The recent violent protest by “students” of controversial Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) over the issue of hike in hostel prices has ignited a debate over the rationale behind such protests seeking rollback despite the fact that existing fees are already low in the university.
A report by Economic Times reveals that the revised hostel fees in JNU were between one-fifth and one-twentieth less compared to the fees that are borne by students in Delhi and Mumbai IITs, Chennai’s Loyola College or even higher education institutions in non-metro centres like Jalandhar and Indore.
According to the ET report, the revised hostel charges for JNU students are Rs 3,600 per annum and for students from below-poverty-line families, the revised annual charges are Rs 1,800. However, in IIT Bombay and Delhi, the annual hostel charges are much higher amounting to Rs 20,000 and Rs 15,000 per student, respectively.
The hostel charges in educational institutions in non-metro cities such as Loyola College in Chennai comes around at Rs 20,000 per year for students in humanities and sciences stream, while for engineering students, the annual fees are Rs 65,000. It is interesting that the hostel charges even non-metro institutes are much more than JNU, a university located in the national capital with extensive facilities.
In IIM Indore, a student has to pay Rs 25,000 per annum in a triple occupancy during his undergraduate course, while a post-graduate student pays Rs 75,000 per annum for single occupancy.
Reportedly, hostel charges are much higher in most undergraduate colleges as well. One of the premier colleges in the Delhi University – St Stephen’s students has a fees structure of Rs 60,000 per year while students at Mumbai’s Tata Institute of Social Sciences pay Rs 30,000 per annum.
Further, the educational institutions which are considered be second-tier also charge students multiple times higher amount compare to what was proposed in JNU. Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology Delhi (IIIT-D) has a Rs 60,000 per year charge for single occupancy and Rs 45,000 for double occupancy. In National Institute of Technology Jalandhar, a student has to shell out Rs 12,000 per year for double occupancy and Rs 18,000 per year for single occupancy. Similarly, the National Institute of Technology, Andhra Pradesh is currently charging Rs 20,000 per annum.
Despite charging more than JNU, these premier institutes and colleges still subsidise accommodation substantially. According to S Samuel Jeyaseelan, who is the hostel director of Loyola College, the college gives hostel accommodation to students from arts and science streams that includes EWS students, orphans, physically challenged persons and the cost is subsidised by the college.
“We are just able to recover the operating cost from the current charges for hostel accommodation. A large amount is being borne by the institute,” said Sarit Kumar Das, Director, IIT Ropar.
According to Anil Sahasrabudhe, “A simple principle that the institutes should follow is that they should not make hostel rent a source of income. Also, they should incur no loss or no profit from this source”.
The recent protests had erupted in JNU after the university administration had introduced fees for utility services like water and electricity on an actual basis, and a fixed charge of Rs 1700 per month for services like sanitation, maintenance, cook etc.
The room rent was also increased from ₹20 to ₹600 for single-seater and from Rs 10 to Rs 300 for double seater. One time security which is refundable had gone up from Rs 5,500 to Rs 12,000 and the students have been protesting against it.
Following the violent protests, the JNU administration had announced a ‘major rollback’ in the hostel fee hike. Despite the rollback, the JNU goons had resorted to shocking vandalism during the protest and had desecrated the soon-to-be inaugurated statue of Swami Vivekananda on campus shocking citizens across the country.
‘Pandit Krishnakant Chaturvedi will soon teach Islam, Shariat and Islamic studies…’ What happened? Shocked? No, nothing of that sort is happening right now. But think about it. If it were to actually happen in any university today. Or even if it were to happen in a madarsa where Islamic studies are imparted? It is only natural that it will come as a surprise.
Recently, in Banaras Hindu University (BHU)’s Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vigyan (SVDV) stream, a Muslim professor Dr Firoz Khan was appointed as an assistant professor. He was appointed on 5th November and as soon as students got to know of his appointment, they started protesting against it. Since past few days the students have been on a dharna outside the vice chancellor’s residence as well.
