On December 16, the niece of

Chhattisgarh’s Drputy Chief Minister Vijay Sharma released a video on social media worried for her own safety. She also accused her uncle of threatening her life.

As per a now viral video, the girl in the video is Anjali Sharma, a resident of Kawardha district, is the daughter of Ajay Sharma and the niece of Bharatiya Janata Party leader and Chhattisgarh Deputy CM Vijay Sharma.

In the video, Anjali can be seen pleading for her safety and justice. She states in the video that she has gotten married to a youth from Satnami community and the lives of the couple is in danger from her uncle, Dy CM Vijay Sharma.

She can be heard saying that “If anything happens to us, my uncle Vijay Sharma will be responsible for it.” She can be further heard asserting that she is happy in her marriage, which she has entered into of her own will, and does not want to be harassed by the state. She says “I request the government and administration that I am happy and should not harass us.”

Anjali then shed light on the issue that she had been facing from her family due to the caste difference between the couple. In the video, she says “My family members were refusing to marry me because our caste was different but I loved Aman so I got married as per my wish. I left my house and came and sat in Aman’s house. Here the family got us married because I had said that as soon as I come home, I have to get married because if this marriage did not happen, my life would not have been possible.”

Further in the video, Anjali emphasises on the threats that she has been facing by her family after her inter-caste marriage. She alleges that her uncle, the deputy CM, will be the one to be held responsible for any harm that is caused to her or her husband as he was the one most against the inter-caste marriage.

She further says, “I had received many threats from my family that either they will kill you or your husband’s family members will kill you. If anything happens to me or my husband’s family members, then the full responsibility for it will be on my uncle, Deputy Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh Vijay Sharma because he was the one who was most against our marriage.”

Anjali then re-iterates her happiness and stands by her decision by saying “But I am happy with Aman and will remain happy in future too. My mental condition is fine but attempts have been made to worsen it but I am absolutely fine. My mental condition is absolutely normal because I am an adult. I can take my decisions as per my own wish. I request the government administration and my family members not to harass me. Let me live in peace and you too can live in peace. I want to stay here for the rest of my life and I don’t want to go back home, thanks.”

The video can be viewed here:

छत्तीसगढ़ के डिप्टी CM विजय शर्मा की भतीजी का वीडियो वायरल हो रहा है। अंजली शर्मा ने दूसरे कास्ट के लड़के से प्रेम विवाह किया है। क्या कह रही है अंजली सुनिए। pic.twitter.com/z7QHlQ2fxb

— Ravi Miri ABP News (@Ravimiri1) December 16, 2023

This video, which has caused an uproar on social media, has resulted in people raising fingers against the newly appointed BJP leader, accusing him of promoting casteism. The said leader had already been indulging in making speeches on the issues of conversion and love jihad, as reported by India Posts. The said report of India Posts also stated that Kawardha district Superintendent of Police, Abhishek Pallav stated that he was aware of the video but no complaint has been received from the victim’s side. The SP assured that if any complaint is received, then cognizance will be taken into the matter.

Related:

9-year-old Dalit girl raped and murdered in Ghaziabad by 52-year-old landlord

Dalits attacked by upper castes at Buddha Katha ceremony in Kanpur

From Ayodhya to Trivandrum, are Dalits still unsafe in India?

Standing Strong: CJP aids Dalit woman labelled as ‘Doubtful Citizen’

Continued Surge of Violence against Dalits Spans Maharashtra to Tamil Nadu

Four arrested for kidnapping and beating Dalit boys

The post Casteism and Honour: Niece of Chhattisgarh’s Dy CM alleges threat to life from her family for inter-caste marriage appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“While considering an application for grant of bail, a prima-facie conclusion must be supported by reasons and must be arrived at after having regard to the vital facts of the case brought on record. Due consideration must be given to facts suggestive of the nature of crime, the criminal antecedents of the accused, if any, and the nature of punishment that would follow a conviction vis à vis the offence/s alleged against an accused.” (Para 22)

