English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

“We want an early resolution of Ayodhya dispute”

Published

on

mudda

Panellists feel that the issue is hanging fire for too long and parties should not misuse it for electoral advantage

The Supreme Court said it will decide in January the date for hearing the Ayodhya land dispute case. In less than three minutes, the court adjourned till next year the hearing of a batch of pleas challenging the Allahabad High Court’s 2010 verdict that divided into three parts the disputed land in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid area in Ayodhya.

APN’s Mudda discussed the issue. Anchorperson Anant Tyagi posed questions to panellists including BJP’s Dinesh Singh, Congress’ Saif Ali, Hindu Mahasabha’s Swami Chakrapani Maharaj, Muslim scholars Ajmal Khan and Maulana Abid, RSS’s Sarvesh Chandra Dwivedi and APN consultant Govind Pant Raju.

Singh said: “For some reason, the Supreme Court has put off the decision. Let’s see what happens, we can’t keep sidelining it. We wanted an early resolution.”

Swami Chakrapani said: “It is sad that despite repeated pleas to the government and agencies, the issue has been put off again and again. BJP leaders say ‘it should be done’. Why are they failing on their agenda? What is the point of BJP getting such a huge majority? It’s a challenge to the protesters now.”

When Anant asked “don’t you trust the SC?”, Swami Chakrapani said: “We want judgment, not settlement, so that there is no dispute on the issue. BJP got a good decisive vote, but its moves are not decisive.”

Maluana Abid said: “Court judges decide as per what they deem fit. This Mudda has been raging on for decades. Earlier with Vajpayee and now with Modi, nothing decisive has emerged even with a BJP government at the centre. Are they expecting the court to be at the beck and call of political parties?”

To this, Singh said:”We have never said that we don’t trust the SC. Ram is of Hindustan, the verdict has to be favourable.”

Maulana Abid said:”It’s a title suit. Why are you bringing in Ram or Babar? When the matter is with the highest court of the country, we shall all have to abide by the verdict.”

When Singh continued to interject, he was silenced by the anchor.

Saif Khan said: “There is a lot the SC needs to know, a lot more research and comments are needed to be heard. People need to know that there is no love lost on this issue. The government has a Rs 500 crore budget for Ayodhya. How has that been used?”

Ajmal Khan said: “We can’t understand why the SC adjourned the case. We can only respect the verdict. There cannot be a debate on the SC adjournment.”

Raju said: “People expected the SC to decide once and for all. It’s unfortunate that the matter was adjourned in three minutes. The court did not deem the matter urgent enough. It could have given an earlier date. In reality, a lot more time is needed to arrive at a conclusion on this issue. The Ram Mandir mudda is a political issue, raised by political parties; faith is a different matter altogether. The SC case has nothing to do with faith. It’s a site dispute.”

Singh said: “Don’t allege that BJP is raking up this issue for political votes before the upcoming elections. Mudda is created by the people, not the parties.”

Swami Chakrapani said: “The BJP got a massive mandate to sort out this issue. But it is still hanging fire. The central government is equally vague about gau maaas (beef). They need to be clearer in their intentions and their actions.”

Said Khan said: “Whatever the SC verdict, we respect it. It is just a poll issue. BJP is not serious about devolving a solution to this at all.”

Maulana Abid said: “In 70 years, Muslims have suffered a lot. Images have been slipped in the dark of the night into the place. Let the SC decide the truth.”

Sarvesh Dwivedi said: “Whoever is raking up this issue should wait for the SC verdict now. However, the issue could have been decided amicably by all parties.”

                                                                                    —Compiled by Niti Singh Bhandari

India News

BJP releases first list of 47 candidates for Kerala assembly polls

The BJP has released its first list of 47 candidates for the Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9, including three former Union ministers.

Published

on

BJP releases list of candidates

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday released its first list of 47 candidates for the upcoming Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9.

Voting will take place for all 140 seats in the state assembly, with counting of votes scheduled for May 4. A party or coalition needs at least 70 seats to secure a majority in the House.

Among the candidates announced in the first list are three former Union ministers — Rajeev Chandrasekhar, V. Muraleedharan and George Kurian.

Key candidates announced

Kerala BJP chief and former Union minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar has been fielded from the Nemom assembly constituency. In the 2024 Lok Sabha election, Chandrasekhar lost the Thiruvananthapuram seat to three-time MP Shashi Tharoor, but he led in the Nemom assembly segment during that contest. The party believes this performance strengthens its prospects in the constituency.

Nemom has held political significance for the BJP since 2016, when senior leader O. Rajagopal won the seat and became the party’s first-ever MLA in the 140-member Kerala Legislative Assembly. The victory marked the BJP’s initial breakthrough in the state assembly.