All media outlets are running the story as if the protests are opposing appointment of Muslim professor in the BHU. However, it is not so. While the name BHU may have similarities with ‘Aligarh Muslim University’ in terms of name, but no one has ever protested in BHU because of their being a Muslim. Then why is it that the students are protesting against Dr Firoz Khan and demanding his removal? OpIndia reached out to students at SVDV and the students explained their reasons for the protests.
Here it is important to note who are the students who are not able to take a Muslim teacher as a professor for Sanskrit? Are these ‘fundamentalist’ Hindus who are not able to accept a Muslim professor? Are these protests against his appointment as professor? Is this discrimination against a Muslim professor? Many such questions can be raised and many ore such conclusions can be reached. The way many from the media have done by dishing out their ‘Facebookish’ knowledge while giving a bad name to the BHU.
One Shashikant Mishra, a student in SVDV stream in BHU told OpIndia that their protest is against appointment of a non-Hindu in ‘Dharma Vigyan’ stream. They would not have opposed Dr Khan’s appointment as professor of Sanskrit language in any other streams at the BHU. The root of protests is appointment of a non-Hindu in stream about Hindu religion. The students who are protesting are also followers of Sanatan Hindu traditions and have full faith in Vedas, Vedang, Karmakand, Jyotish and have dedicated their lives to them.
Student leader Chakrapani Ojha said, “If we do not protest now, then 15 years hence this department will have one Muslim professor, department head and even dean. They will appoint more Muslims and a time will come when the ones who will be in charge of ‘Hindu Dharma Vigyan’ stream will be non-Hindus. Those who do not have any connection to Hindu Sanatan traditions, Yagnas and Jyotish. It will only be their livelihood. This will destroy the very principles Malviya ji built this great institution on.”
Chakrapani further said that to understand the reason behind the protests one needs to understand the origins of the SVDV stream. He explained that “Sanskrit Vidya Dhram Vigyan’ is the full name of the stream. There are two parts to it. First is “Sanskrit Vidya” and other is “Dharma Vigyan” (theology). Person following any religion can lean and teach Sanskrit language. But if a person who does not even believe in the core of the religious science he is supposed to teach, then one cannot have the trust and faith in what that person is teaching.
Chakrapani said that it is because of this that the SVDV stream at BHU is different from other Sanskrit streams in other universities. “In the ‘Hindu’ University, Malviya ji established this stream with an intention to establish scientific value to the Hindu beliefs. When someone from left-liberal ecosystem (helped and propped up by church and Islamic organisations) mocks and demeans Hindu traditions and faith, it is the responsibility of this Faculty to clarify and put forth the scientific (or otherwise) reasons for such a belief/tradition/matter of faith.
The building complex which houses the SVDV stream, has a temple-like structure. On its entrance, there are two pillars which have idols of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati. Most professors bow down to these idols while entering the building. Will this be possible if all the professors in SVDV stream are Muslim? You may not be aware but the “Vishwa Hindu Panchang” which decides and resolves many tithi-related festivals across the world is also published by this stream in BHU. It is unfortunate that not many people even within the BHU are unaware of it. Now think about it if after 20 years non-Hindus are made professors, department heads and dean. The definitions of so many Hindu traditions will be redefined and changed.
SVDV building at BHU (image: hindi.opindia.com)
Chakrapani further said, “We have two issues. First, the appointment was done as a part of conspiracy. Interview and entire hiring process was carried out as per insistence of Dr Firoz Khan. Our second issue is when the BHU rule itself says that a non-Hindu can neither study nor teach in SVDV stream, why is a Muslim appointed as assistant professor?”
The rule at the ‘sheela-lekh’ at BHU which states only those who follow Sanatan Dharma can partake studies at the SVDV in BHU (image: hindi.opindia.com)
He even added that “Hindu institutes” did not prohibit entry of ‘Non-Hindus’ through any constitution. It would be put up in the inscription on the walls and would be followed by all. Hence, the protests against the appointment is perhaps unconstitutional, but it is emotional. But you must understand that Muslim institutes follow their own rules to the T.
