Saffron groups’ protest turns violent in Kumta; IGP’s car set on fire

Bengaluru, Jan 14: Assuring depositors that their money was "100 per cent safe" with the bank, Sri Guru Raghavendra Sahakara Bank Chairman K Ramakrishna in Bengaluru on Monday said 62 loans had locked up Rs 300 crore of deposit.

"Your money is 100 per cent safe with Sri Guru Raghavendra Sahakara Bank. It's my responsibility," Ramakrishna said at Sri Guru Narasimha Kalyanamandira auditorium, to assure depositors.

He was addressing angry customers of the bank at a public hearing. Due to the 62 dud loans, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had restricted the lender from executing business, Ramakrishna said amid shouting by depositors. The RBI has limited withdrawals by depositors to Rs 35,000.

"The bank is saying I can't withdraw more than Rs 35,000. In case of our fixed deposit maturing, we will have to renew it as we can't encash it, " said Nagaraj M, 49, who has been dealing with the bank for the past six years.

To assuage customers, the call to an assistant commissioner of police by Bengaluru South MP Tejaswi Surya -- not present -- was relayed on loudspeaker live and the MP claimed that he had spoken to Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman to help the customers.

Ramakrishna said he would meet customers again on January 19 with all the details and numbers. Dramatic scenes and pandemonium ruled the auditorium before his arrival. Thousands of bank customers threatened to go en masse to the police station and file a case against Ramakrishna.

As he addressed the gathering in Kannada, hundreds of depositors shouted back at him seeking clarifications. At the auditorium, thousands of depositors earlier demanded the bank chairman's presence to clarify the matter.

The lender had invited depositors to the auditorium at 6 p.m. to update them on the bank's status, following a RBI directive restricting the bank from doing business with immediate effect.

"We want the bank's directors here," shouted a depositor from the stage. A handful of policemen were trying to control the crowd and bring order to the assembly. Many elderly and retired persons had arrived to know the fate of their savings. Several women were also present at the meeting.

"It was a good bank with only 0.5 per cent NPAs. Now we can't trust any bank. See what happened with the PMC Bank," said another customer.

Shankar Sharma, 38, an employee of a private company, said majority of depositors were senior citizens and retirees. "I don't have an account with the bank, but my mother, uncle, aunt have deposited money in it. I came for them, " said Sharma. He said many of the bank's 35,000 clientele deposited more than Rs 5 lakh, which had total deposits of Rs 1,600 crore. The bank started operations in 1999.

Ramakrishna was escorted away to safety by the police after his speech even as the depositors were screaming and agitating for justice.

Bengaluru, May 5: The movement of migrant labourers from Karnataka to other states has stopped temporarily, as few North Indian states are yet to give consent.

Revenue Minister R Ashok said that the state government will convince labourers to stay back and ensure free food supply at their camps. "Even if we allow them to travel, they will be quarantined for 14 days as soon as they reach their native states.

The labourers don't know about this and some states have not yet given permission for their return," Revenue Minister R Ashok said.

According to sources in CMO, the decision to convince the workers to stay back came after several major projects - both government and private - were affected by the mass migration of labourers to their native districts and states.

Ashok, along with S Suresh Kumar, Primary and Secondary Education minister and head of the group of ministers focusing on migrant workers, also visited labourers who had gathered demanding that they be allowed to return.

Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa will chair a meeting tomorrow and instruct builders under CREDAI to pay pending wages of labourers, provide food supply and ensure their safety, Ashok said, adding that all construction work by BBMP will also be taken up to help the labourers.

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.