Kabeer killing: Withdraw murder case against ANF personnel, says C T Ravi

Bengaluru, Apr 1: The Opposition Congress leader in the Karnataka Assembly, and former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has appealed the party legislators and MPs to contribute a minimum rupees one lakh each, towards the KPCC's Corona relief fund.

In a statement, here on Tuesday, Siddaramaiah had stated that the COVID-19 disease had created a havoc among the people of the state, and had thrown thousands of people jobless and struggling to get access to the food grains as well as to medical aid.

The people of the state, who had battered from the unprecedented rains and floods recently, had to face another daunting challenge of the spread of COVID-19 virus across the state.

New Delhi, Jan 9: Crime in India has increased by 1.3 per cent in 2018 compared to 2017 with the registration of over 50 lakh cognisable crimes, reveals 2018 edition of 'Crime in India' statistics released this week by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

As per the NCRB, which works under the Ministry of Home Affairs, a total of 50.74 lakh crimes, including 31.32 lakh under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and 19.41 under the Special Local Laws (SLL) was registered in 2018.

The report says that there was an overall rise of 1.3 per cent in the registration of cases in 2017, but crime rate per lakh population was down to 383.5 in 2018 from 388.6 in 2017.

A total of 1.05 lakh cases of kidnapping and abduction across the country was registered in 2018, showing an increase of 10.3 per cent over 95,893 such cases in 2017, the latest NCRB report said.

A total of 29,017 murders were reported in 2018, up by 1.3 per cent over 2017. Of which, disputes were reported as the motive of the highest number of murder cases (9,623) followed by personal vendetta and enmity (3,875) and gain (2,995).

Accidental deaths have also seen a rise to 4,11,824 in 2018 from 3,96,584 in 2017 -- a rise to 31.1 per cent from 30.3 per cent in 2017.

The NCRB report 'Crime in India-2018' said in its disclaimer section that clarifications on data were pending from West Bengal, Arunachal, Meghalaya, Sikkim and Kolkata. Hence, the data from these states and city may be treated as provisional.

No let up in road accident deaths in 2018: NCRB

There were 1,35,051 incidences of deaths due to negligence relating to road accidents in 2018, according to the latest NCRB report on "Crime in India -2018".

When compared to the previous two years, the statistics show that there has been no significant change in the overall situation.

In 2017 there were 1,34,803 incidences reported from across the country, while in 2016 it was 1,35,656.

Incidents of 'Hit and run' accident cases have climbed up marginally over the last year, if the latest figures are any indication. In 2018, the 'hit and run' cases reported were 47,028. In 2017, the cases registered under this category were 43,727.

The data collection process for NCRB report on "Crime in India - 2018" including clarifications from the states/UTs/central agencies started in July, 2019 and continued till December, 2019.

People involved in farming sector, including 5,763 farmers or cultivators, committed suicide during 2018, the report reveals.

The annual data was released around three months after the government released the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report on "Crime in India 2017".

As per the latest data, of the 10,349 persons who committed suicide in 2018, 4,586 were agricultural labourers.

The number of suicides in farming sector in 2018 accounts for 7.7 per cent of the total suicide victims (1,34,516) in the country, the NCRB data said.

Suicides in India in 2018 rose to 1,34,516 from 1,29,887 in 2017. Rate of suicides is also up from 9.9 in 2017 to 10.2 in 2018.

In 2017, a total of 10,655 farmer suicides were reported.

West Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, Uttarakhand, Meghalaya, Goa, Chandigarh, Daman and Diu, Delhi, Lakshadweep and Puducherry reported zero suicides of farmers or cultivators and agricultural labourers during 2018, said the report.

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.