Home Blog Page 1398

Tamil Nadu police say state govt not anti-Hindu, but court docs reveal how only 4 out of 288 permissions were given for 22nd Jan events before courts got involved

Nupur J Sharma
-
0
Tamil Nadu police say state govt not anti-Hindu, but court docs reveal how only 4 out of 288 permissions were given for 22nd Jan events before courts got involved

On the 29th of January 2023, the Tamil Nadu Director General of Police filed a counter affidavit in the Supreme Court, responding to a petition which claimed that the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu had issued an oral order against granting permission to events surrounding Ram Lalla Pran Pratishtha. The Police DGP said that there had been a deliberate attempt to defame the Chief Minister and portray the government as ‘anti-Hindu’, which was patently false.

Interestingly, it is evident from the counter-affidavit filed by the Tamil Nadu police itself that before a court order passed by the Madras High Court in a separate petition, the Tamil Nadu administration had granted permission to only 4 of the 288 permissions applications they received.

In the short hearing on the 19th, the bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna granted an additional 15 days for the state of Tamil Nadu to file a separate counter affidavit, apart from the one filed by Tamil Nadu police. However, it disallowed the petitioner to file a rejoinder to the counter-affidavit filed by the Tamil Nadu police. Justice Sanjiv Khanna reportedly said that the event (Pran Pratishtha) was already over so the petitioner should not “push it further”. The court, in this case, effectively denied the opportunity to the petitioner to present their side of the argument and point towards the duplicitous stand that is clearly being taken by the Tamil Nadu police.

The Tamil Nadu police in its counter affidavit said, “The Petitioner in this writ petition has narrated the facts of the case in about 12 paragraphs, of which he has utilised 9 paragraphs to defame the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and to criticise the actions of the Government. The contents in paragraphs number 1 to 8 are totally unwarranted and are derogatory against the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner has portrayed the Tamil Nadu Government as an Anti-Hindu Government which is totally false and condemnable”. With the police displaying substantial bombast, one would imagine that the petition was wildly false and that the administration did indeed grant permission to events surrounding Ram Lalla Pran Pratishtha to all the Hindus. However, is that true?

To truly understand the politics that was played by the Tamil Nadu administration, it becomes imperative to break down the information provided by the Tamil Nadu police itself in its counter-affidavit to the court.

What the petition by Vinoj P Selvam said

The petition by Vinoj P Selvam said to be a BJP functionary from the state, had said that the Tamil Nadu government had taken a decision to disallow events surrounding the Ram Lalla Pran Pratishtha on the 22nd of January 2023. The petition claimed that Chief Minister M K Stalin had “orally instructed not to allow any ceremony or function” on January 22 — to celebrate the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya.

Interestingly, as per a news report published by Tamil daily Dinamalar on 21st January, the DMK-led-Tamil Nadu government had given ‘unofficial verbal directive’ to temples against conducting special prayers and offering Annadanam (free food) on the occasion of Ram Mandir Pran Prathistha.

The report pointed out that the government has verbally warned temple administrators against organising special programmes on behalf of the devotees.

“No special puja, offering of Annadanam and any related programs should be held in Tamil Nadu temples on the occasion of the opening ceremony of Ayodhya Ram temple. No program should be held on behalf of the temple administration or in the name of devotees or in the name of organizations or parties. It should not be advertised. Action will be taken against the concerned temple executive if any activities including Annadanam are done in violation,“ the report emphasised.

The report further added that the Tamil Nadu police are actively working to prevent the live telecast of the Ram Mandir Pran Prathistha on big screens in public places in the State.

What the Tamil Nadu Police DGP claimed in his counter-affidavit

Since the Tamil Nadu police have claimed that the petitions against the state are baseless and that the permissions for events surrounding Pran Pratishtha were not denied, it becomes important to delve into the explanation provided by the police to substantiate their stand.

Apart from saying that the petition was meant to defame the Chief Minister and that the government of Tamil Nadu is not anti-Hindu, the police DGP said, “It is further submitted that the petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court under an illusion and on false interpretation of reality. He has come with imaginary claims and has challenged a non-existent order. This Writ Petition has to be dismissed in limine because it is politically motivated and filed without any legal grounds”.

The DGP’s affidavit asserts there was no oral order by the Chief Minister to deny permission for Pran Pratishtha events, but the data provided by him leaves much to be desired as permissions for even indoor live streaming were denied before intervention by courts.

The police informed that they received 288 applications seeking permission for events on the date of the Ram temple Pran Pratishtha at Ayodhya. These applications pertained to requests for processions, bhajans, annadhanams, live streaming through LED screens in public places, and live streaming in and around private temples and temples under the HR &CE department.

The police goes on to admit that before the intervention of the court, the state of Tamil Nadu had only approved 4 of the 288 requests they had received.

Out of the 288 requests they received, the police themselves informed the court that they had granted permission for only 4, rejected 146 and kept 138 requests pending for verification.

Further, the police submits that it is only after the order of the Madras High Court and its Madurai Bench that they granted permission for the events.

Here is a table that the police affixed in their counter affidavit:

According to the Tamil Nadu Police’s affidavit, before the order by the Madras HC and the Madurai Bench, they had granted permission to only 4 requests. After the order by the court, granted permission to 248 requests (252 including the previous 4 granted).

The police petition says, “After the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai, petitions those were rejected and kept pending for verification were reconsidered and petitioners were allowed to conduct the events”.

The Tamil Nadu Police elaborates that before the order of the High Court, they had granted 4 permissions. After the HC order, they ended up granting 248 additional permissions.

The police further says that out of the 288 permission requests received till the 20th of January, the local units rejected 146 events based on “the prevailing local issues and the proceedings were served accordingly quoting the same”.

It is, therefore, pertinent to ask what circumstances changed in 2 days that the police believed that these “prevailing local issues” were no longer a consideration and that permissions could be granted – this is a point we will analyse later in this report.

In fact, the petition of the police itself exposes how even permissions for events at private places were skirted by the police and cleared only after the High Court order.

Before the High Court order, the Tamil Nadu police granted permission to only 4 indoor events in public places. All requests for events at private places, indoors and outdoors, were either rejected or kept on hold. Right after the HC order, the Tamil Nadu police granted permission to most.

