English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Mecca Masjid blasts: Acquittal due to lack of evidence indicates botched up investigation, nothing more

Published

on

Mecca Masjid blasts: Acquittal due to lack of evidence indicates botched up investigation, nothing more

As Hindutva groups with BJP leaders in the forefront gloat over the acquittals of their fellow travellers in Mecca Masjid blasts case, a few facts need to be kept in mind to put things in proper perspective.

First, it is wrong to say that acquittals ‘prove’ Hindutva elements are not involved in terror. Among the acquitted is one, Devendra Gupta, a former RSS pracharak, who was convicted in March last year in Ajmer Dargah blast that happened the same year – 2007 – as Mecca Masjid blasts.

The court said the NIA had established that Gupta had bought the cell phone SIM cards used to time and trigger the bombs kept at the Sufi shrine.

Second is the fake allegation that the Congress-led UPA government got Hindutva groups implicated in all terror cases under an agenda.

When the cases were taken over by NIA, the Union Home Secretary was a current member of PM Narendra Modi’s council of ministers, RK Singh, handpicked for the top home ministry post by then home minister P Chidambaram.

It was RK Singh who had disclosed the role of RSS-linked groups in the bomb blasts.

Third, these terror cases had common links.

The SIM cards used in the blast were part of the set used in the Ajmer Dargah blast.

A SIM recovered from an unexploded bomb at Mecca Masjid blast site had matched with a phone used in the Ajmer Dargah blast. Mobile phones and SIMs used in the Ajmer blast were similar to the ones used in the Mecca Masjid blast. The phones even had similar IMEI numbers and SIM card numbers were also in a sequence.

In Ajmer Dargah blast case, Devendra Gupta was convicted along with Bhavesh Patel and Sunil Joshi.

A resident of Bharuch in Gujarat, Bhavesh had allegedly planted two bombs at Ajmer Dargah but only one exploded, the probe agency stated. Two SIM cards found in the unexploded bomb became the first material evidence in the case and led the conviction of the duo.

Fourth, at Mecca Masjid blast site, it was found that only one of the two bombs had exploded. The unexploded IED, a red shirt and a key were recovered from the site.

Till date, it is not known what the key was meant for and who the redshirt belonged to. At first, it was believed that the key was meant to trigger the device, but forensics went on to show that there was a mismatch between the key and the explosive device.

The mystery regarding the redshirt also continues. Interestingly when the case was handed over the NIA by the CBI, the red shirt was missing. The NIA never received the shirt. The shirt would have been crucial to the probe as it would have helped in DNA sampling. Who got it removed?

Fifth, a prime accused Aseemanand, who had also been acquitted in Ajmer Sharif Dargah blast case last year due to lack of evidence, turned hostile. He retracted his confessional statement with the claim that it was extracted under duress.

Fact is, he had given that statement to the judicial officer, over two days when he was in judicial custody. There were no policemen around to threaten or pressurise him.

The NIA had placed heavy reliance on Aseemanand’s confessional statement in which he had said that he decided to come clean was after meeting with one youth called Abdul Kaleem. He said that Kaleem who was in a Hyderabad jail was tortured in connection with the same case and hence he decided to spill the beans.

In fact, the police – NIA in this case – in a way, cooperated with him and did not oppose his bail application either in Samjhauta train blast case or in Mecca Masjid blast case, which it should have done routinely. This was hardly normal. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had granted bail to Aseemanand in Samjhauta train blast case in 2014. He was granted bail in 2017 in Mecca Masjid blasts case as well.

Swami Aseemanand, whose real name is Naba Kumar Sarkar, was arrested on November 19, 2010, from Haridwar in connection with the blast at the Mecca Masjid on May 18, 2007. A resident of Gujarat, Aseemanand now faces trial only in the 2007 Samjhauta Express train blast case in which 68 people were killed.

In addition to Aseemanand, there were many other witnesses who turned hostile and this proved to be fatal to the case.

