Month: April 2023

Wrestlers’ Protest: Have ‘Facts and Logic’ Finally Started to Kick in With BJP Supporters?

One is beginning to sense cognitive dissonance in many BJP supporters who have come out in support of the wrestlers. While they are vociferous in their condemnation of Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, they also see themselves as BJP supporters.

It is 11 pm. The wrestlers’ protest spot at Jantar Mantar is dimly lit by street lights. The street which was packed with supporters, media crews and police personnel during the day is now practically deserted, except for a handful of protestors, a few constables, and a small group of media persons who even at this late hour are waiting to interview the wrestlers. 

A young Sikh is serving dinner in plastic trays to volunteers sitting on the road. A diesel generator powers lights and a fan at the makeshift shelter on the footpath that has become home for the protesting Olympic wrestlers for the last six days. 

“Police vaalon ne bijli kaat dee hai (The police have cut the electricity),” mumbles Rahul, a bearded young man with a pronounced Haryanvi accent. I ask him if he is a wrestler as well. He isn’t, he says. He is just here to help the protestors in any capacity he can, as is Aman, a journalism student studying in NOIDA. 

Aman comes after his classes every evening to Jantar Mantar, and makes himself available to move mattresses around, serve food and water, and help in any way he can. He tells me he is originally from Varanasi. I ask him if he is (or was) a supporter of Modi’s government. 

He says, “Because I am from Varanasi it was but natural for me to be a Modi supporter, as that is also his constituency. But since I am studying to be a journalist, I have to be professionally neutral and base whatever I say only on facts and logic.”

I ask him what facts and logic say about the condition of women in India over the last nine years. 

“Mujhe ab sarkaar pe ghinn aa rahee hai (I am feeling contempt for this government),” he replies. “If such accomplished Olympic medalists are sitting on the road for justice, imagine the plight of millions of others in similar situations. The Parliament is next door and yet not one of their MPs has come down here. The wrestlers’ tears tell their truth!”

Aman’s voice starts to rise. 

“P.T. Usha’s condemnation of the wrestlers’ protest is trending on Twitter! Imagine! The BJP IT cell is actually trending it! They are defending and protecting a darinda (predator) like this! Something like this has probably never happened before in the history of India! This is shameful!”

Sakshi Malik and her husband Satyavrat (also a wrestler, and Arjun Awardee who has been staying with her on the road) look exhausted. 

Satyvrat says, ‘It is not easy to meet thousands of people every day. Everyone affects us. Everyone has a negative or positive vibe and we end up internalising so much of it …” his voice trails off a bit. “But we will fight as long as we have to.”

Wrestler Satyavrat. Photo: Rohit Kumar

Sakshi says she must have given at least a hundred interviews that day. I believe her. It was the day the Supreme Court ordered the Delhi police to lodge an FIR against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. One can imagine how long and intense the day would have been.

Also Read: ‘Everyone Can Find Courage Within Themselves!’ – An Interview with Olympic Wrestler Sakshi Malik

About 20 metres away from the wrestlers’ enclosure, a group of men are sitting on chairs. I ask them why they are there. 

“To show solidarity to our sisters and stand guard here during the night,” one of them, Sunil, a retired pehelwan (wrestler) from Sonepat tells me. “When our younger brothers and sisters win medals, we share in their joy. Shouldn’t we also share in their times of sorrow and difficulty? We are ready to sit here for the next five years if we have to.”

Sunil, incidentally, also tells me has a grouse against ‘left-wing journalists.’ I ask him why. He says it is because they are so good at ‘changing the narrative’. I tell him that is, in fact, the forte of the government and its godi media, who are the true masters of narrative reshaping. 

A couple of days prior, an outfit called the United Hindu Front had set up a stall right opposite the wrestlers’ protest. It remained largely empty and not too many seemed interested in what they had to say. A person from the group walked around distributing pamphlets condemning the use of English in India and decrying the decline of naitiktaa (morality) in Indian society. He handed me a pamphlet too.

“How much naitiktaa do you see in the Modi government’s refusal to take Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh to task?” I asked him, pointing at the wrestlers.

The chap glared, yanked the pamphlet out of my hand and walked away. 

One is beginning to sense cognitive dissonance in many BJP supporters who have come out in support of the wrestlers. On one hand, they are vociferous in their condemnation of Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the government’s reluctance to take him to task, and even Modi. On the other hand, they still see themselves as BJP supporters. It is doubtless an unsettling place to be in. Whether they will continue to believe they are living in amrit kaal despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary or eventually succumb to ‘facts and logic’ remains to be seen. 

The proverbial penny seems to be dropping for many, but whether it will actually hit the ground with a clear ringing sound, only time will tell.

Rohit Kumar is a writer and educator.

HC Judge Hearing Rahul Gandhi’s Appeal in Defamation Case Was Maya Kodnani’s Lawyer

Two Gujarat judges who have heard the Congress leader’s appeals in the case have turned out to have earlier represented top BJP leaders.