The students are worried at media’s portrayal of the issue as that of ‘Hindus vs Muslims’. Students, while speaking to OpIndia, remarked that irrespective of media making this whole issue some Hindu-Muslim thing, and talking at the risk of being termed regressive and what not, they had to put up a fight to defend their traditions, their small piece of land of their village deity. This is necessary in the time when the VC, Prof Rakesh Bhatnagar, thinks he is the government, along with the HoD and experts, and brings in forces with modern equipment to dismantle the protest. The so-called liberal gang is also against us. These students are currently feeling like the Kashmiri Hindus before the exodus. What is unfortunate for them is that their ‘exodus’ is being written under the rule of ‘Sangh-supported Hindu government’. And everyone is silent. If we do not stand for saving our traditions, then whatever little knowledge remains today will also be long forgotten in future.
The students studying in SVDV, BHU also shared some documents with OpIndia on basis of which they are fighting this fight to keep Madan Mohan Malviya’s dream alive. Chakrapani Ojha said that years ago a national general assembly held in Kashi in December 1905. On the same day, under the chairmanship of V N Mahajani a huge gathering took place in the town hall of Kashi. This suggestion was put forth in front of various representatives of religions and educationists. Even there everyone had welcomed setting up a Hindu university. On 1st January 1906, it was announced in a pandal of Congress that a Hindu university will be set up.
Establishment of Hindu University (image: Hindi.OpIndia.com)
The very next year between January 20 to 26 1907, in Prayag, following proposal was accepted in the Sanatan Dharma Mahasabha of eminent sadhus and scholars under the chairmanship of Paramhans Parivrajakacharya Jagadguru Shri Swami Shankaracharya:
A Hindu University be set up in Kashi which will be a central university with the following goals:
To prepare teachers who could spread the knowledge of Sanatan Dharma which nurtures the varna system.
To promote the study of Sanskrit language and literature.
To contribute towards the promotion of scientific and craftsmanship through Indian languages including Sanskrit.
The university to have following institutes:
Vedic school (currently known as Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vigyan), where Vedas and Vedangs and ancient history is taught, a jyotish (astrology) department where jyotish-related studies are imparted and also construction of an astrology-related laboratory.
The religious work of this university and the work of the vedic college (currently Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vigyan) will be under the purview of the Hindus who will follow the principles of Sanatan Dharma which is propounded through the ages through Puranas.
Other rules:
Admission in this University should be done as per the tradition of ‘varnashram’.
Except for this institute (SVDV), students of all religions and caste will be able to avail admission in all other institutes and knowledge of Sanskrit language will be imparted to all without any caste discrimination.
Rules of Hindu University (image: Hindi.OpIndia.com)
Today we are fighting for these values. Our struggle is to keep these ideals alive. Today the university administration is adamant on its stand because of whatever has happened recently. If an inquiry is carried out, a lot of people will be exposed and we are demanding an investigation on Dr Khan’s appointment.
A PhD student who was sitting on the dharna, while speaking to OpIndia, said, “We do not have teachers, we have gurus. Everyone here keeps a ‘choti’, touches feet of the elders and conduct havans and yagnas. The professor who has been appointed identifies his religion as ‘Muslim’. If he is appointed, will it not be discrimination against the students who follow the Vedic Sanatan traditions?”
BHU spokesperson Dr Rajesh Singh has also issued a statement on behalf of the institute to the media on appointment of Dr Firoz Khan. He informed that in the selection committee meeting chaired by the Vice Chancellor, subject experts found Dr Firoz Khan eligible for the post of an Assistant Professor after adopting a transparent process. The spokesperson said that BHU was established with the objective to provide equal opportunities for studies and teaching for the nation to rise above the discrimination of religion, caste, creed, gender etc. This objective is being pursued by the BHU administration in appointment of Dr Khan.