Facts of the case:

As per the First Information Report (FIR) filed by the brother of the deceased against 4 accused, three of whom are the respondents in the current case, the incident took place on May 18, 2020. The deceased, namely Vikash Panwar, was having an extra marital live-in-relationship with a woman named Nirma since the last three month. Nirma also had a spouse named Shrawan Jani and had two children from the said marriage. Unhappy about the said extra marital live-in-relationship, the parents and parents’ in-law of Nirma had been threatening to kill appellant’s brother, Vikash Panwar.

As per the facts of the case, Budharam and Vikas Vishnoi, Nirma’s brothers, Shrawan Jani, Nirma’s husband and Ram Kishor, Nirma’s brother-in-law were threatening the appellant’s brother by way of calls and WhatsApp messages.

On May 17, 2020, the deceased was found lying on the ground, dead, with blood oozing out from around his ribs by the appellant and his father. It was purported that the four accused named mentioned above had come on two motorcycles and dragged Vikash, shooting at him, causing his death.

It is essential to note that earlier on February 24, 2020, Nirma had filed an FIR against her brother-in-law and parents-in-law for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 376 of the IPC, stating therein that her brother-in-law repeatedly raped her and that she was being subjected to cruelty in her matrimonial household

Charges against the respondents-accused in the current case:

On August 19, 2022, the charge sheet was filed by the Jodhpur police before the Metropolitan Magistrate, including the respondents-accused in the current case. Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC and Section 3 read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act were invoked against the respondents-accused. 

Contentions made by the appellants:

The appellant submitted that the impugned judgment was passed without considering the active involvement of respondents and the heinous nature of the crime where they could face even life imprisonment/death for the murder of the deceased.

He further submitted that bail was granted without any reasoning in an “erroneous and perverse manner” in spite of overwhelming material pointing towards the guilt of the respondents. According to the counsel, enlarging the respondents-accused on bail is contrary to the settled principles of law and judgments

The counsel for the state also submitted that there were eyewitnesses and even CCTV footage where respondents were fleeing the crime scene. The counsel further stated that the High Court overlooked such clear and cogent evidence collected during the course of investigation, which, in the very least would prima-facie point towards the guilt of the respondents- accused and erroneously proceeded to grant them bail.

Contentions made by the respondents-accused:

On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents contended that even if the alleged crimes are of serious nature, they would be entitled to bail if the court believes that they were not involved in the crime’ prima facie’. They submitted that there was no evidence to prove that they hit the deceased and shot him.

They further submitted that when the woman witness turned hostile, they were already in judicial custody. So, it’s impossible that they could’ve influenced the witness.

Supreme Court’s observations on grant of bail:

After hearing both the counsel of the parties, the Supreme Court perused the bail orders passed by the HC which noted “Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr. P.C” (Para 17)

The bench stated that in the past, the Supreme Court has ruled that an order granting bail in a mechanical manner, without recording reasons, would suffer from the vice of non-application of mind, rendering it illegal. The bench then reiterated the factors to be taken into consideration for bail, namely the seriousness of the offense, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice, the impact of the release of the accused on the prosecution witnesses, and the likelihood of the accused tampering with evidence. 

“This Court has, on several occasions discussed the factors to be considered by a Court while deciding a bail application. The primary considerations which must be placed at balance while deciding the grant of bail are: 

(i) The seriousness of the offence;
(ii) The likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice;
(iii) The impact of release of the accused on the prosecution witnesses;
(iv) Likelihood of the accused tampering with evidence.” (Para 18)

It observed that while the liberty of an individual is important, the courts cannot lose sight of the serious nature of the accusations against an accused. Referring to a recent judgment given in the matter of Manoj Kumar Khokhar v. State of Rajasthan, the Court had held that “an order granting bail to an accused, if passed in a casual and cryptic manner, de hors reasoning which would validate the grant of bail, is liable to be set aside by this Court”. (Para 20)

Supreme Court’s analysis of the Rajasthan HC order:

The court upon perusal of the chargesheet and materials brought on record noted how the deceased was traced, the reconnaissance done by respondents before the incident and the manner of their participation. Based upon this, the Supreme Court bench was convinced that at least prima facie there’s a case pointing towards the guilt of the respondent.