New Delhi: Justice Hemant M. Prachak, who is hearing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s appeal in the Gujarat high court against the session court’s rejection of his application to stay his conviction in the ‘Modi surname’ remark defamation case, was one of the lawyers defending former BJP minister Maya Kodnani, an accused in the 2002 Gujarat riots case.

On April 13, The Wire had reported that Judge Robin Paul Mogera, who was hearing Gandhi’s appeal in the Surat sessions court against his two-year conviction in this defamation case, was Union home minister and BJP leader Amit Shah’s lawyer in the 2006 Tulsiram Prajapati fake encounter case. The report had underlined that Mogera, as a lawyer, represented Shah at least until 2014 when the case was being heard at a Central Bureau of Investigation court in Mumbai.

Hearing the case on April 20, Judge Mogera rejected Gandhi’s appeal against the two-year conviction in the case filed by a Gujarat BJP leader in 2019. The appeal had political implications with direct links to the BJP since the verdict of the sessions court could have helped the opposition leader return to parliament. 

On its heels comes a similar report by The Federal today about Justice Hemant M. Prachak hearing Gandhi’s appeal against the Surat court’s verdict in the Gujarat high court. The news report underlined that Justice Prachak “defended Kodnani in criminal case number 1708/12 against the Special SIT court in one of the cases following riots in Naroda Patiya and Naroda Gam areas of Ahmedabad in February 2002 where more than a hundred Muslims, including women and children, were killed.” It further pointed out, “Noticeably, all the accused of the Naroda Patiya and Naroda Gam cases were acquitted a week back by the Special Court in Gujarat.” 

According to an April 21 report by The Federal, the acquittal could pave way for Kodnani, a powerful minister in the Narendra Modi government in Gujarat, to return to active politics. 

Gandhi, seeking relief from the Surat court’s verdict, had approached the Gujarat high court. Though Justice Geeta Gopi was to hear the case on April 27, she recused herself. Since Gandhi’s lawyer Pankaj Champaneri appealed that the criminal revision application be heard on an urgent basis, Justice Gopi allowed it but recused herself from hearing it saying, “Not before me.” Justice Prachak then stepped in.

As per Federal, Prachak began practice as a lawyer in the Gujarat HC and thereafter went on to work as assistant pleader of the Gujarat government under Modi. In 2015, after Modi became the prime minister, he was appointed the Union government’s standing counsel for the High Court of Gujarat which went on till 2019. 

In 2021, he was appointed a judge of the Gujarat HC. 

Why the BJP’s Reliance on Welfarism Doesn’t Guarantee It Will Win in 2024

The rise of BJP under Narendra Modi as a dominant political force is credited to welfarism and not just Hindutva. However, many governments in the past were voted out of power despite introducing a slew of welfare measures. That is why it is premature to write off the Opposition even before the 2024 poll bugle is sounded.

There is no dearth of Doubting Thomases who would question the Opposition’s ability to electorally defeat the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) given that the Narendra Modi government has been running several welfare schemes for the poor. They are of the view that apart from the slogan of Hindutva, it is the free distribution of five kilos of foodgrains, gas cylinders, and direct cash transfer to farmers and other beneficiaries which have facilitated the smooth sailing of the BJP in various elections.

The argument is made in such a manner as if welfare schemes for the weaker section of society never existed before. Direct cash transfer is a relatively new phenomenon because of technological advancement, yet it is a fact that many other schemes existed in the past too. Sometimes, they have helped the ruling parties or alliances politically consolidate their position. Yet at the same time, they lost the elections in spite of properly introducing and implementing better schemes. Governments with even better achievements in the field of development have been voted out of power because of other reasons. At times, even freebies announced at the time of elections did not work.

Comparison with past

As there has been a tendency to compare the present government with Indira Gandhi’s, one must not forget the fact that immediately after imposing the Emergency on June 25, 1975, she not only introduced a slew of welfare schemes but made all-out efforts to ensure that they are implemented properly. They were not just for the weaker sections of the society, but also for others. The excesses committed during the 19 months of Emergency are not excusable. But some of the measures she took – not just economic – had a long-lasting impact. Before that, banks and coal were nationalised in 1969 and 1972 respectively.

Her government successfully handled the Oil Shock following the October 1973 Arab-Israel War. By 1975, the Indian economy started showing some signs of improvement and soaring inflation was somewhat reined in.

A significant aspect of the Emergency which could not obviously be highlighted later was that it helped the authorities tighten administrative loose ends. Corruption, at least at the lower level, was kept under control. Office-goers and teachers were punctual in their duties and – as famously said for her’s and other authoritarian regimes – the trains would run on time.

Indira Gandhi. Credit: Public.Resource.Org/Flickr CC BY 2.0

Her government cracked the whip on hoarders, black marketeers and profiteers who were taking full advantage of the situation created after the global economic crisis of 1973-74. Efforts were made to check large-scale unfair means in examinations though it was the same Congress governments in the states which openly encouraged mass copying to thwart Jaya Prakash Narayan’s exam boycott call in 1974-75.

