How does this bode for the women of the country which have been under the rule of the BJP government for the past ten years? The BJP for one has not shied often from supporting men accused of rape and violence against women. 

While the BJP’s website repeatedly talks about Nari Shakti, and the need for removing discrimination and also to give the girl child ‘special emphasis’, BJP MPs and MLAs have often subjected their very own women colleagues to derogatory comments. 

BJP politicians have also not seemed to spare women in power that belong to the opposition. 

The PM Modi himself is not shy of having made comments many considered sexist. In 2018, he referred to Rajya Sabha MP Sonia Gandhi as ‘widow’ in a speech, “Ye Congress ki kaun si vidhwa thi jiske khate mein paisa jaata tha?” PM Modi did not even spare the families of politicians. When he was the chief minister of Gujarat he was reported once calling Trivandrum MP from Congress, Shashi Tharoor’s wife, Sunanda Pushkar, ‘a 50 crore girlfriend.’ 

The Congress leader is repeatedly hit with such comments. In 2019 Giriraj Singh once made a highly derogatory comment on her when it was in the news that actor Sapna Choudhury would join the Congress, “Rahul’s mother was also in the same profession in Italy and his father made her his own. He (Rahul Gandhi) should also take the family tradition forward and make Sapna his own.”

Crimes against women have been consistently rising in the country. In 2021, out of six million registered crimes, 428,278 cases were categorised as crimes against women. This marked a 26.35% increase over a span of six years since 2016 when 338,954 such cases were recorded. Similarly, according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), reported cases of rapes against Dalit women witnessed a troubling 45 percent increase from 2015 to 2020. The data tells us that on an average of 10 incidents of rape against Dalit women and girls are reported daily across India.

What contribution have BJP and their allies’ leaders made to these statistics? In the very recent case of sitting MP from the RD(S), which is part of the NDA alliance, from Karnataka, Prajwal Revanna, who has been noted to have made almost 3000 videos of women being sexually exploited or assaulted, is now reportedly absconding from the country. Sabrang India further noted how several leaders of the BJP have been accused of crimes against women, including MP Brijbushan Sharan Singh, now-convicted Kuldeep Singh Sengar and Ramdular Gond etc. 

Similarly, the BJP’s response to crimes against women has been harrowing. The Hathras rape and murder case of a Dalit woman in UP reveals the harrowing way in which the party has seemingly revealed its position on women’s issues. A young Dalit girl was brutally raped and subjected to brutal and fatal violence by four upper caste Thakur attackers in September 2020. The family of the victim were subjected to threats and fear and intimidation after the incident as it gained limelight. Her family was also denied the right to bury her, as her body was reportedly forcibly cremated by the UP police one night. Similarly, witnesses were also harassed and intimidated during the trial, which resulted in the conviction of only one Sandeep Sisodia, and acquittal of the three others. This took place despite the victim giving a testimony against the four in front of a magistrate before her death. Three Muslims, which included two journalists and a taxi driver, who were visiting Hathras to cover the incident were instead arrested and imprisoned for over three years. Furthermore, a report by The Wire claimed that the UP government, under BJP’s Yogi Adityanath, had tried to use PR firms to push the narrative in foreign media that the victim was not raped. 

Similarly, if we move east to Gujarat, the Bilkis Bano case was a harrowing case from the 2002 Gujarat massacre. Recently, in January 2024 the Supreme Court squashed Gujarat’s BJP-led government that granted remission to her rapists. Before the order was squashed, the rapists were released from jail to be received by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad with garlands and sweets. The rapists were also incidentally seen sharing the stage with BJP MLA and MP in Gujarat in 2023. 

Bilkis Bano had been gangraped in Gujarat while being pregnant. Seven of her family members, including her 3-year-old daughter, were murdered in the horrifying carnage. 

The track record of BJP, its ally parties and organisations, seems to paint a harrowing picture of the BJP’s stance on women’s issues. 

Related

NDA candidate Prajwal Revanna accused of sexually exploiting and videotaping thousands of women

UP government fails to appeal against Hathras gang rape judgment acquitting 3 accused – are we surprised?

Bilkis Bano vindicated!

Justice once more for Bilkis Bano, but what now lies ahead?

The post Report card: BJP and crimes against women appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bijoy Malakar, who is an MLA from the Ratabari constituency in Karimganj district, made the alarming remarks during a public event, promising evictions of those who don’t vote for BJP. This is not the first time a BJP MLA has threatened to demolish people’s houses. In January, the newly elected MLA and Cabinet Minister of School Education & Panchayati Raj Department in Rajasthan, Madan Dilawar also threatened protesting teachers to have their houses demolished if they did not behave appropriately with students. 

Evictions and demolition of homes have become common in recent times. In 2023, Sabrang India reported that over 2500 Bengali-speaking Muslims were evicted and rendered homeless after a demolition drive in Assam. Similarly, in January this year, a 55-year-old Muslim man died from the cold after he was evicted from his house with his family. His family called it a state-led ‘murder.’ 

As Assam goes to polls in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections, these remarks have ignited strong reactions across the state, with criticism against the ruling party. Karimganj will witness polling in the first phase of the election on April 19. The choices are between BJP leader Kripanath Mallah, AIUDF leader Sahabul Islam Choudhury, and Congress leader Advocate Hafeez Rashid Ahmed Choudhury. 

Hafiz Rashid Ahmed, an INC candidate and Senior Advocate at Gauhati High Court, condemned the statement and termed it as a violation of electoral conduct rules, calling for appropriate action to be taken. He further stated that the use of bulldozers for evictions has become a contentious issue in Assam, particularly under the tenure of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, with thousands of people reportedly displaced in recent years. This threat by the BJP MLA has raised concerns about the political climate and the tactics employed during elections.

Earlier a Scheduled Caste seat, but after the last delimitation exercise Karimganj is now an open seat. Karimganj has a large population of Muslims, who form about 56 % of the total population. On-ground observers note that the party is making efforts to bring down the opposition by resorting to such tactics. 

Assam #BJP MLA #VijayMallakar threatens people with bulldozer action if they don’t vote for his party.

The legislator from #Ratabari made these remarks while campaigning for BJP MP candidate #KripanathMallah.#LokSabaElections2024 pic.twitter.com/rOQktFzGgw

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) April 17, 2024

Assam goes to vote in the first, second and third phase of the Lok Sabha elections. April 19 will see Kaziranga, Sonitpur, Lakhimpur, Dibrugarh, Jorhat and go to polls, while Darrang-Udalguri, Diphu, Karimganj, Silchar, Nagaon and Kokrajhar, Dhubri, Barpeta, Guwahati will vote on April 26 and May 07 respectively. 

