Prof A M Khan is new Registrar (Administration) of Mangalore University

Bengaluru, Feb 21: Historian Ramachandra Guha on Thursday refuted Karnataka home minister Basavaraj Bommai's claim that the latter had apologised for police allegedly manhandling him during an anti-CAA protest in the city, saying he received no such call or apology.

The writer further said even if such an apology had been offered, he would have rejected it.

"The Home Minister of Karnataka has claimed on the floor of the State Assembly that he apologised to me by phone for the manhandling by the Bengaluru police on 19th December 2019. This is false.

I received no such call or apology," Guha tweeted.

"Even if such an apology had been offered, I would have rejected it.

The imposition of Section 144 was illegal (as the Karnataka High Court has since held) and I was proud to be one of thousands of peaceful protesters who defied the States arbitrary action on that day," he said in another tweet.

During his reply to the debate on law and order situation in the state, Bommai on Wednesday claimed that he had apologised to Guha.

The minister was apologising to senior Congress MLA and former Speaker K R Ramesh Kumar for police serving him notice and detaining him along with others at Mangaluru airport in December for trying to enter the city despite restrictions following violence there.

Stating that anti-CAA protests have taken place peacefully across the state, he had said, there might have been minor discrepancies, like that with historian Ramachandra Guha, being manhandled during a protest.

"I have called and apologised to him," he had said.

Guha was detained on December 19 for staging a demonstration against the Citizenship Amendment Act and National Register of Citizens at the Town Hall here, in defiance of the prohibitory orders imposed in the city.

He was taken away by police personnel and led to a police vehicle parked nearby.

Leader of Opposition in the assembly and former chief minister Siddaramaiah said Bommai has committed a "perjury" in the House, and asked him to apologise to people and Guha in front of media.

"Bommai has committed a perjury on the floor of the House. It answers the question of where @BJP4India workers derive their motivation to spread fake news.

Bommai has insulted the people whom he represents," he tweeted and demanded that he apologize to people and Guha.

Mangaluru, Apr 13: Struck by the boredom of lockdown imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus, a 17-year old was caught on Sunday trying to sneak his friend out of his apartment complex by stuffing him inside a suitcase, police said.

"A minor, aged 17-years-old, a resident of Orchid Apartment, Balmatta invited his friend, a resident of Motisham Apartment, Pandeshwar to stay with him on April 11, Saturday," said PS Harsha, the Commissioner of Police, Mangaluru.

The friend wanted to return back to his apartment in Pandeshwar the next day but due to strict security put in place, he got inside a large trolley suitcase. Security guards at the apartment, however, got suspicious when they noticed the wobbling of the suitcase that was being wheeled to the gate.

Based on the suspicions, security personnel alerted the residents of the building and opened the suitcase from which they were shocked to find the boy's friend stepping out. Police were later called in.

A case has been registered against the two minors at the East Police station, police said adding that the duo will be produced before the Juvenile Justice Board.

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.