Her 20-point programme, which among others included poverty eradication and employment generation measures, also had some positive impact. Land reforms were expedited and a tree-plantation campaign was undertaken. Within months, bank loans were provided at low interest to lakhs of cycle and auto-rickshaw wallahs so that they could become owners of their vehicles. Otherwise, most of them had to pay a certain amount of their earning to the owners.

Similarly, loans were announced f0r unemployed youths to launch their own small businesses. Most of these measures were good and were often properly implemented during the Emergency as the government had managed to improve its delivery system in those eventful months.

Welfare measures and electoral setbacks

But all these initiatives did not work at the time of voting on March 16, 1977. Not only did the Congress loses the election but even Indira Gandhi and her son Sanjay Gandhi were humbled in their own parliamentary constituencies. This was simply because she went overboard, muzzled the voice of the common masses, including the press, threw all the opposition leaders into jail, and turned authoritarian. Her government’s draconian family planning campaign and anti-encroachment-cum-beautification drive – however well-intentioned she and the captive press claimed them to be – backfired because of the way they were undertaken.

Besides, her political blunders pushed all the non-Left opposition parties to join hands and merge into one outfit, Janata Party. Thus, she lost the poll which many political pundits never predicted when on January 19, 1977, she announced a general election.

Even her government’s achievements in helping the Bangladeshis liberate their nation on December 16, 1971 and the May 18, 1974 nuclear explosion by India could not come to rescue her in the March 1977 election. (The last election was held in March 1971).

In the same way, her son Rajiv Gandhi’s very positive move to sign accords in Punjab, Assam, and Mizoram in the initial months, and steps to bring about telecom revolution and computerisation campaign did not work and he was voted out of power by the last week of 1989. The Bofors corruption allegations led to his rout.

Also read: Those Who Write Off the Opposition Must Not Forget the Electoral Surprises of 1977 and 2004

Even Prime minister Narasimha Rao also could not get a second term though immediately after coming to power in June 1991, he undertook economic reforms. Ironically, the upper caste middle class largely voted against Congress and instead threw their lot behind the BJP even though they were essentially the main beneficiaries of Rao’s economic overhaul. Rao even sought to cancel out the impact of Mandalisation through economic reforms.

The Atal Bihari Vajpayee government was voted out of power in 2004 though it undertook several massive infrastructure projects such as Golden Quadrilateral and the East-West and North-South Corridor. The Internet revolution, the India Shining campaign, and the slogan of good governance failed to click.

Manmohan Singh – the real architect of the economic reforms in 1991 and prime steward of a high growth decade as PM – could not lead his party to victory in the 2014 election notwithstanding some significant achievements. In the 10-year period, his government lifted 27 crore Indians out of poverty – a rare feat in itself.

File image of former PM Dr Manmohan Singh. Photo: PTI

His government successfully confronted the 2008 global economic meltdown. Yet neither the Prime Minister Gram Sadak Yojana (rural road scheme) nor the flagship programme, MNREGA, which was widely hailed across the planet, could overcome the incumbency factor. The India Against Corruption campaign of 2011 paved the way for the Congress’s rout in 2014. The saffron party took a timely decision to replace the old and hackneyed horse Lal Krishna Advani with Narendra Modi and scripted an unprecedented win.

In states too, several governments could not last more than two terms though they apparently did good work. Chandrababu Naidu’s Telugu Desam Party lost the 2004 election in Andhra Pradesh though he was considered the poster boy of the corporate houses. President Bill Clinton in March 2000 made it a point to visit Hyderabad which the then CM converted into a veritable Cyberabad.

Diseases plaguing BJP

The above examples only confirm the fact that parties in power at the Centre have suffered humiliating defeat notwithstanding the fact that they undertook several populist measures to attract voters. They were voted out of power because of political blunders they had committed, as well as due to over-confidence and in-fighting. The BJP is now suffering from all these diseases. Almost all those who had lost – from Indira Gandhi to Rajiv Gandhi to Atal Bihari Vajpayee – were strong PMs but they were humbled by the opposition party/alliance which had no formidable face.

Narendra Modi may at present appear unchallenged, yet the fact is that several equally powerful leaders have suffered defeat because of their own political mistakes. The BJP is fast exhausting its ammunition and has nothing new to offer. Without cannonballs to fire, its tanks and big guns are mere toys. So, as in the past, its so-called welfare measures as well as freebies may not work when 2024 comes around.

Soroor Ahmed is a Patna-based freelance journalist.

‘Everyone Can Find Courage Within Themselves!’ – An Interview with Olympic Wrestler Sakshi Malik

‘I would like to say that a Woman’s Panel should be constituted (to look into our allegations of sexual harassment) and their ‘mann ki baat’ should be heard. Make sure there is a sportswoman on that panel and listen to her ‘mann ki baat’ as well!’

New Delhi: Sakshi Malik, Vinesh Phogat and their fellow wrestlers are certainly not amongst those Narendra Modi can accuse of being andolanjeevis. Watching them at Jantar Mantar, it is obvious that theirs is the world of the wrestling mat, not the arena of public protest. But the unwillingness of the Modi government to take action against Wrestling Federation of India president and six-time BJP MP, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, for alleged sexual harassment has forced them to sit on an indefinite protest in the heart of the national capital.