This speech by Malakar comes as CM Himanta Biswa Sarma recently posted on X, formerly Twitter, that they “don’t do politics of ‘Hindu-Muslims.” However, just a few days earlier, the sitting CM stated that there is nothing wrong with “polarisation.” According to ETV Bharat, the CM was on an election campaign for the BJP leader in Kaki in Lumding on April 14, when he said, “I always do religious polarisation. What is new? There is nothing wrong with that. Because what is my religious polarisation – there will be no insult to Hindus. If it is called polarisation, then I will polarise. Is it religious polarisation to raise a voice for the rights of Hindus?” The BJP leader is also known for giving incendiary speeches. Sabrang India noted that he gave 3 hate speeches during the election campaign for multiple poll-bound states in 2023. 

Related

Assam: After taking an oath to uphold Ambedkar’s Constitution, the BJP CM invoked the Gita to promote caste-based occupation  

CJP brings relief to a family’s struggle for their lost identity in Assam

Assam: Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra faces attacks, Congress demand judicial investigation

The post BJP MLA threatens “JCB Bulldozer” if voters don’t vote for BJP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India provides for freedom of speech and expression. Voters’ speech or expression in case of election would include casting of votes, that is to say, voter speaks out or expresses by casting vote,” the Court said. (Para 35)

This particular judgment was delivered by Justice MV Muralidaran who was recently transferred to the Calcutta High Court. It further provides that while exercising the right to cast a vote, information about the candidate to be selected is must. The judgment also emphasised that the voter’s right to know the antecedents, including criminal past of the candidate contesting election for MP or MLA is much more fundamental and basic for survival of democracy.

The judgment of the court stated that “Voter’s right to know antecedents including criminal past of his candidate contesting election for MP or MLA is much more fundamental and basic for survival of democracy. The voter may think over before making his choice of electing law breakers as law makers” (Para 35)

This particular judgment was delivered by Justice MV Muralidaran, who was Acting Chief Justice at the time of decision and has recently been transferred to the Calcutta High Court. The said judgment has paved a path for a more transparent election process and can potentially have a serious impact in the arena of voting and election rights as it clarifies the legal character that the right to vote holds in India.  

Facts of the present case:

The aforementioned observations were made by the Manipur High Court while hearing a plea filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Thounaojam Shyamkumar. His plea urged for the dismissal of petitions filed that sought for his dismissal of his election from Andro Assembly Constituency during the 2022 Legislative Assembly polls. Shyamkumar’s election had been challenged by Manipur election runner-up candidate Lourembam Sanjoy Singh and his brother Lourembam Sanjit Singh on the ground of non-disclosure of information regarding the pendency of a criminal case against Shyamkumar. The petition had also raised allegations that Shyamkumar had committed the offence of corrupt practices owing to improper declaration of information regarding Shyamkumar’s wife’s non-agricultural land. 

Observations of the court:

After hearing the parties of the plea, the Court observed that whether the criminal cases said to have been registered against the Shyamkumar were deliberately omitted from the FORM-26 at time of filing of nomination papers has to be decided during the trial by the Court. A similar observation was made by the Court with regard to mentioning of non-agricultural land and agricultural land in the relevant columns.

“Whether the allegation of the election petitioner and the second respondent (the Singh brothers) are correct or not has to be proved by the election petitioner and the second respondent respectively and further, as to whether, incorrect particulars have been mentioned in the affidavit in Form-26 by the first respondent/returned candidate and whether the alleged false affidavit would amount to violation of the provisions of Section 33 of the RP Act so as to render 24 the election of the first respondent void are to be considered by the Court in the course of trial,” Justice Muralidharan opined in Para 44 of the judgment. 

In regards to this, the High Court rejected the plea filed by Shyamkumar and concluded that it cannot be said that election petitions against him do not contain a concise statement of material facts. Rather, the court held that the petitions disclose a cause of action against him. 

It further observed that an election vitiated by reason of corrupt practices, illegalities and irregularities, as mentioned in Sections 100 and 123 of the Representation of People Act, cannot obviously be recognized and respected as the decision of the majority of the electorate. Observing this, the Court noted that it is the obligation of the Courts to examine such allegations, the bench said they cannot be “unduly hyper-technical” in their approach and oblivious of the ground realities.

The complete judgment can be read here:

The right to vote in India:

Article 326 of the Indian Constitution provides that every citizen of India above the age of 18 (Sixty- first Amendment) were granted the right to vote. It also provides that the Constitution provides that the elections to the House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of every State shall be on the basis of adult suffrage. It states that “every person who is a citizen of India and who is not less than 18 years of age on such date as may be fixed in that behalf by or under any law made by the appropriate legislature and is not otherwise disqualified under this constitution or any law made by the appropriate Legislature on the ground of non-residence, unsoundness of mind, crime or corrupt or illegal practice, shall be entitled to be registered as a voter at any such election.”

The aforementioned judgment of the Manipur High Court is significant today as on several occasions, the Supreme Court of India has taken a contradictory stand on whether the right to vote is merely a statutory right or holds more value. For context, statutory rights are those provided for by any laws passed by Parliament. These rights can be enforced in courts provided for in the law itself, and can also be curtailed or completely removed by bringing in amendments to the law. On the other hand, fundamental rights are those rights provided under Part III of the Constitution, which are guaranteed to every citizen of the country, and cannot be taken away by the state, except for the reasonable restrictions imposed on these by the Constitution itself. In case of any infringement of the fundamental rights, the victim can approach the Supreme Court (under Article 32) or the High Court (under Article 226). 

Through its recent judgments, the Supreme Court has categorised the same to be a constitutional right. These judgments are provided below.

A move from statutory right to constitutional right:

• Right to vote based on informed choice

In July 2023, a bench comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat (now retired) and Aravind Kumar had deemed it to be paradoxical that the right to vote has not been held to be a fundamental right, though democracy forms a part of the basic features of Constitution. In the case of Bhim Rao Baswanth Rao Patil V. K. Madan Mohan Rao & Ors., the Supreme Court stated that “Democracy has been held to be a part of one of the essential features of the Constitution. Yet, somewhat paradoxically, the right to vote has not been recognized as a Fundamental Right yet; it was termed as a ‘mere’ statutory right”. Notably, even as the Supreme Court had made the said comment, it shied away from declaring the right to vote as a fundamental right.

