Days after Amit Malviya sent a legal notice to one Santanu Sinha for accusing him of demanding sexual favours from women politicians in West Bengal, the latter has now cried foul over the matter.
Sinha claimed that he did not level sexual harassment allegations against Amit Malviya and that his Facebook post had been deliberately misinterpreted by the Indian National Congress.
He has now issued a statement backtracking from his previous claims but pointed out that he would not delete the controversial post.
The transcript of his statement goes as –
“It is a great chagrin to me that the nastiest and most corrupted political party of the country, the Indian National Congress, being armed with a post in Bengali posted from my Facebook account, is spreading hate campaign against Mr. Amit Malaviya and the Bharatiya Janata Party,
No corner in the post there is any whisper about sexual exploition of women by Mr.Amit Malaviya. Rather I have there expressed my fear if Mr. Malviya will be drawn to honey trap by the unscrupulous leaders of the party to remain clung to their post despite such debacle in the recently held election. We have bitter experience of such honey trap during the tenure of Mr. Kailash Vijoyborgiya, Mr. Siddhartha Nath Sing, Mr. Pradip Joshi and Mr. Shibprasad. To be noted that criminal case arising of that honey trap is still pending against Mr. Kailash Vijoyborgiya, Mr. Pradip Joshi and Mr. Shibprasad. Sushri Mamata Banerjee several times threatened to bring out clips of the honey trap.
But to my extreme astonishment, none from the State BJP has ever tried to know the purport of the post, but played a dubious role. A legal notice sent from the end of Mr. Malviya by his learned Advocate was circulated amongst media, purposely, with a view to create pressure upon me on the one hand, and on the other, to divert their responsibility of the debacle in last parliamentary election in West Bengal. Several press people told me that Mr. Jaganath Chattopadhyay, de-facto president of the state party, is the man behind circulating the legal notice [I have the audio clips which I will bring out when require]. However I am ready to contest cases, civil or criminal, as threatened in the said legal notice, if any, is iniiated.
I want to give a clear message that the post was not aimed to malign Mr. Malviya but as caution not to get entangled in honey trap, which first brought to light by Mr. Tathagata Roy, ex-president of the State unit and former governor of Tripura with the phrase KAMINI KANCHAN.
I, a Sangha Swayam Sevak, former State Secretary of ABVP and contestant in State Assembly election and in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation election, do not want the Bharatiya Janata Party and its office bearers get undermined in any manner by misinterpretation of my post.
Be precious, Rahul is my causin brother. He has been unnecessarily dragged into the controversy. He has no role to play in my Facebook post.
If my post hurts Mr. Malaviya and/or undermines my party for such misinterpretation and edited version, I do express my heart felt sorrow for the same. Since I have not written anything untoward in my post, with the mission to malign anyone, I am not withdrawing the post, the bone of contention.“
The Background of the Controversy
In a post dated 7th June, Santanu Sinha accused Amit Malviya and other senior leadership of BJP of accepting sexual favours from leaders in West Bengal and in exchange providing them positions in the party.
He accused West Bengal BJP leaders of sending women to Malviya and other senior leaders of BJP women in 5-star hotels to secure the president’s posts.
In a press conference on 10th June, Congress’s IT Cell chief Supriya Srinate levelled sexual harassment allegations against BJP’s Amit Malviya based on social media post by Santanu Sinha on Facebook.
On 8th June, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) IT Cell Chief Amit Malviya sent a legal notice to one Santanu Sinha from West Bengal for making allegations of sexual misconduct against him.
As per the legal notice, the post against Malviya was published on 7th June 2024 on Facebook. The notice was sent by Supreme Court advocate Abhijeet on behalf of Malviya asking Santanu to take down the post and tender unconditional apology.
The notice pointed out that the post on Facebook by Santanu made “false and defamatory” allegations against Malviya with an “intention to harm his reputation.”
Santanu was asked to remove the post within three days. However, before the notice period could end, Srinate raised the issue in a press conference.
After the right-wing National Rally (Rassemblement National, RN) defeated President Macron’s Renaissance party with 31.5% of the vote in the European Parliament elections, hundreds of far-left supporting people staged a protest in Paris on Monday.
The protestors gathered outside the French Parliament and raised slogans against the victorious right-wing party National Rally. The demonstrators also raised pro-Palestine slogans during the protest.
Thousands of leftists gathered in Rennes, Nantes, and Rouen to push for a far-left ‘Popular Front’ to fight against the conservative National Rally in the parliamentary elections set to be held later this month. In Rennes, over 2,500 people protested against the right wing’s rise and chanted pro “popular front” [Front Populaire] slogans calling for the far-left to unite against the right wing. The protestors largely included left-wing parties, ecologists and trade unions.
