bank—Chairperson, ex officio;
  • Deputy Governor of the Bank, in charge of Monetary Policy—Member, ex officio;
  • One officer of the Bank to be nominated by the Central Board—Member, ex officio;
  • Shri Chetan Ghate, Professor, Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) —Member
  • Professor Pami Dua, Director, Delhi School of Economics (DSE) — Member        
  • Dr. Ravindra H. Dholakia, Professor, Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmedabad—  Member
The Members of the Monetary Policy Committee appointed by the Central Government shall hold office for a period of four years.

Introduction of Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account (BSBDA)

Basic Savings Bank Deposit Accounts (BSBDA)
RBI in 2012 came out with fresh guidelines and asked banks to offer a ‘Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account’.
The aim of introducing 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' is very much part of the efforts of RBI for furthering Financial Inclusion objectives. All the accounts opened earlier as 'no-frills' account will be renamed as BSBDA.
The 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' would be subject to provisions of PML Act and Rules and RBI instructions on Know Your Customer (KYC) / Anti-Money Laundering (AML) for opening of bank accounts issued from time to time.
BSBDA can also be opened with simplified KYC norms. However, if BSBDA is opened on the basis of Simplified KYC, the accounts would additionally be treated as “BSBDA-SMALL account.
Features
  • An individual is eligible to have only one 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' in one bank.
  • Also, Holders of 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' will not be eligible for opening any other savings account in that bank. If a customer has any other existing savings account in that bank, he / she will be required to close it within 30 days from the date of opening a 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account'.
  • However, One can have Term/Fixed Deposit, Recurring Deposit etc., accounts in the bank where one holds 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account'.
  • Banks are advised not to impose restrictions like age and income criteria of the individual for opening BSBDA.
  • The services available free in the 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account’ will include deposit and withdrawal of cash; receipt / credit of money through electronic payment channels or by means of deposit / collection of cheques at bank branches as well as ATMs.
  • There is no requirement for any initial deposit for opening a BSBDA.
  • Banks should offer the ATM Debit Cards free of charge and no Annual fee should be levied on such Cards.
Conditions
  • Total credits in such accounts should not exceed one lakh rupees in a year.
  • Maximum balance in the account should not exceed fifty thousand rupees at any time
  • The total of debits by way of cash withdrawals and transfers will not exceed ten thousand rupees in a month
  • Foreign remittances can not be credited to Small Accounts without completing normal KYC formalities
  • Small accounts are valid for a period of 12 months initially which may be extended by another 12 months if the person provides proof of having applied for an Officially Valid Document.
  • Small Accounts can only be opened at CBS linked branches of banks or at such branches where it is possible to manually monitor the fulfilments of the conditions.

Daily English Vocabulary Capsule.