#BHU ACT is being followed in letter & spirit in ongoing selection process and all the selections are being made as per the guidelines of the Government of India and the UGC. – BHU’s official statement regarding an appointment in Faculty of SVDV. @VCofficeBHUpic.twitter.com/E6Qtg950Q4
A research student in the SVDV stream has put even more serious allegations. The research student told us that Professor Umakant Chaturvedi is the head of department of Literature and his research guide. “He had come to BHU as an assistant professor 5 years ago. Before that he was working with Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan in Jaipur. He is emotionally attached to his previous work place and has good relations with the people working there. He has a reputation of being corrupt and even a casual chat with him will reveal his lust for money. If it were up to him, he would take his share from the money that comes for the JRF (Junior Research Fellow),” he alleged.
The research student further alleged that Dr Khan’s appointment was his plan on which he worked for 6 months. “If proper investigation is carried out, I am sure you will catch him red-handed. The biggest reason for this appointment is money. Dr Firoz Khan is an OBC and has been a student of Prof Umakant Chaturvedi at the Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan’s Jaipur campus. Dr Khan is the safest and most secure way to swindle money,” he alleged. He further informed that as many as 10 candidates were interviewed for this post, many of them were past research students at BHU. “But the HOD was not able to trust anyone in last five years who could help him siphon off money. The HOD was not even aware that there could be a problem because the candidate he has selected is a Muslim,” he said.
“As an interview expert, he had called Tarashankar Sharma Pandey, a professor from Jaipur and his close confidante. Another expert was ex-professor Radhavallabh Tripathi. An opportunist in terms of ideology, he is sometimes ‘left-Congress’, sometimes ‘traditional scholar’ and sometimes he identifies himself as ‘modern critic’ of Sanskrit literature. He has been the Chancellor of the Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan during the Congress regime. He has no doubt worked hard to enrich Sanskrit literature but he has also misused his position to appoint ‘his’ people at various posts in several universities.
“For almost 20 years, their ‘gang’ has a monopoly over all university level appointments. Their appointed people have a nexus in all institutes which teach Sanskrit. Under this nexus, they do not let anyone else get appointed as Sanskrit professors outside of their ‘gang’.
“The people appointed under this nexus are scholars in their fields. Hence it would not seem logical to question their appointment. Their entire gang considers themselves as the expert and most qualified. With Prof Umakant Chaturvedi around, this appointment could not have been done without money. However, if the appointment were that of a Hindu OBC candidate, no one would have protested. That is also true. What is also true is that whichever political party is in power, the appointment in universities is almost always dominated by the Left.
“The fourth person who is involved is Professor Vindhyeshwari Prasad Mishra, Dean of SVDV stream. He is a scholar. The last person is Professor Rakesh Bhatnagar who is the VC of BHU. He is a JNU professor and ideologically Left. Once he was the VC of a University in a small state but he left the post because he could not run it properly. Today he is the VC of the prestigious BHU. Now you know that all is not as simple as it seems?
“Let me also show you how true my above allegations are. Prof Umakant Chaturvedi had said 29 people had filled the forms for the vacancy at SVDV at BHU. Of these 10 people were selected for interview. Only 9 appeared for interview one candidate was most qualified. Remaining candidates got as low as 0 and 2 numbers out of 10 and the selected candidate got a perfect 10,” the research student said.
Now, perhaps you will see some merit in what the students are saying. Till now, the university has not taken action against the students protesting outside the residence of the VC. One can only wait and watch what happens to the protesting students at the BHU. Will the university stay true to the values set up by Madan Mohan Malviya? Or because of this one step will shake the very foundation on which the Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vigyan faculty was set up.
Note: The article was originally published in Hindi. You can read it here.
The Kerala police have sent back 10 women between the ages of 10 to 50 who had travelled from Andhra Pradesh to Kerala to wilfully desecrate the Sabarimala shrine. The Sabarimala temple is scheduled to open today in the evening for the Mandala Pooja festival.
#SabarimalaTemple: Police has sent back 10 women from Pamba. The women (between the age of 10 to 50) had come from Andhra Pradesh to offer prayers at the temple. The temple is schedule to open today in the evening for the Mandala Pooja festival. #Keralapic.twitter.com/YM17JC5Ogp
Two days after the Supreme Court deferred the verdict on the Sabarimala issue, the holy shrine Lord Ayappa in Sabarimala opens today for the annual Mandala Pooja festival.