Leftists protest in Rennes after conservative France’s National Rally wins EU parliament elections (Image source: France24)
In Nantes, more than 1,000 people rallied on Monday screaming slogans like “La jeunesse emmerde le RN” (“Youth f*cks with the RN”) and “Votre haine, notre révolte” (“Your hatred, our revolt”). The leftist protestors began a march in the city in the evening with a banner reading “revolution or barbarism”.
Meanwhile, in Rouen, over 800 people rallied against the right-wing party. The slogans chanted were “Young people f*ck the Front National” and “Everyone hates the Front National.” In Bordeaux and some other places, the protest took a violent turn and the police had to control the situation.
On Monday, French students gathered at Paris’ Henri IV High School to protest the right-wing party’s triumph in the European Parliament. Protesters blocked the building’s entrance, brandishing banners and chanting slogans against the conservative party and President Macron.
French high school students protest against RN in Paris Source: Anadolu)
The left-wing protesting against the rise of right-wing in France indicates that as is the common trait in leftists across the world, it is a democracy only when the Left wins and it dies when their opponents emerge victorious.
This came after President Emmanuel Macron dissolved France’s lower chamber of parliament, sending voters back to the elections in the coming days to elect MPs following his party’s humiliating defeat by the right-wing party in the European Parliament elections on the 9th of June. The declaration came as the provisional results from France showed the far-right National Rally party far ahead in the European Union’s parliamentary elections, giving Macron’s pro-European centrists an embarrassing disappointment.
While the Rassemblement National (National Rally) received 31.37% votes, Marcon’s Renaissance Party and its coalition Besoin d’Europe got just 14.60% votes.
On 10th June, a message on WhatsApp and social media started to circulate that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been added to Bharatiya Janata Party’s “Margdarshak Mandal”. The assertion has been made that he was added to the “Mandal” alongside veteran BJP leaders like LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi as “punishment” for unfavourable results in Lok Sabha Elections 2024.
The WhatsApp message had a screenshot of the BJP’s website’s “Margdarshak Mandal” page alongside text that read, “Was the 2024 election result against Modi? It looks like even BJPee people are sick of Modi. They put him in Margdarshak Mandal on the BJPee website. People are sick of him. they have the numbers, but not the mandate.”
Source: WhatsApp Forward
When we checked social media, there were similar posts made on X. On 6th June, a Congress spokesperson mocked Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a social media post and wrote, “Who is spreading this rumour that Modi Ji is joining “Margdarshak Mandal”.
Source: X
X user Gurudath Shetty Karkala wrote, “Wow!! this is big. BJP’s official website has put Modi on the list of Margdarshak Mandal.”
Source: X
X user Sanatan Dharma questioned why PM Modi and Rajnath Singh’s names were added to Margdarshak Mandal.
Source: X
Another user Dhairya Maheshwari wrote, “For some reason, PM Modi’s and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s names have come up on the website of the BJP ‘Margdarshak Mandal’ besides the names of party veterans LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi.”
Source: X
Reality: Both PM Modi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh have been a part of Margdarshak Mandal since 2014
When OpIndia checked the page of BJP’s Margdarshak Mandal, PM Modi and Rajnath Singh are indeed in the list alongside LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi. However, there is a catch. Both Prime Minister and Defence Minister are not new members of Margdarshak Mandal. They have been part of the committee since 2014.
We found a press release from 2014 that mentioned that five leaders were added to Margdarshak Mandal which were former Prime Minister late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, PM Narendra Modi, Lalkrishna Advani, Dr Murli Manohar Joshi and Rajnath Singh.
Furthermore, we also found archives of the page from 2022 and 2023 where both PM Modi and Rajnath Singh were part of Margdarshak Mandal.
Screenshot of archive from 2022
Screenshot of archive from 2023
The war of narrative
As the dust settles on Lok Sabha Elections 2024, the Indian political landscape has geared up for a fierce battle of narratives. The opposition parties have nothing better to do after getting defeated by PM Modi-led NDA for the third consecutive time. 28 opposition parties came together as I.N.D.I. Alliance and still failed to form a government. Now, these parties would prefer to marshal up all their resources to craft narratives against PM Modi and the NDA-led government. It seems the abovementioned message is going to be part of such narratives.
The incident of misleading information about Margdarshak Mandal exemplifies the broader strategy of the opposition. They will seize upon any opportunity, no matter how trivial, to apprehensions against the ruling party. They will highlight perceived shortcomings, amplify dissenting voices, and leverage social media to spread their message far and wide.
By indulging in such actions, the opposition will hope to sway public opinion and create an atmosphere of uncertainty and discontent. The aim, you may ask. The aim will be to undermine the credibility of the Modi government. They will portray him as an ineffective leader and project as if he is out of touch with the ground reality. This war of narratives is not just about policy or governance; it’s about perception and influence.