The police said that they got “requests for 31 events at private places and 257 events at public places. Out of which 138 petitions were at the verification stage due to late submission of the petition by the organisers. However, after the Hon’ble High Court verdict, all the proposals were reconsidered and regulated by the local police in a tie-up with the organisers and concerned departments. Finally, out of 31 private place events, 27 were allowed and out of 257 public place events, 225 were conducted”.

At this point, a pertinent question to be asked would be that while the Tamil Nadu police had kept various permissions on hold either because of late submission or the verification process, how did the backlog get magically cleared once the High Court order was passed and if they could indeed simply grant permission, why did they not do it before the High Court judgement itself? And since they did not, and it took an HC order to get them to let Hindus hold events on 22nd January, does it not bolster doubts cast by the petitioners that there may have been a deliberate plan to allow such events only sparingly in the state run by DMK, leaders of which wanted to eradicate Sanatan Dharma? It’s for the TN government to clarify.

What the High Court and Supreme Court had said, slamming the Tamil Nadu government

The Supreme Court had come down heavily on the police for their absurd arguments denying permission for Pran Pratishtha events. The Supreme Court had heard another petition on the same day as the Madras High Court.

The Supreme Court, while hearing the case, had directed the Tamil Nadu police and govt to act according to the law and stop arbitrarily refusing permissions.

Terming the reasons provided by the Tamil Nadu police “atrocious” for denying permission to a local temple to hold an event on the 22nd of January, the Supreme Court slammed the Tamil Nadu police.

Tamil Nadu had in its response essentially said that since Hindus are a minority in the Dindigul District, the temple could not be granted permission. The Supreme Court said that if this argument was to be accepted, then wherever Muslims are a minority, they would be able to hold prayer meetings or religious events. The reason given by the state was reportedly, “Here the Hindus are in the minority if they are permitted to hold this prior meeting, that will cause problems in the society”. The judge read this reason out and asked Tamil Nadu counsel, “is this a reason?”.

The Judge then told the state to regulate the events since they have the power, but providing this reason for denial of permission was “atrocious”.

The Supreme Court asked the Tamil Nadu government, who had denied that there was any oral order, to record the reasons for denial of any permission sought for processions, puja etc on the 22nd of January.

What had angered the Supreme Court in this case were statements of the DSP to an application by the administrators of the Sri Bhagavatiyamman Temple, seeking permission to hold Annadaman on the occasion of Ram Lalla Pran Pratishtha in Ayodhya. The DSP had denied the request saying, “The area of A Vellodu village, where you have requested permission to conduct the event, is predominantly inhabited by Christians. Additionally, there are areas with Christian temples. Due to the lower number of Hindu residents in this village, there is a possibility of encountering cultural sensitivities or legal complications related to public peace and morality when organizing events that are perceived as deviating from the prevailing religious practices”. It was further said, “Also, public peace is likely to be affected by the programme proposed to be conducted and law and order problems are likely to arise. Religious problems also are likely to arise public property is likely to be damaged, and the public is likely to be put to discomfort. Therefore, due to the above reasons, permission is denied for the program you want to conduct”.

The Supreme Court categorically said that if such reasons are given by the state to deny permission, “they will be in trouble”.

The Madras High Court on the other hand had to come down on the Tamil Nadu government as well.

In the response by the Tamil Nadu DGP, he refers to Writ Petition No. 1430 of 2024 and the order passed by the Madras HC, according to which, the Tamil Nadu administration had granted permissions.

OpIndia pulled out the order passed by the Madras HC in this case, which was in response to a petition by L Ganapathy. The petition was against the rejection of permission for Rama Nama Bhajan and Annadhanam on 22nd January at KKR Kalyana Mandapam, Pattabiram. The petition had also called to refrain officials from interfering in the rituals.

The public prosecutor claimed that the permission had already been granted and placed a copy of the proceedings of January 21 before it. The government then said that 1) There is no permission required for events in private enclosures like mandapams, private temples and any other private place, 2) If there is the possibility of spillover to public places, the organisers need to inform the police and seek permission 3) If such functions are planned to be conducted within temples, which are within the control of the HR & CE Department, the concerned official belonging to the Department must be informed about the same beforehand, and the permission will be granted subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the Department, and 4) Wherever considering the local situation, the police thinks that the area is sensitive, it will be left open to the police to impose such restrictions and to ensure that the function does not lead to any unnecessary law and order problem.

The Madras High Court accepted these submissions by the Government and disposed of the petition.

Another order cited by the police in their counter-affidavit was WP(MD) No.1383 of 2024. In this case, which came up in front of the Madurai Bench of the Madras HC, the petitioner was one V Subbiraj. The petition was against the denial of permission to “live Telecast, Broadcast or Recording of the Establishment and consecration of Lord Ramllalla Pran-Pratishtha Ceremony at Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple at Ayodhya through the medium of Television, to hold the flex boards, to use mike sets with permitted decibels to worship the God to be held on 22.01.2024 from 08.00 am., to 10.00 pm., at the place of the Desabandhu Ground, Virudhunagar”. This permission was denied on the 20th of January 2024 and the order in this case was passed on the 22nd of January 2024.

In this case, the single Judge bench cited the government’s submissions which were accepted by the court in the petition filed by L Ganapathy and directed the police to give adequate police protection for the Live Telecast of the event at the place of the Desapandhu Ground, Virudhunagar and allow the event to take place. It also said that if any untoward incident happened, the organisers would be held responsible.

The Temples under control of HR&CE and how the Tamil Nadu government tried to control events in those Temples

While the Tamil Nadu government and police want the courts and the people at large to believe that they are not anti-Hindu, their stand on events pertaining to Pran Pratishtha being held at Temples, especially the ones controlled by HR&CE raises several questions.

This is the table submitted by the Tamil Nadu police DGP in his counter affidavit.