The art of building majorities
The BJP’s ideology has more takers than before because it is framing the main issues for elections.
The State elections of 2017 clearly demonstrate that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has replaced the Congress as the principal national party in the country. It won massive victories in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, and emerged as a big player in Manipur. In Goa it remained the single largest party in terms of vote share despite a hugely unpopular outgoing Chief Minister. The only disappointment is Punjab where the party was routed(पराजित करना/हराना) with its senior partner Shiromani Akali Dal after ruling the State for 10 years.
The spectacular performance of the BJP in U.P. should not detract (कम होना /घटना) from its formidable achievements in the recently concluded local elections, where it made huge strides in previously uncharted territory. In Odisha’s Zilla Parishad elections, the party expanded its footprint from 36 seats in 2012 to 306 in 2017, snatching second place away from the Congress to become a formidable contender to the long incumbent (पदस्थ/पदासीन) Biju Janata Dal. In Maharashtra, the BJP won eight of 10 municipal corporations with its total number of seats nearly equal to that of all other parties combined.
Explaining the rise
The electoral success of the BJP raises an important question. Without being able to meet expectations built up in 2014, in the absence of a surging economy, and with the poor decision on demonetisation, how is the party achieving so much success? There is one obvious reason: Prime Minister Narendra Modi remains very popular while the Congress party’s leadership no longer resonates with voters. However, leadership is not the only factor. The BJP is acquiring hegemonic (प्राधान्य/आधिपत्य) status in the Indian polity owing largely to ideological consolidation and its creation of an unparalleled election machine.
The BJP’s ideology has more takers than before because the party frames the main issues for the elections. Its long-standing ideological association with nationalism renders nationalism an issue on which it has a huge advantage over all other parties. Parties that are able to successfully shape election campaigns around their own issues ultimately succeed in winning elections. By placing a large emphasis on nationalism, the party has cleverly tailored its ideological message to be able to capture the imagination of a larger section of the public. It has opened ideological battlefronts in many different spheres — from universities to movie theatres — and promoted conflicts across the board. It has also placed a large emphasis on other issues that it has traditionally been associated with, such as national security and terrorism, patriotism and more recently, corruption.
For a very long time the Jan Sangh and then the BJP relied almost exclusively on the hard-line Hindu nationalists who reside with its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). This is no longer the case. Hindu traditionalists, those who are drawn to a conservative Hindu way of life but are largely opposed to the hard-line Hindutva world view and its intolerance towards other religions, have now shifted their support from the Congress to the BJP. This allows the BJP to win elections without nominating a single Muslim, as it did recently in U.P.
Forging multi-caste coalitions
The party has also revamped its electoral strategy, one focussed on widening its appeal by stitching together multi-caste coalitions. As is widely known, the BJP’s traditional social base is predominantly upper caste. To increase its support base, it has been building an electoral machine of its own at the local level in the form of caste-based coalitions. Fully aware that the party would not receive much support from the Muslims and perhaps even the Jatavs, the former traditionally associated with the Samajwadi Party (SP) and the latter with the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), its leaders targeted the smaller groups that don’t have adequate representation in any of the larger parties. For instance, the BJP tied up with parties like the Apna Dal and Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party, giving it the support of a large section of the Kurmi and Rajbhar populations, respectively. It also increased its ticket allocations to non-Yadav OBCs and non-Jatav Dalits. Its campaign was led by a galaxy of local and national leaders, together covering aneclectic (संकलक/चयनशील) set of caste groups — almost a Congress-style coalition — but without the Muslims and some Dalit communities.
The BJP’s active use of state patronage has also played a big role in strengthening its national footing. In States where the party has come to power, and even at the national level, it has actively worked to break down the existing patronage machinery and replace it with one of its own. For instance, in Maharashtra, a State ruled by the Congress-Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) for more than a decade before the Devendra Fadnavis government assumed office, the BJP has been steadily dismantling the patronage structures put in place by its predecessors. Through ordinances and amendments, the government has managed to severely weaken the hold of NCP and Congress leaders on the powerful cooperative bodies in the State, including the cooperative sugar factories which have been under the tight grip of NCP leader Sharad Pawar for decades. The government not only created a provision whereby it could appoint independent members to the boards of these bodies, but also imposed restrictions on the existing board members, hailing largely from the Congress or NCP, from contesting elections to particular cooperative banks. At the national level, the Modi government removed scores of previous United Progressive Alliance-era political appointees, particularly those notorious (कुख्यात/कुप्रसिद्ध) for their role in creating the large NPA (non-performing assets) problem facing the public sector banks today, and replaced them with its own people.
Risks of rapid expansion
On the electoral front, this has translated into the BJP aggressively co-opting individuals and units of other parties to strengthen its leadership. From Rita Bahuguna Joshi in U.P. to Himanta Biswa Sarma in Assam, the BJP has taken in many rival leaders into its fold before elections. This resembles the strategy followed by the Congress in the 1970s, at the peak of Indira Gandhi’s rule. While in the short term, this strategy is giving the party immense electoral success and helping it expand its footprint, just as it had done for the Congress back then, in the medium to long term it poses grave risks. Many politicians and smaller parties have joined the BJP bandwagon as it looks the most lucrative (लाभ कर/फायदे का) option electorally, and they may desert (त्यागना/छोड़ना) it at next chance. In addition, as the BJP continues to bring into its fold leaders and parties from outside its ideological umbrella, it risks diluting the content of its ideology over time. If uninhibited, this could also lead to tensions between the BJP and the RSS.
The BJP has undoubtedly replaced the Congress as the dominant national party and the cornerstone of India’s political and electoral system. This development has squeezed the space for centre-left forces in India’s polity and has given popular legitimacy to the centre-right narrative on issues of nationalism, secularism and social justice. As Yogendra Yadav has rightly pointed out, the centre-left needs a new vocabulary on the issue of social justice as the BJP has managed to convince a large section of society that the left’s language on the issue reeks of biases based on caste and religion.
However, in order for the BJP to remain the dominant national party for a sustained period of time, it too needs to introspect to ensure it isn’t compromising long-term success for short-term rewards. Going forward, it should continue to widen its social base while ensuring it doesn’t lose its ideological identity. Otherwise, it will only remain dominant as long as a Mr. Modi remains at the helm (शिखर पर). As when individuals acquire larger salience (प्रमुखता) over ideology and organisation in parties, it leads to their decline down the road. That is exactly what happened to the Congress.
Courtesy: The Hindu (Politics)
1. Rout (verb): To defeat completely/ forcing into disorderedly retreat.   (पराजित करना/हराना)
Synonyms: Defeat
Antonyms: Win, Victory
Example: In recent Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections BJP routed its opponents in and proved its political dominance.
Verb Form: Rout, Routed, Routed.