“In the present case, it cannot be said that the accusations against the respondents-accused are prima-facie wholly false, frivolous or vexatious in nature, so as to justify grant of bail. We observe, while not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, that the prosecution has brought on record adequate material that would prima-facie point towards the guilt of the accused.” (Para 24 d)

The Court expressed displeasure at the fact that bail was granted by High Court in a very casual manner without any reasoning. It only relied on the testimony of the woman who turned hostile which is not a consideration for granting bail. It held that not even a single material aspect of the case was considered by HC.

“High Court while passing the impugned orders has not taken into account even a single material aspect of the case. Instead, the High Court referred only to the testimony of one hostile witness in the trial and on the basis thereof, exercised its discretion to grant bail in an erroneous manner. The High Court has lost sight of the aforesaid vital aspects of the case and granted bail to the respondents by passing very cryptic and casual orders, de hors cogent reasoning” observed Justice Nagarathna in the judgment. (Para 25)

The court opined that there is a possibility that respondents may influence witnesses since one of the prosecution witnesses had turned hostile. 

“In the absence of any evidence as to the circumstances under which she turned hostile, we cannot rule out the possibility of the respondents-accused influencing other witnesses, tampering with the evidence, if they continue to remain on bail” (Para 24 e)

Decision of the Supreme Court:

Making the above stated observation, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment of the Rajasthan HC granted the bail to the respondents and asked the respondents to surrender within two weeks of the order. 

The complete order can be read here:

Related:

From “liable to be prosecuted” to “neither opposing nor supporting bail”: The curious case of Delhi Police

UAPA accused to be granted interim bail if prosecution sanction not granted within specified time: P&H HC

SC warns judicial officers, prosecuting agencies against violating bail orders; threatens action and re-education

Lower court judges hesitant to give bail: Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud

More than 1100 days in prison: Gulfisha Fatima awaits bail

‘Scapegoat’, Bail granted to  Muslim woman accused of being Pakistani: Karnataka HC 

The post Bail order cannot be cryptic and casual, needs to be backed by reasons considering vital aspects: Supreme Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a tragic incident of religious intolerance, a 19-year-old girl committed suicide hours after her family allegedly killed her Muslim boyfriend, Zia-ur-Rehman, aged 20, in the Saharanpur region of Uttar Pradesh.

Reports state that the boy was initially summoned by the girl’s family to their home, where they viciously beat him for having an “affair” with their daughter. The boy, who was the girl’s classmate, passed away in a hospital in Dehradun, Uttarakhand.

The incident happened at Islampur locality of Rampur Maniharan region in UP’s Saharanpur district. Both the youngsters involved, Tannu Saini and Zia-Ur-Rehman, were student s of BSc course, reported Times of India.

The police have stated that they have are “yet to receive any complaint from either family,” adding that the required steps would be undertaken once the postmortem report for the deceased youth is received, as reported by the Times of India.

Tannu’s post-mortem report states that she died by hanging. But no FIR has yet been lodged. Since the two were of different faiths and there were reports of their deaths, local markets stayed closed out of concern for communal unrest. According to SSP Vipin Tada, the right steps will be taken in this regard. To manage the situation, police have been stationed in the region.

Zia’s father claimed that the girl’s family called his son on November 1 and severely beat him. Later, he was abandoned outside the house, as reported by the Times of India

“We rushed to the spot after someone informed us and took him to a hospital from where he was referred to Dehradun. He succumbed to his injuries on November 2,” as told by Ayub Ahmad, Zia’s father.

