Before taking the extreme measure he had put out a video message to his friends that he had decided to end his life.
Chennai: A 19-year-old medical aspirant allegedly died by suicide in his house in Choolaimedu here on Thursday, June 30 as he was ‘depressed’ over being unable to choose the right path in education.
The student, who wanted to become a doctor, hung himself when he was alone at home, police said. Before taking the extreme measure he had put out a video message to his friends that he had decided to end his life, they said.
“No one is responsible for my death. I wanted to become a doctor… became depressed as I could not choose the right path in education,” he said in the video.
His mother, a housemaid, returned home only to find her son hanging. He was immediately rushed to Kilpauk Medical College Hospital where the doctors declared him as brought dead.
A case was registered and investigation is on, they added.
(PTI)
If you know someone – friend or family member – at risk of suicide, please reach out to them. The Suicide Prevention India Foundation maintains a list of telephone numbers they can call to speak in confidence. Icall, a counselling service run by TISS, has maintained a crowdsourced list of therapists across the country. You could also take them to the nearest hospital.
The bench also slammed the TV channel for hosting a debate on the Gyanvapi mosque in the first place.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday castigated suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma for her “disturbing” remark against Prophet Mohammad, saying it has led to unfortunate incidents in the country
The court said the remark was made either for cheap publicity, political agenda or some nefarious activities.
“The way she has ignited emotions across the country. This lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country. We saw the debate on how she was incited. But the way she said all this and later says she was a lawyer, it is shameful. She should apologise to the whole country,”Justice Kant said, according to Bar and Bench.
“She actually has a loose tongue and has made all kinds of irresponsible statements on TV and set the entire country on fire. Yet, she claims to be a lawyer of 10 years standing… She should have immediately apologised for her comments to the whole country.”
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Sharma, said she had indeed apologised for her remarks and there are several judgments that say there cannot be two FIRs for the same incident.
The bench said “her apology came too late and that too conditionally saying if religious sentiments are hurt and so on. She should have been on TV immediately and apologised to the nation”.
The court said her petition smacks of arrogance and that she thinks that the magistrate of the country is too small for her.
“When an FIR is registered and you are not arrested, this shows your clout. She thinks she thinks she has the power to back up and goes on to make irresponsible statements,” the bench said.
Singh said Sharma was a spokesperson of a political party and her unintentional comments were in relation to a debate.
“If you are a spokesperson of a party, it is not a license to say things like this,” the bench said, adding, “if there was a misuse of the debate, the first thing she should have done was to file an FIR against the anchor”.
Singh said she had reacted to the debate initiated by other debators and pointed to the transcript of the debate. He said that there were serious debates on the issue within the same community and Sharma’s remarks were made in that context only.
The bench said, “what was the TV debate for? Was it to fan an agenda and why did they choose a sub-judice topic? What is the business of the TV channel to discuss the matter which is sub-judice, except to promote an agenda?
Referring to various apex court verdicts, Singh said there cannot be a second FIR on the same cause of action.
Justice Kant said she has remedy before the high court and can very well approach it, if there is a second FIR.
Singh then referred to the Arnab Goswami case of 2020 and TT Antony case of 2001, and said the law has been laid down by the apex court that multiple FIR on the same configuration can be clubbed and there can be no second FIR on the same cause.
The bench said, “the case of a journalist expressing his right on a particular issue is on a different pedestal from a spokesperson of a political party who is lambasting others with irresponsible statements without thinking of the consequences”.
Justice Kant said, “Yes. In a democracy everyone has the right to speak. In a democracy grass has the right to grow and donkeys have the right to eat”.
Singh said she has joined the investigation being conducted by the Delhi Police and not running away and multiple FIRs are lodged against her in Mumbai, Hyderabad, Nagpur to Jammu and Kashmir for the same cause of action.
Sharma’s remark against the Prophet during a TV debate triggered protests across the country and drew sharp reactions from many Gulf countries. The BJP subsequently suspended her from the party.
While refusing to entertain Sharma’s plea for clubbing of FIRs lodged in various states against her for the remark, the bench allowed her to withdraw the plea.
“She has a threat or she has become a security threat? The way she has ignited emotions across the country this lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country,” the bench said when Sharma’s lawyer Maninder Singh pointed out that she was facing threats to life.
The bench also slammed the TV channel for hosting a debate of this kind in the first place. The debate was on the Gyanvapi mosque, a matter which is currently being heard by the courts. “What was the TV debate for? Only to fan an agenda? Why did they choose a sub judice topic,” the judges asked.
The court also criticised the Delhi Police for not taking substantive action in the FIR against Sharma. Sharma’s counsel said she has joined the probe in the case. “Then what happened There must have been red carpet for you. A red carpet!” the bench responded.
After being told that the Supreme Court would not be entertaining her plea on clubbing FIRs, Sharma agreed to withdraw it.
Opposition hails Supreme Court remarks
After the court’s unsparing criticism of Sharma, the Congress said the Supreme Court has rightly called out Sharma for being responsible for igniting emotions across the country with her remark against the Prophet, and that the ruling party should hang its head in shame.
In a statement, Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh said the court has made crucial and far-reaching observations and strengthened the party’s resolve to fight “destructively divisive ideologies”.
“These remarks by the Supreme Court, which resonate with the entire country, should make the party in power hang its head in shame,” he added.
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi demanded the immediate arrest of Sharma and said rule of law should prevail.
The Left parties also hit out at the government over the Supreme Court’s observations.
“We hope that beyond words, if according to the Supreme Court, Ms. Sharma is responsible for starting the hate spiral & most recent reprehensible cycle of violence, she will be proceeded upon as per law…,” CPI general secretary Sitaram Yechury said in a tweet.
“But if the law does not act against her and others like her promoted by the party, who sow discord, separatism and damage India, the wrong message would go out. We would find many more like her mushrooming from the RSS/BJP’s hate factory and on vitriolic TV debates,” he said.
CPI MP Binoy Viswam tweeted, “Red carpet for Nupur Sarma, prison cells for Teesta and Sreekumar! Comments from Supreme Court should alert Modi Govt. Irresponsibility, driven by bigotry shouldn’t be the hallmark of any spokesperson. Such elements caused Udaipur incident. They should apologise to People & Nation.”
