Above: Medha Patkar's confidential emails & letter from Congress party leader. Download / View Full Letter & Emails
16 December, 2011
08 December, 2011
Rajiv Gandhi Swiss Bank Accounts allegation - Schweizer Illustrierte, 11 November, 1991
Above: Schweizer Illustrierte's issue of 11 November, 1991 exposed 14 Third World politicians who, it said, had stashed their booty in Swiss banks. The title of the expose in German read "Fluchgelder - Die Schweizer Konten der Dictatoren", meaning in English, "Curse of money: The Swiss bank accounts of the Dictators". Rajiv Gandhi was named in the list along with his picture.
21 November, 2011
The Truth behind Best Bakery case.. how Teesta Setalvad tutored witnesses
Above: Shri. Raiskhan Aziz Khan Pathan an ex-employee of Teesta Setalvad 's Citizen for Justice & Peace (CJP) has filed an affidavit on 26th September, 2011 with the Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court for the re-trial of the Best Bakery case. He has in his affidavit to the Chief Justice narrated the whole sequence of incidents - of how witnesses were brought to Mumbai, kept in Bhindi Bazaar, and tutored by Teesta Setalvad for giving false testimonies in the court. He has also requested the court to direct foreignsic science labs to do lie detector / polygraph test of himself & Teesta Setalvad to bring the truth before the court.
Please click Evidence Against Teesta Setalvad for more such instances.
12 November, 2011
The seven deadly sins of judges
Ruma Pal
Judges are fierce in using the word [“independence”] as a sword to take action in contempt against critics. But the word is also used as a shield to cover a multitude of sins, some venial and others not so venial. Any lawyer practising before a court will, I am sure, have a rather long list of these. I have chosen seven.
The first is the sin of “brushing under the carpet”, or turning a Nelsonian eye. Many judges are aware of injudicious conduct of a colleague but have either ignored it or refused to confront the judge concerned, and suppressed any public discussion on the issue, often through the great silencer — the law of contempt.
The second sin is that of “hypocrisy”. A favourite rather pompous phrase in judgments is “Be you ever so high, the law is above you”, or words to similar effect. And yet judges who enforce the law for others often break that law with impunity. This includes traffic regulations, and another regulation to which the “ordinary” citizen is subject. Some in fact get offended if their car is held up by the police at all while controlling the flow of traffic — the feeling of offence sometimes being translated into action, by issuance of a rule of contempt against the hapless police constable, all in the name of judicial independence.
The third sin is that of secrecy. The normal response of courts to any enquiry as to their functioning is to temporise, stonewall and prevaricate. As I have said elsewhere, the process by which a judge is appointed to the high court or elevated to the Supreme Court is one of the best-kept secrets in the country...
If “independence” is taken to mean “capable of thinking for oneself”, then the fourth sin is plagiarism and prolixity. I club the two together because the root cause is often the same, namely the prolific and often unnecessary use of passages from textbooks and decisions of other judges — without acknowledgement in the first case, and with acknowledgement in the latter. Many judgments are in fact mere compendia or digests of decisions on a particular issue, with very little original reasoning in support of the conclusion.
Often judges misconstrue judicial independence as judicial and administrative indiscipline. Both of these in fact stem from judicial arrogance as to one’s intellectual ability and status.... Intellectual arrogance, or what some may call intellectual dishonesty, is manifest when judges decide without being bound by principles of stare decisis or precedent...
Independence implies discipline to decide objectively and with intellectual integrity and as the judicial oath of office requires, without fear, favour, affection or ill will. Most importantly judges must be perceived as so deciding, or to use Lord Hewart’s classic dicta that “justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done,” because the belief of corruption is as damaging to the credibility in the independence of the judiciary as the act of corruption.