Point Number 3 is of particular concern. The police say that before the High Court order, they had received 15 petitions for permissions for “live streaming in Temples and other indoors”. 7 of these were rejected and 8 were kept pending – this would mean that NONE of the permissions sought were granted by the administration. Given that in the High Court, the government admitted that for events at HR&CE-controlled temples, they were within their right to grant permission only within “reasonable restrictions”, one has to wonder how many of these permissions originally rejected by the TN administration were those temples which were under the control off HR&CE Department (state control).

If the administration actively rejected applications by those temples that were state-controlled before the High Court order, can it be said that the state was not trying to stop religious events on the day of the Pran Pratishtha of Ram Lalla in Ayodhya?

It was only after the High Court order that the Tamil Nadu administration promptly granted permission to all 15 applications. If the intention was not to stop the celebration of Ram Lalla Pran Pratishtha, why were these 15 permissions not granted before the Court was approached? The answer to this question has not been clear from any of the responses by the government or the police.

The attempt to eyewash by the Tamil Nadu government and administration

The counter-affidavit by the Tamil Nadu police DGP is rather revealing in itself. It claims that the Tamil Nadu government is not anti-Hindu because the administration granted permission to events on 22nd January AFTER the order by the High Court and the slap on the wrist they got from the Supreme Court, however, there is very little to explain why only 4 permissions were granted out of 288 before the courts got involved.

There is also very little to explain why they would stop permission for events that were to be held inside the Temple premises. Further, it is evident that several of the permissions were denied earlier simply because they did not want to offend other religious communities, thereby, stifling the religious rights of the Hindus in the process.

With such facts that have been revealed mostly by the Police itself and the orders by the Supreme Court, and High Courts, one has to wonder on what basis is one supposed to conclude that there was no active attempt by the government to ensure that the piety of the Hindus were denied an outlet.

The media on its part has, as usual, failed to highlight the duplicitous stand that the Tamil Nadu government and the administration have taken with respect to the Pran Pratishtha events and the manner in which they had denied permissions before the Courts got involved.

The headline by a supposed legal reporting platform gives the impression that the Tamil Nadu govt willingly granted permission to 252 out of 288 applications and therefore, all allegations thereof were unsubstantiated. This is clearly not the truth.

DT Next had a similar headline.

One cannot really be surprised by the chicanery of the Tamil Nadu administration, which has leaders who want to eradicate Sanatan Dharma and the complicity that the media has displayed in this case.

On 22nd January, Prime Minister Narendra Modi conducted the Pran Pratishtha of Shri Ram Lalla and inaugurated the Ram Mandir in a grand ceremony which saw about 7,000 guests attending and Deepavali-like celebrations across the country and the world over.

Exactly 18.75 lakh pilgrims have visited ever since. As per reports, daily visits have averaged over 2 lakh. It has been estimated that the holy city will see an annual footfall of about 5 crore pilgrims.

‘Apologise to PM Modi, and the people of India’: Maldives Opposition leader tells President Muizzu

ANI
-
0
‘Apologise to PM Modi, and the people of India’: Maldives Opposition leader tells President Muizzu

The Maldives Jumhooree Party (JP) leader Qasim Ibrahim called on Maldivian President Mohammed Muizzu to formally apologize to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the people of India, Voice of Maldives, a Maldivian digital news outlet, reported.

“Regarding any country, especially a neighbouring one, we shouldn’t speak in a way that affects the relationship. We have an obligation to our state that must be considered. President Solih did consider this obligation and issued a Presidential Decree banning the “India Out” campaign. Now, Yameen is questioning why Muizzu, who participated with him in the India Out Campaign, has not nullified the Presidential Decree,” he said.

He added, “The Decree should not be nullified, as it would only result in a loss to the nation. That cannot be done. I would tell Muizzu that it shouldn’t be done. Also, I call on President Muizzu to formally apologize to the Indian government and Prime Minister Modi regarding his remarks after the China trip.”

Earlier last year, then Maldives President Ibrahim Solih signed a decree stating that the opposition’s ‘India Out’ campaign is a “threat to national security”. This allows security agencies to take down campaign banners and provides constitutional cover to take action against opposition parties.

The opposition, led by former president Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) was spearheading an ‘India Out’ campaign for over the last year propagating the unproven claim that Indian military officers stationed in the Indian Ocean island nation are a violation of Maldives’ sovereignty. 

The campaign’s implicit target was then Maldivian President Solih and the Maldivian Democratic Party, both perceived as close to India.

Notably, Solih was one of the prominent Maldives leader to condemn the derogatory remarks made by some junior ministers which led to a diplomatic standoff between the two nations.India and the Maldives on January 14 “agreed to fast-track the withdrawal of Indian military personnel” from the island nation, according to the Maldives’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The removal of Indian troops in the Maldives was the main campaign plank of Muizzu’s party during the presidential elections. Currently, there are around 70 Indian troops, along with Dornier 228 maritime patrol aircraft and two HAL Dhruv helicopters, stationed On the second day of assuming office, Muizzu officially requested the Indian government to withdraw its military personnel from the Maldives.

Apart from the call for the withdrawal of Indian military personnel, a massive row erupted after a Maldivian deputy minister, along with other cabinet members and government officials, made disparaging and unsavoury references to Primer Minister Narendra Modi’s recent Lakshadweep visit and call to development the Indian archipelago as a global retreat for beach tourism.

The Maldives government, however, distanced itself from the remarks.

(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)

Hindus move Supreme Court seeking ASI survey of Shivling in wuzukhana of disputed Gyanvapi masjid complex

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Hindus move Supreme Court seeking ASI survey of Shivling in wuzukhana of disputed Gyanvapi masjid complex

Days after the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report on Gyanvapi Masjid was public, the Hindu side has filed an application before the Supreme Court seeking direction to the government agency to conduct survey of the Shivling found in the wuzukhana of the disputed site.

“Direct the Director General of Archaeological Survey of India to make necessary investigation/survey of Shivlingam for determining the nature of Shivlingam and associated features without causing any damage to the Shivlingam situated within the sealed area in terms of the impugned order dated 12.05.2023 passed by the Hon’ble High Court after removing the artificial/ modern walls/floors surrounding the Shivlingam and also to undertake survey of the entire sealed area by excavation and using other scientific methods and submit report within the time provided by the Hon’ble Court…” the application read.

