Shiv Sena calls for ban on burqa across India

Agencies
May 1, 2019

Mumbai, May 1: Citing a ban on the burqa in Sri Lanka after the deadly Easter Sunday attacks, Shiv Sena mouthpiece 'Saamna' on Wednesday demanded the imposition of a similar ban in India.

The Sena's proposal, however, was rejected by another NDA ally, Union Minister Ramdas Athawale of the Republican Party of India, who said that burqa should not be banned as it forms part of the country's tradition.

The Shiv Sena editorial states "It has happened in Ravan's Lanka. When will it happen in Ram's Ayodhya? We ask this question to the PM as he is scheduled to visit Ayodhya on Wednesday".

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to address a political rally near Ayodhya today.

"The present government has made a law against Triple Talaq to stop the exploitation of Muslim women. After the ghastly bomb attacks, Sri Lanka has imposed a ban on the burqa and all types of face covers. President Maithripala Sirisena also announced that the decision has been taken for national security," Saamna said in a write-up published on Wednesday.

"We welcome this decision and in the national interest, we demand Prime Minister Modi to also follow the footsteps of Sri Lankan President and ban burqa and face covers in India as well," the Shiv Sena mouthpiece said.

In an editorial titled "Question to Prime Minister Modi, it happened in Ravan's Lanka, when will it happen in Ram's Ayodhya?", Samna has also cited the death count of Colombo's Easter Sunday attack to assert that the country which freed from itself of LTTE's terrorism is now under the grip of Islamic terrorism.

Sanjay Raut, Shiv Sena leader said, " Burqa and niqab are not religious attires for India, they are being banned all over the world. If some people relate it to religion and Islam in India then they must not have read the Quran, they should read it properly."

RPI leader Ramdas Athwale, however, disagreed with the Sena's proposal to ban the burqa in public places and said it is a tradition in India and there should be no ban on it.

"Not all women who wear the burqa are terrorists if they are terrorists their burqa should be removed. It is a tradition and they have the right to wear it, there shouldn't be a ban on the burqa in India," Athwale told ANI.

Meanwhile, BJP's national spokesperson GVL Narasimha Rao said there was no need for imposition of any kind of ban in the country.

"We have zero tolerance towards terrorism but I don't think there is a need to impose any kind of ban as the country is already in safe hands of Prime Minister Modi. Everyone is free to make suggestions but the whole world knows that the Central government has effectively dealt with terrorism and I don't think any new steps are required for this."

In its editorial, the Shiv Sena mouthpiece has pointed to countries namely France, New Zealand, Australia and Britain who have put a ban on the burqa.

Shiv Sena also claimed that the practice of burqa has nothing to do with Islam and is actually, a practice that was adopted in the Arabian countries due to their climatic condition.

"Basically, the burqa is not at all concerned with Islam, and Indian Muslims are following an arrangement of the Arab nation. At one time, to avoid desert heat and sunlight in the Arab nation, women used to cover their face and get out of the house.

"In Maharashtra also when the temperature rises at many places, the women travelling through cycle and scooters cover their face with a cloth or handkerchief, but this usage is limited to that. But in this delusion or blind faith, that wearing a face cover or burqa is the order of Koran, Muslims continue to use it," an excerpt of the Samna editorial reads.

The Sri Lankan government on Sunday adopted measures to impose a complete ban on all types of burqas and face covers in the wake of the horrific terror bombings that rattled the entire country on Easter Sunday, claiming lives of more than 250 people and injuring hundreds.

Comments

Peacelover
 - 
Wednesday, 1 May 2019

The fellow talks like - a fellow belongs to  different father and  mmissusing his tonge by point Ram Land.

And shows bad image on  Hindu Ahimsa policy.  Better to pack him to Taliban land. Burka is the not used cover from climate Burlka is used to cover and keep safe the woman from these type of Unhuman creatures.

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
January 19,2020

New Delhi, Jan 19: Reacting to a tweet by ace lawyer Indira Jaising urging her to forgive the four men on death row for brutally raping that finally took her life, Nirbhaya's mother said on Saturday: "Even if God asks me, I won't forgive them."

Speaking to news agency, over the phone, the mother who had been fighting for seven long years to send her daughter's killers to the gallows, said, "...even if god comes and asks me to forgive them, I will not. People like these (Jaising) are a blot on the society."

Commenting on Jaising's tweet, she said: "Who is she to tell or suggest to me to forgive them. What relation does she have with me. I have nothing to do with such people. She can be a relative of those (the convicts) that she is having a soft corner for."

"She is an insult to women. She is running a business in the name of human rights. She is a veteran, she should give a message to the society. But she instead will go against her own kind," she added.

Earlier in the day, Jaising had requested Nirbhaya's mother to follow the example of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, who had moved for the clemency of a woman, Nalini Murugan convicted for the assassination of her husband and former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

"While I fully identify with the pain of Nirbhaya's mother I urge her to follow the example of Sonia Gandhi who forgave Nalini and said she didn't want the death penalty for her. We are with you but against death penalty," Jaising tweeted on Friday.

A Delhi Court on Friday issued fresh death warrants against the four convicts -- Akshay, Pawan, Mukesh and Vinay in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Satish Kumar Arora fixed 1 February as the date of execution of the four death row convicts. They will be hanged at 6am.

The move came after the prosecution moved an application seeking issuance of fresh death warrants following the rejection of the mercy plea of one of the convicts Mukesh by President Ram Nath Kovind.

The 23-year-old victim was brutally gang-raped and tortured on December 16, 2012, which later led to her death.

All the six accused were arrested and charged with sexual assault and murder. One of the accused was a minor and appeared before a juvenile justice court, while another accused committed suicide in Tihar Jail.

Four of the convicts were sentenced to death by a trial court in September 2013, and the verdict was confirmed by the Delhi High Court in March 2014 and upheld by the Supreme Court in May 2017, which also dismissed their review petitions.

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
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jun 4: India on Thursday witnessed a record single-day spike of 9,304 coronavirus cases taking the country's tally to 2,16,919, according to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

The ministry informed that 260 more deaths due to coronavirus were reported in the last 24 hours.

The total number of cases in the country now stands at 2,16,919 including 1,06,737 active cases, 1,04,107 cured/discharged/migrated and 6,075 deaths.

Maharashtra has so far reported 74,860 cases, more than any other state in the country.

In Tamil Nadu, 25,872 cases have been detected so far while Delhi has reported 23,645 coronavirus cases.

According to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), 1,39,485 samples were tested in the last 24 hours whereas 42,42,718 samples have been tested till date.

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
March 3,2020

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

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.