Expatriate worker from Bantwal dies in Muscat, mortal remains repatriated

Bengaluru, Jun 7: Suspense over JD(S) patriarch HD Deve Gowda contesting the Rajya Sabha polls from Karnataka with Congress' support continues as KPCC president D K Shivakumar on Saturday said the party has fielded one candidate and the high command will decide on what do with surplus votes.

Mr Shivakumar also said his official takeover as party state unit president is likely to take place on June 14.

"Whatever our national leadership will decide... For now we are fielding only one candidate, regarding surplus votes whatever our high command says, we will abide by it," he said in response to a question about supporting Deve Gowda.

Polls for four Rajya Sabha seats from Karnataka is scheduled for June 19.

The Congress, which can win one seat with its strength in the assembly, has fielded veteran party leader Mallikarjun Kharge as the candidate, while the BJP is yet to decide on candidates for two seats it can win.

The JD(S), which has 34 seats in the assembly, is not in a position to win a seat in Rajya Sabha on its own, and will need support from one of the national parties with their surplus votes for this.

Minimum 44 votes are required for candidates to win.

Speculation is rife that congress is likely to support JD(S) with its surplus votes if the regional party fields Mr Gowda, and in return may seek favour during legislative council polls slated later this month.

Though JD(S) legislators are of the unanimous opinion that Mr Gowda should contest Rajya Sabha polls, the 87-year-old leader is said to be undecided and weighing options.

If he contests and wins, this will be the second Rajya Sabha entry for him, the first time being in 1996 as Prime Minister.

June 9 is the last date for filing nominations.

Stating that on June 8, Mallikarjun Kharge will file his nomination for Rajya Sabha polls, DK Shivakumar requested party workers not to come to Congress office or Vidhana Soudha, where the nomination will be filed, because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Let your love and affection continue, but let's not create problems by gathering here. After the election is over, and once he (Kharge) wins, you can greet and congratulate him. Let's not bring a bad name to his seniority for not maintaining social distancing by gathering," he said.

Belagavi, Jul 23: As many as 14 persons have been arrested following last night’s violence at Belagavi Institute of Medical Sciences (BIMS) - District Hospital.

Angered over the death of a Covid-19 patient, family members had turned violent and damaged the BIMS with stones and set an ambulance on fire alleging medical negligence. 

The 55-year-old male had been admitted to the hospital for treatment on July 19, for treatment of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI) and was positive for Covid-19 according to the report received on Wednesday. He died on Wednesday night while being shifted to Intensive Care Unit for treatment of respiratory problems.

Police rushed to the spot and brought the situation under control. Two persons were detained in the spot and 12 persons later. The matter is under investigation and the police have launched a manhunt to nab the other accused.

During the violence, a police personnel and five other hospital staff suffered injuries.

Meanwhile, prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC were imposed in the areas surrounding the hospital to prevent crowd gathering. 

Deputy Commissioner M G Hiremath visited BIMS on Wednesday night and held a meeting with the doctors and nurses treating the patients and those who were at the receiving end of the violence.

Hiremath said that he instilled confidence among the doctors and nurses and assured them that safety measures would be taken. Security arrangements will be made and prohibitory orders will be imposed. Presently entry of people has been banned, he said.

Police Commissioner Dr K Thiyagarajan said that cases will be filed against all those responsible for the violence. People whose vehicles have been damaged can also file complaints.

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.