In response, the NDA-led government has to remain vigilant and proactive to counter the narratives immediately. In Modi 2.0, the war of narratives led to anti-CAA and anti-farmer laws sentiments across the country. It is essential to curb such dangerous narratives at the budding stage before they become a law and order problem. Transparency and clear communication will be crucial in dispelling misinformation and maintaining public trust.
The Paschim (West) Sarira police station in Kaushambi district, Uttar Pradesh, has been in the headlines for quite some time. The reason is the discussion on social media about the village of Jafarpur Mahawa. It is being claimed that the Muslim community has imposed a social boycott on the Hindu community. Some media outlets have also published similar reports. However, the police are denying these claims.
Meanwhile, Hindu organisations have expressed dissatisfaction with the response of the local administration and have protested at the police station. OpIndia has investigated all aspects of this news.
The root lies in land dispute
There is a land dispute at the root of this entire matter. In the village, there is a temple next to Chhotelal Gupta’s house. This temple is adjacent to a piece of land that used to belong to a Hindu. A Muslim villager bought this land. It is alleged that the buyer now wants to open a door facing the temple. Despite his house facing the other side, the Muslim neighbour insists on opening the door towards the temple, claiming ‘my land, my right.’ The Hindu community believes that if this happens, there will be frequent communal tensions in the future, as the temple could be defiled by the practices of the Muslim family.
The Hindu side levels serious allegations
Villagers Chhotelal Gupta, Mahesh, and Virendra Diwakar have made statements regarding this issue. In unison, they all said that moving beyond the legal battle over the land dispute, the Muslim side has now resorted to a social boycott. It is alleged that the Muslim community in the village held a meeting and unanimously decided that there would be no transactions of any kind with Hindu households. OpIndia has also obtained a letter addressed to the local Deputy SP. The letter is signed by Chhotelal, Mahesh, Rajesh Kumar, Rupendra Kumar Sharma, Dhirendra Singh, and Jagdish Kumar.
(Complaint Copy)
In this letter, the village Pradhan Naseer Ahmed, Abrar’s son Guddu, Akram, Naushad, and Wahab have been identified as the masterminds behind the boycott of Hindus. It is alleged that the boycott includes prohibiting the purchase of goods from Hindu shops, conversing with them, and preventing them from accessing water for their fields. Muslims who do not comply with this decree face a fine of Rs 5,000 and the threat of being ostracised from the community. The complaint mentions that there is an atmosphere of fear among the Hindus in the village. The names Vaijnath and Rajesh are mentioned as those affected by the lack of water for irrigation. The complaint is signed by the entire Hindu community.
Village Pradhan partially accepted the allegations
OpIndia has obtained a video byte of the village Pradhan Nassen alias Naseer Ahmed, regarding this entire dispute. He initially spoke many things like Hindu-Muslim unity. In the land dispute, he supported Muslim buyer, asserting that the construction is legitimate. He denied any claims of social ostracism. In the end, he admitted that strict actions had been taken against some individuals who were talking about the Hindu-Muslim divide.
Police refute all allegations
On Monday (10th June), the Kaushambi Police released their statement on this entire matter. According to the police, claims about issuing a fatwa for social ostracism in the village are baseless and misleading. The police also clarified that the issue of not providing water for irrigation was not a collective action but involved only one person. Fakire had asked for the old dues to be settled before providing water. Claiming peace among the villagers, the police stated that some outsiders were trying to disrupt the environment and had been issued strict warnings.
Kaushambi, UP ?
?Masjid has given open fatwa – Muslims must boycott Hindu businesses – Muslims must shut down water supply to Hindu homes – Muslims must not allow Hindus to use water from their tube wells & private resources
— Shashank Shekhar Jha (@shashank_ssj) June 10, 2024
Hindu organisations dissatisfied with the administration’s actions
Meanwhile, several Hindu organisations have expressed dissatisfaction with the administrative actions. Members associated with Hindu organisations alleged injustice against Hindus in the village. They staged a protest at the Paschim (West) Sarira Police Station on Sunday (9th June). During the protest, it was alleged that the police were threatening the Hindu side. Additionally, the revenue officials were accused of making unilateral decisions. It was announced during the protest that the complaint regarding the incident would be directly addressed to Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.
Notably, the village has approximately equal populations of Muslims and Hindus. Hindu organisations have announced that they will not let any injustice happen to the Hindus in the village. Currently, there is peace in the village. The administration is continuously monitoring the situation. Social media is also being monitored regarding this matter.
On Sunday (9th June), Kiren Rijiju was sworn in as the Union Minister of Minority Affairs. The BJP MP from Arunachal Pradesh becomes the first Buddhist to hold the position of Minority Affairs Minister since its constitution in January 2006.
Conventionally, only Muslim politicians were appointed as the Minority Affairs Minister. The Congress-led-UPA government started the convention with the appointment of Abdul Rahman Antulay between 2006 and 2009.