As crowds of supporters continue to swell daily at Jantar Mantar, the wrestlers themselves prefer to stay in the back of their makeshift tarpaulin shelter, away as much as possible from the nonstop scrutiny of the cameras lined up just outside the police barricade. They give a press conference once a day and try to meet and greet well-wishers as much as they can, but generally keep a low profile, if such a thing were even possible in this situation. The media is not allowed inside their barricaded enclosure.

Early in the morning before the crowds arrive, though, the wrestlers look a bit more relaxed, but it is plain to see the pressure of the situation writ large on their faces.

On Friday, the Supreme Court ordered the Delhi police to lodge an FIR against Brij Bhushan. A couple of days prior, I spoke with Sakshi Malik.

First of all, how are you doing?

(Smiling wryly) You can imagine what it’s like sleeping on the footpath! We have been battling mosquitoes for the last four nights. We trained here on the street this morning and then freshened up at a room nearby. The rest of the time we stay here. We eat and sleep here. It is an effort to keep hope alive, but we have decided that we will sit here till we get justice.

The Prime Minister’s 100th ‘Mann Ki Baat’ episode will be broadcast on April 30, and many people are sending suggestions for topics they would like to see covered. Is there anything you would like him to talk about?

I would like to tell him that a Woman’s Panel should be constituted and their mann ki baat should be heard. Make sure there is a sportswoman on that panel and listen to her mann ki baat as well! Please understand how much we struggle and how many years it takes for us to get anywhere, and the sacrifices we have had to make! It is not easy to win an Olympic medal, you know?

What is making you the saddest about this situation?

My greatest sorrow is not for myself but for what others are going through as a result. I am always concerned about any trouble my parents go through on my account. Look at all the medalists sitting here, and not just the medalists but all the decent, unselfish people who have come here to express their support to us. Will God not listen to their prayers either?

For example, a family came all the way from Bhopal to spend two nights with us here on this footpath, just to show us selfless solidarity. They have a young son, who is probably not more than seven or eight years of age, who also slept here on the footpath for two nights. Other young people barely in their teens are also staying here with us. We have to keep an eye out for them at well as night to make sure nothing bad happens to them.

I feel so bad for people like that but I also marvel at their concern for us. So many people are joining us and that is what is giving us courage.

A lot of farmers are coming to support you…

We come from farmers’ families. My grandfather was a farmer, even though my father came to the city and worked at a government job. I spent my childhood in the village. I have seen farmers struggle, how they work in all seasons, and how they weep when unseasonal rains come. I have seen how they struggle to sell their produce and feed their families. Every day more and more of them are joining us. It gives us a lot of comfort and strength…

Do you have a message for women and girls in India who want to rise above their circumstances?      

The reason we are fighting for justice right now is because we don’t want future generations of sportswomen and girls to be wronged as well. I want to tell women, you can raise your voice. Everyone can find courage within themselves! If any woman will raise her voice, she will be heard. Don’t suffer injustice quietly. Raise your voice! Indian women are second to none and their achievements are there for the world to see.

Did you ever think the day would come when you would have to sleep on a footpath?

Never. But I think God has a plan in all of this. I believe very strongly in karma. I know that if I have done anything wrong, then I will immediately reap the fruits. Whatever is happening is in God’s hands. I certainly didn’t want any of this. But so many people have come together. How have they come together? This is all in God’s hands, and whatever result He brings about in the end, I will accept that.

Interview Video at  https://youtu.be/EvRI-7ToIGo

Rohit Kumar is a writer and educator.

 

J&K: Inquiry Is ‘Official Cover-Up’, Says Family of Man Who Died of Suicide After He Was Summoned

Mukhtar Hussain Shah’s family has sought a judicial probe into his death and alleged that the order of the magisterial inquiry was “full of discrepancies” and that the “order reads like an attempt to cover up the truth.”

Srinagar: The family of a 48-year-old man, who allegedly took his own life after being named as a suspect in the Poonch terror attack case, has dubbed the magisterial probe ordered by the Jammu and Kashmir administration as an “official cover-up”.

Seeking a judicial probe into the death of Mukhtar Hussain Shah, his family alleged that the order of the magisterial inquiry was “full of discrepancies”. “The order reads like an attempt to cover up the truth. It is a farce. We reject it and demand a judicial probe,” said Rafaqat Hussain Shah, Mukhtar’s brother.

The magisterial inquiry order into the death of Mukhtar.

Sources at the Rajouri district hospital, where Mukhtar breathed his last on April 27, said that the victim had reportedly consumed some poisonous substance which is suspected to have caused his death. “The exact cause of [his] death will be known once the post-mortem proceedings are completed,” the source added.

Rafaqat claimed that there were “bruises” and “black marks” on Mukhtar’s back and thighs, suggesting that he was tortured in custody. “If he has committed any wrong, let the investigators reveal the facts publicly. Why are they trying to hide the truth?” he said.