However, the seat returned to the Left camp in the 2021 Assembly election when V. Sivankutty defeated BJP leader Kummanam Rajasekharan.

Former Union minister V. Muraleedharan will contest from the Kazhakoottam constituency, while George Kurian has been nominated from Kanjirappally.

Other candidates in the list

According to the list released by the party, several other candidates have also been announced for key constituencies. P. C. George will contest from Poonjar, R. Sreelekha from Vattiyoorkavu and Padmaja Venugopal from Thrissur.

The BJP has also nominated Sobha Surendran from Palakkad, Navya Haridas from Kozhikode North and Kavitha K. S. from Sulthanbathery, a reserved constituency.

Raji Prasad will contest from the Kunnathur seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, while R. Rashmi has been fielded from Kottarakkara.

Political backdrop in Kerala

Kerala’s electoral politics has traditionally alternated between the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF). However, the BJP has been attempting to expand its presence in the state.

The alternating trend was interrupted in the 2021 Assembly election when the electorate returned the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government to power for a second consecutive term.

The BJP believes recent electoral performances and local body successes have strengthened its position as it prepares to contest the upcoming assembly polls.

Continue Reading

India News

Fire in ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack kills 10 patients

Ten patients died after a fire broke out in the trauma ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack early Monday morning. Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi announced compensation and ordered a judicial probe.

Published

on

A major fire at the trauma care intensive care unit (ICU) of SCB Medical College and Hospital in Cuttack, Odisha, early Monday morning left ten patients dead and several hospital staff members injured.

According to officials, the fire broke out between 2:30 am and 3:00 am in the trauma ICU where critically ill patients were undergoing treatment. Emergency teams rushed to the scene soon after the incident, and multiple fire engines were deployed to control the blaze and assist in rescue operations.

Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi said hospital staff were injured while evacuating patients from the affected ward during the emergency.

Patients shifted as rescue operations continued

Following the fire, 23 patients were moved to other departments and wards within the hospital to ensure their safety and continued medical care.

Speaking to reporters, the Chief Minister said seven critically ill patients died while being shifted to other ICUs and wards, while three more succumbed later.

“A total of 23 patients have been shifted to other departments. Seven serious patients died while shifting to other ICUs and wards, while another three patients died later. I have directed the concerned officers for proper treatment of the injured patients,” Majhi said.

Chief minister visits hospital, announces compensation

Soon after the incident, Majhi visited the hospital along with Odisha Health Minister Mukesh Mahaling to review the situation. They also met patients who were undergoing treatment at the facility.

The Chief Minister announced financial assistance of ₹25 lakh for the families of each deceased patient.

He also ordered a judicial probe into the incident to determine the cause of the fire and examine safety measures at the hospital.

Authorities continue to monitor the condition of injured staff members and patients who were shifted from the ICU.

Continue Reading

India News

Arvind Kejriwal moves Supreme Court against Delhi High Court order in excise policy case

Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging a Delhi High Court order related to proceedings in the excise policy case and alleging violation of his fundamental rights.

Published

on

Arvind Kejriwal

Aam Aadmi Party chief and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court of India challenging certain proceedings in the Delhi excise policy case and alleging a violation of his fundamental rights.

In a petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, Kejriwal has questioned a decision of the Delhi High Court that put a freeze on remarks related to the investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The petition also challenges an order of the High Court Chief Justice rejecting Kejriwal’s request to transfer the case to another bench.

Plea seeks change of bench

Earlier, on March 11, Kejriwal and several others submitted a representation to Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya seeking reassignment of the case to what they described as an “impartial” judge.

In the representation, Kejriwal stated that he had a “grave, bona fide and reasonable apprehension” that the matter may not receive an impartial hearing before the current bench.

However, the Chief Justice declined the request and said the petition had been assigned as per the existing roster.

According to the communication sent by the High Court’s Registrar General on March 13 to eight individuals including Kejriwal, the Chief Justice noted that any decision on recusal must be taken by the judge hearing the matter and that there was no reason to transfer the petition administratively.

Order on trial court proceedings also challenged

Kejriwal has also challenged a March 9 order passed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court.

In that order, Justice Sharma had stayed a trial court direction that called for an investigation into a CBI officer who handled the excise policy case. The High Court had also asked the trial court to defer proceedings connected to the anti-money laundering aspect of the case.

Justice Sharma had further rejected certain observations made by the trial court while discharging Kejriwal and 22 others, stating that some of those remarks were erroneous.

Hearing expected on CBI plea

Meanwhile, Justice Sharma is scheduled to hear a petition filed by the CBI challenging the discharge of Kejriwal, former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and others in the excise policy case.

The matter remains under judicial consideration as the legal challenge now moves to the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com