Related:

Jharkhand: Muslim man allegedly killed for being in a relationship with a non-Muslim woman

CJP’s Love Jihad amendment petition allowed by SC

Marry Hindu men to avoid triple talaq: Suresh Chavhanke’s advice to Muslim women

No interfaith nikah sans parents’ consent: MP’s Ulama Board’s latest diktat

The post Inter-faith love affair takes a tragic turn in Uttar Pradesh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy:worrydot.com

A brutal murder of a young man who had married a woman from a different faith was reported from Hyderabad on Wednesday. The victim, 25-year-old B Nagaraju had married 23-year-old Ashrin Sulthana a.k.a. Pallavi on January 22 this year, after having known each other for years, stated news reports.

Nagaraju was stabbed to death at the Saroornagar Tahsildar office in Hyderabad, reportedly by a bike-borne assailant. The murder is being reported as a case of so called ‘honour killing’, that is a murder carried out by the couple’s families or on the behest of the families who claim their so called ‘honour’ has been defiled by the marriage.

According to news reports, the main accused has been arrested, and some other suspects detained; members of the girl’s family, are reportedly among them. CNN-News18 reported that according to ACP P Sreedhar Reddy, “The brother and brother-in-law of the girl had been against the union,” and Nagaraju was stabbed to death by an “unknown person riding a bike at the Saroornagar Tahsildar office at 9 pm on Wednesday night.” Even though the attacker escaped, “many onlookers took pictures of the dead body and videotaped the incident on their phones.”

Nagaraju’s relatives also staged a demonstration, accusing his wife’s family of being behind the murder, and now “tensions in the region have risen” stated news reports. According to reports, the young couple were also attacked with an iron rod, and one of the assailants then “stabbed Nagaraju several times, killing him on the spot.” 

The crime was also recorded on CCTV cameras installed nearby. The woman was rushed to a hospital by passersby. According to police, her family had always opposed this relationship and had barred the woman from seeing him. However, the couple decided to get married at an Arya Samaj temple on January 31. According to Indian Express, they moved to Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh, as the threats from the woman’s family continued. Police told the media that the couple had come to Hyderabad just a week ago and had rented a house. 

Related

Now, Hate Offender Nischalananda Saraswati demands “Hindu Rashtra”
Cow vigilantes brutally murder two Adivasi men in Madhya Pradesh
VHP backs out on MNS’ Hanuman Chalisa event
Hate Speech: Is administering an ‘oath’ to make India a ‘Hindu-rashtra’ legal?
Will UP manage to stop communal events planned by hate offenders?
Saharanpur: Who were the ‘media men’ whose questions created tension during Friday prayers?
Right-wing attempts at targeting BHU iftar deflated!

The post Hyderabad: Interfaith couple attacked, man stabbed to death! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In what is believed to be the 23^rdsuch case in the last 18 months in Uttar Pradesh, Harivansh Kumar brutally killed his 22-year-old daughter for allegedly having an ‘affair’ with the neighbour’s son, India TV reported.

The incident took place in Firozabad district, where Harivansh Kumar, a resident of SalempurKhutiyana village surrendered before the cops after killing his daughter. Sources say that his daughter Pooja wasin a relationship with Gajendra, a man from the same caste as her. Such relationships are frowned upon in the region where caste equations are fragile and chart the entire course of a person’s life. Kumar disapproved of the relationship and had warned her of dire consequences.

Police say matters took a turn for the worse after he saw his daughter with Gajendra on Sunday night. Kumar electrocuted his unsuspecting daughter while she was asleep and then slit her throat!

JasranaStation house officer (SHO) Girish Chandra Gautam said, “During the interrogation, the accused said that he first electrocuted the daughter and later slit her throat with a knife. The weapon used in the crime has also been recovered.”