Senior superintendent of police, Poonch, Rohit Baskotra, hung up the call when The Wire asked for his comments on the case and what are the charges, if any, against Mukhtar. Deputy commissioner of Poonch, Inder Jeet, when contacted, said the matter is not within his jurisdiction now as he has been transferred out of the district.

Earlier this week, Tahir Mustafa Malik, additional deputy commissioner, Poonch, was appointed as inquiry officer by the J&K administration to conduct an “in-depth magisterial inquiry into the incident and circumstances (that) led to the death” of Mukhtar.

The inquiry order

Mukhtar, a farmer from Poonch’s Nar village, allegedly died by suicide, days after he was summoned by security agencies for questioning in the Bhata Durian terror attack case, as per his family.

Mukhtar Hussain Shah. Photo: author provided

Barring the youngest child, the rest of his three children study at a local school.

However, a Jammu-based daily reported that Mukhtar was “not a suspect… but was called for questioning like most of the residents of his village that is located near the ambush site.” “We came to know [that] he was facing domestic issues and was disturbed,” the daily quoted an unnamed official as saying.

While the inquiry order says that the victim consumed poison at his home on Tuesday, April 25, the family dismissed the claim as a “white lie”.  “I got a phone call on Wednesday [April 26] that Mukhtar was lying unconscious on the road. We took him to a hospital in Mendhar and doctors referred us to the Rajouri district hospital on the same day where he passed away on Thursday [April 27] at 12:20 am. I don’t know why they have written these lies,” said Rafaqat.

Quoting the family and locals, the inquiry order says that Mukhtar took the grave decision of ending his life “within hours after being asked to report to the police station in Mendhar for questioning in connection with the terror attack on an army vehicle” in Poonch.

However, the family rejected the order as an “eyewash”, claiming that Mukhtar got the first phone call from the security forces on the day of the attack itself, i.e., on April 20. Rafaqat said that Mukhtar went to the police station on the next day. He was detained for two days because of which their family didn’t celebrate Eid.

According to reports, there were subdued Eid festivities in Nar, Sanjiote and other villages located in the vicinity of the terror attack in Bhata Durian as the J&K police and the army were actively carrying out raids at several places to find clues about the attackers.

Rafaqat said that Mukhtar returned home two days later on April 23 at around 2:30 pm. “But he again got a phone call, asking him to come to Poonch on the same day for questioning. That was the last time we saw him,” said Rafaqat, breaking down into tears.

As the news of Mukhtar’s death spread on April 27, a pall of gloom descended on the village. Accompanied by neighbours and relatives, Mukhtar’s family, which comprises elderly parents, five brothers, their wives and children, blocked the Jammu-Poonch national highway between Bhimber Gali and Bhata Durian.

The protesters demanded an impartial inquiry into the circumstances that led to Mukhtar’s death following which the magisterial probe was ordered. During the protest, they were shouting anti-police, anti-administration, pro-army and pro-India slogans.

Allegations of torture

A video on Mukhtar’s phone shows him speaking incoherently and breaking down multiple times while alleging that he, his family, and the neighbours were subjected to torture in the aftermath of the terror attack. The video appears to have been recorded just before he passed away.

“I am not under any pressure from the army, police or any villager,” said Mukhtar, in the video, holding a small polythene bag in his hands, purportedly containing a bottle of insecticide. “I am taking my life, which is forbidden by my religion, because of the torture faced by my family and neighbours. No one is listening to me, even though I am telling the truth. It is totally wrong…I don’t have knowledge of anything.”

The duration of the video was 9 minutes and 48 seconds. It seems to have been recorded by another, unidentified person, as Mukhtar is seen rolling his eyeballs in anguish. However, no other person is visible in the frame.

The J&K police have not released any statement on the encounter or Mukhtar’s death.

Expressing regret over the death of five army soldiers, Mukhtar rejected having any links with militants. He also claimed to have worked with the police and the army last year during an encounter in Poonch. He named at least two police officials (names withheld) who were with him before he allegedly took his life.

“I am leaving for good because my villagers and friends are facing problems because of me. I helped the police and the army last year in the encounter. I am doing it today also. I am not afraid. I am on the righteous path. My family has sided with India till this day. But the same family is being tortured from all sides today,” he said, urging his family and villagers to “protect our country and cooperate with the forces”.

According to Rafaqat, one of their uncles, Gulzar Hussain Shah, his wife Khurshid Begum, two daughters, Shahnaz Akhtar and Masrat Kounser and two sons, Tahir Ali Shah and Morawat Ali Shah, were gunned down by suspected militants on September 14, 2000.

“From the last few years, we were living in peace, but the [terror] attack [in Poonch] has revived those horrors again. The government should give us justice, The person who recorded the video found in Mukhtar’s phone and still allowed him to consume poison should be unmasked and punished as well,” said Rafaqat.

Since the day the attack took place in Poonch, Rafaqat said that the army and the police carried out searches at their house on at least two occasions. “They vandalised our belongings and beat us. Even his [Mukhtar’s] 12-year-old son was not spared and slapped repeatedly. What was his crime? We only want justice,” he said.