In the said case, the Court has also held that a voter has the full right to be informed about the background of a candidate. In its judgment, the bench had observed that “The elector or voter’s right to know about the full background of a candidate- evolved through court decisions- is an added dimension to the rich tapestry of our constitutional jurisprudence.”

The court had also emphasized the right of a voter to make an informed choice, a right that had been a result of our long fight for India. The Supreme Court stated “the right to vote, based on an informed choice, is a crucial component of the essence of democracy. This right is precious and was the result of a long and arduous fight for freedom, for Swaraj, where the citizen has an inalienable right to exercise her or his right to franchise. This finds articulation in Article 326 of the Constitution.”

Facts of the case: The division bench of the Supreme Court was considering a challenge to the order of the Telangana High Court that dismissed an application seeking rejection of the election petition filed against Bhim Rao Baswanth Rao Patil, the appellant. The election petition had been filed for non-disclosure of certain pending cases against him. The appellant had contended that the election petition did not disclose any cause of action and was liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

• Right to vote is a constitutional right

In March of 2023, a Constitutional bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices KM Joseph (now retired), Ajay Rastogi (now retired), Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar had sparked a debate on the legal status that is granted to a citizen’s right to vote. In the case of Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, the four judges led by former Justice KM Joseph had declared the majority judgment which had held the right to vote to be a constitutional right. 

Former Justice KM Joseph, who had written the majority judgment, had held that while free and fair elections formulate a basic feature of the Constitution and is fundamental to democracy, the right to elect representatives is one of the most important statutory rights. 

The judgement had stated that “What is important is that the Court noted in Anukul (supra) that holding of free and fair elections constitute a basic feature of the Constitution and approved of the view apparently that the Right to Elect is fundamental to democracy. Even if it is treated as a statutory right…the right is of the greatest importance and forms the foundation for a free and fair election, which, in turn, constitutes the right of the people to elect their representatives. We would for the purpose of the lis in question rest content to proceed on the said basis.”

Notably, in the majority judgment, Former Justice Joseph had refrained from making a final judicial declaration in this regard chose not to “finally pronounce” on this aspect, while taking into account the view taken by an earlier Constitution Bench in Kuldip Nayar and Others v. Union of India and Others. In Kuldip Nayar, the top court had rejected the view that “right to vote is a constitutional right beside that it is also a facet of fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.” 

In his separate but concurring judgment, former Justice Ajay Rastogi had differed from the view of the majority and held the right to vote to be a fundamental right. The former justice had said that by exercising the right to vote, the citizens of India get to choose their own destiny. The former justice had further observed that the right to vote is not merely a constitutional right, but a component of fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution. Holding the same right to be indispensable, the then Supreme Court judge had gone on to state that the right to vote does not only remain limited to Article 326, but also flowed through Article 15, 17, 19 and reflected in Article 21 of the Constitution.

“In history, the right to vote was denied to women and those were socially oppressed. Our Constitution took a visionary step by extending franchise to everyone. In that way, the right to vote enshrines the protection guaranteed under Article 15 and 17…The right to take part in the conduct of public affairs as a voter is the core of the democratic form of government, which is a basic feature of the Constitution. The right to vote is an expression of the choice of the citizen, which is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a). The right to vote is a part of a citizen’s life as it is their indispensable tool to shape their own destinies by choosing the government they want. In that sense, it is a reflection of Article 21,” former Justice Ajay Rastogi had said. 

Facts of the case: The aforementioned judgment of the Supreme Court came in the PIL (Public Interest Litigation) that was filed by Anoop Baranwal in the year 2005 on the ground that the current system for appointing members of the Election Commission of India (ECI) was unconstitutional. As per the PIL, the executive enjoyed the power to make appointments, which the PIL contended had degraded the ECI’s independence over time. The PIL pleaded for the Court to issue directions to set up an independent, Collegium-like system for ECI appointments.

• Right to vote a constitutional right and not a statutory right

In February 2023, the question on the legal position that right to vote holds under the Indian Constitution was also referred to by a Supreme Court bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud. The bench, also comprising Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala, was hearing a PIL challenging the constitutionality of Section 33(7) of the Representation of Peoples Act 1951 that allowed a candidate to contest from two seats in elections. During the hearing, the CJI expressed his reservations regarding treating the right to vote as a statutory right. 

CJI Chandrachud had said “Of course, there are some judgments that say that the Right to Vote is only a statutory right and not a constitutional right. But no, it is a constitutional right because it’s a part of Article 19(1)(a) – the right of expression, the right of people to elect, and for people to vote.”

These remarks of the CJI stand right in the middle of ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. However, CJI Chandrachud did not elaborate much on this issue as it did not form an essential question in this matter.

A necessary shift?

Vote is an instrument by which a person elects their representative to represent them before the sovereign and the elected representative reflects and represents the people by whom that person is elected. It is crucial to highlight that through the current judgment, and the July judgment of the Supreme Court, the courts have also re-iterated the right to information that every voter is guaranteed with. A proper use of voting rights by citizens of a country can act as a shaping instrument of the future of any country, and it is the right of citizens to be supplied with information that aids their decision-making without any manipulation. In the year 2020, in Public Interest Foundation vs Union of India, political parties had been directed by the Supreme Court to publish criminal antecedents of contesting candidates along with reasons for fielding each one of these candidates, notwithstanding their ‘winnability’. Based upon the judgment of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission of India (ECI) had also issued a directive to implement the apex court’s orders concerning criminal antecedents of candidates.

The right to vote has been on a crucial judicial journey. A positive shift can be seen in this regard, with the Manipur High Court holding the said right to be an extension of the fundamental right guaranteed by India’s Constitution rather than a statutory expression provided under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951. An unequivocal judgment of the Supreme Court declaring the right to vote as a fundamental right is the need of the hour as it is through this right that the citizens of India express their political will, exercise their choice and uphold the spirit of our democratic country. 

Related:

CJP moves Election Commission against Kailash Vijayvargiya speech offering money in return for votes

ECI undertaking to SC: Aadhaar number not mandatory to enrol as voter

The Missing Indian Voter, how many crores of Indians are missing from the electoral rolls?

Election Commission of India says voters’ names not to be removed without prior notice

The post Manipur High Court: Right to cast vote an integral part of Article 19(1)(a), affirms voters right to know criminal antecedents appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This report, released by Association for Democratic Reforms has provided a detailed analysis of the cases of hate speeches against the sitting members of the Parliament (MPs) and the members of the legislative assemblies (MLAs). The report states that that the data accumulated and presented through this report is in good faith and the main intention is to ensure that the voters are informed. Notably, the source of the analysis are the affidavits filed by MPs/MLAs with their nomination papers.