The Hindu side highlighted that the Shivling in the wuzukhana is surrounded by artificial walls and has no religious significance for the Muslims. They argued that the new construction of walls was deliberately done to hide original features (Peeth, Pithika) of the Shivling.

“It is submitted that the survey of the entire premises has been conducted except the sealed area by ASI and now it is necessary that the sealed area be also surveyed by ASI, otherwise, the very purpose of survey would be frustrated as there will be no report of ASI regarding the area under seal”, the application added.

Islamists, left-liberals continued to call ‘Shivling’ as fountain in wuzukhana

Soon after the discovery of a Shivling inside a wuzukhana of the disputed structure of Gyanvapi Masjid in May 2022, left-liberals and Islamists expectedly suffered a prolonged meltdown on social media. Some deliberately called it a ‘fountain’ while others compared Shivling to everyday objects.

They made casual ‘Hinduphobic’ remarks and mocked Hindu deities in an attempt to discredit the discovery of the Shivling inside the disputed structure of Gyanvapi masjid in Varanasi.

The usual suspects, who have a notorious past of chiding Hindus for being unapologetic and proud of culture and heritage, took to Twitter to mock Hindus for celebrating the presence of Shivling inside the disputed structure.

Denial of ASI report

On 25th January, the report by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report on the Gyanvapi Masjid was made public. It revealed the existence of a large Hindu temple structure underneath the disputed structure.

As expected, Muslim peitioners refused to believe the report and vowed to challenge it before the higher Judiciary. SM Yasin, Joint Secretary of Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIMC) remarked, “It is our first and foremost responsibility to keep the mosque safe… ASI has given the report as per its reputation. This is a report and not a decision.”

He claimed, “The Gyanvapi mosque was built 600 years ago by a zamindar (landlord) of Jaunpur. It was renovated by Mughal emperor Akbar during his rule. Then the expansion and renovation of the Gyanvapi mosque was done by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. Muslims have been offering namaz for about 600 years ago…and will continue to do so in future too.”

Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren ‘appears’ in Ranchi residence after 30 hours, holds meeting with party MLAs amid ED summons

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren ‘appears’ in Ranchi residence after 30 hours, holds meeting with party MLAs amid ED summons

Days after Enforcement Directorate (ED) officers failed to find Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren at his Delhi residence, he was seen walking out of his Ranchi residence on Tuesday (30th January).

Soren, who left Ranchi for Delhi on 27th January, reportedly traveled by road to see his father Shibu Soren in the state capital. The ED officials had gone to Soren’s residence in Delhi, the Jharkhand Bhavan, and a few other sites to question him, but he was not located.

He is currently chairing a meeting of ruling alliance MLAs at the CM House to examine the current political scenario in the state. According to the reports, Soren arrived at his official apartment past midnight. In images and videos published by the CMO on X, a significant number of MLAs and ministers were seen greeting Soren before the meeting began.

The Chief Minister’s wife, Kalpana Soren, was also present at the meeting. All legislators from the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha-led ruling alliance in Jharkhand were instructed not to leave the state capital and to join the conference.

The conference was called to address current political strategies, as well as the Enforcement Directorate’s proposal to question the Chief Minister on 31st January. Meanwhile, Governor CP Radhakrishnan has called the State DGP to discuss the state’s situation with regard to law and order.

Babulal Marandi, the State BJP leader and Leader of Opposition in the Assembly, stated that “as there has been no trace of the Chief Minister for the last two days, it will become a constitutional crisis in the State.” BJP MP Nishikant Dubey had stated that the JMM is planning to appoint Soren’s wife Kalpana as the next CM in case he gets arrested.

He had notified the ED that officials could question him on 31st January at his home.

In an email to the federal government on 29th January, Soren claimed that the issuance of summons to him was “wholly vexatious and in the colorable exercise of powers given by the statute”. “Preserve video recording of seven-hour questioning [of January 20] to make available to the Court of Law,” Soren added, agreeing to record his statement at his apartment at 1 p.m. on 31st January.

Soren filed his statement with the ED after ignoring eight summonses from the agency. The ED had previously summoned Soren on August 14, 24, September 9, 23, October 4, December 12, 29, and January 13, all of which he skipped.

The case concerns the suspected trade of tribal territory using forged documents between 2020 and 2022.

Lalu Prasad Yadav appears before ED: How the fodder scam convict’s dark past has been forgotten to hail him as a politician with ‘unyielding integrity”

Anurag
-
0
Lalu Prasad Yadav appears before ED: How the fodder scam convict’s dark past has been forgotten to hail him as a politician with ‘unyielding integrity”

On 29th January, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief Lalu Prasad Yadav was summoned by the Enforcement Directorate in the “Land for Job” scam. Social media was flooded with posts in support of Yadav, who has become their favourite as he opposes the Narendra Modi-led government at the centre.

In recent times, it has become a trend of selective amnesia among certain sections of the public as they relentlessly support Lalu Prasad Yadav even though he is a convict in a fodder scam. It seems as if Yadav’s “charismatic political persona” has clouded the judgment of the left-liberals, anti-Modi activists and a special section of journalists. They not only overlook the gravity of the charges Yadav faced but also ignore the legal pronouncements that followed.

Dubious journalist of The Wire, Arfa Khanum Sherwani, called Lalu Prasad Yadav resilient and courageous. She said, “Lalu Yadav will go down in history as the most resilient and courageous politician who did not bend his principles nor bowed down before the fascist forces despite everything they did to him. And this is true despite all the abuses this post will attract.” Notably, this is not the first time she came in support of Yadav. In January 2021, she called for his release from prison. According to Arfa, the accused in the terror and communal riots were sitting in the Parliament, however, ‘Dalit-OBC’ messiah Lalu Yadav was still languishing in jail. “How is this justice? Where is this justice?” asked Arfa Khanum Sherwani, who herself has a history of peddling false propaganda on social media platforms.

Source: X

In the recent matter, Arfa was quoting the founder of Tribal Army Hansraj Meena who wrote, “It is a cowardly act of the Modi government to harass former Bihar CM Lalu Prasad Yadav ji by issuing summons to him in the name of interrogation in Patna by ED. To suppress the issue of caste census and government theft, BJP is conspiring to mute the biggest voice of the backward classes,” in a post in Hindi.