Rahul Gandhi’s Defamation Case to Be Heard on May 2: Gujarat HC

Senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the court that ‘very serious ex-facie vitiating factors’ about the trial’s process led to Rahul Gandhi’s conviction in a criminal defamation case over his ‘Modi surname’ remark.

New Delhi: The Gujarat high court on April 29 posted Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s plea challenging a Surat court order declining a stay to his conviction in a criminal defamation case for final hearing on May 2.

Senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who argued on behalf of Gandhi, told the court that “very serious ex-facie vitiating factors” about the trial’s process led to the conviction of Gandhi in a criminal defamation case over his “Modi surname” remark, PTI reported.

According to the Indian Express, Singhvi pointed out a few basic grounds while seeking a stay on Gandhi’s defamation case.

Firstly, he said that by denying Gandhi’s plea for a stay on his conviction in such a case of criminal defamation, the court would be “rewriting” the scope of section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant on bail).

Second, he submitted that Gandhi’s statement made in Kolar, Karnataka, had not invoked any identifiable class of people, adding that none of the three people named in the statement – Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi and Vijay Mallya – was the complainant in the case.

Arguing that the trial was vitiated, as mentioned earlier, he submitted that the Surat court handed Gandhi the maximum punishment after conducting a hearing on the punishment aspect for only 10 minutes.

He further said that the offence for which Gandhi was awarded the maximum sentence of two years in jail was not serious nor did it involve any “moral turpitude”.

Also read: Is Rahul Gandhi What India Needs to Take On BJP’s Double Engine Sarkar of Development and Terror?

After hearing the arguments, the high court decided to adjourn the hearing to May 2 as advocate Nirupam Nanavati, the lawyer of complainant and Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Purnesh Modi, sought time to file a reply.

Purnesh Modi had lodged a complaint against Gandhi after he had allegedly asked in a rally in Kolar of Karnataka in 2019, “Why do all the thieves, be it Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi or Narendra Modi, have ‘Modi’ in their names?” Gujarat Police had FIR filed an under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 499 and 500 (dealing with defamation).

A day after his two-year sentence was announced, Gandhi was disqualified from the Lok Sabha.

The law states that if a member is convicted of any offence for two or more years, his or her seat will be declared vacant. One can only stay in the parliament if the conviction is suspended.

Eight Core Sector Industries Post 3.6% Growth in March, Slowest in Five Months

The output of core sectors had increased by 7.2% in February and 4.8% in the year-ago month. The previous low was 0.7% in October 2022.

New Delhi: The output of eight infrastructure sectors registered a growth of 3.6% in March 2023, its slowest pace since October, showed government data released on Friday, April 28.

The output of core sectors had increased by 7.2% in February and 4.8% in the year-ago month. The previous low was 0.7% in October 2022.

The output of crude oil declined by 2.8%, power by 1.8% and cement by 0.8% in March this year, PTI reported, citing official data.

On the other hand, coal production recorded an increase of 12.2%, fertilisers 9.7%, steel 8.8%, natural gas 2.8% and refinery products 1.5%.

The growth rate of eight infrastructure sectors – coal, crude oil, natural gas, refinery products, fertilisers, steel, cement and electricity – stood at 7.6% in FY23, down from 10.4% recorded in 2021-22.

Sunil Sinha, Principal Economist, India Ratings and Research told Mint, “With the weakening global and domestic demand, Ind-Ra believes that the growth in infrastructure industries would be under pressure in the ongoing fiscal year. As a result, the agency expects the core sector annual growth in FY24 at around 5%.”

“The halving in the year-on-year core sector growth to a five month low of 3.6% in March 2023 from 7.2% in February 2023, was fairly broad-based, with only coal and crude oil displaying a sequential improvement” ICRA chief economist Aditi Nayar told Mint.

“Output of some of the sectors is likely to have been dampened by the unseasonal rainfall, such as electricity and cement, which displayed a year-on-year contraction in March 2023 along with crude oil. At the same time, coal, fertilisers and steel displayed a healthy expansion in excess of 8% in March 2023, which is encouraging,” she added.

Dampened by a high base and heavy rainfall, the year-on-year performance of most of the available high frequency indicators weakened in March 2023, relative to February 2023, similar to the trend in the core sector, she told the newspaper.

The core sector or key infrastructure industries have a 40.27% weight in the overall index of industrial production.

Big Four IT Firms Hiring 66% Less Employees in FY23: Report

The four firms – TCS, Infosys, HCL Technologies and Wipro – hired 82,679 employees in FY23 as compared to 243,258 staff in FY22.

New Delhi: The big four IT firms – TCS, Infosys, HCL Technologies and Wipro – are hiring 66% less employees in FY23 than a year ago, the Financial Express reported.

The four firms hired 82,679 employees in FY23 as compared to 243,258 staff in FY22.

The report said TCS saw the sharpest decline in hiring at 78% in FY23, followed by Wipro at 70%. The decline in net addition by HCL Tech and Infosys was at 57.2% and 46.3%, respectively, on a year-on-year basis, it added.

