Home Minister Amit Shah on Sunday asserted that no stone pelter or terrorist will be released in Jammu and Kashmir and there will be no talks with Pakistan till terrorism is wiped out.

At an election rally in Nowshera in support of J-K BJP president Ravinder Raina, the Home Minister said he would like to talk to the youth of Jammu and Kashmir, whom he referred to as lions.

Shah alleged that allies National Conference and Congress want to release stone pelters and terrorists after forming their government as promised in their manifesto.

“Farooq Abdullah is talking about the revival of terrorism in Jammu hills but I want to tell them that this is Modi government and we will bury terrorism in patal’ (deep inside earth). No terrorist or stone pelter will be released,” he said.

Shah further accused the allies that NC and Congress are batting for talks with Pakistan.

“I want to tell Farooq Abdullah and Rahul Gandhi that there will be no dialogue with Pakistan till terrorism is wiped out. I will talk with my lions (youth of J-K) and not with Pakistan,” Shah said.

Referring to underground bunkers constructed by the government for the safety of border residents over the years, he said there would be no need for such structures as nobody has the power to open fire from across the border.

“If they fire a bullet, we will respond with a shell,” he said.

He also slammed the NC-Congress leaders’ remarks on the reservation and said nobody would be allowed to touch reservations given to deprived sections, including Paharis, Gujjars, Dalits, and other backward classes.

“Rahul Gandhi is saying in America that there is no need for reservation. I want to tell him that you will not be allowed to finish reservations for the deserving communities,” he said.

Anti-corruption ombudsman Lokpal has said the complaint of the Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra alleging impropriety and conflict of interest by the SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch falls short of persuading it to order any probe, asking the complainant to verify the authenticity of the claims in the recent report of Hindenburg Research.

The anti-corruption body, headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice AM Khanwilkar, stated that the Lokpal cannot solely act based on the Hindenburg Research report. The report raised allegations of quid pro quo against SEBI Chief Buch, citing her investments in offshore funds linked to the Adani group of companies.

While deciding on two complaints filed by different individuals based on a report by US-based short-seller Hindenburg Research, it asked both the complainants to file affidavits mentioning details of the efforts made by them to verify the authenticity and credibility of the claims in the recent report of Hindenburg Research published on 10.08.2024.

The Lokpal requested the details of the allegations against the individual that could constitute corruption within the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, according to its public order dated September 20, to prevent misinterpretation and politicization of the issue.

Hindenburg Research’s report claimed that Buch and her husband were involved in offshore funds related to an alleged Adani scandal, which both parties refuted, considering it an attack on the regulator’s credibility.

In response to a complaint lodged by a Lok Sabha MP, the Lokpal found insufficient grounds to initiate a preliminary inquiry under Section 20 of the Lokpal Act of 2013.

“This direction is only a procedural order, issued for testing the question of tenability of the concerned complaint and to record a prima facie view as required under Section 20 of the Act of 2013, in the peculiar fact situation,” reads the order issued by Lokpal chairperson Justice A M Khanwilkar and three other members — Justices L Narayana Swamy, Ritu Raj Awasthi, and Sushil Chandra.

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra filed a complaint on September 13 and proposed that the matter be referred to the Enforcement Directorate or the Central Bureau of Investigation for a full inquiry.

Concerning the complaint and its subsequent investigation, the Lokpal highlighted the importance of protecting the identities involved and ensuring a fair inquiry process.

The Lokpal in its order, without mentioning the name of the complainant, said the communication filed in its office is dated September 11, 2024, whose entire copy “was contemporaneously placed in public domain (in media) despite the mandate of Rule 4 of the Lokpal (Complaint) Rules, 2020-guaranteeing protection of identity not only to the complainant but also to the public servant complained against till the conclusion of the inquiry or investigation.”

The complainant hastily submitted the complaint on the same day they came across the Hindenburg Research report without adequate verification, prompting the Lokpal to stress the need for credible evidence before lodging complaints.

The Lokpal emphasised the requirement for a thorough articulation of corruption allegations, following a strict procedural approach to assess the validity of the complaint.