The position was subsequently held by Salman Khurshid and K Rahman Khan. After the NDA came to power, the Modi government chose Najma Heptulla and Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi to lead the Ministry of Minority Affairs.
The big shift came in July 2022 when BJP leader Smriti Irani was roped in by the Modi government as the Minority Affairs Minister. Irani was assisted by Christian John Barla as the Minister of State.
Kiren Rijiju, who has previously served as Minister of Law, will now lead the Ministry of Minority Affairs. George Kurian, a Christian politician from Kerala, has been appointed as the Minister of State.
It must be mentioned that Muslims constitute the largest majority among ‘religious minorities’ in India. The Ministry of Minority Affairs was carved out of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment by the UPA government in 2006.
A case of molestation with a Hindu woman has come to light in the Amroha district of Uttar Pradesh. The accused, named Ata ur Rehman, has been arrested by the police in the case. The incident took place on Saturday (8th June). The police are investigating the case and taking necessary actions. Two videos related to this incident are also going viral on social media. In the first video, Ata ur Rehman, seen wearing Islamic attire and a netted skull cap, can be seen walking towards the woman. In the second video, the accused is seen limping and taking support from the shoulders of the police personnel.
अमरोहा में दूध लेने जा रही महिला का रास्ता रोककर अभद्रता करने वाला मो. अताउररहमान गिरफ्तार।
महिला अपराध में जीरो टॉलरेंस की नीति अपनाते हुए यूपी पुलिस अपराधी को पैरों पर चलने लायक नहीं छोड़ रही। pic.twitter.com/kZr6Ksk3q5
— Prashant Umrao (Modi Ka Parivar) (@ippatel) June 9, 2024
The incident took place in the Kotwali Gajraula area of Amroha district. On Saturday (8th June), the victim’s husband filed a complaint with the police. The complainant stated that on Saturday morning around 5:30 AM, his wife was going to buy milk. At that time, an unknown person approached her from behind. He stopped the victim and molested her. When she resisted, the accused threatened to kill her and hurled abuses at her. When the victim raised an alarm, the accused fled the scene while threatening her.
#Amroha : गजरौला में शनिवार की सुबह दूध लेने जा रही महिला से छेड़खानी करने वाले मुस्लिम युवक को पुलिस ने गिरफ्तार कर लिया है
The complainant works in a factory. He has demanded strict action against the unknown accused. The police have registered an FIR against the unknown person under sections 341, 323, 504, and 506 of the IPC. During the investigation, the accused was identified as Ata ur Rehman who is a resident of Gajraula. The police have arrested him. In the first of the two videos going viral on social media, the accused can be seen moving hurriedly towards the woman.
In the second video, Ata ur Rehman is seen limping and relying on support from Police personnel to walk out of the Police station. OpIndia has a copy of the complaint. The police are investigating the case and taking necessary actions.
On Monday (10th June), the Satnami Samaj staged a massive protest in Baloda Bazaar, Chhattisgarh. The protesters demanded a CBI probe into the recent act of vandalism at the Amar Gufa in the Giraudpuri area where miscreants damaged Jaitkham, a revered religious symbol for the community.
As per reports, while the state government had already announced a judicial probe into the vandalism incident that took place last month, protesters in thousands gathered outside the collectorate demanding a CBI probe. However, the protest turned violent and miscreants indulged in stone pelting and arson.
#WATCH | Chhattisgarh: Violence erupted in Balodabazar today after a demonstration over alleged damage to the religious place of Satnami Community. Stone pelting and arson reported during the violence; government offices vandalised, vehicles set on fire. pic.twitter.com/a3yF3mipwO
As per reports, miscreants also vandalised government offices and torched several vehicles. It is being reported that the miscreants damaged about 3 dozen motorcycles and a dozen cars in Baloda Bazaar, Chhattisgarh.
Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh: Protesters vandalize collectorate in anger over Amar Gufa and Jaithkham destruction. About 3 dozen motorcycles, a dozen cars damaged. Police encounter stone-pelting, causing injuries pic.twitter.com/03RtgZ6uIg
Notably, Satnami Samaj has been expressing displeasure with the administration’s action in the vandalism of the Jaitkham case for a long time. On Monday, they reached the collector’s office to stage a massive protest. During this time, thousands of people gathered around the collectorate. However, things went out of control and several miscreants broke the security cordon and stormed inside. Subsequently, clashes erupted between the miscreants and the Police personnel deployed there.
About 3-4 thousand people had gathered outside the office. As per reports, during this time, the mob set fire to the collector’s office and also torched several administrative vehicles parked outside.
The State government announced a Judicial probe into the vandalism of the Jaitkham incident
State Deputy Chief Minister, who also serves as the state Home Minister, Vijay Sharma had already ordered a judicial inquiry into the demolition of Jaitkham given the resentment of the Satnami Samaj. However, the community is demanding a CBI inquiry against those who were involved in the May vandalism incident.