In addition to this, the report also provided a state wise division of the hate speech cases filed. According to the data, cases of hate speech had been filled against seven Sitting MPs from Uttar Pradesh. This is followed by Tamil Nadu with cases against four MPs, three MPs each from Bihar, Karnataka and Telangana and two each from Assam, Gujarat, Maharashtra and West Bengal.

For the state assemblies, of the 4005 current sitting MLAs in the legislative assemblies, cases of hate speeches have been filed against 74 of them. The report provides the party wise distribution of MLAs with declared hate speech cases. According to this data, 20 MLAs from the BJP have cases of hate speech against them, 13 are from the INC (Indian National Congress), 6 are from Aam Aadmi Party. Furthermore, 5 MLAs each from SP (Samajwadi Party) and YSRCP (Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party), 4 each from DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) and RJD (Rashtriya Janata Dal), 3 each from AITC (All India Trinamool Congress) and SHS (Shiv Sena, Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), and 2 from AIUDF (All India United Democratic Front) have cases of hate speech against them.

As per the state-wise distribution, the highest number of hate speech cases, nine in total, have been against MLAs from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh each, followed by six each from Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Telangana. Furthermore, five MLAs each from Assam and Tamil Nadu, 4 each from Delhi, Gujarat and West Bengal, three each from Jharkhand and Uttarakhand, two each from Karnataka, Punjab, Rajasthan and Tripura and one MLA each from Madhya Pradesh and Odisha have pending hate speech cases against them.

In conclusion, a total of 16 MPs and MLAs from Uttar Pradesh have cases of hate speech against them. The BJP party also has the highest number of sitting MPs and MLAs, 42 in total, with hate speech cases against them.

Details of the hate speech cases filed against MPs

The report also provides details of the cases filed against the MPs, which includes the total number of cases filed, the sections of the Indian Penal Code employed against them, the status of the cases and whether there has been any conviction or not. The data also includes the details of the FIR filed, the jurisdictional police station, framing of charges and the details of the appeal filed.

According to the data provided by the report, the highest number of pending cases related to hate speech are against Bapu Rao Soyam, Adilabad, Telangana from the BJP. According to the report, a total of 52 cases have been filed against him wherein 55 serious sections have been invoked along with 232 other IPC sections. The brief details of the IPC sections used are as follows:

Serious IPC charges:

• 13 charges related to Mischief by destroying or moving, etc., a land- mark fixed by public authority Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to amount of one hundred or (in case of agricultural produce) ten rupees (Section-435)
• 12 charges related to Punishment for dacoity (Section-395)
• 8 charges related to Attempt to commit robbery or dacoity when armed with deadly weapon (Section-398)
• 8 charges related to Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house, etc. (Section-436)
• 3 charges related to Punishment for criminal intimidation (Section-506)
• 2 charges related to Lurking house trespass or house-breaking by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment (Section-457)
• 2 charges related to Theft in dwelling house, etc. (Section-380)
• 2 charges related to Attempt to murder (Section-307)
• 1 charge related to Forgery for purpose of cheating (Section-468)
• 1 charge related to Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means (Section-324)
• 1 charge related to House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint (Section-452)
• 1 charge related to Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony (Section-153A)
• 1 charge related to Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property (Section-420)

Other IPC charges:

• 45 charges related to Punishment of criminal conspiracy (Section-120B)
• 41 charges related to Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees (Section-427)
• 34 charges related to Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant (Section-188)
• 30 charges related to Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object (Section-149)
• 29 charges related to Punishment for Rioting (Section-147)
• 26 charges related to Rioting, armed with deadly weapon (Section-148)
• 8 charges related to Punishment for house-trespass (Section-448)
• 6 charges related to Punishment for criminal trespass (Section-447)
• 3 charges related to Joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon (Section-144)
• 3 charges related to Punishment for Being member of an unlawful assembly (Section-143)
• 2 charges related to Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty (Section-353)
• 2 charges related to Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention (Section-34)
• 1 charge related to Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record (Section-471)
• 1 charge related to Punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for (Section-290)
• 1 charge related to Punishment for cheating by personation ( Section-419)

Notably, there has been no conviction against him till date.

It is crucial to highlight here that a total of 183 cases related to hate speech are pending against the aforementioned 22 BJP MPs. A total of 44 cases were reported to have been filed against the 2 MPs belonging to the INC.

The report also provides the details of the cases related to hate speech filed against Union Home Minister and BJP MP Amit Shah. According to the data provided, a total of 4 cases remain pending against Shah, which include 4 serious IPC sections and 7 other IPC sections. The brief details of the charges filed and section of the IPC invoked against him are as follows:

Serious IPC sections:

• 1 charge related to Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house, etc. (Section-436)
• 1 charge related to Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony (Section-153A)
• 1 charge related to Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration (Section- 153B)
• 1 charge related to Punishment for criminal intimidation (Section-506)

Other IPC sections:

• 2 charges related to Punishment for Defamation (Section-500)
• 1 charge related to Criminal intimidation (Section-503)
• 1 charge related to Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace (Section-504)
• 1 charge related to Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees (Section-427)
• 1 charge related to Defamation (Section-499)
• 1 charge related to Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant (Section-188)

Notably, there has been no conviction against him till date.

Hate speech cases filed against MLAs

The report also provides details of the cases filed against the MPs, which includes the total number of cases filed, the sections of the Indian Penal Code employed against them, the status of the cases and whether there has been any conviction or not. It also includes the details of the FIR filed, the jurisdictional police station, framing of charges and the details of the appeal filed.