The cases were scheduled for further review by the Lokpal on October 17, 2024, to delve deeper into the allegations and the necessity for a detailed investigation, PTI reported.

Amid the unabating crisis in Manipur, Congress MP A Bimol Akoijam raises pointed questions over the Centre’s inaction, suggesting that such a situation would not have been left unaddressed if it happened in states such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

In an interview with PTI, Akoijam vehemently criticised the Centre’s handling of the situation in Manipur, asking why the government of India was allowing the northeastern state to become like Afghanistan, which he described as a “banana republic”.

“With 60,000 troops stationed in Manipur, the central government should have prevented this crisis from persisting for so long,” Akoijam stated.

“If this were happening in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, or Madhya Pradesh, would it have been allowed to linger? Most people would say no,” he added.

Amid the continuing crisis, Akoijam urged the Centre to thrash out the issues in the state government, claiming that BJP MLAs were speaking in two different voices on the issue of separate administration.

“Prime Minister Narendra Modi should have called his MLAs and ministers and said ‘this should not happen in India. Manipur is not a part of any Banana Republic, I will not allow this to happen, talk it out, what is the problem’,” Akoijam said.

Representatives of certain Kuki groups in Manipur made a demand last month for the creation of a Union Territory with a legislature similar to that of Puducherry, stating that it was the only solution to the ongoing strife.

However, Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh has emphatically rejected the demand.

Akoijam, who represents the Inner Manipur constituency in the Lok Sabha, emphasised that while he viewed Singh as a “small-time player” in the broader crisis, he could not be completely absolved of responsibility.

He alleged, “The government of India is squarely responsible for the crisis.”

He voiced serious concerns about the deteriorating situation in the state and cited the example of Afghanistan, saying, “where warlords roam around and the central authority cannot assert itself.”

Akoijam also urged the Centre to assert itself “decisively and judiciously.”

When asked if he thought Manipur was heading in the direction of Afghanistan, the Congress MP said, “The government of India has been allowing it. So, the question is – instead of asking whether Manipur is going the Afghanistan way, we should be asking why the government of India is allowing Manipur to be like a banana republic, like in Afghanistan. That should be the right question.”

Akoijam alleged that there had been a deliberate effort to destabilize Manipur, claiming that “someone is scripting this in cahoots with those seeking to split and dismember the state.”

He observed that the violence witnessed in Manipur was unprecedented in post-colonial India, describing it as akin to a civil war characterized by sophisticated arms and military-style operations.

Akoijam, an associate professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, stated, “India is not a banana republic. Even if the Indian Armed Forces were allowed to act as a peacekeeping force in a foreign country, you would not allow these things to happen.”

Akoijam also dismissed Home Minister Amit Shah’s assertion that the overall situation in Manipur had been calm outside of three days of recent violence.

“The government’s statements create confusion rather than clarity,” he said.

Regarding the possibility of restoring peace and facilitating movement between communities in Manipur, Akoijam expressed skepticism, noting that the situation was far more complex than other historical conflicts in the country.

When asked if he could provide a timeline for normalizing the situation in Manipur, the MP said it was “embarrassing for me” as an Indian to ask when communities affected by communal violence would be able to return to their homes.

He stated, “The situation of Kashmiri Pandits is often discussed but at least some Pandits remain; in this case, there is a complete absence of certain communities.”

Akoijam pointed out that while there were security concerns, there was a need to acknowledge that certain armed groups had committed violence, and civilians had been armed as well.

He added, “This has never happened before and blaming one community or another only complicates matters further.”

As the situation in strife-torn Manipur continues to be tense, there have been increasingly louder calls for a robust response from the central government, with stakeholders expressing deep concerns over the future of peace and stability in the region.

Ethnic violence in Manipur erupted on May 3, 2022, following a tribal solidarity march in the hill districts to protest against the majority Meitei community’s push for Scheduled Tribe status. Since then, the violence has claimed the lives of more than 220 individuals, including members of both the Kuki and Meitei communities, as well as security personnel.