2. Detract (verb): To subtract or diminish something. (कम होना /घटना)
Synonyms: Depreciate, Derogate, Devalue, Underrate, Undervalue
Antonyms: Enlarge, Develop, Grow, Overrate, Upgrade
Example: But all these operations render the metals harder, and detract them from their plasticity.
Verb Form: Detract, Detracted, Detracted
Related Words: Detraction (Noun) - महत्त्व कम करना / नीचा दिखाना

3. Incumbent (adjective): (Of an official or regime) currently holding office. (पदस्थ/पदासीन)
Synonym:  Current, Existing, Present, In Office, In Power, Reigning.
Antonyms: Retired, Resigned, Superannuated.
Example: The Incumbent President ordered to Implement new policies immediately.
Related words:
Incumbency (noun) - पदग्रहण 

4. Hegemonic (adjective): Domination of an authority over another authority. (Especially in politics or society aspects.) (प्राधान्य/आधिपत्य)
Synonyms: Dominance, Authority, superiority.
Antonyms: Inferiority,
Example: By Winning consecutive elections across the country, BJP has proved its hegemonic existence.
Related Words:
Hegemony (Noun) – प्रधानता
Hegemonist (noun) – प्रधान

5. Eclectic (adjective): Selecting a mixture of what appears to be best of various methods or styles.  (संकलक/चयनशील)
Synonyms: Catholic, Diverse, Inclusive, Liberal, Mingled, Varied
Antonyms: Homogenous, Orthodox, Standard, Uniform.
Example: An eclectic set of all elements is needed for betterment of any society.
 
Related Words:
Eclecticism (noun) – Any form of art that borrows from other styles.

6. Notorious (adjective): Widely known but especially for something bad.  (कुख्यात/कुप्रसिद्ध)
Synonyms: Ill-Famed, Infamous, Disrepute,
Antonyms: Famous, Popular, Reputed.
Example: Marked by his notoriousness, the court denied his bail.
Related Words:
Notoriously (adverb) – in a notorious manner.
Notoriousness (noun) – infamy.

7. Lucrative (adjective): Producing a surplus/ something that seems profitable.  (लाभ कर/फायदे का)  
Synonyms: Advantageous, gainful, paying, profitable, remunerative, worthwhile,
Antonyms: Unprofitable, poorly-paid
Example: The company advertized the product in so lucrative way that it gained an immediate popularity.
Related Words:
Lucratively (adverb) – profitably

8. Desert (verb): To leave (anything that depends on one’s presence to survive, exist or succeed.) (त्यागना/छोड़ना) 
Synonyms: Leave, Abandon, Bare, Solitary Forsake.
Antonyms: Accompany, Inhabited, Populated,
Example:  A true friend would never drive off and desert his friend in the middle of nowhere.
Verb Form: Desert, deserted, deserted.
Related Words:

9. At the helm (Idiom): To be at the top of something/ to establish oneself at the top. (शिखर पर)  
Synonyms: High, In authority
Antonyms: Irresponsible
Example: He won the elections as he as at the helm of his career.