The Sabarimala Temple has been under siege after activists had decided to desecrate the temple. The Supreme Court recently had bundled a bunch of cases including the case of women’s entry into Sabarimala along with cases against female genital mutilation and the entry of women into Mosques and referred it to a larger 7-judge bench.
As the Sabarimala shrine opens today for the 41-day annual pilgrimage season, the Kerala government had already clarified that the shrine is no place for activism and the women devotees hoping to enter the temple will not be given police protection. In a statement on Friday, Kerala Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran said that women seeking protection to visit the shrine will have to get a court order. “This (Sabarimala shrine) is not a place for activism. This is not a place for activists like Trupti Desai to show their strength. We won’t take them in. Let them go get a court order,” he said.
Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict, controversial ‘activist’ Trupti Desai on Thursday had said that women should be allowed entry into the temple till a seven-judge Supreme Court bench delivers the verdict on the issue.
The controversial activist had also ‘vowed’ to offer prayers at the shrine when it opens for worship this year.
The entry of women of menstruating age (between the ages of 10 to 50) is disallowed in the Sabarimala temple. This tradition arises from the fact that Lord Ayyapa is a Naishtika Brahmachari.
Journalist Ali Sohrab, who is infamous for sharing objectionable and bigoted content on his Twitter page, has been arrested by the Uttar Pradesh police from Delhi and transit remand has been granted to the police to take him to Lucknow.
None of the charges against him entail punishment of more than 3 years. Bail should not be difficult.
An FIR had been lodged against Sohrab at Hazratganj, Lucknow for uploading repugnant posts following the murder of Hindu samaj founder Kamlesh Tiwari. In a joint operation with the Delhi police, the Uttar Pradesh police arrested Sohrab under sections 295A, 295B, 66, 67 IT act and he is being taken to Lucknow after securing his transit remand.
The Uttar Pradesh police had registered a complaint against ‘journalist’ Ali Sohrab for his inflammatory posts after Tiwari’s gruesome murder by Islamists. In his tweet, Ali Sohrab went on to wish the deceased Kamlesh Tiwari on the occasion of Diwali despite knowing that he is not alive anymore.
Ali Sohrab’s attempts to incite and spew venom against Hindus had not stopped there. He had even threatened journalist Rohit Sardana and his child by saying he will pray for Sardana and his kid that someday in the future, Sardana’s kid should experience the ‘hatred’ caused due to Hindu-Muslims tensions. He was implying that Sardana had been instrumental in spreading hatred between the two communities. Following his hateful behaviour, the Uttar Pradesh police had registered a complaint against Ali Sohrab for inflammatory messages.
Sohrab had been continuously indulging in sharing fake and inciteful posts on his social media pages. In September, following the abrogation of Article 370 by the centre, Sohrab had tried to pass off an old image of two army men cleaning a pool of blood on a road as a recent one. He shared the misleading image implying that it was taken during the ongoing situation in Kashmir.
The Congress government in Rajasthan led by Ashok Gehlot has sanctioned Rs 1.88 crore for Madarsas in the state after the central government under Prime Minister stopped funding to Madarsas.
According to reports, the Rajasthan government claimed that the centre was supposed to grant them Rs 9 crore for the functioning of nearly 3240 Madarsas in the state. Reportedly, as the centre did not release any funds, the Rajasthan government decided to fund them as Madarsas are on the verge of being closed in the state.
Saleh Mohammad, Minister of the State for Minority Affairs in Rajasthan government, claimed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not fulfil his promise of taking every community together by referring to the PM’s call for winning everyone’s trust – Sabka Vishwas. He further said the decision to stop the grant of Madrasas is directly affecting the education of Muslim children.
“All the tall promises made by the Centre and PM Narendra Modi for helping the minorities have failed. I would like to thank Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot for providing Rs 1.88 crore as a grant for Madarsas,” said Saleh Mohammad.
The funds provided by the state government will be spent on the development and maintenance of Madarsas. The funds are being allocated under the Madarsa Modernization Scheme. Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot will also write a letter urging the central government to continue with the grant for Madarsas.
