Minister's 13-yr-old daughter memorises the entire Quran, inspires many

Bengaluru, Jan 29: The high court has granted bail to a 37-year-old Bangladeshi woman from the Christian community on the strength of Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019.

The court cited Section 2 of the amended Citizenship Act 1955, according to which minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who entered India on or before December 31, 2014 should not be treated as illegal immigrants, while granting her bail.

Allowing the petition filed by Archana Purnima Pramanik, an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh, who claims to be staying in India since 2003, justice John Michael Cunha on Monday directed her to furnish a bail bond for Rs 2 lakh to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and cooperate with the probe.

The judge observed the allegations made against her must be proved in a full-dressed trial. Archana was booked for obtaining documents such as PAN and Aadhaar cards and also fraudulently obtaining an Indian passport on March 28 last year. Based on a complaint filed by the assistant passport officer, Archana was arrested on November 7, 2019 and her bail petition was dismissed by a sessions court on December 4, 2019.

Born on March 23, 1983 at Tanore, Rajshahi district of Bangladesh, Archana came to India in 2003 to pursue a career in nursing. After obtaining a diploma in general nursing and midwifery at Ranchi in 2006, she worked in many reputed hospitals.

In 2010, she got married to Rajashekaran Krishnamurthy and the marriage was registered at Ranchi. After the wedding, she moved to Bengaluru and obtained PAN, Aadhaar and voter ID cards.

On April 1, 2019, Archana applied for a visa to Bangladesh for herself and her son. During her journey on May 20, 2019, they were detained at Kolkata airport and released later. However, the regional passport office issued a notice revoking Archana’s passport and she was arrested by RT Nagar police on November 7, 2019.

Koppal, Jun 3: Opposition Leader in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly Siddaramaiah on Wednesday said that allegedly there was deep crisis in the state BJP but categorically denied any role of Congress in it.

Addressing a press conference here, the former Chief Minister said 'I and my party have nothing to do with the developments in the ruling party. I came to know through media that some 25 BJP MLAs allegedly not satisfied with the way of functioning of the government. The Congress party is not interested in what is happenings in BJP and if the government falls on its own, then Congress might stake claim to form the government eventually".

Mr Siddaramaiah alleged that the State’s BJP government was trying to 'subvert the Constitution and Panchayat Raj Laws' by postponing election to Gram Panchayats citing spread of COVID-19.

'The Commission has not provided any information so far about the preparation of electoral rolls, fixing of reservation to seats, and calendar of events for holding elections. It is the duty of the Commission to hold elections as per the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act,' he further said.

The EC on May 28 postponed elections to GPs citing 'exceptional circumstances' prevailing in Karnataka following the coronavirus pandemic situation. Elections to as many as 5,800 GPs scheduled to be held by next month with the ending of their terms have been put off, and fresh dates were yet to be announced.

Like most of the political phenomenon, even the practice of Nationalism is not a static one. It changes with the changing political equations of the political forces and assumes the expressions which are very diverse. As such the phenomenon of Nationalism has a long journey and various state policies in particular have used it for purposes which relate more to the power of the state ‘vis a vis’ its people, power of the state ‘vis a vis’ the neighboring countries among others.

In India there has been a certain change in the practices of the state which have transformed the meaning of Nationalism during last few years. Particularly with BJP, the Hindu Nationalist outfit gaining simple majority, it has unfolded the policies where one can discern the drastic change in the meaning and application of Nationalism in regard to its citizens, particularly those belonging to minority community, with regard to those who are liberal, and with those who stand with the concept of Human rights.

Our former Prime Minister of Dr. Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said that “Nationalism and the "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" slogan are being misused to construct a "militant and purely emotional" idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. Former Prime Minister recently stated this in an apparent attack on the BJP.” The occasion was the release of a book, ‘Who is Bharat Mata’, edited by Purushottam Agarwal and Radhakrishna. This is a compilation of significant extracts from writings of Nehru, and important assessments of and contributions of Nehru by prominent personalities.

Dr. Singh went on to add "With an inimitable style…Nehru laid the foundation of the universities, academies and cultural institutions of Modern India. But for Nehru's leadership, independent India would not have become what it is today," This statement of Dr. Singh has great importance in contemporary times, as Nehru is being denigrated by Hindu nationalists for all the problems which India is facing today and attempts are on to undermine his role and glorifying Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. This is also significant as it gives us the glimpses of what Nationalism meant for Nehru.

As Singh’s statement captures the present nationalism being practiced by BJP and company, the Hindu nationalists, immediately shot back saying that Dr. Singh is supporting the anti India activities at JNU and Jamia and his party is supporting the anti India nationalists. They asked whether Singh likes the nationalism of the likes of Shashi Tharoor or Manishankar Ayer who are provoking the Shaheen Bagh protest rather than making the protestors quiet. Whether he likes the anti national protests which go on at JNU or Jamia? As per them there is no Nationalism in Congress. One more example being cited is the private visit of Shatrughan Sinha who talked to Pakistani President during his visit there recently!

Most of the arguments being used to oppose Dr. Singh are very superficial. What is being referred to; is not opposition to Indian nationalism and its central values which were the core of anti colonial struggles. While ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ may not be acceptable to a section of population, even the book he was releasing has the title ‘Who is Bharat Mata’. What is being stated by Singh is the twist which slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ has been used by Hindu nationalists to frighten the religious minorities.

Indian nation came into being on the values, which later were the foundation of Indian Constitution. Indian Constitution carefully picked up the terminology which was away from the concepts of Hindu or Muslim nationalism. That’s how the country came to be called as ‘India that is Bharat’. The freedom of expression which was the hallmark of freedom movement and it was given a pride of place in our Constitution. It respected the diversity and formulated rules where the nation was not based on particular culture, as Hindu nationalists will like us to believe, but cultural diversity was centrally recognized in the Constitution. In addition promoting good relations with neighbors and other countries of the World was also part of our principles.

JNU, Jamia and AMU are being demonized as most institutions so far regard the freedom of expression as a core part of Indian democracy. These institutions have been thriving on discussions and debates which have base in liberalism. Deliberately some slogans have been constructed to defame these institutions. While Constitution mandates good relations with neighbors, creation of ‘Anti Pakistan hysteria’ is the prime motive of many a channels and sections of other media, which are servile to the ideology of ruling Government. They also violate most of the norms of ethical journalism, where the criticism of the ruling party is an important factor to keep the ruling dispensation in toes.

A stifling atmosphere has been created during last six years. In this the Prime Minster can take a detour, land in Pakistan to have a cup of tea with Pakistan PM, but a Congress leader talking to Pakistani President is a sign of being anti National. Students taking out a march while reading the preamble of Indian Constitution are labeled as anti-national; and are stopped while those openly wielding guns near Jamia or Shaheen Bagh roam freely.

Nationalism should promote amity and love of the people; it should pave the way for growth and development. Currently the nationalism which is dominant and stalking the streets has weakened the very fraternity, which is one of the pillars of our democracy. Nehru did explain that Bharat Mata is not just our mountains, rivers and land but primarily the people who inhabit the land. Which nationalism to follow was settled during the freedom movement when Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism were rejected by the majority of people of India in favor of the Nationalism of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad, where minorities are equal citizens, deserving affirmative action. In today’s scenario the Hindu nationalists cannot accept any criticism of their policies.