Yogi campaigns in Udupi, UK; says Siddaramaiah joined hands with Jihadists to kill Hindus

Jan 14: A police complaint was lodged on Tuesday against BJP West Bengal unit president Dilip Ghosh for his threat to "beat up" and "shoot' " anti-CAA protesters, whom he called "infiltrators".

The complaint was registered in Ranaghat police station of Nadia district by a Trinamool Congress worker Krishnendu Banerjee, who alleged that Ghosh was inciting communal passion.

Addressing a party rally on Sunday in Ranathat, about 80 km from Kolkata, Ghosh went ballistic, saying the governments in BJP-ruled Assam, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh have shot dead "like dogs" those protesting against the new Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

Alleging there were one crore infiltrators in the state, Ghosh had accused them of destroying public property worth Rs 500-600 crore during the violent protests against the CAA last month

"Friends, please know these people who are opposing Hindus and Bengalis. In whose interest are they doing this? There are one crore infiltrators. They are having their meals and staying here on our money".

He accused the state's Mamata Banerjee government of remaining silent a spectator to the violence.

"This (violence) happened because there was neither any baton charge, nor firing, nor was any FIR filed. Why? Didi's police did not arrest anybody... because they vote for her".

He then referred to the three states ruled by the BJP.

"In Assam, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh, our governments have shot dead these devils like dogs. They were taken elsewhere and then again cases were filed against them. They will come here, eat, stay, and then destroy property. Do they think this is their zamindari?"

He had said once a BJP government was installed in Bengal, "We will hit them with sticks, shoot them and also send them to jail. Our governments have done exactly that. Mamata Banerjee doesn't have the guts to do anything".

However, his incendiary comments did not meet the approval of sections in the party.

Union Minister Babul Supriyo came out with a tweet slamming Ghosh and distancing the BJP from the comments.

"Very irresponsible of Dilip Da to have said what he said. It is a figment of his imagination... BJP governments in UP and Assam have never resorted to shooting people for whatever reason," he tweeted.

Supriyo's tweet was retweeted by nominated Rajya Sabha member Swapan Dasgupta, considered close to both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah.

But Ghosh did not budge and aggressively asked whether the party was being run by Shah or Supriyo.

"People comment according to their understanding. What I feel is that our governments have done it, and so I said all that. If we get a chance we will also do such things," he said, sticking to his earlier comments.

Supriyo also hit back. "Just as he has remarked 'whatever Babul Supriyo has understood he has said', similarly I am saying this is Dilip da's personal opinion, and it has no connection with the party".

Kanpur, Jan 1: In a seemingly bizarre development, the IIT in Kanpur has set up a panel to decide whether the poem "Hum dekhenge lazim hai ki hum bhi dekhenge", penned by Faiz Ahmad Faiz, is anti-Hindu.

The panel has been set up in response to complaints filed by a faculty member who claimed that the students, during a protest, sang this poem which was anti-Hindu.

The poem reads thus -- "Lazim hai ke hum bhi dekhenge. Jab arz-e-Khuda ke kaabe se. Sab bhut uthwaye jayenge, Hum ahl-e-safa mardood-e-harm. Masnad pe bithaye jayenge. Sab taaj uchale jaenge. Sab takht giraye jayenge. Bas naam rahega Allah ka. Hum dekhenge."

It was the last line that has turned into a bone of contention. Translated into English, it means, 'When thrones will vanish, only Allah's name will remain' -- implying the misleading translation by the professor.

The poem had been written by Faiz in reference to military dictator Zia-ul-Haq in 1979 and was against the military rule in Pakistan. Faiz had left leanings and was an atheist. He was known for his revolutionary writings that kept him in jail for several years.

It may be recalled that the IIT-Kanpur students had taken out a peaceful march on the campus on December 17 in support of the students of Jamia Millia Islamia and during the march, the students sang the Faiz poem.

According to IIT Deputy director Manindra Agarwal: "In the video, the students are seen reciting the Faiz poem which can also be perceived as being anti-Hindu.

The IIT faculty member, in his complaint, has alleged that the students made anti-India and communal statements during their demonstration in solidarity with the Jamia students.

The complaint was based on two lines of the poem, which have obviously been misinterpreted -- "When all idols will be removed, only Allah's name will remain."

The faculty member has stated that "organisers and masterminds must be identified and expelled immediately."

Fifteen other students have also signed the complaint filed by the professor against the protesting students.

Meanwhile, IIT students have said that the faculty member who lodged the complaint has been banned on a social networking site for posting communal content.

In an article published on the IIT-Kanpur student media portal, the students clarified what exactly happened on the day of protest and how their chant was given a 'communal and misleading' turn. They stated that they had recited a few lines of the Faiz poem in reference to the police crackdown on the Jamia students.

Mysuru/Chamarajanagara, Apr 3: In order to prevent the transmission of Novel Coronavirus though overcrowding, the central jails in Mysuru and Chamarajanagar have begun releasing some of their inmates.

As many as 55 undertrials and convicts were released from Mysuru jail since the last two days, while 18 were released from the prison in Chamarajanagar. The jail inmates had been released on interim bail, for a period of two months.

While the undertrials were facing charges that involved a maximum prison term of seven years, the convicts were facing criminal miscellaneous cases of the family court. Most of the convicts released were prisoners who had not paid the maintenance costs ordered by the family courts in divorce cases.