Meanwhile, a letter petition was filed before Chief Justice N V Ramana seeking withdrawal of adverse remarks made by a Supreme Court bench against Sharma.
The letter petition said that it be treated as a PIL and the adverse remarks made during the hearing be declared as “uncalled for”.
(With PTI inputs)
Note: This copy, which was first published at 12:20 pm on July 1, was updated with additional details on the same day at 10:10 pm.
Educated young people, who believe government recruitment is the only way they can find a stable job, have been protesting on the streets.
Leh: Three years into acquiring the status of a union territory (UT) after being bifurcated from the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir and two years after the Galwan Valley clash, Ladakh is facing a crisis that is spilling on to the streets as several organisations dissent against the UT administration.
Stanzin Gurmat, a 29-year-old commerce graduate, hasn’t been able to find a stable job for five years now. He has been surviving off the money he earns from odd jobs that he is forced to do for a living. Gurmat is also patiently preparing for Staff Selection Commission (SSC) exams which have been tentatively scheduled for the month of August.
Local students say that even these government recruitment exams have their roots in the J&K Public Service Commission (PSC). The exams which are to be held in August are the fruit of three years of relentless agitations during which the unemployed from across Ladakh reached Leh to register their protest.
Lacking a PSC for Ladakh, locals cite the example of the bifurcation of Punjab and Haryana in 1966, where both states held on to a joint PSC until they set up their independent commissions.
Expectations after bifurcation
On August 5, 2019 when the BJP government arbitrarily severed Jammu and Kashmir from Ladakh, the cold desert region had mixed reactions. While Leh had supported the idea as they had felt neglected by Kashmiri politicians over the years, Kargil has observed a “Black Day” every August 5 since 2019, to express dissent against the alleged theft of their rights and guarantees.
The reading down ofArticle 370, the constitutional provision that enacted India’s promise to J&K, was celebrated by many in Leh. Irrespective of their alliance with the BJP, locals in Leh were ecstatic about the legalisation of a separate identity. But three years later, Ladakhis have found themselves without a legislature and without powers over laws affecting their livelihoods and community rights – and their expectations from the bifurcation have turned into disappointment.
The Wire met Rinchen Dolkar, state president, BJP Mahila Morcha in Leh, who left the Congress to join the BJP post the bifurcation. Dolkar says, “I myself found that BJP had given to Ladakh what Congress couldn’t, BJP gave us the UT status.”
Dolkar appears convinced and confident that the BJP is going to develop Ladakh, even as students like Gurmat are uncertain about the tentative nature of exam dates that the administration has been declaring.
On being asked about rising unemployment in a region like Ladakh which houses merely three lakh people and sits on the edge of conflict, she remarked that Ladakhis have ‘too many’ expectations now that they have the UT status and they should understand that rebuilding institutions from scratch takes time.
Exams and excuses
In Leh, locals have revamped the All Ladakh Unemployment Youth Association (ALUYA), an association for concerns of the youth, that had been dormant for decades. “This is our situation, we are creating unemployment associations,” says Tundup Thinlas, president, ALUYA. “In the name of progress, we received hollow promises from the administration.”
In September, October and December 2021, student groups across Ladakh organised protests in Leh to sound an alarm to the dormant UT administration. “When the bifurcation was announced, there were advertisements by JKPSC for posts, but after the separation, no exams were held. It was only our protests that moved the UT administration here to conducts exam for the 55 panchayat accountant posts,” Thinlas explains.
Students also explain that they have been alerting the administration about various gaps in examination rules – for instance, they say, subordinate posts didn’t have break ups such as UT cadre, divisional cadre and district cadre. Students also says that there has been no new job creation undertaken by the UT administration for three years now. All their efforts right now are aimed at the conduction of those exams which were scheduled before the bifurcation and towards pushing the government to look at Ladakh in terms of rising unemployment.
ALUYA claims that at least 4,500-5,000 locals have registered with them as unemployed, in a region that has a population of 3,00,000.
A majority of Ladakh’s population is either dependent on government jobs or seasonal tourism. Photo: Tarushi Aswani
In Kargil, Ali Murtaza, president, Students Educational Movement of Kargil (SEMOK), has been occupied with obstacles that surround students across Ladakh. Murtaza has also been in touch with students who have now become frustrated with waiting for the UT administration to wake up. “Here, the terrain is difficult and prohibits private industries, so the population greatly depends on government jobs. But for three years we’ve been left hanging.”
“Even for the SSC exams for 797 posts, they were to be held along with other states in July, but as of now we have a tentative date scheduled in August. The recruitment rules for the exams were also not in the favour of many students; for that as well, we had to beg the admin,” laments Murtaza.
Students allied with ALUYA as well as SEMOK said they met the lieutenant governor of Ladakh, R.K. Mathur, who has promised them speedy action and job opportunities. However, they are yet to see the impact of his words.
Another student, Pema Phuntsok, 24, had always dreamt of becoming an interior designer. Three years ago, when Ladakh became a UT, she thought the decision would fast-rack her dream as development would knock on the region’s door at last. Phuntsok, now employed as a cashier at a grocery store, sees her dreams dying every day.
“Our MP Namgyal had the time to write to HM Amit Shah to get Urdu removed as mandatory requirement for Revenue Department jobs, but he has no time to talk to disgruntled youth about job creation, opening colleges for professional courses?” asks Phuntsok.
Unemployment amid conflict
The rugged terrain of Ladakh is not only important to India for its own territorial integrity but also for transporting Indian forces to the Line of Control (LOC) with Pakistan. This area is significant to maintain the larger geopolitical equilibrium of power in southern Asia, and unemployment in a conflict region can be a hazard when the population dissents.
In this atmosphere of conflict and a rising number of disgruntled youth, Stanzin Dolkar, president, Territorial Mahila Congress Committee, says it’s a reality that no new recruitment opportunities have been created by the UT admin. “Even for the dismal number of recruitments that we’ve had, they been outsourced to agencies to conduct, who hire our students for a paygrade lesser than the standard.”
Dolkar also adds that the present situation shows that there is a glaring lack of policy and institutions post the bifurcation, which is heightening concerns of unemployment. The Congress leader also details how students are facing the issue of exceeding the age limit for certain exams: “There are students who have aged over the limit waiting for the UT’s policies. While they have given a two years relaxation now, even for those 797 posts, thousands are going to be applying.”