Source: X

Dayashankar Mishra, who wrote a book on Rahul Gandhi, said, “Lalu Yadav’s unparalleled struggle! The future of Indian democracy relies heavily on the existence of Lalu Prasad Yadav. In what we call the politics of struggle, he is the prominent leader of his endangered species. There is no one like Lalu! Even after constant manoeuvring by Nitish Kumar, Lalu stands tall against the tyranny and walls between dictatorship and democracy before the Enforcement Directorate.”

“His standing is essential for preserving democracy. He is fighting, with a frail body and a bright spirit. His battle, after independence, is the toughest to save democracy. In the fight against the capture of democratic institutions by communal forces, the attack on the ailing ground warrior by government agencies will always be remembered. It will be remembered that the government was cowardly,” he further added.

“On the day of Gandhi’s martyrdom, the government’s actions reveal its fear, even after a massive majority. The sole intent is to establish control over the nation. If the people of Bihar and the country remain silent even now, speaking later will be meaningless!” Mishra concluded in a post on X.

Source: X

Editor of Public Station Nitin Kumar Yadav wrote, “Lalu Prasad Yadav is a visionary. Revered as a warrior for social justice, and the saviour of the poor, downtrodden, Dalits, and Adivasis, the honourable Lalu Prasad Yadav’s contribution to the history of these groups will always be unforgettable. If anyone has secured the right to live with dignity the most after the Constitution, it is Lalu Prasad Yadav,” in a post on X in Hindi.

Source: X

Another dubious journalist Ansar Imran SR called central agencies like CBI and ED “puppets of Central Government” just because ED questions Yadav.

Source: X

‘Journalist’ Zakir Ali Tyagi claimed Lalu would not bow down before PM Modi.

Source: X

These posts on social media are just the tip of the iceberg. While these people flaunt their amnesia, it is essential to revisit the observations of the court while convicting Yadav in the fodder scam. The court found Yadav guilty of embezzling public money meant for cattle fodder. His actions undermined the trust citizens placed in the elected representatives. Notably, the judgment highlighted the need for accountability in public life and sent a strong message against corruption that spanned across Bihar during Yadav’s regime.

It was found that excessive withdrawals had been the trend for several years. For example, between the years 1993-96, Rs. 10.5 crores were approved by the government to purchase 5,664 pigs, 40,500 hens, 1,577 goats and 995 sheep. However, the State Department of Animal Husbandry withdrew a whopping Rs 255.33 crore. After factoring in over-expenses, according to the Auditor General’s report, the total fraudulent withdrawals stood at Rs. 409.62 crores.

The Auditor General’s comments while preparing the report on financial irregularities drew the imagery which became synonyms for the fodder scam. He commented, “cattle were transported on scooters, police vans, oil tankers and autos.”

The respective scam covered districts of present-day Jharkhand namely, Ranchi, Chaibasa, Dumka, Gumla and Jamshedpur along with Banka in Bihar. The scale of the fodder scam was estimated at Rs 950 crore (in rough value through dollar conversion, it would be over 2,300 crore today).

Despite the clear verdict, these individuals who support him turn a blind eye to the fact just because they do not like the sitting Prime Minister and the ruling party. The tendency to selectively ignore the legal proceedings and evidence in favour of personal biases also raises serious questions on the integrity of these individuals, especially when they are part of public life being journalists and social activists.

Interestingly, the fodder scam was not the only black spot in Yadav’s and his family’s political career. Between 2004-09, Lalu Prasad served as the Minister of Railways and ordered a fresh probe into the Sabarmati Express fire at Godhra in Gujarat, the incident in which 59 people were killed on February 27, 2002, by Islamists. Lalu argued that as per the forensics report “no inflammable material was thrown in the compartment of the Sabarmati Express from outside. The only damage done to the coach was by stone-throwing”.

Furthermore, over 10,000 traders and businessmen fled from the state during that decade under the Yadav family’s rule due to fear of life or extortion. More about his political career and controversies can be seen here.

Those who choose to champion politicians like Lalu Prasad Yadav despite being convicted in scams must critically assess their stance. Supporting such leaders sends a detrimental message to the public. It undermines the fabric of the democratic principles and erodes public trust on critical institutions such as the judiciary. It is high time people start to position their stand with the truth instead of allowing their political considerations and pathological hatred of a man skew their sense of morality.

I.N.D.I. Alliance’s first election lost: BJP’s Manoj Sonkar defeats AAP-Congress candidate to become Chandigarh mayor

OpIndia Staff
-
0
I.N.D.I. Alliance’s first election lost: BJP’s Manoj Sonkar defeats AAP-Congress candidate to become Chandigarh mayor

On 30th January, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s Manoj Sonkar became Mayor of Chandigarh after defeating Congress-AAP candidate Kuldeep Tita. He secured 16 out of 35 votes while Tita secured only 12. Eight votes were declared invalid.

Following the results, protests broke out against presiding authority Anil Masih. Marshals were called into the house to control the situation. BJP’s Rajinder Kumar was elected as Deputy Mayor. The voting took place at the Municipal Corporation Building in Chandigarh.

This was the first time the opposition’s I.N.D.I. Alliance members fought any election against the BJP. Also, it is the first time AAP and Congress allied to defeat BJP in any election. It is unclear how deep the impact would be on the alliance. Notably, AAP has already announced it will fight Lok Sabha elections alone in Punjab which was a major jolt for the I.N.D.I. Alliance for the general elections.

The polling process took place in the presence of Chandigarh Municipal Corporation Deputy Commissioner Vinay Pratap Singh. The voting was scheduled for 10 AM. However, it began almost an hour later as the deputy commissioner and BJP councillors were late. Ex-officio member of the house and BJP MP Kirron Kher was also present in the house. She was the first to cast a vote in the election.

It took an hour to complete the voting process. Though the AAP-Congress alliance had 20 votes and the BJP had 15 votes excluding one from the ex-officio member Kher, the alliance failed as eight votes were declared invalid.

