Damocles' sword on Gujarat Dalits? "False" FIR charging 16 of murder of cop wouldn't be taken back: Minister

Minister (extreme left) with the Dalit delegation

By Our Representative
In a development that is likely to be further exacerbate tension between protesting Dalits and the Gujarat government, a top state minister has declared that the state will not take back the crucial first information report (FIR) against 16 Dalits, books by the Amreli police under Section 302 (murder) of a cop on duty during a July 19 rally.
While those who have been booked assert (click HERE) that they were in no way involved in the death of the constable, Pankaj Amrelia, who allegedly died as he was hit by a stone while getting down from the police van, the minister told a Dalit group that the FIR “wouldn’t be taken back.”
However, he added, “There has been a compromise. There wouldn’t be any action against those whose names were put in the FIR”, an answer which did not satisfy the delegation.
On July 19, hundreds of Dalits took out a rally in Amreli, a major town of Saurashtra region, against the gruesome flogging of four Dalits in Una by cow vigilantes, an event which has triggered major protests across Gujarat and India.
After the FIR was lodged, Dalits regrouped in Amreli and took out another rally on August 8 with the participation of about 800 to protest against the “false” charge of murder in the FIR levelled against the 16 Dalits.
This was followed by 46 members of the families of the Dalits, against whom the FIR was lodged, to sit in protest in front of the Amreli district collectorate office for 31 days, till September 7. The sit-in ended after the district collector met the victims and assured them that “no action would be taken against them.”
However, as the Dalits’ demand for taking back the FIR was not met, the Dalit activists’ delegation led by well-known Dalit rights activist Rajesh Solanki called on social justice and empowerment minister Atmaram Parmar in Gandhinagar, the state capital.
“When I asked the minister if 90 per cent of the cases against the Patel agitators could be taken back, why couldn’t this one, which was totally false, couldn’t be taken back, he told me that I am whipping up the issue because of the forthcoming elections of the Gujarat state assembly”, Solanki told Counterview.
A local Dalit activist stationed in Amreli, attached with an Ahmedabad-based NGO Centre for Social Justice, said, “What is particularly perturbing is that, the police has even prepared a list of 49 other persons who were to be added in the FIR. These persons were to be added on the basis of the video footage of the rally on July 19.”
While this has so far not happened, there is a strong suspicion that the FIR would continue to remain as a Damocles’ sword on those named and others who have been “identified”.
Along with Solanki, those who met the minister on September 12 also included Kevalsinh Rathod, Piyush Sarvaiya, Jethabhai Chauhan, Kishor Sankhat and Harshvardhan Kataria. Earlier they made a similar representation to Ahmedabad Dalit MLA RM Patel, an ex-IAS bureaucrat, and MP Kirit Solanki.
The minister said, “You are not alone. Ten other groups have met me with a similar demand.” When told that those who had come were victims themselves, the minister, who saw the demands, replied, “I don’t see your demands here. You are preaching me.”

Comments

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Visually challenged lady seeks appointment with Gujarat CM, is 'unofficially' detained

By Pankti Jog*
It was a usual noon of November 10. I got a phone call on our Right to Information (RTI) helpline No 9924085000 from Ranjanben of Khambhat, narrating her “disgraceful” experience after she had requested for an appointment with Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. She wanted to meet Rupani, on tour of the Khambhat area in Central Gujarat as part of his Janvikas Jumbesh (Campaign for Development).

Violent 'Ajodhya' campaign in 1840s after British captured Kabul, destroyed Jama Masjid

Counterview Desk Irfan Ahmad, professor at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany, and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India” (Princeton University Press, 2009), short-listed for the 2011 International Convention of Asian Scholars Book Prize for the best study in Social Sciences, in his "initial thoughts" on the Supreme Court judgment on the Babri-Jam Janmaboomi dispute has said, while order was “lawful”, it was also “awful.”

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

By Rajiv Shah
A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

VHP doesn't represent all Hindus, Sunni Waqf Board all Muslims: NAPM on SC ruling

Counterview Desk
India's top civil rights network, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), even as describing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya judgement unjust, has said, it is an "assault on the secular fabric of the Constitution". In a statement signed by top social workers and activists, NAPM said, "The judgement conveys an impression to Muslims that, despite being equal citizens of the country, their rights are not equal before the law."

Would those charged for illegally demolishing Babri now manage a new Ram temple?

By Fr Cedric Prakash sj*
The long-awaited verdict on the contentious issue of the disputed land in Ayodhya was finally delivered by the Supreme Court on November 9, 2019. The judgement has come after a 70-year-old conflict filled with acrimony, divisiveness, hate and violence between sections of the Hindus and Muslims of the country. At the core of the issue was the Ram Mandir – Babri Masjid dispute: was there a temple on the place where the Masjid was built? To whom should the land be given to?

Counterview

Search This Blog