Analysts told the newspaper that the talent market is returning to the pre-pandemic times with FY23 numbers being closer to that of FY21, when net addition was at 86,685 employees.

“If you look at quarterly annualised attrition, our attrition rate has come down by 4.2% from last quarter to this quarter. For future, I expect it to come down to pre-pandemic levels in the second half of this year,” Milind Lakkad, chief HR officer said, TCS, told the business daily at the post-March quarter earnings of the company.

However, there was an increase in revenue per employee by all the companies in FY23, the report said.

“TCS’s revenue per employee increased to Rs 36.6 lakh in FY23 from Rs 32.4 lakh in FY22. Similarly, revenue per employee for Infosys increased to Rs 42.7 lakh compared to Rs 38.7 lakh in FY22. HCL Tech and Wipro also saw their revenue per employee go up to Rs 44.9 lakh and Rs 35.2 lakh, respectively, in FY23, from Rs 41 lakh and Rs 32.5 lakh,” it said.

‘National Shame’: International Booker Winner Geetanjali Shree Condemns Atrocity Against Wrestlers

‘Even as private a person as me feels constrained to come out of my solitude and condemn this atrocity.’

New Delhi: International Booker winner Geetanjali Shree has expressed solidarity with the wrestlers protesting at New Delhi’s Jantar Mantar against the Delhi Police’s prolonged refusal to register an FIR against a BJP MP and the Wrestling Federation of India’s chief, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh over serious allegations of sexual harassment levelled against him.

She is the most well known of contemporary writers to have written publicly in support of the wrestlers, who have noted time and again that their voices are being drowned out in favour of Singh because he belongs to the ruling party.

“To obtain simple justice, our ace wrestlers, forsaking their work and security, have been forced to mount an agitation and to approach the Supreme Court. It is painful and a national shame,” Shree said in the statement.

A day ago, the Supreme Court was told by the Delhi Police that it would register an FIR on the matter and that it had found “after preliminary enquiry” that such a step could be taken.

“What as a people have we done to ourselves? Justice should be available as a matter of course and not require agitation and knocking at the Supreme Court’s door,” Shree noted in a statement.

“Even as private a person as me feels constrained to come out of my solitude and condemn this atrocity. That it is to do with our ‘national treasures’, and to do with women, absolutely cannot let anyone be quiet,” she further said.

Indian football legend Bhaichung Bhutia was among noted personalities who tweeted on Saturday expressing solidarity with the wrestlers.

Former hockey captain Viren Rasquinha also noted his awe at the show of courage.

A day after Indian Olympic Association chief P.T. Usha said the ongoing protest by wrestlers “amounted to indiscipline,” top athletes of the country like Neeraj Chopra, Sania Mirza and Nikhat Zareen had tweeted their support. Olympic gold winner Abhinav Bindra had tweeted in support on April 26.

As SC Stays Calcutta HC Judge’s Direction to it, Judicial Discipline Is Under Scrutiny

On Friday, at 8 pm, a special bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli, took suo motu notice of Calcutta HC Judge, Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay’s direction to the Supreme Court Secretary General and stayed it.

The Supreme Court’s special sitting at 8 pm on Friday, April 28, to stay Calcutta high court judge Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay’s  direction to it brings to the fore the relevance of judicial discipline in sustaining people’s confidence in judiciary.  

Justice Gangopadhyay had on Friday, directed the Supreme Court’s Secretary General to provide him with the translation of his controversial media interview on the West Bengal teachers’ recruitment scam that was placed before the Supreme Court bench of the Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, and Justice P.S. Narasimha in the morning. This led to concerns on whether he had exceeded his jurisdiction and violated the judicial discipline applicable to the Judges of the Higher Judiciary.   

The CJI-led bench had, in view of the interview, directed the acting Chief Justice of the Calcutta high court, T.S. Sivagnanam, to reassign the pending proceedings in the case being heard by Justice Gangopadhyay to another judge. 

“The judge to whom it is reassigned shall be at liberty to take up any application in that regard. Anybody who wants to make an application, that judge will consider it,” the Supreme Court’s order, issued by the CJI-led bench, read. On April 24, the same bench had made strong observations against sitting judges giving interviews to the media. 

Justice Gangopadhyay was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) petition alleging massive corruption in the recruitment of assistant teachers in primary schools of the state on the basis of the 2014 Teacher Eligibility Test. The Supreme Court had earlier refused to entertain a petition filed by the West Bengal government questioning the maintainability of the plea before the high court. 

Several division benches of the high court had recused themselves from hearing appeals against the interim orders issued by Justice Gangopadhyay in this case. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s intervention at this stage, on the ground of his interview, has raised eyebrows. When a division bench of the high court did stay his judgment in the case last year, he had publicly complained that his hands were being tied again and again.

Also read: Bengal SSC Recruitment Scam: How a ‘Focused’ Judge Exposed the Racket

Justice Gangopadhyay had earlier directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to question the ruling Trinamool Congress party national general secretary, Abhishek Banerjee. Banerjee is the nephew of Bengal chief minister and TMC chief Mamata Banerjee and is understood to be influential in Bengal.