While Dolkar points to policies, Smanla Dorje Nurboo, territorial president, Indian Youth Congress feels that lack of public representatives at the UT level, a strong executive and a reliable legislature is what is bringing the unemployed youth to their knees. “We have an MP who represents us at the Centre, but who will make policies here? Who will work towards formulating strategies according to the aspirations of the people of Ladakh?” asks Nurboo.
Jigmet Paldan is a local taxi driver who ferries tourists to different destinations in Ladakh. As he travels to peaks and distant lakes, the mountains that guard Ladakh seem to have been snatched away from him. “We live at the mouth of conflict. Peaks that were once accessible to us are no-man areas today.” Amid the chaos of the conflict, he is hunting for jobs for his younger brother. While Paldan is illiterate, it pains his heart to see his brother who is a graduate sitting idle as the UT administration prolongs job creation. “The carelessness of the administration has levelled the gap between the educated and illiterate, both him and I are being forced to take up odd jobs,” says Paldan, 35.
As unemployment numbers are mounting in the cold desert, three years after bifurcation, people across the region are uncertain about their livelihood, fearful about the of loss of land, and confused about constitutional guarantees.
A citizen of the UK, Jagtar Singh Johal was arrested in Punjab in 2017 on terror charges and has remained in prison in India for 4.5 years without his case being heard.
New Delhi: British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has reportedly acknowledged the “arbitrary detention” of Scotland-based Sikh activist Jagtar Singh Johal by the Indian government for the first time.
Johal has been in a Punjab prison since November 2017, when he was arrested for allegedly being involved in two killings in the state by the banned Khalistani Liberation Force (KLF) that year. He is currently lodged in Delhi’s Tihar Jail.
According to a report by the Guardian, Johnson, in a letter to the leader of the Labour Party, Kier Starmer, said that Johal has been arbitrarily detained by the Indian government without any formal charges being levied against him.
The revelation came to light on Thursday, June 30, when Johal’s brother, Gurpreet Singh Johal met with Starmer as well as British shadow foreign secretary David Lammy.
The Guardian report notes that Prime Minister Johnson has claimed that the issue has been raised “almost 100 times” with the Indian government; by Johson to Prime Minister Modi himself as well as by British foreign secretary Liz Truss with external affairs minister S. Jaishankar.
While expressing gratitude at the fact that the matter has finally been mentioned, Johal’s brother Gurpreet also noted that he would “never forget” that it took the UK government close to five years to acknowledge the arbitrary detention of a citizen of the UK.
“But at least they got there in the end,” the report quotes Gurpreet as saying.
Who is Jagtar Singh Johal?
A British national and resident of Dumbarton in Scotland, Johal had travelled to India in October, 2017 to get married. After the wedding, Johal’s parents and his brother, Gurpreet, returned to the UK while Johal stayed behind.
On November 4 that year, the Punjab Police apprehended Johal, alleging his involvement in a number of targeted killings in the country that year, including that of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) leader, Brigadier Jagdish Gagneja (Retired), as well as affiliations with the KLF, the Indian Express had reported.
Following his arrest, the Punjab Police alleged ties to a number of wanted terrorists and KLF-affiliates within and outside India. They even alleged that Johal had arranged funds KLF operatives to procure weapons for terror attacks.
Among these operatives was UK-based Taljeet (aka ‘Jimmy) Singh, for whom the police alleged Johal had procured funds to buy weapons. When Singh was apprehended in connection with a weapons recovery case that year, he reportedly informed them of Johal’s presence in the country, on the basis of which the police made the arrest.
Ever since his arrest, the sizeable Sikh community in Dunbarton, as well as Sikhs in other parts of the world, have called for his release. Over the years, allegations of torture and custodial violence, coerced confessions and more violations have surfaced.
Speaking to the Express, Johal’s lawyer said that 11 cases have been filed against him by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the Punjab Police, and the Special Cell of the Delhi Police. While chargesheets have been filed in all cases, charges have only been framed in the case pertaining to his immediate arrest in 2017.
He was discharged in one case and is awaiting trial in the rest.
United Nations takes note
In May this year, the UN Human Rights Council’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention had published a report detailing Johal’s case.
The report details Johal’s detention “by 15 unidentified men” who did not identify themselves as belonging to law enforcement. Further, it details allegations of torture including “electric shocks, forcing his limbs into unnatural positions and depriving him of sleep”.
“Despite Johal having been in detention for three years and three months, the (probe) agency has not commenced trials in any of these nine cases and has not produced any admissible evidence,” the report reads.
The report states that Johal’s detention is arbitrary and that the deprivation of liberty of Johal as violative of numerous provisions in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As such, it called for Johal’s immediate release and the payment of reparations and compensation.
Further, Johal’s lawyer alleges that his detention is based on confessional statements and that investigative agencies have not produced any substantive evidence in the case. It is worth noting here that the UN report includes allegations that Johal was made to sign blank sheets of paper.
Speaking to the Express, an officer of the Punjab police refused to comment on the matter since it is sub-judice. However, the officer denied allegations of wrongdoing, claiming that all procedures were followed in his arrest.
“The delinquent MLAs who have been acting as pawns of the BJP, thereby committing the constitutional sin of defection, ought not to be allowed to perpetuate their sin even for a single day by permitting them to continue as members of the assembly,” the petition states.
New Delhi: The Shiv Sena has approached the Supreme Court asking that the newly ordained Maharashtra chief minister Eknath Shinde and 15 other MLAs against whom disqualification petitions have been filed be suspended from the state assembly while the petitions are decided on. The court has agreed to hear the matter on July 11.
The vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala said on Friday (July 1) morning that this petition, filed by Shiv Sena chief whip Sunil Prabhu, will be heard alongside the main petitions on the recent developments in Maharashtra, LiveLaw reported. Prabhu’s advocate Kapil Sibal had asked for an urgent hearing of the matter on Friday.
“The delinquent MLAs who have been acting as pawns of the BJP, thereby committing the constitutional sin of defection, ought not to be allowed to perpetuate their sin even for a single day by permitting them to continue as members of the assembly,” NDTV quoted the petition as saying.