Sixth, and finally, the argument that since the chargesheet was prepared under Congress-led UP and hence the BJP government could not be accused of trying to influence prosecution does not wash. Without going into whether Modi government tried to do so or not, the fact is certainly could do it. Letting witnesses go and not following up evidence, not contesting bails, and not arguing the prosecution case properly, among others, are all possible. In Malegaon blasts case, this was exactly what the former prosecutor Rohini Salian had said when she alleged that she had been asked to ‘go soft’ against the accused.

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

on

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

India News

Give all tickets to Muslim women, Amit Shah says, attacking Akhilesh Yadav on sub-quota demand

A sharp exchange between Amit Shah and Akhilesh Yadav in Parliament over sub-quota for Muslim women highlights key divisions on women’s reservation implementation.

Published

on

A heated exchange broke out in Parliament during discussions on the women’s reservation framework, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav locking horns over the demand for a sub-quota for Muslim women.

The debate unfolded as the government pushed forward key legislative measures to implement 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Akhilesh Yadav argued that the proposed reservation must ensure representation for women from marginalised communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslim women. He said that without such provisions, large sections could remain excluded from political participation.

He also questioned the timing of the bill, alleging that the Centre was avoiding a caste census. According to him, a census would lead to renewed demands for caste-based reservations, which the government is reluctant to address.

Government rejects religion-based quota

Responding to the demand, Amit Shah made it clear that reservation based on religion is not permitted under the Constitution.

He stated that any proposal to provide quota to Muslims on religious grounds would be unconstitutional, firmly rejecting the idea of a separate sub-quota for Muslim women within the broader reservation framework.

The government has maintained that the existing framework already includes provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) women within the overall reservation structure.

Wider political divide over implementation

The issue of sub-categorisation within the women’s quota has emerged as a major flashpoint, even as most opposition parties broadly support the idea of women’s reservation.

Samajwadi Party leaders reiterated that their support for the bill depends on inclusion of OBC and minority women, while the government continues to defend its constitutional position.

The debate is part of a broader discussion during the special Parliament session, where multiple bills linked to delimitation and implementation of the women’s quota are being taken up.

Continue Reading

India News

No state will lose a seat, Centre assures as delimitation debate takes centre stage in Parliament

Parliament’s special session begins with key focus on implementing women’s reservation and delimitation, setting the stage for major electoral changes.

Published

on

Parliament

A special session of Parliament commenced on Thursday, with the Centre set to take up crucial legislation related to women’s reservation and delimitation of constituencies. The session, scheduled over three days, is expected to witness intense debate as the government pushes forward its legislative agenda.

At the centre of discussions is the proposal to operationalise the women’s reservation law, which seeks to allocate 33 percent of seats in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies to women. The law, passed earlier, requires enabling provisions before it can be implemented.

The rollout of the reservation is closely tied to the delimitation exercise — a process that redraws parliamentary constituencies based on updated population data. The implementation is expected only after the next census and delimitation process are completed.

The government is aiming to put in place the framework so that the reservation can be enforced in future elections, likely around 2029.

Delimitation and numbers at play

Delimitation is a key aspect of the proposed changes, as it will determine how seats are redistributed and which constituencies are reserved. The exercise is expected to reflect population shifts and may also involve an increase in the total number of Lok Sabha seats.

This linkage has made the issue politically sensitive, with several opposition parties backing women’s reservation in principle but raising concerns over how and when delimitation will be carried out.

Political reactions and expected debate

The session is likely to see sharp exchanges between the government and opposition. While there is broad agreement on increasing women’s representation, disagreements remain over the timing, process, and potential political implications of the delimitation exercise.

Some leaders have argued that delimitation could significantly alter the balance of representation among states, making it a contentious issue beyond the women’s quota itself.

The government, however, has framed the move as a step toward strengthening women’s participation in governance and ensuring more inclusive policymaking.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com