Pooja, a post-graduate, was the youngest among five siblings and the only daughter. Her brother, Yogesh filed the murder complaint against his father.

At the time of the incident, only the victim and her father were at home. Her mother and three brothers were in Gurugram, while the fourth brother lives in another house. The autopsy report is still awaited.
 

Some dis-honourable statistics

According to a report by Huffington Post, so called honour-killings had grown in India by more than 796% from 2014 to 2015. While 28 murders were reported under this category in 2014, the number jumped to 251 in 2015 as per the National Crime Record Bureau statistics.

Uttar Pradesh recorded the highest number of honour killings with 131 incidents reported in 2015. The latest report released by NCRB of its 2017 records left out numbers on honour killings citing the data was unreliable and ‘vague’.

The lack of a separate law pertaining to honour killing means that these incidents are clubbed under murder and not investigated further. The Supreme Court in 2011 ruled that accused persons in honour killings should face the death penalty but in many cases, crimes are covered up.

Amnesty International’s Halt the Hate website recorded 621 caste-based incidents from 2015 to 2019, with 31 being related to honour killing. In the first half of 2019, 7 honour killing related incidents were reported. In June 2019, in 58 incidents of crime against women, 7 were alleged incidents of honour killing, in which 3 women were killed.

The case of Pooja, an educated young woman, just goes to show that a regressive Indian society is unwilling to respect a woman’s agency over her own life. The incident could have gone unreported had her father not surrendered. It is not just the responsibility of an individual to take steps to mitigate the menace of honour killings. It is the responsibility of the village council to ensure to elect forward-thinking, liberal members who do not stoke violence in the name of caste and community, but work to foster individuality, respect and equality in the society.

Related:

‘Caste’ing evil: Inter-caste couple killed 4 years after marriage in K’taka
PUCL condemns ‘love jihad’, communalization of Anjali-Ibrahim marriage
FIR Lodged Against Family Members in Pune’s Inter-Caste Couple Case
Only Better Educated Mothers Of Grooms Can Lead To More Inter-Caste Marriages

The post UP’s dis-honourable dad kills daughter for loving the ‘wrong’ man appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image: The Hindu
 
She is a senior journalist from NDTV. Got many awards and is known for ‘fair’ reporting from Andhra-Telangana states but one tweet actually said so many things which she might have been trying to hide under the pretext of being ‘progressive.’ The problem in this country is that ‘progressive’ have enjoyed the patronage of power for long and how they are compelled to defend things which will expose. ‘I am not justifying angry father’s killing away his daughter but it is also heartbreaking to see a daughter brought up with much love, wishing her father hangs to death, no mercy given. Can there be a worse punishment for dad,’ said Uma Sudhir in her tweet. Her husband T S Sudhir also wrote the same thing in a different way, ‘ Violence over inter-caste marriages is not justified but to look at it only through the prism of caste is not right. Madhavi’s family are goldsmiths, the boy she married work as a parcel boy at a Biryani point. Why won’t father feel aggrieved as his daughter’s choice’?
 
Two tweets are related to the case in Hyderabad where Madhavi, the young girl from a goldsmith family (jaati) and her husband Sandeep Dilda, a Dalit, both students were brutally attacked by her father in broad daylight. Madhavi is in a serious condition struggling for her life in the hospital.
 
The famous journalists are actually justifying the ‘pain’ of the father whose daughter chose a ‘pick up boy’ as a partner, against their izzat. When those who claim to be ‘writers’ and ‘intellectuals’ write such rubbish then it is more disturbing though it never surprises me how the powerful caste intellectuals find ways and means to justify their position. Agreed, parents normally are aggrieved in if their children take a different decision about marriage. No parents will welcome it unless they are unIndian in their thoughts and actions, thoroughly isolated from rest of the society. But does being aggrieved means going to the length of killing their children? So how can Uma and Sudhir condemn Khap Panchayats who are issuing farmans to control their children. I was wondering why was Pranay killed because he had all the traits as per Uma and Sudhir. Pranay, was educated as well as handsome and from a reasonably well to do family. Why was he killed? It is simple. Caste killed Pranay. Education, job, qualification does not matter except your caste.
 