Sharma said, “An attempt was made to harm the revered Jaitkham in the holy Amar Gufa on the intervening night of 15-16 March. As per the instructions of the Chief Minister of the state Vishnudev Sai, a judicial investigation will be conducted into this incident which disturbed the social harmony. An investigation will be conducted.”
He also asserted that incidents that disturb social harmony will not be tolerated anywhere in the state. Strict action will be taken against the culprits who commit such acts.
The vandalism incident that took place in May this year in Giraudpuri, Chhattisgarh
On the night of 15-16 May, some anti-social elements damaged Jaitkham near the holy Amar Gufa of Giraudpuri Dham. Police had arrested three people in the case. The Satnami Samaj alleged that there were many more accused behind the scenes in this case, who should be arrested. Following the demand of the society, the state government had also announced to conduct a judicial inquiry.
(An example of Jaitkham, revered for the Satnami Samaj, Source – X/Progressive CG)
What is Jaitkham
Lakhs of people from the Satnami Samaj live in Chhattisgarh. They have established their religious places in many villages in and around Raipur. Jaitkham is a sacred religious symbol of the Satnami Samaj which they worship daily. Wherever people of the Satnami Samaj reside, they establish a Jaitkham there. In Raipur alone, more than 100 Jaitkhams have been erected by the Satnami Samaj. A white flag is hoisted over each Jaitkham.
On Monday (10th June), the Supreme Court upheld a Karnataka trial court’s order to prosecute Congress MLA Vinay Kulkarni for the murder of former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) worker Yogesh Gowda. Yogesh was an elected member of Dharwad Zilla Panchayat. He was killed at his gym in June 2016.
Notably, Congress MLA Vinay Rajshekarappa Kulkarni was accused of a 2016 murder conspiracy against the BJP worker. A bench of Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and Augustine Masih rejected the MLA’s Special Leave Petition against the Karnataka High Court Order, which sustained the Special Court’s charges against Kulkarni and twenty other accused persons.
The Supreme Court held that Vinay Kulkarni had ‘bought over’ the deceased victim’s widow. Given that the Court was unlikely to consider the plea, Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave, who represented Kulkarni, moved to withdraw it. This, however, enraged Justice Kumar who said, “This court has become a gambling court.”
Justice Kumar observed that the case was not fit for quashing. “This is not a case for quashing, 57 phone calls between you and A1 within the ambit of 5 months,” the Judge said.
The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Sidharth Dave, contended that the MLA was only mentioned in the CBI’s second charge sheet, and that the deceased’s widow’s statement did not reveal the petitioner’s name.
“The deposition of the wife is not against me, all that material has to be reconsidered…it is further investigation (the CBI’s second chargesheet) it is not an investigation. If it is not re-investigated, the earlier material cannot be wiped out…..He (trial judge) cannot go only on the basis of the supplementary chargesheet filed by the CBI,” Kulkarni’s counsel said.
Justice Sanjay Kumar intervened to verbally observe, “You also write a letter to the Chief Secretary seeking transfer of the public prosecutor because she was vigorously conducting the trial, uninfluenced by you Minister…”
Expressing his disagreement, Kulkarni’s counsel said, “Even when I was the Minister, the trial took place, but not a whisper by the wife of the deceased.”
While dismissing the SLP, Justice Kumar said, “You obviously bought over the widow…sorry SLP dismissed.”
As Kulkarni’s counsel requested to withdraw the plea, the bench strongly condemned the trend of cases being filed and withdrawn over unfavourable outcomes.
“This has to stop. This trying your luck at the Supreme Court then back out, this court has become a gambling court or what?” the court said.
Yogesh Gowda murder case
Yogesh Gowda, a BJP Zila Panchayat member from the Hebballi constituency, was murdered by an armed gang at his gym in Saptapur, Dharwad, on the 15th of June 2016. Following his murder, Dharwad Police arrested six people and charged them with murder. Gurunath Gowda, Yogesh Gowda’s brother, wanted a CBI probe into the matter, which was finally fulfilled after the BJP-led government took power in the state. The CBI took up the investigation on the 24th of September 2019, arrested eight other accused, and submitted a charge sheet on the 20th of May 2020. Vinay Kulkarni was arrested on November 5, 2020, and has been in judicial custody in Hindalga Jail, Belagavi, after his bail plea was denied twice, first by the lower court and then in April this year by the High Court.
The CBI told the court in November 2020 that Congress leader Vinay Kulkarni had travelled to Delhi before and after Yogesh Gowda’s murder to use it as an alibi. The CBI investigation into the killing revealed that Kulkarni travelled to Delhi on the 12th of June, 2016, around 11.30 a.m. and returned the following day at 10.40 a.m.