10. Salience (noun): A highlighted or perpetual prominence. (प्रमुखता)
Synonyms: Prominence, growth
Antonyms: Depression, lack
Example: After winning several election, the party has secured a salient place in political atmosphere.
Related Words:
Salient (adjective) – प्रमुख

Daily English Vocab Capsule.

Daily English Vocab
The degradation of Indian universities through politics
Governments must recognize that the provision of resources to universities does not endow them with a right to exercise control. Photo: Raj K Raj/Hindustan Times
Universities are in the news. Yet again, for the wrong reasons. It would seem that February is jinxed (अभाग्य या बदकिस्मती होना) for universities in the Capital. This year, it was the violence in Delhi University’s (DU’s) Ramjas College. Last year, it was the storm in Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).
There have also been several instances elsewhere in India during the past 12 months, sparked by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), where harassment, intimidation or violence have been used to stifle (दबाना) independent voices. Invitations have been withdrawn. Events have been cancelled. Meetings have been disrupted. Sometimes, university administrations have taken action against the organizers, after the event, as in Jodhpur last month.
It is no coincidence that the aggressive, often militant, posture of ABVP on campuses surfaced following the election of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) governments in states. This has now been reinforced by the comfort of a BJP government at the Centre. In such episodes, university administrations have been silent spectators or have acted against those targeted by the ABVP.
These occurrences negate the essential concept of universities as autonomous spaces, where freedom of expression, exploration of ideas and advancement of knowledge are an integral part of the learning process. There are bound to be differences in views, but these must be addressed through discussion, with open minds. In this, there must be respect—not contempt—for the other. The attitude of the ABVP is the opposite, as it seems to believe that those who are not with them are against them, or worse, anti-national. And its behaviour is simply unacceptable. The ABVP has a right to disagree. It should pose questions, engage in debate, or organize events to articulate (स्पष्ट रूप से कहना) its views, but it cannot and must not seek to silence others. Universities are, above all, about reason and tolerance.
Such political intrusion in universities is not new. It began almost five decades ago, has gathered momentum in the past 25 years, and has now reached a stage that could be the edge of the precipice (a very steep or overhanging place) for public universities in India.
Starting in the late 1960s, state governments began to interfere in universities. For one, it was about dispensing patronage (संरक्षण/अधिकार) and exercising power in appointments of vice-chancellors (VCs), faculty and non-teaching staff. For another, it was about extending the political influence of ruling parties. Unions of students, teachers and employees became instruments in political battles. Campuses were turned into spheres of influence for political parties. Provincial politics also played a role, with an implicit rejection of national elites and an explicit focus on regional identities. Just as important, political parties and leaders were uncomfortable with, if not insecure about, independent voices and critical evaluation that could come from universities.
It was not long before similar reasons began to influence the attitudes of Central governments towards universities. Similar actions were a natural outcome. The turning point, perhaps, was 1977, the end of the era of majority governments and one-party rule. It gathered momentum after 1989. There were short-lived coalition governments. And there were regime changes after almost every general election. The competitive politics unleashed by changes in governments soon spilt over to universities not only as spheres of influence but also as arenas for political contests. The discomfiture(घबराहट) with independent or critical voices, even if few, grew rapidly. Central universities were no longer immune.
The decline of public universities in India has been an inevitable consequence of this process. The first set to bear the brunt were the universities of national standing in states. The obvious examples are Allahabad, Lucknow and Patna among the old, with Baroda and Rajasthan among the new. These are not even pale shadows of what they were until around 1980. The next set to be progressively damaged were the oldest national universities in the states—Bombay, Calcutta and Madras—established more than 150 years ago. Their drop in quality is alarming. DU and JNU continued to look good in comparison, not because they got better but because others declined so rapidly. Unfolding reality suggests that they cannot be exceptions for long.
This downward trajectory might just gather pace. It takes years, even decades, to build institutions. But it takes much less time to damage them. What is more, short-term actions have long-term consequences, so that revival is a difficult task. Indeed, we are simply mortgaging (Used figuratively -expose to future risk or constraint for the sake of immediate advantage.) the future of public universities in India.