On Monday, soon after Shinde and the other MLAs had made their motives clear, the Shiv Sena led by former chief minister Uddhav Thackeray had asked the deputy speaker to disqualify the 16 MLAs. The rebel MLAs had then approached the Supreme Court, saying any move to disqualify them would be illegal.
“After June 29 order, Eknath Shinde was sworn in as Chief Minister. There is no merger. How are you going to control the house? Whose whip is to be followed? The moment he is sworn in, he has incurred disqualification under para 2. He is not the party,” Sibal submitted before the court on Friday.
While Shinde has come to power with the Bharatiya Janata Party’s support, the 16 rebel MLAs claim to still represent the Shiv Sena. Thackeray and his supporters have denied this in their petition. “Despite the rebellion carried out by the Eknath Shinde faction, the original Shiv Sena political party remains under the leadership of Uddhav Thackeray…who was elected president of the Shiv Sena way back on 23.01.2018 when the organisational elections of the were conducted and the same was communicated to the Election Commission on 27.02.2018,” the petition states.
The PSLV-C53 launch marks ISRO’s second dedicated commercial mission in the span of a month and carried three Singaporean satellites on the launch vehicle.
Sriharikota: In its second successful commercial mission in a week, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) launched three foreign satellites in precise orbit from the spaceport in Andhra Pradesh’s Sriharikota on Thursday, June 30, onboard PSLV C53, with the space agency’s trusted launch vehicle once again living up to its reputation of being a reliable rocket.
PSLV-C53 is the second dedicated commercial mission of NewSpace India Limited (NSIL), the commercial arm of ISRO which had, on June 23, launched the GSAT-24 in its first “demand-driven” communication satellite mission post space sector reforms, leasing the entire capacity on board to Direct-to-Home (DTH) service provider Tata Play.
On Thursday, the four-stage, 44.4 metre tall PSLV-C53 that blasted off from the second launch pad of Satish Dhawan Space Centre, placed the three Singapore satellites – DS-EO, NeuSAR and SCOOB-1 – in intended orbit of 570 km.
Just one week from now, #ISRO is set to launch #PSLVC53 carrying 3 Singaporean satellites into Low Earth Orbit. It will be their second mission of 2022 and the first launch of PSLV in its ‘Core Alone’ configuration in 3 years. 🇮🇳🇸🇬 pic.twitter.com/oyV4YlHJrs
ISRO chairman S. Somanath confirmed that the mission achieved its intended objective, saying the rocket placed the three customer satellites “in the precise orbit of 570 km with a 10 degree inclination” and congratulated NSIL for accomplishing “yet another major mission this month itself,” the earlier one being the GSAT launch last week.
“With today’s mission, all these three satellites are placed in the right orbit,” Somanath said in his post-launch address from the Mission Control Centre.
After the primary mission, the PSLV 4th stage is going to “write some poems in orbit,” he said, referring to the PSLV Orbital Experimental Module (POEM).
“POEM is going to be functional after this, taking over the control of the primary mission computer to another one. The fourth stage will be powered by generating power on board and will be stabilised with altitude control and host some experiments by some of young startups enabled by InSpace,” Somanath, who is also the secretary of the Department of Space, said.
Mission director S.R. Biju described the launch as “wonderful” and said the launch vehicle injected the three “precious” satellites in the desired orbit.
He also said PSLV was in a different configuration this time, the ‘Core Alone’ version, “and we are coming back with this variant after a pretty long time.”
“We had to introduce some changes to improve the productionisation of PSLV so that we can meet the growing demand of customers and all those changes which we have implemented have yielded results,” he said.
The idea for this mission was conceptualised in the record time of three months and “it is effectively two missions rolled into one,” Biju added.
D. Radhakrishnan, CMD, NSIL, said their association with Singapore has been quite long.
“It was a national mission that NSIL was undertaking and in the coming months and years, there will be many more dedicated missions for its customers, both national and international,” he said.
The launch vehicle lifted off at 6.02 PM at the end of the 25-hour countdown.
This is the 55th mission of PSLV, often described as ISRO’s ‘trusted workhorse’, and the 15th one using the PSLV-Core Alone variant. It also marks the 16th PSLV launch from the second launch pad.
The mission, which is designed to orbit the DS-EO satellite along with two other co-passenger satellites from ST Electronics, Singapore, proposes to demonstrate the utilisation of the spent upper stage of the launch vehicle as a stabilised platform for scientific payloads subsequent to the separation of the satellites, ISRO said.
S-EO is a 365 kg satellite while NeuSAR weighs 155 kg. Both belong to Singapore and are built by Starec Initiative of the Republic of Korea, while the third satellite is a 2.8 kg SCOOB-1 of Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.
POEM DS-EO carries an Electro-Optic, multi-spectral payload that will provide full colour images for land classification, and serving Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief needs. NeuSAR is Singapore’s first small commercial satellite carrying aR payload, which is capable of providing images in day and night and under all weather conditions.
SCOOB-I is the first in the Student Satellite Series (S3-I), a hands-on student training programme from the Satellite Research Centre (SaRC) at Singapore’s NTU School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering.
The POEM activity performs in-orbit scientific experiments using the spent PS4 stage as an orbital platform, ISRO said. It is the first time that the PS4 stage would orbit the earth as a stabilised platform.
Attitude stabilisation is achieved using a dedicated NGC system, it said. POEM derives the power from the solar panels mounted around the PS4 tank and a Li Ion battery.
POEM carries six payloads including two from Indian Space Start-ups M/s Digantara and M/s Dhruva Space, enabled though IN-Space and NSIL.
The police had come under heavy criticism following tailor Kanhiaya Lal’s murder on Tuesday for failing to act on his complaints of receiving death threats.
New Delhi: In the aftermath of the killing of tailor Kanhaiya Lal in Rajasthan’s Udaipur on Tuesday, June 28, 32 officers of the Indian Police Service (IPS) have been transferred.
A number of senior officers also feature in the list of transfers, including the inspector general of police (IGP) and the Udaipur superintendent of police (IPS), according to a report by NDTV.
Lal, 48, was killed by two individuals – Riaz Akhtari and Ghouse Mohammad – for sharing on Twitter the derogatory remarks against Prophet Mohammad made by suspended Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Nupur Sharma last month.