This was the first time reporters were not allowed in the press gallery to cover the elections. They watch the process on a screen installed in the conference room.

Initially, the elections were supposed to take place on 18th January. However, they were postponed to 6th February after Masih got sick. However, the opposition councillors of AAP and Congress approached Punjab and Haryana High Court over the new date. The court directed that the elections be held on 30th January.

Islamic scholar Atiq ur Rehman wants Muslims to be ‘credited’ for not ‘completely destroying’ Hindu temple underneath the disputed Gyanvapi mosque

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Islamic scholar Atiq ur Rehman wants Muslims to be ‘credited’ for not ‘completely destroying’ Hindu temple underneath the disputed Gyanvapi mosque

On Monday (29th January), Islamic scholar Atiq ur Rehman attempted to downplay the desecration of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders and claimed that the Muslim community should be credited for not destroying evidence of mosques being built atop Hindu temples.

During a panel discussion on the disputed Gynavapi masjid and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report on News18, Rehman brazened out, “The Muslim side could have wiped off everything. Every sign of Mandir could have been wiped off but they kept it.”

“Why did they keep it? Because they were given an assurance that it wouldn’t be challenged. And they respected those artefacts,” he remarked.

“You should appreciate this fact instead of making an issue out of it. You should appreciate that they kept as they were historically very important monuments,” he further continued.

Journalist Anand Narasimhan intervened, “Why did they keep it since 1677 CE, sir? Did they keep it because it was a mosque or did they keep it as Swami Chinmayananda said that these were victory monuments.”

“Did they keep it because they wanted to show that it was a victory? These are victory monuments. Waqf Board has so many properties. Masjid could have been built anywhere? Why are they built on Ram Janmabhoomi, Krishna Janmabhoomi and so on,” he added.

Swami Chinmayananada on victory monuments

During an interview with Ram Madhav in 1993, the spiritual leader Swami Chinmayananda spoke about Ram Janmabhoomi and the disputed Babri Masjid.

He had said, “That building (Babri) is called by misnomer that it is a mosque. It is not. There were no minarets. They had not offered their prayers. Why did they build it? They broke down our Rama temple and built it there as a victory monument.”

In the context of Gyanvapi mosque, Swami Chinmayananda had added, “First let us have this Rama Temple. Afterwards, there are two more monuments which are built upon our Krishna’s birth place and Kashi Viswanath.”

Atiq ur Rehman concedes that Muslims cannot offer namaz at Gyanvapi

It must be mentioned that Atiq ur Rehman had conceded during the panel discussion that Muslims cannot offer Namaz at Gyanvapi Mosque as the mosque was built atop a Hindu temple.

Later, he resorted to mental gymnastics and began inquiring whether Hindus had the right to offer prayers at the mosque. At that point, journalist Anand Narasimhan informed him that the site was not ‘disputed’ for the Hindu community.

He added that even though the temple was defiled, the deity underneath had perennial rights. And as such, Hindus have the right to pray at the site given that the Hindu temple was not constructed atop a mosque.

Denial of ASI report

On 25th January, the report by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report on the Gyanvapi Masjid was made public. It revealed the existence of a large Hindu temple structure underneath the disputed structure.

As expected, Muslim peitioners refused to believe the report and vowed to challenge it before the higher Judiciary. SM Yasin, Joint Secretary of Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIMC) remarked, “It is our first and foremost responsibility to keep the mosque safe… ASI has given the report as per its reputation. This is a report and not a decision.”

He claimed, “The Gyanvapi mosque was built 600 years ago by a zamindar (landlord) of Jaunpur. It was renovated by Mughal emperor Akbar during his rule. Then the expansion and renovation of the Gyanvapi mosque was done by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. Muslims have been offering namaz for about 600 years ago…and will continue to do so in future too.”

Inscription of Aurangzeb’s order for mosque construction was erased

In the 850-page long detailed report, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has revealed that efforts were made to erase parts of the inscription of Aurangzeb’s order to make the mosque in place of the temple.

The inscription was found on a loose stone slab of sandstone recovered from the lower room of the south corridor. It contains Arabic and Persian scripts and the text says, Allahu Akbar, Bismillahi – Ar- Rahman-Ar-Rahim, and other such text. However, in the 6-line text on the slab, the lower two lines have been erased.

But the ASI had photographed the same slab earlier in 1965, in which all the text was intact. The report noted that the photograph of this stone inscription was recorded in ASI records in the year 1965-66. Which shows that the slab has been damaged after 1965.

According to the detailed ASI report, the erased inscription conveyed information about Aurangzeb’s order and mentioned the timeline, that is, in which year the construction of the now-existing structure took place and when expansions to the existing structure were carried out.  

As per the records, the construction of the mosque took place in 1676-77 CE. The mosque was later repaired with sahan in around 1792-93 CE. 

On comparing the two inscriptions, it was established that “attempt was made to erase last two lines of the inscription mentioning about the construction and expansion of the mosque.” 

Idols of Hindu gods buried in Gyanvapi cellars, blocked with debris

The ASI report stated that several artefacts related to the temple were deliberately kept hidden, they were found in cellars which were blocked by debris and walls. As per the ASI report, on the Eastern part of the complex, there are six cellars, three on southern side and three on the northern side on the both sides of the sealed area. There are two more cellars on the north, closer to the structure.

The cellars were made below the ground level when the pre-existing structure was modified and extended towards the east, the report states. The underground cellars were used for various purposes, however most of the cellars were found blocked, either completely or partially. For the study, ASI cleaned the cellars and removed a large amount of debris, recovering several signs of a pre-existing Hindu temple.

The most important artefacts were found in the southern cellars, S1, S2 and S3. ASI says that there are five entrances from S2 to S1, but all of them were blocked with lakhauri bricks and/ or stone blocks set in lime mortar. Similarly, all four entrances to S3 were blocked filling soil or keeping stones and architectural materials.

When the ASI teams entered cellar S3 by clearing the entrances, the found that the cellar was deliberately filled with soil and debris. Holes were make on the ceilings and soils and debris were dumped through that holes, blocking the cellar.

The report says that cellar S2 was used as a dumping place of large number of diverse things ranging from bamboos, to terracotta and metal pots, doors and windows, architectural members, etc. A number of architectural members were found stacked over the blocked entrances of the western wall.

