Ayodhya Verdict Not "Complete Justice", Says Asaduddin Owaisi

News Network
November 20, 2019

Hyderabad, Nov 20: Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi on Tuesday claimed the Supreme Court's verdict on the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi land dispute was by no means "complete justice".

"The Supreme Court's judgement in the Babri Masjid title suit is by no means the complete justice that the powers under Article 142 are required to be used for. It is at best incomplete justice or at worst complete injustice," he tweeted.

Article 142 of the Constitution deals with the Supreme Court's power to exercise its jurisdiction and pass order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.

Mr Owaisi was responding to media reports on the Ayodhya verdict and whether judicial discretion and the resultant directions guarantee complete justice.

The Supreme Court, in its verdict in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi title case on November 9, said the entire 2.77 acres of disputed land should be handed over to the deity Ram Lalla, who was one of the three litigants.

The five-judge Constitution bench also directed the centre to allot a five-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya to build a mosque.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 13,2020

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 21,2020

Lucknow, Jul 21: Madhya Pradesh Governor Lalji Tandon, a veteran political figure in Uttar Pradesh where he had served as a cabinet minister, died at a hospital here early Tuesday.

The 85-year-old was admitted to the hospital on June 11 with breathing problems, fever and difficulty in urination.

He died at 5:35 am in Medanata Hospital, according to his son Ashutosh Tandon, a UP cabinet minister.

Lalji Tandon is survived by wife and three sons.

His body will be kept at his official residence in Hazratganj and later at his Sindhi Tola residence in Chowk to enable people to pay their last respects.

The last journey will start at 4 in the evening for the Gulala Ghat where his last rites will be performed later in the day, Ashutosh Tandon said in a statement.

The UP government has announced three days mourning as a mark of respect to Lalji Tandon, a former cabinet minister, a government spokesman said.

Belonging to the Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L K Advani era of BJP leaders, Lalji Tandon proved himself as an able administrator during his decades-long political career in Uttar Pradesh.

A former Lok Sabha MP, he was later given gubernatorial responsibility.

He took oath as Madhya Pradesh governor on July 29, 2019, when the Congress was in power in the state, after serving in the same post in Bihar for nearly 11 months. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 3,2020

Lucknow, Mar 3: Two days after wife of Kafeel Khan, who is booked under the National Security Act, alleged that her husband faced a threat to life in Mathura jail, where he is lodged for anti-CAA protests, the District Magistrate claimed that Khan was 'fully secure' in the jail.

"Kafeel Khan, who has been booked under the National Security Act (NSA) for alleged inflammatory statements during an anti-CAA protest in Aligarh, is absolutely fine and fully secure in Mathura jail. Allegations of 'inhuman' treatment being meted out to him are baseless," Mathura District Magistrate Sarvagya Ram Mishra said on Monday.

Also Read: Kafeel Khan’s wife fears threat to his life
Senior Superintendent of Mathura district prison, Shailendra Maitrey, said that Khan's condition is being monitored every half an hour and the report is written in the gate book. He said, his ECG is normal and blood pressure was also in control.

He said that Khan was demanding checkup from a cardiologist.

"Since no specialist is available in the government sector here, his request could not be complied with. However, the jail authorities have sent his request to chief medical officer and have asked him to make a specialist available," the jail official said.

He said Khan is in barrack, which is fully ventilated, and he shares it with 50-60 'good behaviour' prisoners.

It may be recalled that in a letter to the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, Additional Chief Secretary (Home), and Director General (Jail), Shabista Khan, wife of the jailed doctor, had alleged that her husband was being treated inhumanely in the jail.

She feared that an attempt could be made on her husband's life inside the jail. She had demanded adequate security for him and had urged that her husband should be kept away from active criminals lodged in the jail.

Khan was booked by Aligarh police on December 13 for delivering a provocative speech in Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) during an anti-CAA protest in the campus, a day earlier, and was arrested from Mumbai airport on January 29 by Uttar Pradesh special task force.

The Aligarh police had slapped the stringent National Security Act (NSA) against Khan on February 13 night, hours before he was expected to walk free from the Mathura jail, after he was granted bail by Aligarh's chief judicial magistrate on February 10.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.