Bhaskar Shetty murder: Royal treatment for accused in police custody?

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Mangaluru, Jun 3: Mangaluru MLA and former minister U T Khader has urged the state government and Dakshina Kannada district administration to take steps to facilitate the return of Indians stranded in foreign countries amid covid lockdown.

A delegation comprising Mr Khader, DCC President K Harish Kumar, and MLC Ivan D’Souza met District In-charge Minister Kota Srinivas Poojary and submitted a memorandum on Tuesday.

“Kannadigas who are working outside the state are in distress due to the lockdown. More than 50,000 people had uploaded applications on Seva Sindhu portal seeking permission to return to their villagers and are waiting for permission. With the authorities failing to take any decision, they are worried,” said the delegation.

The government should initiate measures to get them back and quarantine them, urged the delegation.

Mr Khader said, “Many workers stranded in foreign countries are eager to return home. The district administration should make arrangements to quarantine those returning from foreign countries and other states.

There are thousands of migrant labourers from Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar stranded in DK. They are waiting to return to their families. The state government should facilitate their return journey, the delegation urged.

MLC Ivan D’Souza said, “Assistance should be provided to private bus staff, beedi workers, tailors, garage labourers and street vendors who are in distress. The price of Covid-19 tests in private laboratories should be reduced.”

The delegation informed that after Wenlock Hospital was converted into the designated COVID-19 hospital, poor patients are facing many inconveniences. A portion of the hospital should be earmarked for treating other patients, they said.

Bengaluru, Jan 3: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Friday clarified that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured him to consider all the demands made by his government.

"Prime Minister spoke to me personally and assured me of all help and suggested that I visit New Delhi and meet the concerned Ministers and apprise them about the state's problems and pending projects. He also directed me to prepare a detail report on this matter," Yediyurappa said in a statement.

He claimed that a section of media has misinterpreted his speech which was plain and honest towards the development of the state.

"A section of media has attached motive to my speech which was plain and honest in its content. Being in federal set up, there is nothing wrong with placing the facts before the Prime Minister and making submissions," the Chief Minister said.

"As a Chief Minister, I placed our state's problems and need for more funds for developmental activities. I pleaded before the Prime Minister for more funds to the relief work, the scientific and remunerative price for the farm produces, and special fund of Rs 50,000 crore for speeding up of on-going irrigation work. As it was farmers' meet, I felt it worthy and timely to plead the Prime Minister for more funds for all the developmental activities in the state," he said.

Asserting that Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a great visionary and his concern for the poor and farmers is unquestionable, he said: "When the whole world is appreciating his statesmanship and visionary zeal, it is in very bad taste for the media to attribute motives to my speech and relate it to the Prime Minister."

Yediyurappa requested media to show support to his government in the interest of the development of the state.

"I humbly request the electronic and print media not to misinterpret but support the government in the interest of the development of the state and interests of the people. I hope the media will respond to my request," he said.