According to the report, the highest number of pending cases related to hate speech have been filed against Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao, representing Siddipet, Gajwel, Telangana of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS). As of the year 2018, a total of 64 cases related to hate speech had been filed against him out of which 37 serious IPC charges have been imposed with 283 other IPC sections. It is essential to highlight here that out of the 64 cases filed, cognizance was taken in 63 of them and charges have been filed in only one of them. There has been no conviction till date. The brief details of the charges filed and section of the IPC invoked against him are as follows:

Serious IPC charges:

• 13 charges related to Punishment for criminal intimidation (Section-506)
• 4 charges related to Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty (Section-332)
• 3 charges related to Attempt to murder (Section-307)
• 3 charges related to Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means (Section-324)
• 3 charges related to Theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt or restraint in order to the committing of the theft (Section-382)
• 3 charges related to Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony (IPC Section-153A)
• 2 charges related to Statements conducing to public mischief (Section-505)
• 2 charges related to Mischief by destroying or moving, etc., a land- mark fixed by public authority Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to amount of one hundred or (in case of agricultural produce) ten rupees (Section-435)
• 2 charges related to Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment (Section-511)
• 1 charge related to Fraudulent cancellation, destruction, etc., of will, authority to adopt, or valuable security (Section-477)
• 1 charge related to Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration (Section- 153B)

Other IPC charges:

• 43 charges related to Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant (Section- 188)
• 42 charges related to Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object (Section-149)
• 39 charges related to Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment (Section-109)
• 28 charges related to Punishment for Being member of an unlawful assembly (Section- 143)
• 22 charges related to Punishment for Rioting (Section-147)
• 18 charges related to Punishment for wrongful restraint (Section-341)
• 14 charges related to Punishment of criminal conspiracy (Section-120B)
• 11 charges related to Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his
• duty (Section-353)
• 10 charges related to Abetting commission of offence by the public or by more than ten
• persons (Section-117)
• 9 charges related to Rioting, armed with deadly weapon (Section-148)
• 9 charges related to Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees (Section-427)
• 9 charges related to Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions (Section- 186)
• 6 charges related to Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot-if rioting be committed- if not committed (Section-153)
• 4 charges related to Punishment for house-trespass (Section-448)
• 4 charges related to Punishment for criminal trespass (Section-447)
• 3 charges related to Joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon (Section-144)
• 3 charges related to Knowingly joining or continuing in assembly of five or more persons after it has been commanded to disperse (Section-151)
• 3 charges related to Punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for (Section-290)
• 2 charges related to Abettor present when offence is committed (Section-114)
• 2 charges related to Attempt to commit suicide (Section-309)
• 1 charge related to Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done (Section-111)
• 1 charge related to Intentional omission to give information of offence by person bound to inform (Section-202)

Not surprisingly, BJP MLA T. Raja Singh has the highest number of cases related to hate speech where charges have been framed. As per the report, a total of 43 cases have been filed against Singh wherein 51 serious IPC sections have been invoked and 92 other IPC sections have been used. Furthermore, out of the 43 cases, cognizance has been taken in 27 cases and charges have been framed in 16 cases. It is essential to note that there been no conviction in any of the cases till date. A brief of the serious charges invoked against Singh are as follows:

• 17 charges related to Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony (Section-153A)
• 9 charges related to Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs (Section-295A)
• 7 charges related to Punishment for criminal intimidation (Section-506)
• 4 charges related to Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment (Section-454)
• 4 charges related to Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house,

etc. (Section-436)

• 3 charges related to Injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class (Section-295)
• 3 charges related to Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty (Section-332)
• 1 charge related to Attempt to murder (Section-307)
• 1 charge related to Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration (Section-

153B)

• 1 charge related to Statements conducing to public mischief (Section-505)
• 1 charge related to Theft in dwelling house, etc. (Section-380)

The complete report can be read here:

Related:

Hate speeches, stone pelting, brandishing of weapons – what VHP’s Shaurya Yatras have achieved till date

Terror accused BJP MP Pragya Thakur delivers hate speech in Bhopal, recalls her role in demolition of Babri Masjid

Bilkis Bano gang rape convict shares stage with BJP MP, MLA: Gujarat

Bakri Eid: FIR against 9, including BJP MLA, for harassing Muslim family, using disparaging words against Muslim community

Raja Singh, a BJP MLA with a history of communal speeches, delivers another anti-Muslim speech

CJP files complaint against suspended BJP MLA T. Raja Singh in SEC, Karnataka for delivering anti-Muslim hate speeches at BJP rallies

Crossing all limits, BJP MLA, T. Raja Singh calls for genocide & economic boycott of Muslims: Maharashtra

In line with the approaching Karnataka polls, BJP MLA KS Eshwarappa gives anti-Muslim speech

Descendants of Tipu will not win, says BJP MLA in Karnataka

No action taken by authorities as BJP MLA Raja Singh engages in communal hate speech again in Maharashtra

Hate Watch: Notice served to BJP MLA Raja Singh for hate speech at Ajmer Dargah: Hyderabad

The post Indian elected officials and hate speech: ADR Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Manipur has seen a series of violent incidents since early May, leading to loss of over a hundred lives and property worth lakhs and tens of thousands displaced, PM Modi has not spoken a single word about the issue. Despite pleas and even taunts he has ignored both the people and the state.

Things have deteriorated to the extent that reports of armed civilian mobs belonging to Meiri and Kuki communities appear to be ruling the streets of Manipur, and hence, the PM’s continued silence on a state governed by his own party, the BJP, is being questioned by political opponents, civil society groups and locals.

Social media posts show that people’s anger with Modi’s studied silence and the state chief minister N. Biren Singh’s inability to control the law and order situation has manifested in posters decrying the PM as ‘missing’. In places, radio sets were broken as Modi’s programme ‘Mann Ki Baat’ aired.

According to local news reports, two sets of BJP MLAs from Manipur have been camping in New Delhi since June 15 to meet the PM.

An Imphal Free Press report said at least nine Meitei BJP MLAs opposed to the Biren-led government over its handling of law and order in the state (the CM is also the home minister), sought an appointment with Modi on June 15. They received an acknowledgement on the same day, the report said.

“But, as the PM is leaving on June 20 for an international tour, in the larger interest of Manipur, the delegation submitted the (a) memorandum (to the Prime Minister’s Office) on Monday (June 19),” it said.

The MLAs included Karam Shyam Singh, Th. Radheshyam Singh, Nishikant Singh Sapam, Kh. Raghumani, P. Brojen, Wangjing Tentha, T. Robindro, S. Rajen, S. Kebi Devi, Naoriya Pakhnaglakpa and Y. Radeshyam.

Their memorandum has highlighted “the complete breakdown of law and order in the state, loss of faith by the public in the present state government and restoration of the rule of law so that the trust and confidence of the general public is restored”, it also pressed the government to not tamper “at any cost” with the integrity of the state and agree to the Kuki leaders’ demand for a separate administration of their areas.

Also, another set of BJP MLAs had also sought an appointment with the PM but were able to get a meeting instead with defence minister Rajnath Singh, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman and the party’s in-charge for the state, Sambit Patra.

Incidentally, this delegation too comprised of Meitei MLAs of the party besides including one MLA each from Janata Dal (United) and the BJP ally National People’s Party (NPP). One of the important appeals of this delegation too was to not consider a separate administration for the Kukis.