Apparently irked by the Supreme Court’s intervention into the high court’s Chief Justice’s functions as the master of the roster, Justice Gangopadhyay suo motu passed the order directing the Supreme Court’s Secretary General to furnish the translation, giving the latter time till midnight on Friday to comply with it.   

The suo motu intervention by Justice Gangopadhyay, and the tone and tenor of his order, imposing a deadline on a Supreme Court’s senior official, smacked of his ignorance of jurisdictional powers of a high court judge, and the separation of judicial and administrative functions of the Chief Justice of India. The Secretary General of the Supreme Court, being the senior-most employee of the court, comes under the direct supervision of the CJI, in his capacity as the administrative head of the Supreme Court. 

The CJI’s vast administrative powers as the head of the entire judiciary in general, and that of the Supreme Court in particular, and as the master of the roster, cannot be diluted by the judicial directions of his colleagues in the Supreme Court or by the judges of the high courts. 

It can be debated whether the CJI can use his judicial arm to interfere with the administrative powers of a high court chief justice, to assign cases. In our constitutional scheme, the high courts enjoy equal powers of judicial review like that of the Supreme Court, and can hear and decide constitutional questions as well.

The chief justices of the high Courts too enjoy powers as master of the roster within their respective high courts, just as the CJI within the Supreme Court.  

More important, administratively, the high courts are not subordinate to the Supreme Court and they enjoy considerable autonomy in their functioning. Therefore, the CJI’s “direction” to the Chief Justice of the high court to reassign the case to a judge other than Justice Gangopadhyay, as a punitive step for the media interview he had given on the pending matter, comes as a surprise. 

But the response of Justice Gangopadhyay to this administrative interference by the CJI, as the head of the judicial family in the country as a whole, was worse than what he might have considered as a judicial remedy, as it conveyed a clear and unmistakable sign of judicial indiscipline. 

The controversial interview

In his interview to the news channel, ABP Ananda, Justice Gangopadhyay had reportedly said that Abhishek Banerjee should face jail for three months if he fails to substantiate his allegation that a section of the judiciary was hand in glove with the BJP. 

“I am aware that after the interview, there will be a controversy, but whatever I am doing is as per The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, which state that judges have the freedom of expression but that whatever they say has to be under the purview of the law,” the judge had said.

Also read: Why a HC Judge’s Interview to a TV Channel Is Being Seen as a Crusade Against Corruption

Justice Gangopadhyay claimed that he believed in “strictest action” against anyone who points a finger at the judiciary.

The judge said he was in Ladakh when Abhishek had made comments regarding the judiciary. “I thought I would issue a ruling against him, summon him, take action. Once back in Kolkata, I found that a petition was filed in this regard, but a division bench did not consider it. They thought he would get extra attention. But I have a different opinion.”

Claiming he had “never compromised with corruption”, Justice Gangopadhyay had gone on to add: “I want to pass judgments which, long after I am not there, will come up before researchers, who will know that there was a judge like this.”

It is interesting to note that the interview, which was relied upon for divesting the part-heard matter from Justice Gangopadhyay, made only a general reference to the allegation of corruption in the matter, though it was unusual for a sitting judge to directly refer to political personalities in the course of an interview.  

Courtroom Observations

But Justice Gangopadhyay seems to have made headlines not only because of his notable judgments, but also due to his loose tongue. 

On November 26 last year, during a hearing in the recruitment case, Justice Gangopadhyay observed that he might have to ask the Election Commission to cancel the recognition of the TMC as a political party and withdraw its logo. “No one has the right to (mess) with the constitution,” he added.

The observation came after West Bengal Education Secretary Manish Jain told the court that a decision to create additional teachers’ posts to accommodate “illegal” appointments was taken by the state cabinet and ordered by Bengal education minister Bratya Basu. Jain added that he himself was not present at the said meeting.

Wondering how the cabinet could take such a decision, Justice Gangopadhyay observed: “The state cabinet will have to announce that they are not backing the illegal appointments and also withdraw the notification of May 19 (2022) for the creation of additional teachers’ appointments. Else, I will take such a decision that is unprecedented in the country… If necessary, I will make the entire state Cabinet a party in the matter and summon each member. If necessary, I will issue a show-cause notice to all of them.”

Justice Gangopadhyay’s comments had then drawn sharp criticism questioning his moral authority to make such comments as a Judge. 

The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, as adopted by the Full Court Meeting of the Supreme Court of India, on May 7, 1997, says  a judge shall not enter into public debate or express his views in public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to arise for judicial determination. Another code says a Judge is expected to let his judgments speak for themselves and that he shall not give interview to the media. 

To be fair, the Supreme Court order divesting Justice Gangopadhyay the teachers recruitment scam case being heard by him, should make it clear how he was prima facie guilty of violating these codes, and record his version as well. Indeed, a petition seeking a ban on telecasting the interview was dismissed by the high court last year through a reasoned order. 

It is not clear whether this order was placed before the  CJI, along with Justice Gangopadhyay’s interview.