The Centre had announced its plan to bring Madrasa under the ambit of the formal education system of the country. The Centre had announced that it would provide a grant of Rs 5,000 at the primary level and Rs 8,000 per Madrasa at upper primary level.
In June this year, PM Narendra Modi-led BJP government announced scholarships for over 5 crore students from minority community including 50 per cent girls, in the next five years. Making the announcement, Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi had said that government will provide for pre-matric, post-matric, and professional and technical course studies.
The “students” from Jawaharlal University (JNU) are protesting the hike in hostel prices. While earlier, the protestors had clashed with the police, now a video has emerged where these “students” can be seen manhandling a Zee News reporters and making lewd remarks against her.
शर्मनाक- जेएनयू में ये कौन सी शिक्षा दी जा रही है ? जो महिलाओ के साथ मारपीट सिखाती है, महिला पत्रकारों पर हमला करना सिखाती है @reporter_pooja के ऊपर हमला करने वाले छात्रों को जेनएयू प्रशासन तुरन्त निष्काषित करे। pic.twitter.com/khC31SXJKi
ABP journalist Vikas Bhaduria tweeted a video on November 16th where one can see JNU “students” manhandling the reporter. The reporter in questions is one Pooja. Bhaduria tweeted saying that the video was shameful. He questioned what sort of education is being imparted in JNU that taught the students to manhandle female journalists, hit them and attack them. He also demanded that the students who attacked the journalist should be rusticated.
In the beginning of the video, one can be lewd ‘students’ remarking to other students to let the reporter be so they can ‘maza lo’. When the reporter questions one the students, he says that if she stays, then “hum baitha ke mazaa lenge”.
Then, amidst chants of “Zee News murdabad” and “Hindi media murdabad”, rather middle-aged ‘students” can be seen manhandling the reporter.
Then one can see students demanding that the cameras be shut off. The ‘students’ told the reporter to get out. “Nikaliye yaha se” they said after manhandling her and shouting at her. After that, ‘students’, even joined by women, started chanting ‘bhaag Zee News bhaag’.
Towards the end of the video tweeted by Vikas Bhaduria, one can see snippets of JNU students attacking and manhandling reporters.
The University has introduced fees for utility services like water and electricity on an actual basis, and a fixed charge of ₹1700 per month for services like sanitation, maintenance, cook etc. The room rent also has been increased from ₹20 to ₹600 for single-seater and from ₹10 to ₹300 for double seater. One time security which is refundable also has gone up from ₹5,500 to ₹12,000 and the students have been protesting against it.
As the JNU students protest against the Draft hostel manual that has provisions for the fee hike, curfew timings and dress code restrictions on the students intensified, the administration has announced a ‘major rollback’ in the hostel fee hike and other stipulations said the Ministry of Human Resource Development. JNU, however, called it cosmetic.
It has been two weeks since the JNU Student’s Union (JNUSU) has been conducting protests over the hostel manual. The JNUSU Vice-Chancellor Mamidala Jagadesh Kumar had on November 8 alleged that Associate Dean Dr Vandana Mishra was kept in illegal captivity by some students as a part of their protest.
In the ‘roaring’ anti-government protests in Iraq, one of the demonstrators brought along with him a Lion draped in Iraq’s national flag, apparently to battle out dogs deployed by the police to subdue the protests.
A video of the handler bringing a lion on the streets of Baghdad is doing the rounds on the Internet. In the now viral video that is embedded in the above tweet, a handler can be seen with a lion draped in Iraq’s flag can be seen. The lion lunges at a group of onlookers before being restrained by the handler.
The city of Baghdad has witnessed numerous protests in the last month and a half with demonstrators hitting the streets over issues of corruption, unemployment and the dis-functioning state. Violence has accompanied in many protests as the law enforcement authorities have used brute force to quell the protests. This has resulted in hundreds of casualties as the authorities have not shied away from firing live rounds and hurling tear gas shells directly at protesters, along with snapping Internet connection across the nation.