An Indian Express report quoting a delegation member said, “Sambit Patra spoke to home minister Amit Shah over the phone…the home minister has reiterated and assured [us] that the territorial integrity of the state will be maintained.”

This delegation, which also had MLAs that support the chief minister, sought the Modi government’s withdrawal from the tripartite talks with the Kuki armed groups under suspension of operation (SoO). Weeks before the Meitei-Kuki conflict broke out in Manipur, the Biren Singh government had unilaterally withdrawn from the peace talks and recommended the same to the Union home ministry. The latter refused to entertain the request.

One significant query that this delegation raised with the party’s Union ministers was about Kuki armed group UKLF chief S.S. Haokip’s claim. Haokip has said that the group had helped the BJP grab power in the state by winning the elections. This is a serious claim that has been ignored by the union government.

“This has been in conversation in Manipur and needed to be clarified,” an MLA told Indian Express, adding that, “They (the Union ministers) assured us that there is no such tactical understanding or arrangement between the party and SoO groups and that a clarification will be issued by the party in a day or two.”

In response to the Prime Minister not taking out time even for his own party’s MLAs coming from a violence-hit Manipur, Congress spokesperson Jairam Ramesh tweeted, “Today, one group of BJP MLAs from Manipur met the Raksha Mantri. Today, another group of BJP MLAs from Manipur went to submit a memorandum to the PM, which said that the people had completely lost faith in the state administration – essentially saying the CM has to be replaced. He did not see them of course. The BJP itself in Manipur is not united. That is why the state is bitterly divided today. And the PM simply doesn’t care!”

Aside from the BJP delegations, a Congress delegation led by former state chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh has also been camping in New Delhi for days now to have an audience with the prime minister. The PMO has not even thought it fit to give a response,

Functioning in parallel and ignoring the plight of all Manipuris, the PM has flown out of the country today for a four-day visit to the United States and Egypt. In the US, he is scheduled to meet not only the American president Joe Biden and top names from his government but also about two dozen “thought leaders” and CEOs including Elon Musk. He will also be meeting delegations from the Indian diaspora and celebrating International Yoga Day on June 21 at the United Nations headquarters in New York

Related

Denial of internet an assault on fundamental freedoms – a deep dive into Manipur’s incessant internet ban

Denial of internet an assault on fundamental freedoms – a deep dive into Manipur’s incessant internet ban

120 Churches destroyed, Christians insecure: Manipur

The Invisible Split: A report documenting reports of “ethnic cleansing” in Manipur, 2023

120 Churches destroyed, Christians insecure: Manipur

The post Despite efforts, three delegations from violence-struck Manipur failed to meet PM Modi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Katni’s local journalist Ravi Gupta in Madhya Pradesh on May 27, 2022 accused local BJP MLA and former Minister Sanjay Pathak of kidnapping, thrashing and threatening his family members with sexual assault.

According to a letter written by Gupta to the Superintendent of Police (SP), the journalist was forced into a car and taken to a local restaurant on May 23 night. On this day, a Mahanadi Bachao Abhiyan press conference was organised at Indian Coffee House wherein Pathak was accused of illegal mining. Gupta reported the same on his YouTube channel.

Later at 1 AM a persona named Anuj Tiwari forced Gupta into a car already seating three men. At the restaurant, the journalist met Pathak along with 12-15 people. There Gupta was allegedly beaten, assaulted with sharp weapons, nearly killed by hanging and finally threatened with a gun to his head.

Gupta claimed he was made to sign blank documents and told not to mention this incident to anyone. Failing this, they threatened to sexually assault the women in his family before killing them all. Further, they warned him from criticising Pathak in his work. Otherwise, he will be falsely implicated for crimes.

Having survived this ordeal, the journalist tried to approach the district police station for three days. However, the police officers appeared to be scared of filing a complaint against Pathak.

“If something happens to me or my family, today or in future, then the sole responsibility lies with Saajay Pathak and his supporters. If there is no investigation against them in the next three days, then I’ll be forced to consider suicide, for which the administration will hold the sole responsibility,” he said in his letter to the SP.

However, the SP told news channels like ABP Live that he did not receive such a letter from Gupta. Meanwhile, the victim told IANS that the SP refused to meet with him on learning about Pathak’s alleged role.

Additional Superintendent of Police Manoj Kedia said that he learnt about the matter from social media. While stating that the police will look into the case, Kedia claimed there are many fake journalists in the city.

He alleged, even after 3 days of attempt, Police is not ready to lodge FIR against MLA fearing his job.

“I don’t want to lose job,” cops told journalist.

He threatened for self-immolation, if @DGP_MP did not act against BJP MLA. @CMMadhyaPradesh @digvijaya_28 @IndEditorsGuild

— काश/if Kakvi (@KashifKakvi) May 29, 2022

A local journalist from Katni, MP, Ravi Gupta has alleged that BJP MLA Sanjay Pathak kidnapped him and thrashed him. After this, Pathak threatened Gupta to leave journalism or else he would rape his wife, daughter and sisters. Sick!#JournalismIsNotACrime pic.twitter.com/ehC09VBRal

— Arbab Ali (@arbabali_jmi) June 1, 2022

On social media, journalists have taken to resharing Gupta’s letter, condemning the local police for their stand in the matter. As per his letter, police officers said they only want to do their job and not fight with Pathak. It is worth considering whether protecting Gupta’s rights comes within police duties.

Related:

Landmark ruling: SC orders Sedition law to be kept in abeyance
Is GoI unwilling to investigate Facebook’s ecosystem of hate?
Victory! Youtube acts on CJP’s complaint, blocks hateful videos
Over 100 Indian journalists stand with Shireen Akleh and Palestinians

The post MP: BJP MLA allegedly kidnaps, attacks local journalist Ravi Gupta appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a blatant example of hate speech designed to incite economic boycott of Muslims, Uttar Pradesh BJP MLA Suresh Tiwari reportedly asked people in Deoria district to not purchase vegetables from Muslim vendors, reported The Indian Express.

The legislator from the district’s Barhaj constituency in a video that went viral said, “Keep one thing in mind, I am telling everyone openly, no one should purchase vegetables from Muslims.”

Suresh Tiwari, BJP MLA of Barhaj constituency of UP is instructing people to not to buy vegetables from Muslim. pic.twitter.com/D6s9Nzf5P8

— The Accidental Engineer (@DNLIMBACHIYA) April 27, 2020

When Tiwari was contacted, he said that he made the statement last week during his visit to the office of the Barhaj Nagar Palika where several government officials were present.