This brings me to the seventh and final sin of nepotism or what the oath of office calls “favour” and “affection”. What is required of a judge is a degree of aloofness and reclusiveness not only vis-a-vis litigants but also vis-a-vis lawyers. Litigants include the executive. Injudicious conduct includes known examples such as judges using a guesthouse of a private company or a public sector undertaking for a holiday or accepting benefits like the allocation of land from the discretionary quota of a chief minister. I can only emphasise again that nothing destroys a judge’s credibility more than a perception that he/she decides according to closeness to one of the parties to the litigation or what has come to be described in the corridors of courts as “face value”.
...I will conclude with most important facet of judicial independence. Judicial independence cannot exist without accountability. At present the only disciplinary power over judges is vested in Parliament which provides for the extreme punishment of removal for acts of proven misbehaviour by or incapacity of a judge...
Deprivation of jurisdiction or the non-allocation of work to a dishonest judge was resorted to by Chief Justice Sabyasachi Mukherjee when the impeachment of Justice V. Ramaswamy failed for political reasons. Sometimes Chief Justices control a recalcitrant judge by ensuring that the judge concerned sits with the Chief Justice or with a “strong” judge until he or she retires. The situation becomes more difficult if the allegations are against the Chief Justice. Solutions evolved have proved inadequate and ad hoc. There is a need for an effective mechanism for enforcing judicial accountability...
Ruma Pal is a former Supreme Court judge. Article extracted from the V.M. Tarkunde memorial lecture, delivered on November 10, 2011
10 November, 2011
CNN-IBN fakes live debate with Sri Sri 's recorded interview!
The Truth behind Face the Nation (FTN)
Airing a fabricated and totally biased cut-and-paste panel discussion as a desperate attempt to silence and tarnish some one of high standing who may disagree with you ideologically... this is the pathetic and highly deplorable tactics some of the media houses are resorting to in our country.
A very serious ethical issue here is that the defendant does not have any chance to defend herself/himself against any of the (probably false) allegations leveled against her/him. A clear attempt to malign the image of a responsible citizen by influential vested interests.
This is exactly what Ms. Sagarika Ghose and the CNN-IBN crew did to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, a leading light in the fight against corruption!
What was a one-on-one interview at around 3 PM was aired on the same day at 10 PM as a live panel discussion!!
Ms. Ghose acted as if Sri Sri was on the line and was speaking to her. She shamelessly even posed questions to him and even invited his response to the live panel discussions!! A close look at the video shows that he was actually not wording any of the statements correctly. Hence the video was made at another time and the interview taken at another!!
To think that the public or the rival networks are foolish and will not hit out at this cut and paste job shows the arrogance and naivette of the broadcasters. To think that Sri Sri's followers will not catch on to it is also foolish.
Lets hope that Ms. Ghose and the CNN-IBN crew pay the price of this misdemeanor. CNN-IBN has opened itself to law suits that may run into multi-million dollar damages for such a blatant abuse of power just in case Sri Sri's office decides so!!
Will the channel axe her or will it let her hang around like Ms. Barkha Dutt just to resurrect her another day? A small prize for their loyalty and political clout!
Airing a fabricated and totally biased cut-and-paste panel discussion as a desperate attempt to silence and tarnish some one of high standing who may disagree with you ideologically... this is the pathetic and highly deplorable tactics some of the media houses are resorting to in our country.
A very serious ethical issue here is that the defendant does not have any chance to defend herself/himself against any of the (probably false) allegations leveled against her/him. A clear attempt to malign the image of a responsible citizen by influential vested interests.
This is exactly what Ms. Sagarika Ghose and the CNN-IBN crew did to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, a leading light in the fight against corruption!
What was a one-on-one interview at around 3 PM was aired on the same day at 10 PM as a live panel discussion!!
Ms. Ghose acted as if Sri Sri was on the line and was speaking to her. She shamelessly even posed questions to him and even invited his response to the live panel discussions!! A close look at the video shows that he was actually not wording any of the statements correctly. Hence the video was made at another time and the interview taken at another!!