Therefore, the second attack on two lovers in Hyderabad is nothing but a caste attack. Caste has such a dirty mind that it refuses to go away from our heart. Many of our friends wrote about how their lives matter but I say every life matters. This graded inequality is so powerful that it won’t allow even a Mala to marry a Madiga, a Chamar to marry a Balmiki or a Palla to marry a Pariah. The system is made so powerful that Baba Saheb Ambedkar had to call for its total annihilation which means the total abolition of the Brahmanical religion based on this. While I agree with the point that let us not call these marriages as project ‘annihilation of castes’ but it is also a fact that those who are doing so know each other and are consenting couples, which is a welcome sign.
 
I will not call these marriages as ‘inter-caste’ marriages. Marriage is not a ‘TRP’ project. It is your personal choice and I am sure as we grow, more boys and girls will opt for it. The society has been killing people since ages but it has not reduced. Our so-called activists may cry a lot but people will go and you can’t stop them unless you take one community to the moon and other to the ocean. If you are living together, these youths will rebel. Not everyone sails against the wind and those who do it have to face it. It is the failure of the state to protect them. We cannot stop asking questions about the role not played by our states. What are they doing to protect the individual’s life and liberty?
 
Baba Saheb Ambedkar said we are still not a society because we never respect an individual’s liberty and choices. Unless an individual is given right to decide about his or her fate, we can’t call ourselves a society. Thankfully, our Constitution acknowledged the rights of an individual but our societies and families have not allowed us to do so. The conflict between primitive ideas and the modern constitution is now clearly visible. A constitution which gave us all equal treatment but the jaati-minds would not agree to it. For them, your jaati matters more. As Madhav Rao felt or Madhavi’s father felt. These are caste killings plain and simple.
 
However, it is not that all such marriages are abused. The success of a marriage is not because of your being from the same community or different, otherwise, why would marriages fail in India despite the priests looking at your ‘kundalis’ and marriages being performed on ‘auspicious’ dates. Most of the Indian society, those who are either Hindus or semi Hindus or varnavadis, actually marry according to the advice of their priests and yet most marriages fail. You deem a marriage successful just because you see them riding the scooter together or participating in a marriage together but beyond that, there is a suffocation. It is also a fact that the so-called love marriages too are not based on any ideological grounds. They are the stories of ‘mills and boons’ so please do not bring any big ideological slant in them. They are simple middle-class fiction. Romantic partner, good looking (looks are too important in India) and obsession with fair skins. Once you marry whether inside the castes or outside it, love or without, you become husband and wife with a clearly defined division of labour. I have seen many who married on their own and after marriage have become typical husband and wife. Now, once you are just doing your duties, not much is expected from you.
 
The attempt to get legitimacy from parents and society is the most dangerous things and a honey trap. When the young fall in love particularly those from different castes, the biggest challenge for them is how to get their act legitimized. The constitution provides them but they return to Manusmriti. I am sure, no Manuwadi will ever agree to their children marrying outside their varna. They are getting exposed with their acts of desperation.
 
It is also important for us to speak up and guide our children that marriage is not ‘everything’ and that consenting sexual relationship may not necessarily end up in marriage. Sex and marriage in India are considered synonymous and that result in the biggest crisis of our time. When two young boys and girls enter into a relationship, it has two different narratives. Before entering into any relationship, it is important whether they want it to lead to marriage or not. The problems start from there. Secondly, unless the boys and girls are independent enough, not to look for ‘guidance’ from their ‘families’, only then they opt for it otherwise better not do it. We are witnessing this where children are committing suicide due to failure and rejection in love. It is time for a proactive approach to these issues.
 