Trying to clarify his stance he said, “After hearing complaints that people of a community were selling vegetables after contaminating them with saliva in an attempt to spread coronavirus disease, I advised them not to purchase vegetables from them… After the situation gets normal, then decide what they want.”

Thread … This is Suresh Tiwari , a @BJP4UP MLA from east UP . A video of him asking for a boycott of Muslim vegetable vendors in #lockdown is viral. Today, when asked, the MLA said he had done nothing wrong and that he was only reacting to complaints of spitting …. pic.twitter.com/OgtCiR97il

— Alok Pandey (@alok_pandey) April 28, 2020

Referring to Muslims as “miyan log” he said that his statement was being blown out of proportion, adding that people like Asaddudin Owaisi who also said objectionable things about Hindus, was never pulled up for his words.

The ostracisation of Muslims has taken new fervor post the media demonizing the Tablighi Jamaat attendees and holding them solely responsible for the spike in the cases of coronavirus.

Last week, the authorities in Jamshedpur removed the banner from the cart of a fruit seller which read “Hindu Fruit Shop” saying that no one would be allowed to disturb the social fabric of the city.

However, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) which distributed this banner, defying the authorities’ stance, said it would launch a campaign to distribute banners and posters saying “Hindu Shop”.

In many cities, a small flag on veggie/fruit vendor’s shop/cart is a silent guaranty that goods sold aren’t contaminated by #Tablighi_Jihadi‘s spit/urine & don’t spread #ChineseVirus. Good Idea.@_sabanaqvi @khanumarfa@Sanjay_Dixit @prafullaketkar @ShefVaidya @swati_gs @ippatel pic.twitter.com/nx8I5RLHsl

— Swami Nishchalanand ?? (@Swamijitweets) April 27, 2020

Remember how jews had to wear a star in nazi Germani, this is the hindutwa version, they are forcing hindu shops to carry a saffron flag with Jai shree ram written.

Such flags were also seen at some hindu houses just before the Delhi genocide began. pic.twitter.com/5WDdXxKzuE

— Lessi Rey (@lessirey) April 26, 2020

The Times of India reported that the BJP criticized the Hemant Soren led government for taking action against the vendors and assured the vendors their full support. The Congress, though, accused the BJP and VHP of trying to create communal divide in the society.

VHP’s Jamshedpur Mahanagar Secretary Janardhan Pandey accused the Tablighi Jamaat for “irresponsible acts” and said that in Jharkhand most people wanted to be safe when they purchased essential items and food from the market.

Clarifying the stance of the VHP he said that there were several establishments in the city which were run by Muslim proprietors and were easily identifiable, making a reference to the ‘Jhatka’ and ‘Halal’ meat shops and ‘Muslim Hotels’ in the city.

Even the National Spokesperson of the BJP, Sambit Patra had tweeted about the same asking why there was discrimination and a hue and cry about the topic. If Muslims could specify the religion on their establishments, why couldn’t Hindus, he asked in a tweet.

पक्षपात क्यों? pic.twitter.com/EHh7JqiNml

— Sambit Patra (@sambitswaraj) April 26, 2020

The reason for this Salman Nizami, INC Politician and Columnist said that because Muslims didn’t eat Jhatka and Pork meat, restaurants had to specify the same. However, there was no halal or jhatka difference in vegetables and hence it was no point specifying religion there, he said.

Muslims don’t eat Jhatka or Pork meat, that’s why in restaurants its written Halal or Jhatka, Muslim or Vaisho, Hindu dhaba. While in vegetables or fruits there is no Halal or Jhatka, Hindu or Muslim. Thanks! https://t.co/kfy6KDCn7b pic.twitter.com/zoSqmCWEvb

— Salman Nizami (@SalmanNizami_) April 26, 2020

Two weeks ago too, a group of Muslim vegetable vendors had complained to the authorities of Mahoba, Uttar Pradesh that they weren’t being allowed to sell vegetables in some villages due to their religion and that they had allegedly been subject to verbal abused for doing so.

In Mahoba , Uttar Pradesh , a group of muslim men – vegetable vendors – have complained to the district administration in written saying they were not allowed to sell vegetables in some villages in district because of their religion . They also claim they were abused …. pic.twitter.com/XGo4YZIu0e

— Alok Pandey (@alok_pandey) April 13, 2020

This hatred against Muslims is growing day by day and being fuelled by right wing media. However, bearing the brunt of this is the innocent Muslim trying to earn a living and life live in peace.

Related:

Why is Delhi Police using anti-terror law against Jamia Milia Islamia scholars?
No public gatherings and loudspeakers for religious events: Guj Gov’t

The post UP BJP MLA asks people not to buy vegetables from Muslim vendors appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Even as the Prime Minister himself remained silent on the communal hate being spread against Muslims in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic, some from his party continue adding fuel to the fire. In Maharashtra, a BJP MLA has ‘demanded’ that the Indian Army be deployed in Satranjipura, a Muslim-dominated area in Nagpur. 

East Nagpur BJP MLA Krushna Khopde claimed that “a lot of coronavirus cases” had been reported from that area and the residents were “not cooperating with civic officials and police” towards the containment efforts.

He clearly called Muslims the ‘other’ when he told the Indian Express that, “These people are not like you and me. We will cooperate. They won’t. It can’t be managed by local police. That’s why I have demanded military.” The MLA of course has no real authority in “demanding” that the army be deployed but he has succeeded in fanning the flames of hate in the area, and amongst his own followers.

His words are clear hate speech, targeting Muslims and invoking the need for Army intervention making an entire community out to be an enemy. According to news reports the MLA claims that the area has had many people who returned after attending the Tablighi Jamaat Markaz at Nizammudin.   “Initially, when the civic authorities had come to do a survey in the area, the people didn’t cooperate. They misbehaved with them and forced them to leave the area. But now several coronavirus cases have been reported from the area. So, I have requested Nagpur Municipal Commissioner Tukaran Mundhe to hand over the area to the military,” Khopde, a three-time MLA from the East Nagpur constituency which covers the Satranjipura area quoted in the report.

The area had already been sealed by the police following the Coronavirus containment protocol that is being practiced across the country. A  68-year old man from the area had died of Covid-19 and several others had also tested positive, said news reports. 

However, for this MLA’, mere sealing is not enough and he wanted the Army to be deployed as it is a “Muslim-dominated locality”.  He implied that Muslim citizens were not law abiding and only the sight of uniformed army personnel in the area will scare them into staying indoors. He has not presented any proof or data to back his accusations, or claims.

