Mughal emperors were Traitors; Taj Mahal a blot on Indian culture: BJP MLA Sangeet Som

News Network
October 16, 2017

Meerut, Oct 16: Courting fresh controversy, BJP MLA Sangeet Som has termed Mughal emperors Babur, Akbar and Aurangzeb as “traitors” and said their names would be removed from pages of history.

During a visit to Meerut district, the legislator from Sardhana also said the Taj Mahal was built by an emperor who had imprisoned his own father and had targeted many Hindus in his kingdom. He also said that Taj Mahal is a blot on Indian culture.

Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal in memory of his wife and was imprisoned till the end of his days by his son Aurangzeb.

Addressing a gathering on Sunday at Sisoli village after inaugurating a statue of 8th century king Anangpal Singh Tomar, he said invaders of India have been glorified in history.

The lives and achievement of the “real great men” of the country like Maharana Pratap and Shivaji would be taught in schools and colleges, Mr. Som said. There were many Hindu kings in the past who do not have a mention in history books. The BJP government would make sure that their valour and sacrifice is properly respected, Mr. Som said. He also said no one can now stop the construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya and Krishna Mandir in Mathura.

About Taj Mahal, Som said, “Many people were pained to see that the Taj Mahal was removed from the list of places (tourist destinations). What type of history? Is this history that the person who built the Taj Mahal imprisoned his father? Do you call it a history when the one who built the Taj targeted many Hindus in Uttar Pradesh and Hindustan?”

Mr. Som’s comments came days after reports in a section of the media that a booklet brought out by the tourism department of the Uttar Pradesh government left out the Taj Mahal from its list of major tourist destinations.

Following the reports, the State government had issued a press release stating, “Tourism projects worth ₹370 crore are proposed, under which schemes worth ₹156 crore are meant for the Taj Mahal and its surrounding areas in Agra.”

Comments

Abu Muhammad
 - 
Monday, 16 Oct 2017

Under Islamic name, you export your mother to foreign countries shouting Bharath Mata Ki, Gou Mata ki. You are present day Traitor and terrorist (muzaffar nagar terror) have no morality to question history..

KHAN
 - 
Monday, 16 Oct 2017

Biggest Beef Exporter Fooled many Bhakts ... What a hypocrictal leader for the Bjp

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 16,2020

Haveri, Jan 16: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Wednesday hinted at inducting 16 MLAs into the Cabinet which was due for expansion despite the fact that it was a difficult task.

Participating in a function of Choudayya Community here, he further said one should understand the difficulty faced to undertake cabinet expansion in the prevailing situation and whoever gives suggestion should understand the circumstances otherwise the statements would lead to confusion among the community and people of the state.

He stated that 'as many as 17 MLAs resigned to make me Chief Minister and now their community people want their leader to become Minister, it is very difficult to satisfy all of them'.

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
June 15,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 15: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Monday said those coming to the state from Chennai and Delhi will have to undergo three days of institutional quarantine followed by 11 days of home isolation.

Up till now a seven-day institutional quarantine was prescribed for those returning from Maharashtra, while there was no mandatory institutional quarantine for asymptomatic people returning to Karnataka from other states.

Those returning from states other than Maharashtra were asked to quarantine themselves at home.

"Those coming from Maharashtra are subjected to seven days of institutional quarantine followed by seven days of home quarantine, while those coming from Chennai and Delhi will have to go for three days of institutional quarantine and eleven days of home quarantine," Yediyurappa said.

Speaking to reporters here, he said the decision has been taken following the increase in the number of coronavirus cases from these states.

"It is because of returnees from other states the cases have increased, not because of the local (intra-state) movement, so we have to control people coming from outside, we have to quarantine them and have to tighten measures.

We are making honest efforts in this regard," he added.

Yediyurappa was speaking to reporters after chairing a meeting with top ministers and officials to discuss about the surge in COVID cases in the state.

"There are no plans for any lockdown, and we will request the Prime Minister for more relaxations," the Chief Minister said in response to a question.

Out of total 7,000 cases in the state 4,386 are returnees from Maharashtra and their contacts are 1,340.

Those who returned from abroad comprise 216.

Returnees from other states constitute- Delhi 87, Tamil Nadu 67, Gujarat 62.

Noting that there are indications that the coronavirus infections are expected to increase in the days to come, Yediyurappa assured people that the government will take all precautionary measures required, and appealed to people to cooperate, follow social distancing, and wear masks.

He said it has been decided to observe the coming Thursday as "mask days" by organising a walk across the state and the main event will be held at Vidhana Soudha, the state secretariat.

"Strict measures will be taken against those not wearing masks and not maintaining social distancing here on.

Initially Rs 200 fine will be imposed, this will be throughout the state," he said.

Further stating that the government has made special efforts to control the spread of COVID, he said a special COVID-19 taskforce has been constituted for Bengaluru and surrounding areas, BBMP (city civic body) commissioner and Deputy Commissioners of neighbouring districts have been asked to pay special attention.

As of June 14 evening, cumulatively 7,000 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 86 deaths and 3,955 discharges.

Out of 2,956 active cases in the state till last evening, 2,940 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and are stable, while 16 are in ICU.

Yediyurappa said the state's mortality rate is 1.2 per cent while the national average is 2.8 per cent.

The state's recovery rate is 56.6 per cent and the national average is 51 per cent, he said, adding that 93 per cent of the total cases are asymptomatic while the remaining seven per cent are symptomatic.

In Bengaluru, there are 697 cases and out of them 330 are active. The city has reported 36 deaths.

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

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.