It would seem that the political class and the ruling elite do not have an understanding of the critical role of universities in society and democracy. It is a serious mistake to think of universities as campuses or classrooms that teach young people to pass examinations, obtain degrees, and become employable, where research is subsidiary (less important than but related or supplementary to something.) or does not matter. Universities are about far more. For students, there is so much learning outside the classroom that makes them good citizens of society. For faculty, apart from commitment to their teaching and their research, there is a role in society as intellectuals who can provide an independent, credible, voice in evaluating governments, parliament, legislatures, or the judiciary, as guardians of society. This role is particularly important in a political democracy.
Thus, academic freedom is primary because universities are places for raising doubts and asking questions about everything. Exploring ideas, debating issues and thinking independently are essential in the quest for excellence. It would enable universities to be the conscience-keepers of economy, polity and society. Hence, the autonomy of this space is sacrosanct (रक्षणीय). Of course, this cannot suffice where quality is poor or standards are low. That needs reform and change within universities.
Alas, the political process, parties and governments alike, meddle in universities. In India, this has become more and more intrusive with the passage of time. Micromanagement by governments is widespread. Interventions are purposive (having or done with a purpose.) and partisan(पक्षपातपूर्ण). These can be direct, or indirect, through the University Grants Commission and pliant VCs. The motives are political. Such interventions are characteristic of all governments, whether at the Centre or in the states, and every political party, irrespective of ideology. There are no exceptions. The cadre-based parties are worse: the Communist Party of India (Marxist), mostly in the past, and the BJP, on the rise, at present. Of course, the Congress is almost the same, much experienced through long practice. The irony of double standards is striking. The same political parties when in government invoke public interest and when in opposition wax eloquent about autonomy and freedom for universities.
It is essential for governments to recognize that the provision of resources to universities does not endow them with a right to exercise control. The resources are public money for public universities, which are accountable to students and society through institutional mechanisms that exist or can be created. Every government laments the absence of world-class universities, without realizing that it is attributable in part to their interventions and the growing intrusion of political processes. Where politics is largely kept out—as in Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian Institutes of Management or the Indian Institute of Science—institutions thrive.
The blame for the present state of our universities cannot be laid at the door of politics and governments alone. Universities as communities, and as institutions, are just as much to blame. The quality of leadership at universities has declined rapidly, in part because of partisan appointments by governments of VCs who are simply not good enough as academics or administrators, and in part because most VCs simply do not have the courage and the integrity to stand up to governments but have an eye on the next job they might get. The professoriate (a group of professors.) is mostly either complicit(involved with others in an activity that is unlawful or morally wrong.), as part of the political process in teachers’ unions, or just silent, preferring to look the other way, engaged in their narrow academic pursuits. Those who stand up are too few. The students are either caught up in the same party-political unions or opt out to concentrate on their academic tasks.
For university communities, it is imperative to recognize that such compromises are self-destructive as acts of commission. So is opting out, as an act of omission. Indeed, if universities want autonomy, it will not be conferred on them by benevolent (हितैषी) governments. They have to claim their autonomy. In this quest, solidarity within universities—leadership, faculty and students—and among universities—is absolutely essential. The whole is greater than the sum total of parts. And its voice cannot go unheard.
Structures of governance in universities must be conducive to autonomy. The best model would be a board of governors, to which governments could nominate at the most one-third the total number. The other members, two-thirds or more, should be independent, of whom one-half should be distinguished academics while one-half should be drawn from industry, civil society or professions. The chairman should be an eminent academic with administrative experience. Members of the board should have a term of six years, with one-third retiring every two years. The VC, to be appointed by the board with a six-year tenure, would be an ex-officio member. Except for nominees of governments, the board should decide on replacements for its retiring members.
Such institutional mechanisms are necessary but not sufficient. A better world will become possible if we can make two radical departures from our past. Governments and political parties must stop playing politics in universities and stop turning them into arenas for political battles. Universities must reclaim their autonomy from governments, for which university communities need to come together, and just focus on raising academic standards in pursuit of academic excellence.
Courtesy: Live Mint (National)