The Indian Army has not been deployed for law and order reasons in any Coronavirus containment area so far. In fact army teams had been helping out by providing expertise for monitoring cases of travelers in quarantine from March. As reported in the  financial Express, “Medical staff has been placed at the Indian Army Wellness Centre at Jaisalmer to monitor all those evacuated people from Iran who are being quarantined in an effort to control the spread of Covid-19. The Army Chief General MM Naravane, accompanied by Lieutenant General CP Mohanty, General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Southern Command reviewed the facilities provided at the Wellness Centre.”

In March, the chief of army staff, General Manoj Mukund Naravane, had also launched Operation Namaste to prepare the army to assist in helping with the national efforts needed to flatten the Coronavirus transmission curve. According to a report in The Diplomant, the troops had been trained in collaborating  with law enforcement authorities to make sure that lockdown rules were followed. According to the Economic Times, this training involved the many precautions to be taken including the type of clothing and protective gear needed by soldiers on duty. 

The Diplomat had reported at that time that no states had “formally requested the Indian Army’s assistance in enforcing a lockdown. The Indian Army has been in contact with the state governments of Maharashtra, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Rajasthan.”

However people like MLA Khopde see the Coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to make it a communal pandemic. He claimed that Muslims are “loitering” in groups and implied that non Muslims were concerned. According to the MLA, “There is an atmosphere of panic in the area due to this. Handing the area over to the military will mitigate it.”  “You go to Mominpura. You will find the same scene there. These people are not like you and me. We will cooperate. They won’t. It can’t be managed by local police. That’s why I have demanded military.”

The Express asked Nagpur Municipal Commissioner Tukaran Mundhe about Khopde’s charges against Muslim residents of  Satranjipura and he said, “People have started cooperating but more cooperation is expected, particularly in giving information to NMC staff for containment and survey.”

People like BJP MLA Khopde are merely reflecting the undercurrents of communal hate which are threatening to be more dangerous than the Coronavirus pandemic itself.  He perhaps also draws his ‘confidence’ to openly discriminate against Muslims from his party seniors like lawyer Subramanian Swamy who in a video interview to Vice News said things like, “They are not an equal category… Muslims are not, or should not be, equal is not an uncommon sentiment.”

The Prime Minister’s deliberate silence on the threat of communal targeting and vilification of Muslims is also enabling these once fringe elements into making loud public proclamations of hate. Even when the vaccine, and cure, for Covid-19 has been found, the communal virus would have taken deeper roots.

The post These people are not like you and me: BJP MLA Krushna Khopde on Muslims appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While all of India is staying home to flatten the curve of the Coronavirus infection, Karnataka MLA Masala Jayaram, has flouted all lockdown norms by holding a grand birthday party in his constituency in Tumakuru district on Friday, April 10, cited various media reports. The MLA invited over a 100 people in his constituency, Turuvekere, to come and join in his birthday celebrations. Some other media reports say that over 500 people were invited.

#Breaking | Karnataka BJP MLA Masala Jayaram ‘lavishly’ celebrated his birthday amid the lockdown. Over 100 people attended the function.

Details by TIMES NOW’s Deepak. pic.twitter.com/lJpOL3DvOX

— TIMES NOW (@TimesNow) April 10, 2020

According to reports, at the MLA’s party at Idagoor village in Gubbi taluk, guests who wore no masks and huddled close together, were served biryani and cake. While some huddled around him as he cut the cake, some later huddled together in small groups to enjoy the meal.

Visuals from the event show Masala Jayaram was dressed for the occasion wearing a Mysuru pete and wrapped in a purple shawl, wearing white latex gloves. He cut a chocolate cake under a shamiana while others stood around the table, cheering and taking photographs. In visuals, people could be seen standing close to each other, taking photographs and feeding the MLA cake, reported The News Minute.

However, what was ironical was that the MLA who flouted social distancing norms, was educating the people about the spread of the virus. He said, “We do not know how the virus spreads. Social distancing is vital. Please wash your hands regularly with warm water.” He also said that he would distribute face masks to everyone in the village and asked villagers to share their knowledge about how to stop the spread of coronavirus, to others.

Criticizing the event, JDS leader Narase Gowda told The New Indian Express, “It marked his 51st birthday and he should have observed it in a simple manner in these times. He had arranged non-vegetarian food for over 500 people, and social distancing was not maintained.”

Related:

India braces for a possible extension of an altered lockdown

Mumbai and Pune make mask wearing compulsory in public amid Covid-19 outbreak

The post BJP MLA violates lockdown, invites 100 people to birthday bash appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Tragedy was our focus was never on Unnao because there were not much sensibilities about her but she is a brave woman and must be saluted for persisting the case. And this alone has become her biggest crime.

Her father was tortured in police custody and died. Now her uncles and aunts also met with the same fate. She is also battling for her life in a hospital in Lucknow. The Neta who should have been facing rape charges and behind the bar was let loose by the state and it is not possible if he did not have protection and patronage of the highest order.

He is still in the party. The nation, the party which shouted on the roof top, the chelas who virtually brought India to standstill during the Nirbhaya case, shamelessly remained silent. The women leaders who were so quick on Azam Khan’s abominable statement for which has apologised, have sealed their lips. Does this girl not belong to India. Does she not have a right to live life with dignity.

I know living a life of dignity for her will be very difficult as a nation and a society we are hypocrites. She is fighting despite all odds against her. No civil society, no activists because her story was not suitable for many but the incident two days back in which she and her family were attacked in a planned way is the eye opener.

These are politicians or thugs who are hatching such conspiracies. This is the chilling example of how our netas can do to eliminate you if you come in their way. The whole thing look like thriller from some film.

Who can trust the police given for your security. Now reports are coming that the security given to this brave girl, actually informed the goons of MLA who than planned the attack meticulously. Where are we heading for ? We have not heard much from top leaders of the BJP. They would rubbish it as any other story made to embarrass the government but they will not have the answer as why the MLA was still in the party, why he was not arrested and why the case has not been expedited.

Why the samaj at Unnao or its villages, not standing up with the woman who is seeking justice. Why have we become so dumb ? Will the Rajput Mahasabhas and Karni Senas stand up and speak for the cause of woman seeking justice from their own community neta who tried to kill her and her entire family ?

Vidya Bhushan Rawat is a social activist

Courtesy: Counter Current

The post Unnao Story Is The Failure Of Indian system appeared first on SabrangIndia.