Our prophet and our duty...

Adv P A Hameed Padubidri, Riyadh
January 7, 2019

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is a 'Mercy' to the whole world (Rahmathullil Aalameen). Muslims are the followers of that great 'Mercy' and they are fortunate to be his Ummath for the betterment of this life and life hereafter. He is the final messenger and "seal of prophets", whom Allah sent for the guidance of the whole mankind. 

While he was very strong in upholding and propagating the oneness of Allah as per His commandment, he was very soft in dealing with all affairs of lives of the people in both Duniya and Akhirah matters. He brought an uncivilized people into light from the darkness. He brought about a rich civilization out of his great message. That's the reason why, even his deadliest enemies used to call him as "Al-Ameen"(most trusted one). He is most unparalleled & matchless personality on the earth (Ashraful Khalq). 

As far as a Mo'min (believer) is concerned, he should be loved by him more than his self, his parents, his families, his properities, his each & everything. His teachings are our ways & lights. 

Even a single word or deed that defames or despicable his great personality is not easily digestible & it should be strongly slated & lambasted in the way as it should be. 

Our intellectual properties, tangible properties, human resources, unified strengths, powers etc. should be utilized for defending his sacred personality. But, all these should be within the Islamic & legal boundaries without harming others or damaging anything. Strong adherence to Islamic values & respect to our systems/laws should all times be remembered because the Prophet (Pbuh) is our role model for each & everything. 

Mash'Allah, that's what we observed from the good reactions of our people & others alike in Karnataka & other parts of India & gulf countries after Suvarna News TV's  Ajith Hanumakkanavar spitted the venomous bubbles against our Prophet (Pbuh). A wide protests in a legal & very democratic way are on the move in many parts of Karnataka, largely in the coastal regions of DK, Udupi, Bhatkal etc. NRI muslims & other compatriots of different faiths in gulf countries including in Saudi Arabia are also on the active mode in this regard.

We need to accelerate our agitations against his mindless remarks on organizational or individual basis (like submitting complaints, total discouraging his TV channel, filing case in courts, complaint in ministry of information & broadcasting etc.). Also we need to see him to be booked under the relevant law of the land & to be arrested. 

However, our abiding to the system/law should not be treated as weakness by any authorities & State Government. The government & concerned authorities should take this matter seriously so that peace & order shall prevail in the society. Please note that the defamatory remarks uttered by Ajith is heinous & very serious in nature. 

Let us hope for the justice and equity. 

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of coastaldigest.com and coastaldigest.com does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.

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.
Agencies
March 7,2020

New Delhi, Mar 7: The Union government has issued a Global Invite for Expression of Interest for disinvestment in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) from prospective bidders with a minimum net worth of $10 billion as of Saturday.

The EoI submissions can be made till May 2, whereas investor queries will be entertained till April 4.

Another condition pertains to a maximum of four members are permitted in a consortium, and the lead member must hold 40 per cent in proportion. Other members of the consortium must have a minimum $1 billion net worth.

The EOI allows changes in the consortium within 45 days, though the lead member cannot be changed.

The GoI proposes to disinvest its entire shareholding in BPCL comprising 1,14,91,83,592 equity shares held through the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, which constitutes 52.98 per cent of BPCL's equity share capital, along with the transfer of management control to the strategic buyer (except BPCL's equity shareholding of 61.65 per cent in Numaligarh Refinery Limited (NRL) and management control thereon).

The shareholding of BPCL in NRL will be transferred to a Central Public Sector Enterprise operating in the oil and gas sector under the Ministry and accordingly is not a part of the proposed transaction.

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.
Agencies
June 22,2020

Chennai, Jun 22: Commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment for five convicts, the Madras High Court on Monday set free Chinnasamy, the main convict, who had also been sentenced to death in the Udumalpet Shankar honour killing case.

A Division Bench comprising Justice M. Sathyanarayanan and Justice M. Nirmal Kumar also dismissed the appeal by the state police against the acquittal of three persons by a lower court.

The Bench ordered the five convicts sentenced for life to undergo a jail term of not less than 25 years.

In 2016, V. Shankar, who had married C. Kausalya, was killed by a gang in Udumalpet in Tamil Nadu. The gang also injured Kausalya in the attack.

It was alleged the parents of Kausalya -- Chinnasamy, Annalakshmi -- were against the marriage.

P. Pandidurai, the uncle of Kausalya at the behest of Chinnasamy and Annalakshmi had hired a gang to kill Shankar.

The gang killed Shankar in broad daylight in a public place and Kausalya too got injured in the attack as she tried to save her husband.

The Principal District and Sessions Court in Tiruppur had convicted and sentenced to death six accused persons -- Chinnasamy, P. Jagadeesan, P. Selvakumar, M. Manikandan, M. Mathan alias Michael and P. Kalaithamilvaanan.

The court also sentenced two other accused, K. Dhanraj for life and Manikandan to a five year jail term, while acquitting Annalakshmi, Pandidurai and Prasanna.

The convicts had filed an appeal against their sentence in the Madras High Court while the police filed an appeal against the acquittal of three persons.

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.
Agencies
June 27,2020

Mumbai, Jun 27: The Bombay High Court observed that COVID-19 patients from poor and indigent sections cannot be expected to produce documentary proof to avail subsidised or free treatment while getting admitted to hospitals.

The court on Friday was hearing a plea filed by seven residents of a slum rehabilitation building in Bandra, who had been charged ₹ 12.5 lakh by K J Somaiya Hospital for COVID-19 treatment between April 11 and April 28.

The bench of Justices Ramesh Dhanuka and Madhav Jamdar directed the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in the court.

The petitioners had borrowed money and managed to pay ₹10 lakh out of ₹12.5 lakh that the hospital had demanded, after threatening to halt their discharge if they failed to clear the bill, counsel Vivek Shukla informed the court.

According to the plea, the petitioners were also overcharged for PPE kits and unused services.

On June 13, the court had directed the state charity commissioner to probe if the hospital had reserved 20% beds for poor and indigent patients and provided free or subsidised treatment to them.

Last week, the joint charity commissioner had informed the court that although the hospital had reserved such beds, it had treated only three poor or indigent persons since the lockdown.

It was unfathomable that the hospital that claimed to have reserved 90 beds for poor and indigent patients had treated only three such persons during the pandemic, advocate Shukla said.

He further argued that COVID-19 patients, who are in distress, cannot be expected to produce income certificate and such documents as proof.

However, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, who represented the hospital, said the petitioners did not belong to economically weak or indigent categories and had not produced documents to prove the same.

A person who is suffering from a disease like COVID-19 cannot be expected to produce certificates from a tehsildar or social welfare officer before seeking admission in the hospital, the bench noted and asked the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in court within two weeks.

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.