1. Jinx (verb): Bring bad luck to; cast an evil spell on. (अभाग्य या बदकिस्मती होना)
Synonyms: Bewitch, Hoodoo, Hex.
Antonyms: Boon, Luck, Advantage.
Example: His luck has been so bad he feels jinxed.
Verb forms: Jinx, Jinxed, Jinxed.
Related words:
Jinx (noun) - बदकिस्मती

2. Stifle (verb): Restrain (a reaction) or stop oneself acting on (दबाना)
Synonyms: Suppress, Smother, Restrain.
Antonyms: Allow, Release, Assist, Encourage, Free.
Example: Some medical researchers believe the reduction of animal testing will have a stifling effect on drug innovation.
Verb forms: Stifle, Stifled, Stifled.

3. Articulate (verb): Express clearly and distinctly. (स्पष्ट रूप से कहना)
Synonyms: State Clearly, Express Distinctly, Say Lucidly.
Antonyms: Inarticulate, Unclear, Vaguely Represent. 
Example: The president is known for his ability to articulate his thoughts in front of millions of people.
Verb forms: Articulate, Articulated, Articulated.
Related words:
Articulately (adverb) - स्पष्टत:

4. Patronage (noun): Support or sponsorship/ the support given by a patron. (संरक्षण/अधिकार) 
Synonyms: Backing, Sponsorship, Guardianship, Aegis.
Antonyms: Obstruction, Opposition, Antagonism.
Example: Since patronage of the food kitchen has decreased, we have had to reduce the number of meals we serve the homeless each day.
Related words:
Patron (noun) – संरक्षक

5. Discomfiture (noun):  A feeling of unease (घबराहट) 
Synonyms: Unease, Discomfort, Discomposure, Disconcertion.
Antonyms: Delight, Composure, Equanimity.
Example: The Political dominance has created a kind of discomfiture for honest voices in the country.
Verb forms: Discomfit, Discomfited, Discomfited.
Related words:
Discomfit (verb) - Cause to lose one's composure

6. Sacrosanct (adjective):  Too important or respected to be criticized or changed (रक्षणीय)
Synonyms: Inviolable, Unimpeachable, Unchallengeable.
Antonyms: Profane, Unsacred.
Example: During the financial meeting, the company president reminded everyone that no department was too sacrosanct to avoid a cut in its yearly budget.

7. Mortgage (verb): Figurative form -expose to future risk or constraint for the sake of immediate advantage. (Literally) -  Convey (a property) to a creditor as security on a loan.(गिरवी रखना)
Synonyms: Pledge, Guarantee, Pawn.
Example: In the U.S., many people have to mortgage their house to pay for the medical care of a family member who becomes seriously ill.
Verb forms: Mortgage, Mortgaged, Mortgaged.

8. Partisan (adjective): Prejudiced in favor of a particular cause (पक्षपातपूर्ण)
Synonyms: Biased, Prejudiced, Discriminatory, Preferential, Partial, Factional.
Antonyms: Fair, Unbiased, Impartial.
Example: Please listen to the entire suggestion before you decide to make a partisan issue out of one part of the proposal!
Related words:
Partisanship (noun) – An inclination to favor one group or view or opinion over alternatives.

9. Complicit (adjective): Involved with others in an activity that is unlawful or morally wrong. (सह-अपराधी)
Synonyms: Cahoot, Conniving, Conspiring, Colluding.
Antonyms: Clear, Honest, Straightforward.
Example: Your complicity in the crime is probably going to earn you five years in prison.
Related words:
Complicity (noun) – सहअपराधिता

10. Benevolent (adjective): Willing to help, do good, and be generous towards people (हितैषी)
Synonyms: Benign, Generous, Helpful, Unselfish, Unstinting.
Antonyms: Stingy, Unkind, Malevolent, Selfish.
Example: She was a benevolent woman, volunteering all of her free time to charitable organizations.
Related words:
Benevolently (adverb) - Generous in providing aid to others.

Daily English Capsule Day 22

Hi, Friends, iam back with some of new actions. so please read always my blog. Hunting for Solutions In July 2015, when Cecil, a...