When the debris was removed from the cellar, several things purposefully buried were exposed. This included a miniature temple, sculptures of Vishnu, Shaiva Dwarpala, Hanuman and other stone objects as well as terracotta figurines. “A miniature shrine with sculptural depiction of deities is another noteworthy find,” the ASI report says, talking about the miniature temple found in S2.

The report added that Shiva linga and Yonipatta in good numbers were doing in cellar S2 and the western wall area. It states that Two sculptures of Vishnu were also recorded from cellar S2, one of which is a complete image and another one is only the parikara part of an image depicting the figure of seated Vishnu.

Islamists, left-liberals continued to call ‘Shivling’ as fountain in wuzukhana

Soon after the discovery of a Shivling inside a wuzukhana of the disputed structure of Gyanvapi Masjid in May 2022, left-liberals and Islamists expectedly suffered a prolonged meltdown on social media.

They made casual ‘Hinduphobic’ remarks and mocked Hindu deities in an attempt to discredit the discovery of the Shivling inside the disputed structure of Gyanvapi masjid in Varanasi.

The usual suspects, who have a notorious past of chiding Hindus for being unapologetic and proud of culture and heritage, took to Twitter to mock Hindus for celebrating the presence of Shivling inside the disputed structure.

Some deliberately called it a ‘fountain’ while others compared Shivling to everyday objects.

Curious case of the missing Sorens: Did you know Jharkhand’s ‘missing’ CM Hemant Soren’s father had also gone missing after being held guilty in a murder case

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Curious case of the missing Sorens: Did you know Jharkhand’s ‘missing’ CM Hemant Soren’s father had also gone missing after being held guilty in a murder case

On Monday, January 29, the media a abuzz with news that the Jharkhand CM and Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) chief Hemant Soren has gone missing and cannot be reached as ED wants to interrogate him in a money laundering case linked to the land scam case. As per reports, an ED team visited the Jharkhand CM’s residence and the Jharkhand Bhavan but could not find him. He was reportedly unreachable. The office of the CM reportedly said that they are not aware of the CM’s whereabouts.

Later in the day, reports emerged that the Jharkhand CM was probably in the National Capital Region, and his last location was traced to Gurgaon. It was also reported that he flew from Ranchi to Delhi in a chartered aircraft, which is currently parked at Delhi airport. However, the ED was still unable to reach or contact him.

The phones of several members of his team are reportedly switched off. His BMW car in Delhi has been seized by the ED. His driver has also been questioned but to no avail.

While the Enforcement Directorate is making every effort to find the ‘missing’ Jharkhand chief minister, it wouldn’t be incorrect to assume that Hemant Soren seems to have inherited this peculiar trait of going ‘missing’ from none other than his father Shibu Soren, popularly known as ‘Guruji’ in the state. Shibu Soren had reportedly also resorted to similar tactics almost two decades ago after he had been held guilty in a murder case.

In 2004, the sins of the past had finally caught up with a defiant Shibu Soren as the Jamtara court issued an arrest warrant against him in a 30-year-old murder case. A police team from Jharkhand reached Delhi to execute the arrest warrant against him in connection with the 1975 Chirudih massacre. It was then that Shibu Soren, the then Union Coal Minister, went missing trying to evade the arrest.

The 1975 Chirudih Massacre in which Shibu Soren, father of Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren, was named as the fourth accused

On the evening of January 23, 1975, 10 people were murdered, nine of them Muslims, in a massacre in the hamlet of Chirudih in Dumka district (now in Jamtara district, in Jharkhand). The incident happened after a violent clash erupted between two mobs, one of tribals led by Soren and the other of non-tribals under the banner of the CPI. Soren was accused of inciting the mob to kill ‘dikus’ or outsiders following a movement launched by the JMM chief to drive them away.

The FIR on the incident, registered in the Narainpur police station, named 69 accused and Shibu Soren’s name appeared fourth in the list of names of the accused.

Reportedly, Lakhindra Soren, one of the accused, in his dying declaration recorded by the magistrate on February 7, 1975, at Jamtara Sadar hospital, declared, “Shibu Soren told us that since Muslims were burning the houses of tribals we should first kill the Muslims.”

On December 26, 1979, a chargesheet against all of the accused was filed following the examination of forty witnesses. Soren was chosen to be an MP in 1980. The case continued for the following six years.

Judicial procedures against the fifty-nine accused were initiated on September 1, 1986. The judicial magistrate revoked the bail for Soren and the nine other absentees since they did not appear in court, and they were ordered to surrender by September 6.

Arrest warrants were issued for them as a result of their inability to comply with the court’s order.

In April and June 2004, the court repeatedly summoned all the accused. Finally, the court declared Soren an “absconder” and ordered his arrest.

Two officers of SP rank were sent to Delhi to arrest Soren, but Sibhu Soren went ‘missing’. He reportedly did not even turn up in Rajya Sabha, where he was to take questions. The police team from Ranchi then visited Soren’s house and pasted a copy of the arrest warrant outside and met the then Delhi Police Commissioner K K Paul. There was even a rumour that the minister was “surrendering” in the city, but the teams of both Jharkhand and Delhi police did not find any trace of Soren.

Soren later sent in his resignation through a party delegation to the Prime Minister’s office.

Like father like Son

Now, history seems to be repeating itself, as Shibu Soren’s son Hemant Soren is reportedly gone missing as the ED has been trying to close in on him in connection with a major land scam case. Soren has already skipped 9 ED summons. The current summon to him is the 10th summon by the probe agency. As reported by ANI, the ED had written to Jharkhand CM asking him to provide a date for questioning on January 29 or 31, or else the agency itself will go to him for questioning, in connection with a money-laundering case linked to an alleged land scam.

Interestingly, following the sudden disappearance of the Jharkhand CM, veteran journalist and the senior adviser to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Kanchan Gupta, also took to X to draw parallels to a similar situation involving Shibu Soren, who too had gone ‘missing’ when investigating agencies were closing in on him.