The CBI alleged that Kulkarni went to Delhi on the 16th of June evening, one day after the murder, and returned on the 18th of June 2016. “The tickets were booked on the same day of the journey and the purpose of the journey was to create an alibi,” according to the CBI.
Notably, the CBI said that Gowda’s murder was caused due to political rivalry because Congress’s Vinay Kulkarni, had allegedly asked him not to run in the Zila Panchayat elections, however, Yogesh refused to do so.
Notably, Yogesh Gowda’s wife, Mallamma, a BJP candidate for the Hebballi zila panchayat by-election, lost by six votes and later joined the Congress party. After switching parties, she stopped blaming the Congress leaders for conspiring to kill her husband.
The Rajasthan High Court recently held that the act of removing a six-year-old minor girl’s innerwear and the accused undressing himself without proceeding beyond the stage of preparation will not attract the offence of ‘attempt to rape’ punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC. The court, however, ruled that it would attract the offence of ‘outraging the modesty of a woman’ punishable under Section 354 of the IPC.
The single-judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand emphasised what constitutes an “attempt”. He highlighted the distinction between an attempt to commit rape and attempt to commit indecent assault. The court stated that for the former, the accused must have gone beyond the stage of preparation.
The Court explained that 3 stages need to be fulfilled for any act to be punishable under the offence of “attempt”. First, the accused must have the intention to commit the offence. Second, the accused performs acts that lead to the commission of that offence. Third, the said act must be reasonably close to the culmination of the crime.
The Court noted that any act that fell short of such an act that crossed the stage of preparation constituted indecent assault which is punishable under Section 354 IPC.
The court stated, “The first stage exists when the culprit first entertains the idea or intention to commit an offence. In the second stage, he makes preparations to commit it. The third stage is reached when the culprit takes deliberate overt steps to commit the offence. Such overt act or step in order to be “criminal” need not be the penultimate act towards the commission of offence. It is sufficient if such act or acts were deliberately done and manifest a clear intention to commit the offence aimed, being reasonably proximate to the consummation of the offence.”
As per the case details, the 6-year-old prosecutrix alleged that the accused undressed both her and himself and fled the scene when she made hue and cry. However, there was no allegation that the accused attempted penetration.
The court modified Sections 376/511 under which the trial court had convicted him and changed it to Section 354. For this, the court relied upon the case of Sittu v State of Rajasthan. In that case, the girl was forcibly made naked and the accused attempted to penetrate her despite her resistance. The court noted that the said acts by the accused were seen as crossing the stage of preparation and amounted to attempting to commit rape.
However, in the case of Damodar Behera v State of Orissa, it was alleged that the accused had removed the victim’s saree but he fled away on seeing some persons. In that case, the act was not seen as reaching the stage of an attempt to commit rape but as fulfilling the conditions of an indecent assault under Section 354 IPC.
Relying on the aforementioned court orders, the Rajasthan High Court held, “Looking to the fact that the allegations have been levelled against the appellant, that he took-off the inner wear of the prosecutrix ‘D’ and also undressed himself, certainly, such act of the appellant does not amount to commission of offence under Section 376/511 IPC… In other words, the accused-appellant cannot be held to be guilty of attempt to commit rape.”
It added, “The prosecution has been able to prove the case of assault or use of illegal force on the prosecutrix ‘D’ (PW-2) with an intention to outrage her modesty or with knowledge that her modesty was likely to be outraged. Thus, it is a clear case of Section 354 I.P.C. as the act of present accused has not proceeded beyond the stage of preparation.”
The court noted that in the present case, the accused was below 25 years of age when he committed the act and he remained in jail for a total period of about 2.5 months.
Listing out reasons, the court restricted the custodial sentence of the accused-appellant to the period already undergone by him adding that would meet the ends of justice. In its order, the court elaborated on the following reasons –
(i) At the time when the offence under Section 354 I.P.C. was committed, the accused was below 25 years of age.
(ii) The incident took place on 9th March 1991 and near about 33 years have passed and this period is sufficient to exhaust anybody mentally, physically, and economically.
(iii) He has been in jail for about 2½ months during investigation, trial, and appeal.
(iv) After such a long time for the offence under Section 354 I.P.C. the accused should now not be sent to jail and this Court does not think it proper to send back the accused-appellant in custody, the court order added.
Consequently, the court partly allowed the appeal filed by the accused-appellant in the following manner –
It altered the Sessions Judge judgement and order dated 3 July 1991 and changed the sections of the offence from Sections 376/511 to Section 354 of the IPC.
(Screengrab from court order)
However, for the offence under Section 354 I.P.C., the accused-appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. The order of sentence dated 03.07.1991 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk stands modified accordingly, the court concluded.