The protesters want the country to usher in a new era with electoral reforms, constitutional amendments and infrastructure legislations. The Iraqi parliament has acknowledged these demands and received a draft of a new electoral law this week. However, it has not been debated yet.
Recognising the resentment among public, Iraq’s current Prime Minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi has assured that he would step down from his post and hold a snap parliamentary election but with a caveat that he would do so only if the parliamentarians found a suitable replacement for him in the interim.
Reeling under tremendous stress following the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Ram Janmabhoomi case, a resentful Owaisi yesterday took to Twitter to express his disapproval with the verdict. Owaisi tweeted “I want my masjid back”, expressing his discontent with the top court’s verdict granting the contentious land to the Hindu parties for building a Ram Temple over it.
Soon after Owaisi attempted to flare up communal passions, a raft of Islamists on Twitter, inspired by his defiance started sharing their staunch objection to the apex court’s verdict. With total disregard to the authority of Supreme Court, Islamists on Twitter started trending “#IWantMyMasjidBack”.
One Twitter user, Ali Sohrab, who has often normalised bigotry on his Twitter page rued that the Supreme Court on November 9, 2019, “illegally” ordered to build a Ram Temple on the disputed land on the directions of “Terrorist organisation” RSS with the hashtag “IWantMyMasjidBack”.
6 दिसंबर 1992
को गैर कानूनी तरीके से
बहुसंखयकों (हिन्दुओं) ने
बाबरी मस्जिद बाबरी मस्जिद को विध्वंस कर दिया
और
9 नवंबर 2019 को
गैर कानूनी तरीके से
आतंकदवादी संगठन आरएसएस के मांग के अनुसार
मस्जिद की जमीन पर
मंदिर बनाने का फैसला सुना दिया गया….#iWantMyMasjidBack
Another resenting Muslim, Rizwan Maniyar, asserted that Owaisi is the voice of 200 million Indian Muslims who are aggrieved with the court’s decision and exhorted them to trend “#IWantMyMasjidBack” and stand in solidarity with Owaisi.
One Twitter user Sultan Khan, with obvious deficiency in historical knowledge, cited the distorted provenance of the dispute, stating that the Babri masjid was built in 1528, desecrated in 1949 and demolished in 1992, while conveniently hiding the Archaeological Survey of India’s findings that a grand temple existed beneath the mosque and the foundations of the mosque were built from the ruins of that temple.
Incidentally, another hashtag that started trending on Twitter was #IndiaStandsWithOwaisi.
There were some who wanted to divisive Owaisi to be awarded with “some prestigious award” for his respect towards the constitution ironically after he rejected the Supreme Court verdict.
Owaisi is the politician who knows and respects the Indian constitution more than any other parliamentarian. He should be honored by all the citizens of the nation. He should be honored with some prestigious award as a recognition to his contribution.#IndiaStandsWithOwaisi
These elements were also joined by Islamists who ran a tirade against Hindus.
#IWantMyMasjidBack
It is not for the polytheists to maintain the mosques of Allah [while] witnessing against themselves with disbelief. [For] those, their deeds have become worthless, and in the Fire they will abide eternally.(9:17) #IWantMyMasjidBack
It is indeed a worrying trend that someone as radical as Owaisi finds mass support among a section of Indian Muslims. Owaisi had in the past threatened Kamlesh Tiwari who was later brutally murdered by Islamists. He had said, “By speaking against Rasalullah, you have invited your own doom”, while threatening Kamlesh with consequences.
In the video, Owaisi could be heard saying whoever dares to speak anything against Rasalullah is haram as per Quran. “Woh zaalim, woh kutta jo Uttar Pradesh mein baith kar Allah ki shaan mein gustakhi kiya, yaad rakh. Tu aaj jail main hai magar duniya tere liye chuhe ki bil ki tarah ban jayegi. (That dog who is sitting in Uttar Pradesh and speaking such things against the Allah, remember. You are safe in jail but the world will become a rat’s hole for you),” Owaisi said.
Owaisi had also displayed his anti-Hindu hate when he had mocked rituals by Hindus in one of his speeches. It is worthy to note here that Owaisi is the brother of Akbaruddin Owaisi who had in 2012 threatened Hindus while saying that if Police is removed for 15-minutes, he would show Hindus their place. He had repeated this same threat in 2019 as well.