After Lal’s murder, the Udaipur police had come under heavy criticism for failing to pay heed to Lal’s reported allegations that he had been facing death threats after the post was shared from his handle. The police had even arrested Lal for the post, but had later released him.
Following the brutal killing, the two perpetrators had released a video in which they claimed that the act had been committed to “avenge an insult to islam”, an ostensible reference to Sharma’s remarks being shared by Lal.
In the video, the two accused were also seen threatening Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Subsequently, one of the two accused was found by the Rajasthan police to have had links with the Pakistan-based Dawat-e-Islami organisation. The police also said that the accused had visited Karachi in 2014.
“One of the accused, Ghouse Mohammad, has links with the Karachi-based Islamist organisation Dawat-e-Islami. He had visited Karachi in 2014. So far, we have detained five people, including the two prime accused,” Rajasthan director general of police (DGP) M.L. Lather had said.
The case how been transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and will be investigated in conjunction with the Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) of the Rajasthan Police.
On Thursday, June 30, the two accused were produced before a local court and sent to 14-day judicial custody. A total of five others have been detained in the case so far.
In the aftermath of the incident, Lather said that an assistant sub-inspector had been suspended for failing to take appropriate action in the case. Now, amid the heavy criticism being levied against the state police, 32 more officers have been transferred.
Protests were seen in Udaipur in the days that followed the killing, in light of which heavy police presence has been deployed in the region and curfews have been imposed.
The ban, which comes into effect from July 1, faces challenges at several levels, from enforcement to a lack of viable alternatives to plastic products.
Kochi: Plastic forks and spoons that come along with your food through your online food delivery platforms; earbuds with plastic stems; thermocol sheets that are used widely in decorations – these are some of the many single use plastics (SUPs) that have banned by the Union government.
However the Union government will have a tough time when it comes to enforcing the ban, one of the reasons being that there is no specific state machinery in place for this, according to experts.
Shop owners also cited the lack of cheap and mass-produced alternatives to SUPs as a concern in implementing the ban.
India and plastic
In the year 2020-21 alone, India generated 41.26 lakh tonnes of plastic waste, as per a government press release based on data from State Pollution Control Boards and Pollution Control Committees.
According to another estimate from the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, almost half of all plastic used in India in 2017 (around 160 lakh tonnes in total) was single-use plastic.
Single use plastics, as the name suggests, are those that are disposed of after a one use. A majority of these plastics find their way into landfills and either cannot be, or are not, recycled.
The need to tackle this problem has been identified at both the national and international level. India was one of the 175 countries that pledged to develop a legally binding international treaty to curb plastic pollution across the world. Modi has also called for eliminating the use of single use plastics by 2022 on several occasions.
Policies to manage plastic waste, including SUPs, currently come under the purview of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Plastic Waste Management (PWM) Rules, 2016.
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has also notified the Guidelines on Extended Producer Responsibility on plastic packaging as part of the Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2022. This makes it the producer’s responsibility to ensure that plastic is disposed of in a sustainable way.
Several states have enacted specific laws to tackle this as well. A 2019 reportby a committee consisting of scientific experts and officials of the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers noted that uniformity across states and Union territories in policies, guidelines and executive orders would be critical to tackle the issue of single use plastics in the country.
Banning single use plastics
The Union government’s ban on single use plastics was announced in August, 2021, under the PWM Rules 2016. It calls for alternatives, such as plant derivatives-based cutlery and paper straws to be used instead of their plastic counterparts. The government’s SUP Public Grievance App also enables citizens to report and track SUP-related complaints with pictures.
“The Union government’s ban on SUPs is the first national-level policy being enacted in this regard,” said Priti Mahesh, chief programme coordinator of Toxics Link, a non-governmental thinktank working on waste issues in India.
“However, in terms of preparedness, we may not be ready for the ban,” she said. While states have taken small measures and some have banned certain types of single use plastics earlier, it hasn’t been very successful.
“Enforcement, however, would be the biggest gap in the process,” she said. “For instance, we would need to have mechanisms at the level of states to check and enforce the ban. However, there is no specific machinery in states to do this currently.”
In the days leading up to the ban, the Union government has been engaging with state governments and municipal commissioners to ensure enforcement within their jurisdictions, as per a government press release. The MoEFCC approached 82 cities under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) to take steps to eliminate SUPs, apart from taking steps to improve air quality management, on June 30. Some states are also following suit.
Kerala, for instance, has once again started enforcing bans as part of a cleaning drive in state capital Thiruvananthapuram, as per an order by the Suchitwa Mission, a technical support group in waste management under the state’s Local Self Government Department. This is also, in part, to enforce the Union government’s ban, said K.T. Balabhaskaran, Executive Director of the Mission.
“There are plans to identify steps to monitor and enforce this at the grassroots level with local administrative units,” he told The Wire, adding that discussions are still ongoing.
However, how much of this will be implemented and successfully enforced remains to be seen. For instance, restaurants partnering with online food delivery platforms in India mostly use SUPs for food delivery. The Wire reached out to online food delivery platform Swiggy to find out how they plan to support the ban, but they didn’t respond.
Zomato, another food delivery platform, did not respond either to similar queries on how they plan to cut down on their food partners’ usage of SUPs with respect to the July 1 ban.
Companies, such as Amul and PepsiCo, have already asked for a year’s extension on the ban. Livemint reported that according to the Action Alliance for Recycling Beverage Cartons (AARC; members of which include companies like Coca-Cola India, PepsiCo India and Dabur), the ban on SUPs could lead to losses in sales to the tune of Rs 3,000 crore for the industry.
“However, this shows an unwillingness in the industry to implement the ban, which was notified a year back, giving them adequate time to come up with alternatives,” said Mahesh. “The government also discussed with stakeholders and has banned only those items for which some alternatives are available,” she added.
Small-scale shopkeepers, meanwhile, are preparing to take the plunge. In New Delhi’s Shadipur area, soft drink seller Mohammad Galib said he’s using paper cups as a replacement to plastic ones.
“It is ten rupees costlier than a plastic glass, but it’s okay, we have to accept it,” he said.
