news details |
|
|
| IR against TRS MP Kavitha for remarks on J&K, Telangana | | Why not case against NC, others? | | Neha
JAMMU, Aug 12: Telangana police has registered a case against Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) MP and daughter of Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, K Kavitha, for her controversial comments on Jammu & Kashmir and Telangana. The case was registered two days back under Sections 124-A (sedition) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) following directions from a local court. The Seventh Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Nampally, had last week directed police to investigate and file a case against Kavitha, the Nizamabad MP, upon a complaint over alleged remarks attributed to her. The complaint was filed by K Karunasagar, an advocate and the convener of the BJP's city legal cell. The complainant in the petition had alleged that Kavitha, in an interview to The Indian Express, had made observations that Jammu & Kashmir and Telangana were not part of India earlier.
What exactly had Kavitha said? She had said: "Jammu and Kashmir and Telangana were both formed forcefully and at the same time annexed to the Indian union. When I say I feel strongly, it's because we were both separate countries, but were merged with the Indian union after independence. In 1947, we were not a part of India. After 1947, we became a part of India. Then the troubles really started. None of our people were very rich before. So it's from the people's perspective that I've started reading about Jammu and Kashmir. We need to solve issues, particularly the Kashmiri Pandits' issue which is put up in the agenda of the BJP. They say we can all take them back home, but it is just a political statement. You have to create a safe environment before you take them there. We need to come out clean on Jammu and Kashmir. Few parts were not ours, we should agree, we should redraw the international lines, and move on. Development is suffering and you see frequent bombings. Our economy takes a toll. Even in the Budget, almost R2.50 lakh crore has been allotted to defence. If we have a peaceful environment in our bordering states, we don't have to spend so much on defence. We can spend that money on education, women's development or sanitation. Today, if I talk about no bathrooms in girls' schools, I should be ashamed of myself being a citizen of this country".
The local court did well to ask the police to register a case against Kavitha. After all, she had made comments which accorded legitimacy to secessionists in Kashmir and other parts of the country. It is important to note that her remarks had also evoked a very strong reaction even from the Congress. Reacting to the statements of Kavitha, Congress spokesperson Abishek Manu Singhvi had said that such statements by elected representatives of the nation in Lok Sabha "are liable to misunderstand, misquote it and alter India's stated established invariable position for decades". "They (J&K and Telangana) were autonomous regions before independence even within the British Empire. They were, of course, princely states but the whole meaning and purpose of an Instrument of Accession is that princely states surrendered whatever autonomy they had to become part of the system after the lapsing into the Indian Union", he said.
Now that a case has been registered against Kavitha, it is also time for the J&K High Court to take a suo-motto notice of what many in Kashmir, including Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, have been saying about the political status of J&K so that those who have been questioning the legal presence of India in its own state of J&K are brought to justice and the menace of secessionism is checked.
It is a well-known fact that Omar Abdullah, like many others in Kashmir, has consistently questioned the political status of J&K both in and outside the state legislature. His March 25, 2013 statement on the floor of the Assembly on J&K is still fresh to be forgotten. He had said: "By repeating the words atoot ang again and again, you cannot change the political status of J&K". He had made this outrageous statement ten days after the Indian Parliament adopted a unanimous resolution against Pakistan and reiterated that J&K was, is and shall always be an integral part of India. It is also too well-known that the party he heads has been demanding pre-1953 political status, which only means a small step short of independence from India. It is disturbing that the governor of the state has not acted against the Chief Minister, who is under oath to protect Indian Constitution and uphold the unity and integrity of India but who has been doing exactly the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