On Sunday, 9th June, Prime Minister Narendra Modi took oath for the third consecutive term and became the second ever Prime Minister to do so after India’s first PM Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. Alongside him, cabinet ministers and ministers of state also took oaths at the hands of the President of India, Droupadi Murmu. PM Modi-led third cabinet has 72 ministers. Interestingly, there is not a single Muslim MP or cabinet minister in NDA in this term that irked Islamists, “intellectuals” and left-liberals alike.
Propagandist posing as a journalist, The Wire’s Arfa Khanum Sherwani said in a post on X, “293 MPs, 72 Ministers. Zero Muslims Zero. This is how the largest democracy of the world excludes its Muslims, by design.”.
Source: X
Funny thing is, less than two hours before this post, Arfa “tried” to figure out what could be the reason that forced Muslim Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan to attend the oath taking ceremony of PM Modi.
She was not the only one to assert that the Bharatiya Janata Party-led NDA government at the centre believes in excluding Muslim representation by design. Several others also accused the Modi government of “deliberate” exclusion. Congress supporter Dhivya Marunthiah posted, “293 MPs 72 Ministers ZERO Muslims Sums up NDA.”
Source: X
Rajdeep Sardesai, who is a Journalist and husband of Trinamool Congress’s journalist-turned-Rajya Sabha MP Sagarika Ghose, said in a post on X, “72 member council of ministers has wide representation from every caste, community, state, with 7 former CMs providing the weight and wealth of experience. Just one aspect missing: yet again not a single Muslim in the ministerial list . Not one. Truth is, Indian Muslims have been ‘invisibilised’ in the last decade politically. Surely, between regional allies, a dominant party and lateral entrants from bureaucracy, space could be found for representing 14% of the population.”
Source: X
Quoting Sardesai, journalist Sadanand Dhume said, “This is fair criticism. There are 200 million Muslims in India. That most of them don’t vote for the BJP does not absolve the government of the baseline responsibility to include Muslim representation in the cabinet.”
Source: X
Popular among left-liberals and anti-Modi social media users, X user Gabbar said, “No place for minorities in Modi Model”. He was quoting a graphic by Makhtoob Media, an Islamic propaganda news portal.
Source: X
In a post, Makhtoob Media said, “No Muslim, Christian, & Sikh MPs are among 293 elected MPs of the BJP-led NDA. Despite Muslims constituting over 200 million in India, Sikhs over 23 million, and Christians more than 22 million, the NDA has no representation from these communities among its 293 elected MPs.”
Source: X
Journalist Prabhat Shunglu said, “But that community is the biggest minority spread across different states in India. A population of nearly 20 crore goes unrepresented in Modi 3.0. cabinet. It’s surprising that being a miniscule minority in a state you claim you have been hounded out from you weigh in nasty majoritarian biases sitting in Delhi.” He was quoting journalist Adiya Raj Kaul who had quoted propagandist posing as RJ, Sayema, raising similar questions and informed her that NDA government has minority representation as there are two Sikhs, one Christian and one Buddhist Minister in the Council of Ministers.
Source: X
Author and propagandist Saba Naqvi said, “As they have done with Christian and Sikhs by inducting non elected people into cabinet, it would be good form for Modi regime to induct a Muslim, 14 per cent of India’s population. On TV last night both JD U and TDP spokies told me not to critique as this is not final cabinet. Even cosmetic civilities have some meaning when India engages with the world.”
Source: X
Propagandist and Islamist posing as RJ, Sayema, said, “Mockery of equal representation of all. No Muslim, Christian, Sikh MPs in NDA!” She was also quoting Maktoob Media’s post. Interestingly, she later accepted she committed a mistake as NDA government has ministers from minority community but asserted that it was shameful that a community that makes up 20 crores in population has no representation.
Source: X
X user Shoaib questioned where was Muslim representation in the government.
Source: X
AIMIM national spokesperson sarcastically wrote, “Sab ka sath sab ka vikas sab ka vishwas???” while quoting misleading report by The Print that suggested there were no Muslim, Christian or Sikh MPs in NDA.
Source: X
X user Zafar Saifi said, “Muslims are new “untouchables” in India” as there were no Muslims in Modi Govt 3.0.
Source: X
For those who are unaware, there are two Sikh, one Christian and two Buddhist ministers in the cabinet. These ministers are Hardeep Singh Puri, Ravneet Singh Bittu, George Kurien, Kiren Rijiju, and Ramdas Athavale.
The level to which they lie & peddle fakery Not just MPs but here are Sikh, Christian, Buddhist ( minority ) MPs & Ministers of NDA
Hardeep Puri – Sikh Ravneet Bittu – Sikh George Kurien- Christian Kiren Rijiju & Ramdas Athavale – Buddhist
— Shehzad Jai Hind (Modi Ka Parivar) (@Shehzad_Ind) June 10, 2024
For the past decade, PM Modi-led government has been under relentless scrutiny for various reasons, specifically by self-proclaimed left-liberals and Islamists. Despite the efforts by the government of India, these critics have struggled to pinpoint any concrete evidence that there has been systematic injustice or widespread discrimination against Muslims or any other minority community under the Modi government. The narrative of exclusion is now being pushed to set a narrative that Muslims are marginalised despite making up the largest population of the country after Hindus.
