‘Till now I did not get freedom. Allow me to meet my husband’: Hadiya tells India

News Network
November 29, 2017

Salem, Nov 29: Freed by the Supreme Court from the custody of parents and directed to pursue her studies, Akhila alias Hadiya, on Wednesday reiterated that she desired to meet her husband Shafin Jahan, against whom her father had made shocking allegations.

Hadiya, who had been kept under house arrest by her father for converting to Islam and then marrying a Muslim man, said that college should not be another prison for her.  “I will continue my studies. But I should be allowed to meet my husband,” said Hadiya.

Earlier speaking to a television channel Hadiya said: “I need the freedom to meet the person I love. I wanted to meet my husband... Till now I did not get freedom because I was not allowed by the officials to meet my husband. I am asking for my fundamental rights.”

She arrived here in a police vehicle from Coimbatore, about 170 km from here, amid tight security, to pursue her studies at a homeopathy college here. "I have sought permission from the college authorities to meet my husband. I hope they will allow," she told reporters at the college where she will undergo a 11-month internship.

During the proceedings yesterday, the apex court refused to allow Hadiya's plea to go with her husband. Earlier, she arrived here in a police vehicle from Coimbatore, about 170 km from here, amid tight security. Hadiya, wearing a yellow scarf, was whisked away to the Managing Director's office at the college soon after arrival.

Hadiya's body language appeared to be in contrast to her conduct during her departure from Kochi to New Delhi a few days ago when she shouted she was a Muslim and married on her own will. The woman quietly walked past the big contingent of waiting media persons and went straight to the MD's office accompanied by police and college officials. On her way to hostel, Hadiya said she does not need security at the college.

"It is not necessary, but at least for two days I think security will be there," she told reporters in reply to a question. A Police official said they would have to comply with the court's order and adequate security would be provided to her in the college and hostel. On the issue of allowing Hadiya to meet her husband, the official said it could not be done without any order from the court. Expressing solidarity with Hadiya, a small group of persons stood outside the college compound holding placards.

It read "Stop judicial terrorism, we stand with you Hadiya, Allow her to live with her husband." The Kerala High Court had on May 29 annulled the marriage of Hadiya with Jahan. The judgment was a shock for Hadiya as he had repeatedly stated that she is a mature and it was her decision to marry him.

Comments

FairMan
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2017

Starting from Modi to sweeper in Govt. offices are all carried by RSS even in Indian Judiciary.

These buggers are playing politics with a normal womens Life.  

Get UP, Get UP ....  Public come to street and act .

SHAJI
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2017

Why court is not allowing her to meet her husband.  Why freedom is avoided to her.  Is this not voilation of human rights.  Court should listen to her request and let us lead peaceful life with her husband.  None should prevent her from living with her husband.   Avoiding her from meeting her husband is like harassing her and torturing her.  where are women organisations who fight for women freedom.  Why are they closing eyes.   Is this because she married a muslim male.   As she has no rights to live as per her wish? 

sharief
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2017

Her basic right has been curtailed by apex court, where it is the only final source where all basic rights are defended. Where can an oppressed can seek the justice.

The same court questioned the high court on the same matter in favour of the girl. 

 

 

Abdul Ghanim
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2017

how shame it is ! we call India as bharath matha, gow matha etc , but the way womens are treated in world largest democracy is disgraceful. Being an adult women her basic rights are voilated by even judiciary! Shame on Indian democracy!!

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
January 23,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 23: Expressing shock over the blast which left him and his supporters injured yesterday, Shantinagar MLA NA Haris today said that the incident cannot be brushed aside as a firecracker blast and appealed to the state government to inquire into the incident.

Recovering from the injuries sustained on his leg, Haris was discharged from St Philomena's Hospital on Thursday afternoon. 

Interacting with mediapersons outside his residence in Shantinagar, Haris said, “It wasn’t a cracker but a ball-like object that was hurled at me. Since my childhood, I have been seeing crackers and the object that was thrown at me was certainly not a cracker. It had splinters and hard objects.”

He said, “I have been representing the constituency for over 12-years and had no rivalry with anyone. Barring political ideology during elections, all the leaders in our constituency have been cooperative with each other. Yet, we do not know what the intention was or who was behind the incident.”

Revealing that home minister Basavaraj Bommai had called him to enquire about his condition at the hospital Haris said, “I have also briefed the home minister and explained to him what exactly happened. I have full faith in the police and will cooperate with the police during the investigation.” Haris said that doctors have advised him three to four-days of rest.

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.
Ram Puniyani
January 22,2020

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.

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

Bengaluru,  Jul 21: The salaries of doctors under the National Health Mission (NHM) has been hiked to Rs 45,000 in Karnataka, according to Medical Education Minister Dr K Sudhakar.

Addressing the media on Monday, Dr Sudhakar said that the state government will bear the cost of the hike in salaries of the doctors and added that ASHA workers too will get a hike in their pay soon.

Regarding the COVID-19 management in the state, he further said that testing will be increased in the containment zones.

During a meeting chaired by Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa, the Education Minister said that it had been decided that booth level committees will conduct door to door survey for early detection of influenza-like illness (ILI) and severe acute respiratory infections (SARI), and vulnerable persons.

He also implored private hospitals to admit and treat COVID-19 patients and asked them to not be hesitant in admitting pregnant women.

Karnataka on Monday reported 3,648 COVID-19 cases taking the tally to 67,420, informed the state health department.

According to a bulletin issued by the department, the state recorded 72 more deaths due to COVID-19 with the toll at 1,403 while six patients who tested positive for the infection have died due to non-COVID causes, as of Monday. There are 42,216 active cases in the state.

Comments

Prakash Salins
 - 
Tuesday, 21 Jul 2020

What about the nurses???

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.