Priest booked under SC/ST Act for assaulting student, insulting his caste

New Delhi, Feb 12: Senior Karnataka BJP leader Umesh Katti, who has been left out of the latest cabinet expansion, on Wednesday met party president Jagat Prakash Nadda over the issue.

On Tuesday, Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa allotted portfolios to 10 newly inducted ministers. The leader was sulking after he was left out from the cabinet.

According to sources, Katti urged JP Nadda to consider his seniority in the party and give him a ministerial berth.

Earlier, Yeddyurappa had announced that Umesh Katti would be given a place in the state cabinet, but his name was dropped from the list of ministers at the last moment.

According to sources, Umesh Katti also urged Nadda for a Rajya Sabha berth for his brother Ramesh Katti.

Bengaluru, Feb 4: Congress leader and former minister U T Khader today demanded an “objective” probe by an IAS officer into the sedition case the police have booked against a school in Bidar for a play students staged on the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

On January 26, the Shaheen Primary and High School was charged by the Bidar New Town police with sedition on January 26. This was based on a complaint by an Akhila Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishat (ABVP) worker who claimed that the play staged by the students on January 21 “insulted” Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

On January 30, the police arrested Nazbunnisa, the mother of an 11-year-old student and Fareeda Begum, a head-teacher in the school.

“This shows how today in India and in Karnataka, the BJP is looking to suppress the voices of people. Sedition cases have no value anymore,” UT Khader told a news conference.

“When a complaint on sedition is filed, action must be taken after obtaining legal opinion. But today, a written complaint by any BJP worker is enough to brand someone as anti-national. Even schoolchildren aren’t spared,” Khader said.

“An IAS officer should be appointed to objectively probe this. If something is found, then the police can continue the investigation,” Khader said. “But the government should pressurize the police. We’ve seen what happened in Mangaluru,” he said, referring to the police shootout that killed two people during an anti-CAA protest. “I know it’s difficult for officials to resist political pressure, but a line must be drawn. All officials must come together and send the government a message, that they will not be bogged down to pressure that’s against societal interests,” he added.

Khader said he lacked faith in the BJP government. “That’s because the BJP tends to give election tickets to those who plant bombs,” Khader said, citing the example of terror-accused Bhopal MP Pragya Thakur. “Even the Aditya Rao case (Mangaluru airport bomb planter)...we don’t know what’s happening. They just want to hush it up,” Khader charged.

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.