However, the issue of alternatives is a contentious one, legal policy expert Dharmesh Shah (LIFE) had told The Wire Science. Biodegradable items, too, will need to be composted industrially, which brings us back to the need for a viable system to collect and recycle these items, he said.
Many consumers are also sceptical about the ban.
“I don’t think this ban will last longer than a month,” said Lavkush Yadav, who has been running a small canteen in Karol Bagh in New Delhi for the last five years. “The last time when they announced the ban, we started packing the food in boxes, but it didn’t last for more than a few days.”
As a fauji kid, it is easy to see that the Indian military has problems – but the Agnipath scheme is not a solution to any of them.
I am an odd creature in some circles. I am a fauji kid who then got an education to become deeply critical of the state, and some would deem me a ‘lefty feminist academic’.
I do not come from a long line of academic intellectuals, but rather a long line of military officers (and am aware of and bear the guilt of all those historic burdens). A lot of my extended family has turned politically right in the recent past and me along with my immediate family further left, given what has happened to the very idea of secular India.
I straddle two worlds – one world where I hang out in gendered parties with my parents, where all uncles sit on one side and aunties on the other side of the room. And the other world is where I cannot imagine a gendered divide in my seminars or gender segregated conversations in intellectual debates or meetings.
And yet, in mid-June 2019 both these different worlds came colliding. My lefty academic and activist’s social media were abuzz with angry narratives that outlined the horrors of the police shooting of a young protesting Muslim man in less than two seconds but no accounting of the Agniveers burning down trains and mass protests by angry young men.
And my (mostly retired and conservative) army uncle and aunty networks (accessed through my parents) were angry at how these young men, the ‘Agniveers’, with so much potential had been turned into protestors by the state.
Both groups of people, pretty much always on the opposite side of most issues, were for different reasons angry at the Indian government for having failed to see the long-term impact of this scheme – on the military (for the conservatives) and on Indian society (for the progressives).
The demographic question
The Agnipath scheme aims to change the face of military recruitment and retention in the Indian army by recruiting young people (both men and women) at below-officer rank on short=term contracts. The scheme arrives after a freeze in recruitment for over two years, with the Bharatiya Janata Party proposing COVID-19 to be a reason. The scheme is also aimed at addressing the shortage of military human resources given the recent freeze.
However, while attempting to address the military concern, the government is also attempting to address the demographic bulge – that our working age population is larger than our dependent population. In fact, India has one of the largest working age populations in the world (and in our own history). Two-thirds of Indians are of working age – and if allowed to be employed in productive (not exploitative) labour, they could help the Indian economy grow dramatically by some accounts.
Historically, this large working population was called the demographic dividend. For example, Japan experienced its largest economic growth when its working age population was larger than its dependent population. But experts viewed this dividend with concern under declining economic conditions, which is currently the case in India.
Also, the inability of the Narendra Modi government to create the promised two crore jobs every year has led to the highest unemployment rate in 45 years, according to 2019 data.
Yet, this demographic dividend will likely be squandered in the name of politics.
The current policy deprives young people of stable, long-term employment, and instead offers them four years of contractual labour with a chance of one in four ‘Agniveers’ being moved onto a permanent position at the end of the contract.
The deep competition and resentment this would create in each military battalion will not be ideal for any military force that is expected to be battle-ready. This said, I am more concerned with what this means for Indian society outside the military.
Ripple effects
The ripple effects of this short-term military training for a large swathe of young people will not only affect the military but also our everyday social lives. Three key points matter here:
1. An easy election win for the current BJP led government:
In 2024, this large cadre of young people who have thus far, in 2022, been failed by the promises of jobs and are getting angry at the BJP government will still be employed. They will likely be given fake assurances about jobs in the future because they have been trained as ‘Agniveers’. For young people living in the moment, fed a constant stream of hope, with disillusionment at least three years away, their choices will be quite limited because they will have been given jobs by the current government.
2. Angry young men without jobs in five years:
When these young people trained as soldiers rejoin civil society, with the added competition for jobs outside the army (remember, the number of people joining the workforce is only going to increase until 2044 given our demographic dividend), they will likely face many disillusionments. They will be upset and they will also have been trained to be violent. There isplentyofresearch that shows that men who return from military training and action are more likely to be violent – both with their intimate partners and also with others.
3. Fodder for the hate machine:
These men will seek out the comradery they have experienced in the military and they will most likely be welcome in hate-mongering organisations with no compunctions about public violence. The Agnipath scheme will thus become a training ground for the next set of foot-soldiers for these groups – with the exception that these men will be more disciplined, better trained and decidedly more dangerous.
Kicking the can
As a fauji bachcha who grew up and moved outside the military, and has continued to pay attention the nature of military forces in different parts of the world, it is easy to see how the Indian military is deeply antiquated and still tethered to their colonial legacies of class hierarchies and gendered biases.
The Indian military has problems – but the Agnipath scheme is not a solution to any of them. Instead, it will create more problems for the military, which then will be passed onto the civil society en masse.
There may or may not be options to stop the Agnipath scheme now but short-term schemes like this can be reversed.
Maybe a new government committed to providing productive and stable jobs for our demographic dividend, protecting gender rights and safeguarding the wellbeing of all Indian citizens can do the work of dismantling this Frankenstein monster of a scheme.
2024 is not far away, and even if we can’t stop ‘Agniveers’ from being recruited, we have to work to convince each ‘Agniveer’ that they need to vote for their and their families’ future – and long term, instead of on a five-year election cycle and on a contractual basis.
Nayantara Sheoran Appleton is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Science in Society at the Victoria University of Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand. She is trained a medical anthropologist and a feminist STS scholar. She tweets at @nayantarapple.
The former Supreme Court judge said there can be no doubt that the Delhi police is applying two different standards for Mohammed Zubair and Nupur Sharma.
Journalist Mohammed Zubair was arrested by the Delhi police on June 27 for an alleged offensive tweet that was posted more than four years ago. The police action against the Alt News co-founder has been criticsed by various rights and press bodies, with the Editors Guild of India saying that his work was “resented by those who use disinformation as a tool to polarise the society and rake nationalist sentiments”.
