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 14,2020

New Delhi, Jan 14: The curative petitions of Vinay Sharma and Mukesh, who were sentenced to death in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, was on Tuesday rejected by a five-judge Supreme Court Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana.

In a three-page order, the Bench concluded, after an in chamber consideration that began about 1.45 p.m., that there was no merit in their pleas to spare them from the gallows.

“We have gone through the curative petitions and relevant documents. In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra. Hence, the curative petitions are dismissed,” the court held.

Curative is a rare remedy devised by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the Rupa Ashok Hurra case in 2002. A party can take only two limited grounds in a curative petition - one, he was not heard by the court before the adverse judgment was passed, and two, the judge was biased. A curative plea, which follows the dismissal of review petition, is the last legal avenue open for convicts in the Supreme Court. Sharma was the first among the four convicts to file a curative.

The Bench also rejected their pleas to stay the execution of their death sentence and for oral hearing in open court.

Besides Justice Ramana, the Bench comprised Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.

Curative petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by both convicts on January 9. The petitions had come just days after a Delhi sessions court schedulled the execution of all the four convicts in Tihar jail on January 22.

Sharma and Mukesh, in separate curative petitions, argued that there was a “sea change” in the death penalty jurisprudence since their convictions. Carrying out the death sentence on such changed circumstances would be a “gross miscarriage of justice”.

In his plea, Sharma said the Court had commuted the death penalty in several rape and murder cases since 2017, when it first confirmed the death penalty to the Nirbhaya convicts.

“fter the pronouncement of judgment in 2017, there have been as many as 17 cases involving rape and murder in which various three-judge Benches of the Supreme Court have commuted the sentence of death,” the petition contended.

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by Akshay Singh, another of the four four condemned men, to review its May 5, 2017 judgment confirming the death penalty. It also refused his plea to grant him three weeks' time to file a mercy petition before the President of India.

A Bench led by Justice R. Banumathi had said it was open for the Nirbhaya case convicts to avail whatever time the law prescribes for the purpose of filing a mercy plea.

Akshay (33), Mukesh (30), Pawan Gupta (23) and Sharma (24) had brutally gang-raped a 23-year-old paramedical student in a moving bus on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. She died of her injuries a few days later.

The case shocked the nation and led to the tightening of anti-rape laws. Rape, especially gang rape, is now a capital crime.

One of the accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar jail. A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board. He was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.

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
February 18,2020

Ayodhya, Feb 18: A senior Supreme Court lawyer has written to the Ram temple trust on behalf of a group of Muslims in Ayodhya, asking that five acres of land around the demolished Babri Masjid where a graveyard is situated be spared for the sake of 'sanatan dharma'.

The letter, written by advocate M R Shamshad, is addressed to all 10 trustees of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra.

Shamshad said according to Muslims, there is a graveyard known as 'Ganj Shahidan' around the demolished Babri Masjid where 75 Muslims who lost their lives in the 1885 riots in Ayodhya were buried.

"There is a mention of this in Faizabad Gazetteer also," he said.

"The central government has not considered the issue not using the grave-yard of Muslims for constructing the grand temple of Lord Ram. It has violated 'dharma'," the letter stated.

"In view of religious scriptures of 'sanatan dharma', you need to consider whether the temple of Lord Ram can have foundation on the graves of Muslims? This is a decision that the management of the trust has to take," it said.

"With all humility and respect to Lord Ram, I request you, not to use the land of about four to five acres in which the graves of Muslims are there around the demolished mosque," the letter added.

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
June 29,2020

Bengaluru, June 29: The Karnataka government on Monday issued guidelines to conduct online classes for all students of ICSE, CBSE and SSLC under the directions of the High Court.

According to the guidelines, for the kindergarten students, online classes can be held 30 minutes a week and students in classes 1-5 will have online classes for 30-45 minutes divided into two periods for three alternate days every week.

For students in classes 6-8, the online classes will be for 30-45 minutes divided into two periods for five days every week while students in classes 9 and 10 can have the virtual classes for 30-45 minutes divided into four periods for five days a week.

Earlier, the state government barred online classes for the kids from LKG to class 5.

Minister for primary and secondary education S Suresh Kumar had said that online classes cannot be held for the kids from LKG to class V.

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.