Amidst the lament from begrudging Muslims on Twitter demanding their masjid back, it is notable to mention that the Sunni Waqf Board, one of the litigants in the Ram Temple-Babri Masjid dispute case has decided not to challenge the court’s verdict.
Ever since the court pronounced the verdict in the case, assorted liberals and Owaisi have been unceasingly experiencing a prolonged meltdown. Owaisi had blasted off earlier saying that he rejects the court’s judgment and raised aspersions about the Supreme Court by stating, “Supreme Court is Supreme but not infallible”.
On Thursday, the Delhi High Court ordered the removal of an ‘unauthorised’ temples falling in the middle of the Chandni Chowk main road. These unauthorised temples were falling in the middle of the main carriageway in New Delhi’s Chandni Chowk.
According to the reports, the Delhi High Court bench comprised of justices S Murlidhar and Talwant Singh set aside the decision of the Religious Committee of the Delhi government recommending integration of the building in the area’s beautification and redevelopment plan. The Delhi High Court order overrules the stand of the Delhi government’s religious committee which had proposed to integrate the temple into the plan.
The Delhi High Court also slammed Delhi government for its “u-turn” on the removal of the temples, pointing out that the Delhi government had directed the North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Delhi government in 2015 itself to clear encroachments, including the temple that stalled the progress of Chandni Chowk redevelopment project.
During a previous hearing, the government had cited law and order as one reason to retain the edifice, causing hindrance in redevelopment work, and only suggested dismantling of a platform (chabutra) around it.
Reportedly, the religious committee had earlier agreed to follow with the court orders and had even given an undertaking. However, after a series of meetings held last month, the panel advised the architect to include the Hanuman Mandir and Shiva Mandir, both part of the same structure in the re-development plan.
The court was annoyed with the committee for taking a U-turn in the matter as earlier it had recommended removal of the structure. The court has now asked the government to ensure that its order is implemented in eight weeks.
Last week, the bench had sought the presence of the architect with the relevant drawings to explain the new plan proposed by the Delhi government. however, the architect, who had appeared before the court had added that it is not possible to allow the temple to exist at the present site after dismantling the chabutra platform around the structure.
The court direction to remove the unauthorised temple came only after the architect categorically stated that the structure will hamper the carriageway work.
In 2015, while assessing the progress of the pedestrianisation of Chandni Chowk and building of a dedicated Non-Motorised Lane (NMV) in the area, the court had been informed that five unauthorised religious structures were blocking the right of way in Chandni Chowk.
A day after the Central Bureau of Investigation raided the New Delhi and Bengaluru offices of Amnesty India, news agency ANI citing CBI sources says that the books of accounts of Amnesty India reveal that they indulged in activities which were in violation to the FCRA (Foreign Contribution Regulation Act).
CBI Sources: It was also alleged that Amnesty International (UK) invested Rs. 10 crore(approximately) as FDI in Amnesty International India Pvt. Ltd, Bengaluru by subscribing to the debentures.
CBI sources reportedly told ANI that the activities carried out by Amnesty India were not commensurate to activities of for-profit company. These activities by Amnesty India were allegedly either prohibited or were regulated under the FCRA. The CBI sources further told the news agency that Amnesty International (UK) invested approximately 10 crore as fixed deposit (FD) in Amnesty India Private Limited, Bengaluru, by subscribing to the debt instruments, debentures.
The CBI raid on the alleged human rights organisation came just weeks after a show-cause notice was issued to the organisation by ED. The NGO is accused by ED of violations in borrowing and lending regulations of FEMA to the tune of Rs 51.72 crore for rendering civil society activities in the country by getting remittances from its parent body, Amnesty International UK, in the garb of export of services.
ED’s Bengaluru offices were searched by ED in October last year in connection with its probe in the alleged violation of FDI guidelines and remittances it had received from the parent body. Amnesty director Akar Patel’s residence was also searched by ED at that time.