On June 30, Karan Thapar spoke to former Supreme Court Justice Deepak Gupta about the journalists arrest. The judge says that he is worried by the Delhi police’s action but even more worried that the court did not grant him bail. He also says that if people are arrested at the drop of a hat, the courts should consider granting compensations to people who are wrongfully arrested. He says freedom of speech is sacrosanct and if it comes under pressure, that is not a good day for democracy.
The following a transcript of the video interview, edited lightly for style and clarity.
§
Is Mohammed Zubair the victim of blatant prejudice at the hands of the Delhi police? That’s the key issues I should discuss today with one of the most illustrious former judges of the Supreme Court, Justice Deepak Gupta.
Let’s start with a simple question. How do you view the way the Delhi police have treated Mohammed Zubair, who has been arrested and charged under sections 153 A and 295 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for a tweet posted over four years ago on March 24, 2018? That means he is accused of promoting enmity as well as intent to outrage religious feelings even though nothing of the sort has happened as a result of his tweet over the last four years.
I am a bit worried, a bit confused as to why this gentleman, Zubair, was taken into custody at all. As you point out, the incident is of March 2018. Four years have elapsed. There’s not even an indication that his tweet led to any dispute between two communities. Suddenly, after four years, the police comes up and says, “We have to arrest him.”
We’re talking about the human rights of a citizen. Should a citizen of this country be put behind bars for something. let’s assume the police’s case, has the possibility of inflaming passions. That can be the police’s case at best. But there’s no such.. they have not said there is any such incident.
I am even more worried that the court refused to grant him bail. This was an instance where the police woke up after four years. The judge should have asked them, “If you didn’t arrest him for four years and nothing untoward happen in those four years, why do you need to take him into custody?”
In a nutshell, can I put it like this, Justice Gupta? You fail to understand why the police have arrested him, and you are deeply concerned that the court didn’t grant him bail immediately. Have I understood both points correctly?
Yes, absolutely.
The tweet that Zubair posted in 2018 carried a shot from a 1983 Hindi film called Kissi Se Na Kehna, which was a) cleared by the censor board and b) according to the newspaper, its been shown on television repeatedly. Isn’t it strange that this shot has given no offence for almost 40 years and yet suddenly, it is considered offensive in June 2022?
We are suddenly turning into a very intolerant society. If for 40 years nothing happened, suddenly in one year or six months, this tweet becomes so offensive? I’ve seen the tweet. In my view, at best it can be – if you are very very strict about your religion – said to be “slightly not proper”. It is not offensive. As children, I don’t know if you ever watched, but I used to watch the Ramleela in Shimla. Much worse things were said and done at that time by the people performing the Ramleela itself. You have to have a little sense of humour. There’s nothing in this tweet, a ‘honeymoon hotel’ has been turned into ‘Hanuman hotel’. It may not be in the best taste or something, but how is it offensive? How does it violate any criminal law? I fail to see that.
Now, according to news reports, the police are also looking into other tweets by Zubair, which they allege are offensive. But as The Wire points out, those other tweets are either satirical riffs or they are direct quotations from people like Yogi Adityanath; Biplab Deb, the former chief minister of Tripura; and of a BJP MLA. So again, doesn’t this collectively show that the police don’t have a case at all against Zubair?
No. You can’t arrest a person to collect evidence against them. You have to arrest a person when a case is made out against them. And then also, somehow we have got that arrest must be done in every case. Why should there be an arrest in every case? Even if there is an arrest, the court should grant bail in such cases. And like you said, the other tweets, the police itself says, “We’re looking into other tweets.” When they look into the other tweets and find something offensive, the law must take its own course. If there is something that violates the law, Zubair as a citizen of this country, will face the law. But then at the same time, the law should not be used in a manner as if he’s been targeted. And somehow, I feel, that he’s been targeted.
I’ll come to this critical question of whether he’s been targeted in a moment’s time. But let me pick up first on something you said in that answer. “You can’t arrest to collect evidence. Only when a case is made out against someone can you arrest him.” In this instance, you get the feeling that this is a fishing exercise, that the police don’t have the evidence, they’ve arrested the man. Now they are trying to justify the arrest by desperately looking for evidence.
Yes, absolutely. You see, from what I’ve read in the papers, he was called for investigation in a matter in which he had already got protection from the high court that he could not be arrested. Then, while he was being examined in that matter, suddenly they put up this four year old tweet against him. Now they are saying they are looking for other tweets. You please do your homework first and then arrest the gentleman. Not arrest the gentleman and then do the homework.
Let’s then at this point come to the issue of targeting. Because many people suspect that Zubair has been targeted by the police in revenge for the fact that he was the one who first confirmed that Nupur Sharma had made offensive remarks against the Prophet Muhammad on a Times Now programme. When you gave me that answer earlier suggesting that there was targeting, do you share the suspicion that this is some form of ‘revenge targeting’, a ‘revenge arrest’?
I’ll not go to the extent of ‘revenge’, but there is something amiss. There is something amiss. The lady, Nupur Sharma, said something which offended feelings and almost impacted our relationship with certain countries abroad. But I feel, even she should not have been arrested. She has a right to say something. If its offensive, people can’t..
May I correct you, Justice Gupta, she has not been arrested. Neither of the persons [Sharma and Naveen Kumar Jindal] have been arrested.
Yes, I know that. I am saying she should not have been arrested. She was not arrested. Similarly, Zubair also should not have been arrested. You have to use the same scales of justice for both of them. In fact, if you look at those scales and you weigh her (Sharma’s) tweet vis-a-vis the tweet of Zubair, hers has much more potential to cause harm than the one of Zubair. Now, if the police is silent on that (Sharma’s comments) and arrests Zubair, it does feel that there is something wrong in the way the police have dealt with it.
Well, let me pick up on that point, because it raises a fundamental question about the police’s behaviour and my claim in the introduction that Zubair is the victim of prejudicial police behaviour. Zubair, as I said, has been charged with 153A and 295A. So too, and this is the important point, have Nupur Sharma and Naveen Jindal. But weeks have gone by, maybe even a month, and Nupur Sharma has not been arrested. And yet, Zubair has been arrested and not just with incredible haste, but whilst he was being questioned in an altogether different matter. Is this difference of treatment, this start difference of treatment, where you charge people with the same sections of the IPC, but treat them very differently, does that once again reflect prejudicial handling by the police?
