Mangalurean Vibhali Shetty wings ‘Sharjah Award for Excellence in Education’ 2018-19

Malappuram (Kerala), Feb 19:  children of a couple in a span of nine years has raised suspicion among police personnel here who have registered a case following a complaint after a three-month-old child of the family died on Tuesday and was buried.

Police exhumed the body, which was buried in the morning, and took it to the district hospital at Tirur for post-mortem.

The infant was the sixth child of the couple, police said.

"A case has been registered (for unnatural death) in the matter to verify the death beyond any suspicion raised by locals since five other children of the couple had died in the past nine years," a senior police official said.

The couple had three boys and three girls of which the third girl child lived till the age of four and the rest died before turning one.

"The post-mortem will take place today itself.We are collecting the medical records of the children who had passed away earlier.

We will identify the cause of death after analysing the records and discuss the matter with forensic doctors," Tirur Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP) said.

However, relatives claimed that there was nothing suspicious in the death of the children and that doctors have said it was due to some genetic disease.

"The post-mortem of the third child was conducted and the doctors said the death was due to some genetic problems. They said they were helpless," a relative said, adding that the family was ready to face any probe.

According to the locals, the couple had claimed that the children have died due to epilepsy.

Sources said the baby was taken to a hospital but was dead prior to reaching the hospital early this morning.

Bengaluru, Jul 8: Karnataka on Wednesday reported the biggest single-day spike of 2,062 coronavirus cases and a record 54 fatalities, taking the total number of infections to 28,877 and the death count to 470, the health department said.

778 COVID-19 patients were also discharged after recovery in the state.

Out of the fresh cases reported today, 1,148 cases were reported from Bengaluru alone with 22 deaths.

The previous biggest single-day spike was recorded on July 5 with 1,925 cases.

As of July 8 evening, cumulatively 28,877 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 470 deaths and 11,876 discharges, the health department said in its bulletin.

It said out of 16,527 active cases, 16,075 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and stable, while 452 are in ICU.

The dead include 22 from Bengaluru urban, Dharwad seven, Ballari four, three each from Hassan and Raichur, two each from Ramanagara, Chikkaballapura, Vijayapura, Tumakuru, Mysuru, and one each from Bidar, Dakshina Kannada, Kalaburagi, Chikkamagaluru and Bengaluru rural.

Among the districts where the new cases were reported, Bengaluru urban accounted for 1,148 cases, followed by Dakshina Kannada 183, Dharwad 89, Kalaburagi 66, fifty nine each from Ballari and Mysuru, Bengaluru rural 37, Ramanagara 34, Chikkaballapura 32, 31 each from Udupi and Haveri, Bidar 29, Belagavi 27, Hassan 26, and 24 each from Bagalkote and Tumakuru.

While Chikkamagaluru reported 23 cases, it was 20 in Mandya, Uttara Kannada 19, Davangere 18, 17 each from Raichur and Shivamogga, Kolar 16, 11 each from Yadgir and Koppal, Gadag five, Vijayapura four, and Chitradurga two.

Bengaluru urban district tops the list of positive cases, with 12,509 infections, followed by Kalaburagi 1,816 and Dakshina Kannada 1,534.

Among discharges, Bengaluru urban tops the list with 2,228 discharges, followed by Kalabuagi 1,351 and Udupi 1,178.

A total of 7,59,181 samples were tested so far, out of which 19,134 were tested on Wednesday alone.

According to the bulletin, so far 7,11,319 samples have been reported as negative, and out of them 16,503 were reported negative today.

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.