It is a fact that the Muslim representation in the cabinet is missing. However, the crux of the argument lies in whether it is by design as claimed by the likes of Arfa Khanum Sherwani or it is a result of the electorate dynamics and political landscape of the country. If we look at the historical data, it is evident that despite getting a large portion of the central government’s benefits, Muslims do not vote for the BJP government.
Take the example of a specific village in Rampur which has a 100% Muslim population. 2,322 voters cast votes at the polling booth and not a single vote went to BJP candidates even though the area got over 500 PM Awas Yojna Houses. Even if the BJP gives tickets to Muslim candidates, the votes go to other parties’ candidates, Muslim or not. The absence of Muslims in prominent cabinet positions is a reflection of the electoral outcomes and cannot be pinned on the ruling party as an orchestrated plan to exclude them.
This is an opener!
People get 532 PM Awas Yojna: Faizabad, Ayodhya, Rampur
— ADV. ASHUTOSH J. DUBEY ?? (Modi Ka Parivar) (@AdvAshutoshBJP) June 5, 2024
BJP-led NDA government has always believed in “Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas” and PM Modi has ensured that the Muslim community gets its fair share in the central government schemes. The representation of Muslims in government jobs, especially in civil services has increased after PM Modi took charge. Just because there is no Muslim representation, that does not mean that they do not get benefits.
The BJP has historically had less support from Muslim voters compared to other communities. In a democratic country like India, electoral success determines political power and representation. The lower level of support translates to fewer Muslim MPs from the BJP, which in the current case is zero. Consequently, the pool from which ministers can be chosen includes fewer Muslim candidates as the allied parties of BJP also have a lower number of Muslim candidates and none managed to win elections.
Out of 78 Muslim candidates who contested Lok Sabha Elections, 24 Muslim MPs won Lok Sabha Elections from their respective seats out of which seven are from Congress, four from Samajwadi Party, six from TMC, three from IUML, two from National Conference, one from AIMIM and two independents. None of these are part of the NDA. If they are not part of the alliance that formed the government at the centre, how can there be a cabinet minister from the Muslim community?
Furthermore, it is essential to consider the regional dynamics as well. Take the example of Lakshadweep. NDA candidate Yusuf TP got only 201 votes and some Muslims went online and celebrated it. Lakshadweep is 98% Muslim-dominant UT. In such a place, despite NDA having a Muslim candidate, he managed to get only 201 votes. If Muslims were that concerned about their representation at the centre, they could have voted for the NDA candidate. But that was not the case. Notably, despite the fact that BJP or NDA never won election in Lakshwadweep, Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself went to the UT and promoted tourism there.
The left-liberals outcry appears to be an attempt to spotlight a perceived injustice. However, it is essential to look deeply into the narrative to find out if it is a substantive issue or merely a politically motivated narrative. Accusations of systematic exclusion of Muslims have to be backed by concrete evidence of discriminatory policies and practices which was missing from the two terms of PM Modi’s leadership.
The left-liberals threw narratives like CAA was anti-Muslim which was not. For those who are unaware, the CAA or Citizenship Amendment Act was passed in 2019 to facilitate persecuted Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians and Jains in neighbouring Islamic countries of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh to get fast-track Indian citizenship. It did not affect Muslims who seek Indian citizenship or Indian Muslims in any way. Above all, CAA only benefits those who entered India before 31st December 2014. Sadly, the false narrative against CAA caused India dearly and we saw the deadly anti-Hindu Delhi Riots of February 2020 as a result of the protests.
While the critics are focusing on religious representation in the cabinet, which is anyway not promised by the Constitution of India, there are more pressing issues that the Muslim community faces such as education, social integration and education. The government of India has always been committed to providing the best facilities to all citizens of India irrespective of their religion. Muslim-centric schemes were announced from time to time by the PM Modi-led government to help the Muslim community live a better life. Interestingly, it was PM Modi who gave the slogan of “Quran in one hand and laptop in other”.
Moving forward
We may say that representation is important in the parliament, but it should not be viewed as in isolation. The true test of the government’s inclusivity lies in its policies and their outcomes for all communities, including Muslims. The Modi government’s track record in various sectors, such as housing, healthcare, and economic empowerment, offers a more comprehensive picture of its approach to governance.
The debate over Muslim representation in the cabinet is emblematic of the broader ideological battles being fought in India’s political arena. As the country continues to evolve, it is crucial to ensure that discussions about inclusivity are grounded in facts and focused on genuine issues of concern, rather than being swayed by politically motivated narratives based on religious representation in the Houses.