Definitely. There can be no doubt about it that they are applying two different standards.
Axed BJP politicians Nupur Sharma and Naveen Jindal. Photos: PTI
You really mean that? “No doubt about it, these are two different standards.”
In my view, both should not be arrested. I mean, freedom of speech is sacrosanct. If somebody has a dispute, let them file a civil case. In fact, we add fuel to the fire by giving these cases so much publicity.
But the main point you are making, if you are going to arrest Zubair – for what you yourself described as a lesser alleged offence – but not Nupur Sharma for what you said was a greater potential offence, that is prejudicial handling by the police. That is the point you stand by.
Absolutely. Absolutely. There’s no two ways about that.
What do you make, Justice Gupta, of the fact that the Twitter account that raised the complaint against Zubair’s 2018 tweet was only created in October 2021 – almost three-and-a-half years later. The complaint on June 19, 2022 was the first tweet from this account – which Zubair’s lawyer has actually said, the police magically picked up. What do you make of that?
There is one more thing which I have read today. If it is correct, now that account has vanished from Twitter. Now, obviously, this is something somebody has created.. Now, you don’t have any evidence that this tweet led to any disaffection in any section of society. Somebody sends you a tweet, which you don’t even investigate that the tweet is from a movie which was made about 40 years back, which has been shown on television, which has been seen by so many people. It has not created any problem. So how do you say that this tweet is offensive?
In fact, as you correctly pointed out, not only was the Twitter account closed on Wednesday evening but as a report in Thursday’s The Hindu points out, during its longevity, the brief period of its existence, it only posted three tweets. The original complaint on June 19, another one on June 27 and the third on June 28. Should this account itself be enquired into?
Absolutely. Definitely. Who opened this account? What were its credentials? Who is this person who has made this complaint? Why is the police acting so hurriedly on this complaint? And I can tell you, there are hundreds of much more serious cases of rape and murder, where the police always claim, “We have limited resources. Our manpower is limited. We don’t have the time to go and investigate and arrest.” But in cases like this, within minutes, the manpower is there and the arrests are made.
You made a very important point when you said, “Why has the police acted with such haste into this particular issue?” Zubair’s lawyer, Vrinda Grover, pointed out that the real problem is Zubair’s name, faith and profession. But leave that aside, that is her opinion. Let me ask you another slightly different question.
Should an inquiry be held into the way the Delhi police have acted and behaved over this matter? A proper, formal inquiry into their treatment of Zubair?
I really don’t know whether inquiries help. These inquiries go on for long, long years and no result.. even if the inquiry report is against the police, they don’t take action. But I think the courts have to be more upfront. The Delhi high court is one of the best in the country. Somebody should take this, why are the not being given bail? If people are arrested at the drop of a hat, I think the time has come when courts should think of granting compensation to people who are arrested in such a manner. You look at Disha Ravi [a young climate activist who was arrested in the ‘toolkit’ case]. We talked about Disha Ravi about six months back. Now, no case has been made against her. Similarly, nothing will come out of Zubair finally. Even the police knows it. But they’ve arrested him, he’s been behind bars for three or four days. It is unfortunate.
File photo of environmental activist Disha Ravi. Photo: Social media
You made two very important points there. First, you said, Justice Gupta, that there is no point in an inquiry into the police. Such inquiries are held, nothing comes out of them, they end up being – although you didn’t say this – attempts at whitewashing the police.
However, the second point is that the court should look into this. Are you actually recommending to Zubair’s lawyers, who I imagine are listening to his interview, that they should raise this matter immediately with the high court?
No, I don’t know whether immediately would be proper or not. Because that is a court order, they can challenge the order, the procedure must be followed – you can’t take it on the administrative side.\
But if the high court comes to the conclusion – or any other court comes to the conclusion – that Zubair was wrongly arrested, then he must be compensated. You know, compensation should be of such a scale that the police thinks twice before arresting innocent persons.
How confident are you that if this matter were to be raised at a higher court, lets for argument say the Delhi high court, that they will see that issue in the way you’ve just seen it and talked about.
I hope that.. No, I have great hope that the issue will be seen in the proper perspective. I am not saying that I am always right. This is my point of view. Maybe a judge can give good reasoning to [explain why I am wrong] – and I might agree with that judge later on. But right now, as the facts stand today, I see no reason why Zubair should not have been granted bail.
We’re coming to the end of this interview. Let me raise two further questions with you. The United Nations secretary-general’s spokesperson has said, and I’m quoting, “Journalists should not be jailed for what they write, what they tweet and what they say.” Would you agree with that?
I would agree with that, but I think the United Nations would be better off saying these things to Russia, Uzbekistan or.. I am not saying that Zubair is not an important issue, but less said about what the United Nations does [the better]. I have strong opinions on that also.
May I just point out, whilst there is clearly a case for the United Nations directing its comments against Russia, there are several – far too many in fact – instances which would justify similar quotations being directed against India. We have had many cases in which journalists have been wrongly arrested.
Yes. And that is for the Indian system itself. We have to see for ourselves, how to improve the system. And we must do it, whether it is the courts [or some other institution]. I mean, if we are to survive as a democracy, then we have to see that freedom of speech in its true form is always available to the citizens and to the press.
That’s a very important thing you are saying. Are you also suggesting that the survival of freedom of speech in India is under a question mark? I won’t go so far as to say threat, others would say threat, under question mark? And that, in turn, questions our survival as a democracy?
Yes. Because freedom of speech is one of the basic functions of democracy. And when it is either threatened – not even threatened, if it is put under pressure – if people are, you know, made to feel that if they express a certain point of view, they will face trouble – whether it is from the ED or the money laundering cases – then that is not a good day for democracy.
My last question, Justice Gupta. This arrest of Zubair by the Delhi police happened almost at the same time as Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Bavaria – where he was an invitee to the G7 summit – signed a document upholding freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Have the Delhi police not just embarrassed the prime minister with the timing of their behaviour, but have they embarrassed the country as well?
I don’t even know whether the Delhi police was aware of what the prime minister was signing or not. But their action is absolutely opposite to what the prime minister intended at the G7 summit. So in that sense, it is an embarrassment. Though I think they were probably totally ignorant of what was being signed.