Our society does not really allow you to be independent. This is my own personal experience of nearly 30 years. You live on edge and people will only come to you if you are ‘successful’. The false caste pride exists everywhere. It is doomed to fail but it will ruin the lives of our youths. While the media may make noise about it, people speak according to their caste locations and at the end, those who talk a bit of sense and reasoning are outdated and isolated. The age of technology is that you don’t work with the communities, their youth and children as that is a difficult task, it takes your time and does not give you much needed ‘publicity’. You only wake up when something happens and then these incidents provide an opportunity to everyone according to their convenience.
 
Last year we saw grand celebrations in London on Prince Harry’s marriage to Meghan Markle, a biracial American commoner. I watched the entire journey on BBC and it gave me a lot of insight why they remain far superior to us even today and I say it with conviction that Shashi Tharoor remains the biggest hypocrite in this case when talking about India. These anglicised brahmins who gained everything from the British want to portray themselves as a ‘superior’ race. Shashi Tharoor, your civilization is in the gutter. Please visit a Balmiki Basti or a sewage being cleaned. Your civilization is in the home of Pranay. Please meet his family and find out what is great about it. Your civilization is when the children in school refuse to eat mid-day meal cooked by the Dalit women. What rubbish these netas and ‘philosophers’ talk about. At least, at the Oxford, people listened to him and those like him clapped for him, but back home if we speak anything adverse, we face the music.
 
As I have said several times, India’s cultural crisis is severe. It will become further chaotic unless people think about it and find solutions together. Calling each other names is not going to solve anything. Asking children not to marry and look for love inside your castes, will not succeed and is no guarantee of a great marriage. What’s important is to strengthen individuals and their rights where the state must protect their choices.
 
Of course, marriage is not the end and can be broken if does not work. Once, the sanctity of marriage and sex is broken, India could become a much more humane society. Marriage within communities was purely a Brahmanical attempt to ensure purity of their castes. It is not going to help.
 
Those who plan ‘special’ children to maintain the purity and superiority of their race will not succeed at all. 21st century’s Ambedakrite youths are not going to accept the Brahmanical casteist dominance and will follow the path shown by him. Indian cannot call themselves a civilized nation as long as they have Dalits being killed in the gutter and in the name of castes.
 
The Indian state has failed. Political parties have failed. Our constitution has everything which protects the rights of the people to live according to their choice but those in charge of implementation have no respect for it. In their heart, they have Manusmriti and that is why the police fails to produce witnesses or make a foolproof case. Moreover, caste prejudices are so high in our administration and system that at the end of the day they make our constitution merely a book which has to be adored and worshipped but not implemented. Those who join our administration, police and any other government jobs, must be made to respect and follow the law of the land but also shed their own prejudices so that it is fairly implemented in the greater interest of democracy and justice.
 
The author is Vidya Bhushan Rawat, a social and human rights activist. He blogs at www.manukhsi.blogspot.com

The post IN FOCUS: Caste killed Pranay and intellectuals on Twitter empathized with the murderer appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is unfortunate that despite Delhi’s chief minister Arvind Kejriwal meeting them thrice, the government has not provided any sort of monetary help or compensation for the loss of their child. It had promised them free medical help in a government hospital, but after consulting a doctor there, the couple had to pay for medicines worth Rs. 2,000 from their own pocket. They are mostly being taken care of by their nephew Ashish Duggal and few other relatives – Ashish doing much of the legal formalities at the moment.
 
After meeting the family and discussing their various requirements, we felt that some funds need to be raised to not only take care of their immediate medical needs, but also to fulfill Yashpal Saxena’s wish to create a group or institution for peace and social harmony. There can be no better cause than this for all of us to pool in our resources to deal with the trauma of the Saxena family at this moment.
 
Kindly contact us if you wish to contribute for this cause. Details about how to make your contributions will soon be available on www.imsd.in, www.ektara.org and other websites.
 