To think that the public or the rival networks are foolish and will not hit out at this cut and paste job shows the arrogance and naivette of the broadcasters. To think that Sri Sri's followers will not catch on to it is also foolish.
Lets hope that Ms. Ghose and the CNN-IBN crew pay the price of this misdemeanor. CNN-IBN has opened itself to law suits that may run into multi-million dollar damages for such a blatant abuse of power just in case Sri Sri's office decides so!!
Will the channel axe her or will it let her hang around like Ms. Barkha Dutt just to resurrect her another day? A small prize for their loyalty and political clout!
04 November, 2011
Now It Can Be Told by A.N. Bali (Read Online)
'Now It Can Be Told' is a narrative of some of the events which followed the partition of India. In mainly deals with the riots which took place in West Punjab, in which Muslims attacked Sikhs and Hindus.
Now It Can Be Told (1949), Prof. Amar Nath Bali, The Akashvani Prakashan Ltd., Gopalnagar, Jullundur City, East Punjab
04 October, 2011
Hindu Sculptures in Ancient Afghanistan
Above: Hindu Sculptures in Ancient Afghanistan - A paper by P. Banerjee and R.C. Agrawala
Classical Afghanistan
Above: Classical Afghanistan - A paper by Prof. Lokesh Chandra on Buddhism & Hinduism in ancient Afghanistan
02 August, 2011
The lost history of Lumbini
Francois Gautier, The Pioneer
Muslim invaders treated Buddhists as infidels and attacked their places of worship. They razed every single Buddhist temple they encountered, burnt libraries and killed monks. This is why we cannot find Buddhist structures in India, except a few stupas, and why Lumbini has been lost
Buddhism was once upon a time prevalent in India till about the 4th century AD. Many historians, both in India and abroad, have implied that it nearly totally disappeared from India, because it was slowly ‘swallowed’ back by Hinduism at the hands of spiteful Brahmins.
Others have however pointed out that if Hinduism resisted the Muslim onslaught thanks to its Kshatriyas - the Rajputs, Marathas and Sikhs - Buddhism, because it made non-violence an uncompromising dogma, was literally wiped-off the face of India in a few centuries, as it refused to oppose any resistance.
For the Muslim soldiers, Buddhists, who adored statues and did not believe in Allah, were as much infidels as the Hindus, and they razed every single Buddhist temple (and also Jain temples, as the ruins below Fathepur Sikri have proved) they encountered, burnt all the precious libraries and killed tens of thousands of monks, without encountering any opposition. This is why you cannot find a single trace of Buddhist structures today in India, save for a few stupas, which were too cumbersome to be destroyed.
The history of the Islamic onslaught on Buddhism in India should be rewritten. In 1193 CE, for instance, the wonderful Nalanda University was razed to the ground by Bakhtiyar Khilji, a Turkish Muslim invader on his way to conquer Bengal. He looted and burned the monastery, and killed hundreds or even thousands of monks. The shock of this event lives on in local cultural memory: The three libraries of Nalanda - with books like the ones famous travellers famous Xuanzang and Yi Jing carried back to China were so large that they smouldered for six long months.
But most interesting is the history of Lumbini, the birthplace of Buddha, which is one of the four holy places of Buddhism. Lumbini is situated at the foothills of the Himalayas in modern Nepal. In Buddha’s time, Lumbini was a beautiful garden full of green and shady sal trees.
The garden and its tranquil environs were owned by both the Sandyas and the Kolias clans. King Suddhodana, father of Gautama Buddha, was of the Shakya dynasty belonging to the Kshatriya or the warrior caste. In 249 BC, when the Emperor Ashoka visited Lumbini, it was a flourishing village. Ashoka constructed four stupas and a stone pillar with a figure of a horse on top. The stone pillar bears an inscription which, in English translation, runs as follows: “King Piyadasi (Ashoka), beloved of devas, in the 20 year of the coronation, himself made a royal visit, Buddha Sakyamuni having been born here, a stone railing was built and a stone pillar erected to the Bhagavan”.
