Shah Rukh Khan's car damaged by VHP miscreants in Gujarat

February 15, 2016

Ahmedabad, Feb 15: Shouting slogans against actor Shah Rukh Khan, members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad or VHP threw stones at a parking lot of a luxury hotel in Ahmedabad early on Sunday damaging his car.

srk

The attack was reportedly against the shooting of his upcoming film "Raees" in Gujarat over his earlier remarks on "intolerance".

The film's crew members are staying in the hotel but the 50-year-old actor was not there at the time of the incident as he arrived in Ahmedabad only this afternoon.

After an FIR for rioting and damaging property was filed in this regard in the evening, at least seven persons, claimed to be associated with the VHP, were detained, police said.

According to Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) BU Jadeja, eight to 10 people threw stones in the open parking lot of Hyatt Regency Hotel on Ashram Road, where Mr Khan's vehicle was parked, this morning and fled from the spot.

"As per the complaint lodged by the Security Officer of the hotel, eight to 10 persons came on bikes and threw stones on cars parked in the open parking lot early this morning. Due to the stone pelting, windscreen of Shah Rukh Khan's car got damaged," said Mr Jadeja.

"We have learnt that Shah Rukh Khan was not there in the hotel when incident took place. Some of his crew members, who have come here for shooting, were staying in the hotel. Shah Rukh landed in the city this afternoon for the shoot," he added. The shooting is taking place in Bhuj.

Meanwhile, a video showing unidentified persons throwing stones inside the hotel also surfaced on social media sites. In the video, they can be seen shouting slogans against Mr Khan and fleeing on bikes after throwing stones.

Gujarat unit of VHP claimed responsibility for the incident. The outfit's State spokesperson Raju Patel said the detained persons are associated with VHP and threw stones on Mr Khan's car as part of their ongoing protests against the actor.

Around 20-30 VHP activists had last week handed over a memorandum to Bhuj district officers and demanded withdrawal of the permission given for the shooting of the film. They protested outside the district Collector's office pressing for the same demand and shouted slogans against the actor and also burnt and tore his posters.

In November last year, Mr Khan sparked a debate when he said during an interview that there was "growing intolerance" in India.

However, the actor later statements just a few days later, claiming his comments had been misconstrued.

Comments

optimistic
 - 
Tuesday, 16 Feb 2016

i recognised majority of hindus living in gulf countries are very polite with pakistanis and keep good relation with them . But in india they act like very patriotic.

Jaber
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

RAKESH YOU WANT JOB FROM MUSLIM COUNTRY AND LOYALTY TO CHADDIS SHAME ON YOU BAJARANGI.

Sherief
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

Sangparivar's leader Nathuram Godse was shown his excellent tolerance to the world by assasinating non-violent Mahatma Ghandi at evening prayer closely shot three bullets to his chest.

Rakesh
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

good lesson , we support this act of VHP ... they want benefits from our country but loyalty to pakistan ... shame on u SRK

Miserable
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

Barking dog never bite. dont attack SRK you will face soon....

Nishaan
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

Still we claim tolerant country. lol

A. Mangalore
 - 
Monday, 15 Feb 2016

Thank God , This is Gujrath RSS baba Sharukh. They are expert in killing children, women and old aged people. They are mass murderers headed by their Na... . Tum log bachgaye... jaldi waapas Bombay jaawo... Gujarat is not India it is Taliban in Afghanistan re baba.

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 4,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 4: A 33-year old woman techie allegedly stabbed her mother to death and made a murderous assault on her younger brother before fleeing their home here, police said on Tuesday.

According to police, the woman fatally stabbed her mother using a knife and attacked the brother early on Monday.

The injured brother has been hospitalised here.

A search was on for the techie and the motive for her action under investigation, police said.

The woman, employed as a software engineer with a company here, earlier had told her mother and 30-year old brother that she has been transferred to Hyderabad and she may have to relocate.

The brother told police that in the early morning on Monday he saw his sister searching something desperately and offered to assist, which she refused.

However, minutes later she made a murderous assault on him, he told police, adding when he screamed for help and called his mother, his sister said she has killed their mother.

She stabbed him and attacked with an iron rod before fleeing, her brother told police.

The body of the mother was found in another room in the house.

"We are still investigating the matter. We are not clear about the motive behind the murder," a police officer told media adding the woman was yet to be arrested.

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
July 23,2020

Bengaluru, July 23: The High Court of Karnataka has directed the state government to formulate Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for child protection, particularly for cases of child pornography and child missing.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice M Nagaprasanna passed a detailed order and asked the state government to submit compliance within three months.

The division bench passed the order on two PILs, including a suo motu litigation registered in 2018. The PILs were registered to ensure effective implementation of the directions of the Supreme Court on the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act).

The bench observed that in normal courses, courts do not issue writ of mandamus to the legislature on rule-making aspects. However, when the failure of the state is demonstrated under exceptional circumstances, courts can issue directions. The bench directed the state government to expedite the rule-making process to ensure proper implementation of the JJ Act.

The bench expressed displeasure on the insensitive police investigation in cases of child pornography. “The police machinery did not show the sensitivity expected from it while dealing with cases of alleged child pornography. Therefore, it will be appropriate if the state issues SOP or guidelines for dealing with cases of child pornography so that proper investigation is carried out in such cases. As we are directing the formation of SOP for dealing with child pornography cases, the state is also directed to formulate guidelines on child missing cases,” the bench said.

The bench had been issuing several directions since 2018 and has also been monitoring police investigations. The court observed that while the state government has incorporated several directions, some issues still remain unaddressed.

The bench directed the government to have dedicated staff for the Directorate of Integrated Child Protection Scheme considering the sensitive nature of work.

On working of Juvenile Justice Boards (JJB), the court asked the Registrar General of the Karnataka High Court to issue directions to the principal magistrates of all the JJBs in the state to sit on all working days for a minimum of six hours a day. 

The high court directed the state to exercise the rule-making powers for obtaining an annual report from the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.

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.
Ram Puniyani
January 22,2020

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.

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.