The post Campaign: Justice for Ankit Saxena appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Would you peacefully allow your sister/daughter to marry a non-Muslim man? Because, if you won’t, we lose the moral authority to fight the ruckus created by RSS over the so-called “Love Jihad”. The Special Marriage Act allows interfaith couples to register a marriage without conversion. When we, as a minority, insist on our Constitutional rights, let’s remember that this too is a Constitutional right. Not only do minority communities have Constitutional rights, individuals too have Constitutional rights.
 
The way an adult Muslim woman Hadiya has a right to choose Shefin Jahan as her life partner, another adult Muslim woman has a right to choose Ankit Saxena as her partner. It’s the Constitution – and not Islamic/Hindu law – that gives both of them this right. Both Islamic and Hindu law require the father to “give away” the daughter. But it is the Constitution that allowed Hadiya to choose her partner. So, when you outrage – and rightly so – over the denial of her right to choose, please understand that the right is Constitutional, and is available to all adult Muslim women, regardless of who they love. When we insist that Hadiya be treated as an adult, as an individual who has Constitutional rights, let’s please uphold the same standard for all adult Muslim women – regardless of who they love.
 
There are those who hate Muslims, and those who love Muslims – who do we prefer?
 
A 20-yr old Hindu girl who said “I love Muslims” was driven to suicide by BJP members. A 23-yr old boy who dared to love a Muslim girl was killed by conservatives of the other shade.
Shame on us.
 
If we do not make room for love, we deserve to be ruled by hatred.
 
#JusticeForAnkitSaxena

(As received through Whatsapp).
 
 

The post #JusticeForAnkitSaxena: Shehla Rashid’s, ‘Question to my Muslim friends’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Victim with her husband     Image: India Today

Bijapur (Karnataka): In a dreadful incident of honour killing, a pregnant woman in Karnataka's Bijapur district was burnt alive by her family members for allegedly marrying a Dalit man. She happened to be Muslim. The incident took place in a village called Gundanakala in the Bijapur district.

Media reports suggest that 21-year-old Banu Begum was in love with 24-year-old Sayabanna Sharnappa Konnur, a young man from the same village. The couple decided to elope to Goa when there was rigid resistance from the girl's parents who refused to accept their relationship. Banu's family was so enraged that they dragged the girl to the local police station and sought a case of POCSO to be filed against Sayabanna.

On June 3, the duo returned home after she got pregnant, with the hope that they will have to accept their marriage. However, both the families were unwilling to change their stand and soon got into a fight.Sayabanna was brutally assaulted by the girl's family but he managed to escape with bite marks all over his body but Banu could not escape.When Sayabanna returned with police, the family members had set Banu on fire.According to reports, four members including Banu's mother, her sister, brother and brother-in-law have been arrested.
 

The post A Woman, Pregnant Was Burnt Alive for Marrying a Dalit: Karnataka appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to the report, Venkatesh D has complained that during his visit to Chitradurga district last Friday, the BJP leader put up a show before the media of eating at a Dalit home but it wasn’t food the family had prepared. It had been ordered from a hotel.

The complainant said such action from the BJP leader would send a wrong message to society, in particular in his own home district Mandya which has already seen several honour killings in recent marriages.

The police confirmed they had received the complaint and would take necessary action after looking into the matter.

Yeddyurappa is already faced with a similar controversy on social media following photographs showing him eating “tatte idli” at a Dalit house in Tumkur district.

Following the allegations leaders from the Congress and the Janata Dal (S) have lashed out at Yeddyurappa alleging that he has dishonoured Dalits wth his “stunts”.

In response, Yeddyurappa has accused his detractors of dishonouring Dalits and demanded that they apologise to the Dalits in whose homes he had breakfast.
 
 

The post Dalit charges Karnataka BJP chief Yeddyurappa with practicing untouchability appeared first on SabrangIndia.