“Lik father, like son. Absconding Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren leaves behind ‘benami’ BMW car (and Rs 36 lakh in loose change) at his Delhi residence. In early-1990s his father Shibu Soren had done the Houdini trick, leaving behind superexpensive Dalmatians at his MP bungalow in Delhi. The dogs were taken into care by TN Chaturvedi,” Kanchan Gupta posted.

India says notice issued to French journalist Vanessa Dougnac “not related to her work”, has “violated visa rules”

OpIndia Staff
-
0
India says notice issued to French journalist Vanessa Dougnac “not related to her work”, has “violated visa rules”

Reports quoting Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra said that the subject of French journalist Vanessa Dougnac‘s visa violation was discussed with the French side both before and during President Emmanuel Macron’s visit.

As per reports, the government has said that the notice issued to the journalist was “not related to her work” and clarified that she had “violated visa rules”.

The same was conveyed by India to the French delegation during bilateral talks. This comes exactly a week after a notice was issued to Dougnac reportedly asking why her OCI card should not be withdrawn.

As per a report by The Print, the notice was issued over her “malicious” work which has created a “biased negative perception” of India and over alleged violation of visa rules.

The Foreigners Registration Office (FRRO) notice of the MHA was issued to her on 18th January. A response was sought from her by 2nd February.

Dougnac has also cooperated with relevant authorities, reports claim. Moreover, Kwatra said that France appreciated India’s “frame of reference” to look at the case through a lens of rules compliance.

“People are free to do what they are accredited to do in a given space. But here I think the principal issue is whether the person is compliant with the rules and regulations of the state under which they come,” he reportedly said.

Meanwhile, a group of 30 foreign correspondents residing in India signed an open letter to MHA expressing their “deep concern” for Dougnac.

“Ms Dougnac, who has lived in India for more than two decades and is highly regarded as a senior journalist covering South Asia, has cooperated with the relevant authorities in an effort to remove any misunderstanding,” the letter read.

The letter was signed largely by French and Western media including The New York Times, Le Monde, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and more.

Cypher Case: Former Pakistan PM and cricketer Imran Khan sentenced to 10 years jail

ANI
-
0
Cypher Case: Former Pakistan PM and cricketer Imran Khan sentenced to 10 years jail

A Pakistan court has sentenced former prime minister Imran Khan and former Pakistan’s foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi to jail for 10 years each in a case involving leaking of state secrets, local media reported on Tuesday.

A special court established under the Official Secrets Act sentenced Pakistan Tehreeke-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Khan and former Pakistan’s foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi handed out the 10-year jail sentence in the cypher case, Dawn reported.

The verdict was announced by special court Judge Abul Hasnat Zulqarnain during the hearing held at Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi.
The special court had begun the cipher trial afresh last month at the Adiala district jail after Imran and Qureshi were indicted for a second time in the case on December 13, Dawn News reported.

The former premier and Qureshi, who is also behind bars, were first indicted in the case in October. Both had pleaded not guilty. The IHC had termed the government’s notification for a jail trial “erroneous” and scrapped the entire proceedings.

Taking to social media platform X, Khan said, “This is not a trial but a fixed match whose outcome was predetermined by the characters and planners of the London Plan and their seals. That is why I already know the decision of this case.”

He added, “Remember that Cipher is a case which has been declared null and void twice by the Islamabad High Court and ordered to be re-tried because both times the case was tried to be run in violation of the constitution and the law. Then the Supreme Court has also given me bail in this case because the whole building of this case has been built on lies, bullying, conspiracy and deceit.”

The former Pakistan PM also alleged that “these people want to provoke you by giving me a harsh sentence in this case so that you go out on the streets and protest, then add your unknowns to it and do another false flag operation in the style of May 9 to get those results. Attempts should be made which could not be achieved by the earlier false flag operation. Second, they want you people to stay at home on February 8, disappointed and angry.”

He urged, “My Pakistanis! This is your war and this is your test that you have to take revenge for every injustice by your vote on February 8 while remaining peaceful. Innocent Pakistanis imprisoned in jails for the last 8 months will get justice and release now only with your vote. I believe that just as you broke the chains of fear yesterday, you will come out in millions on election day and defeat the planners of the London plan by the power of your vote and tell them that we There are no sheep that can be driven with a stick. I believe that February 8 will be our day of victory. God willing.”

Earlier this month, Pakistan’s caretaker federal government challenged the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) decision to declare its notification regarding the jail trial of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader in the cypher case as null and void.

It reported that the government filed a petition in the apex court to overturn the High Court’s decision saying that the High Court did not evaluate the facts of the case properly.

It contended that the IHC did not have the authority to declare a special court formed to hold cypher trial of the former premier invalid.
As per Geo News, in November last year, the IHC nullified the notification for conducting PTI founder Imran Khan’s jail trial in the cypher case registered on charges of leaking state secrets.

An IHC division bench, comprising Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, announced the verdict on November 21, 2023 on Imran’s intra-court appeal against a single-member bench’s decision to approve his jail trial in the cypher case under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.

Earlier, allowing Khan’s intra-court appeal, the division bench declared the law ministry’s notification “to be without lawful authority and no legal effect”.

The IHC stated in the three-page short order that the jail trial can be conducted in “exceptional circumstances”.

“In exceptional circumstances and where it is conducive to justice, a trial can be conducted in jail in a manner that fulfills the requirements of an open trial or a trial in camera, provided it is in accordance with the procedure provided by law.

“The court also declared that the November 15 notification issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice after the caretaker cabinet’s approval of the jail trial “cannot be given retrospective effect”.

Geo News reported that Imran’s cypher trial was started afresh, but the IHC declared all the proceedings in the cypher case conducted by a special court after December 14, 2023, invalid.

Last week, state defence counsels had been appointed due to the previously appointed ones who had agreed to conduct cross-examinations not appearing in the next two court hearings.

Imran had said the trial was nothing less than a “joke” because the prosecution and defence team both belonged to the government.
The cypher case involves a diplomatic document that the Federal Investigation Agency alleges was never returned by Imran Khan, with the PTI asserting the document contained a threat from the United States to remove Imran as prime minister.

(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)

1...1,3971,3981,399...7,656Page 1,398 of 7,656