Archives for July 2018

It is said that the national administration of BJP has sent clear guidelines to state leaders against attempting to shape the government in a rush, as it has cautioned about the likelihood of such an exertion bringing about the loss of face for the party and its leaders.

It is assembled that the high summons of the party has forewarned the leaders in Karnataka that there is plausibility of officials from different parties ganging up against BJP and drawing up a plan according to which they may dole out confirmations of bouncing over to the saffron party and pulling back the promises ultimately to humiliate BJP. Consequently, the BJP leaders here have been requested to be extremely cautious not to get captured off kilter.

The leaders have detected that the ruling party leaders may at first act like indicating enthusiasm for joining the BJP and afterward recording the discussions by utilizing modern technology in a bid to make the party face discomfiture. Along these lines, they have exhorted the local leaders to simply tune in to what the other party leaders need to state and after that hold interviews with senior leaders of the party before pushing forward.

The central leaders feel that it would be fitting for their party to avoid endeavors to destabilize the state government and wait for differences between the coalition partner to widen with a passage of time so that the government falls apart on its own.
As different parties have ganged up against BJP and are attempting to manufacture an alliance together at the national level, there are odds of them enjoying distinctive strategies to trap BJP leaders.

Union Minister Arun Jaitley on Friday attacked the Congress for amending the Constitution in 1951 to restrict Syama Prasad Mookerjee from advocating ‘Akhand Bharat’ whereas currently it finds calls for ‘tukde tukde’ a “legitimate free speech”.

“The first amendment to the Constitution in 1951 and the 16th amendment in 1963 imposed further conditions on the Right to Free Speech,” Jaitley said in a Facebook post on the 117th birth anniversary of Mookerjee, founder of Bharatiya Jan Sangh, the predecessor of BJP.

Jaitley said then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was against idea of ‘Akhand Bharat’ (Greater or Undivided India) as he thought it would lead to wars. With no scope to contain Mookerjee from advocating the casue, Nehru went ahead with the first amendment of the Constitution.

“The restriction (brought by the first amendment) is very broadly worded. It empowers the State to prohibit free speech if it adversely impacts ‘friendly relations with foreign states’. The State can even make the exercise of speech in this regard as a penal offence,” Jaitley said.

Mookerjee was one of the key advocates of a united India which he referred to as ‘Akhand Bharat’.

Two days before the “Nehru-Liaquat Pact” was to be signed in April 1950, Mookerjee, who was Industry Minister in the First Cabinet as a Hindu Mahasabha representative, resigned from the Cabinet in protest and took strong public position against the “Nehru-Liaquat Pact”, Jaitley noted.

“Nehru over-reacted to Mookerjee’s criticism. He interpreted the very idea of ‘Akhand Bharat’ as an invitation to conflict since the country could not be reunited other than by war,” the BJP leader said.

Mookerjee, on the contrary, claimed that Pakistan wanted a war and was already at war with India having captured part of its legitimate territory of Jammu and Kashmir and, therefore, to suggest that his speeches on ‘Akhand Bharat’ would lead to a war was not acceptable.

“The paradox in our jurisprudential evolution is that we have applied a different yardstick to those who want to dismember India and commit an offence of sedition. This debate recently came into forefront during the ‘tukde tukde’ agitation at the Jawaharlal Nehru University.”

Jaitley said a 1962 judgement of the Supreme Court in Kedarnath Singh’s case was repeatedly cited in which the court interpreted Article 124(A) of the IPC to mean that utterances would be punishable only if it intended to incite violence and a speech per se advocating disintegration would not be sedition unless the element of violence was apparent.

“In the past 70 years, this country has witnessed a change in the situation where Nehru amended the Constitution so that a demand for ‘Akhand Bharat’ could incite a war and therefore should be prohibited. On the contrary, we all were told that to advocate a breakup of the country without inciting violence is legitimate free speech,” Jaitley said.

In an alleged case of VIP hooliganism, two traffic policemen were at the receiving end of a local politician of leading political party. The video of the verbal duel between the politician and the traffic cop went viral on Thursday.

The incident allegedly took place near Bengaluru University on Wednesday noon. When Deccan Chronicle approached the cop on duty, he said on condition of anonymity, “I along with my ASI was on duty when two bike-borne men violating traffic zipped-past us. The duo wasn’t wearing helmet. As I ran to catch him, a car stopped next to me. The man sitting in the front seat of the car began shouting at us. He said, ‘Why are you running in the middle of the road and causing traffic jam? You people don’t know how to perform duty?”

He further said, “When I explained to him that we were trying to catching the violators, the man called us names.”

According to the video, the politician was heard allegedly saying, “Do you know who I am? You are a loafer. I will punch your face,” The politician was seen flashing his party’s card to browbeat the cop. When Deccan Chronicle tried contacting the local politician involved in the verbal-duel, there was no response.

The traffic police constable told this newspaper that he duly informed his higher-up in this regard. However, no complaint has been registered in this connection.