Lumbini then remained neglected and forgotten for centuries. But in 1895, Feuhrer, a famous German archaeologist, discovered the great Ashoka pillar while wandering about the foothills of the Churia range. Further exploration and excavation of the surrounding area revealed the existence of a brick temple and a sandstone sculpture within the temple itself, which depicts the scenes of Buddha’s birth. But there was great damage, which Feuhrer could not explain, except speculate that the place was once ransacked.
Historian Bhuban Lal Pradhan believes that it was Sikandar Lodi (1489-1517 AD) and Aurangzeb (1668-1701 AD) who were mainly responsible for the ravage and subsequent desertion of the Lumbini and Kapilavastu regions. Nepalese rulers were helpless and even Mukund Sena (1782-93 AD), who ruled the region from Palpa, could do nothing to recover the religious glory of the site and the result was that this holy place was lost in the dense forest that grew over it. Later the name of Lumbini gradually changed to Rummindei and then to Rupandehi, the present name of the district.
Since Feuhrer’s discovery, several excavations have been conducted and a large number of ancient relics have been brought to light which reveal that Lumbini was an important place of Buddhist pilgrimage even during the time of the Mauryas. Now China is leading a project worth $3 billion to transform the small town into a premier place of pilgrimage for Buddhists from around the world. Little Lumbini will have an airport, highway, hotels, convention centre, temples and a Buddhist university. It’s not all about philanthropy, but also to undermine the Dalai Lama’s influence in South Asia.
Romila Thapar, India’s most respected historian, believes that because Buddhism challenged the very structure of the caste system, it was not liked by the upper castes who did not let it flourish. She also points a finger at the “policy of assimilation” of Hinduism, such as stating that Buddha is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.
But Romila Thapar is wrong. If it can be said that Adi Shankaracharya’s preaching the five-fold path of bhakti got the Buddhist converts back into Hinduism, the reality is that Buddhism in India was wiped out by Islamic invaders and that Lumbini, the birthplace of Gautam, suffered greatly in the process.
Muslim invaders treated Buddhists as infidels and attacked their places of worship. They razed every single Buddhist temple they encountered, burnt libraries and killed monks. This is why we cannot find Buddhist structures in India, except a few stupas, and why Lumbini has been lost
Buddhism was once upon a time prevalent in India till about the 4th century AD. Many historians, both in India and abroad, have implied that it nearly totally disappeared from India, because it was slowly ‘swallowed’ back by Hinduism at the hands of spiteful Brahmins.
Others have however pointed out that if Hinduism resisted the Muslim onslaught thanks to its Kshatriyas - the Rajputs, Marathas and Sikhs - Buddhism, because it made non-violence an uncompromising dogma, was literally wiped-off the face of India in a few centuries, as it refused to oppose any resistance.
For the Muslim soldiers, Buddhists, who adored statues and did not believe in Allah, were as much infidels as the Hindus, and they razed every single Buddhist temple (and also Jain temples, as the ruins below Fathepur Sikri have proved) they encountered, burnt all the precious libraries and killed tens of thousands of monks, without encountering any opposition. This is why you cannot find a single trace of Buddhist structures today in India, save for a few stupas, which were too cumbersome to be destroyed.
The history of the Islamic onslaught on Buddhism in India should be rewritten. In 1193 CE, for instance, the wonderful Nalanda University was razed to the ground by Bakhtiyar Khilji, a Turkish Muslim invader on his way to conquer Bengal. He looted and burned the monastery, and killed hundreds or even thousands of monks. The shock of this event lives on in local cultural memory: The three libraries of Nalanda - with books like the ones famous travellers famous Xuanzang and Yi Jing carried back to China were so large that they smouldered for six long months.
But most interesting is the history of Lumbini, the birthplace of Buddha, which is one of the four holy places of Buddhism. Lumbini is situated at the foothills of the Himalayas in modern Nepal. In Buddha’s time, Lumbini was a beautiful garden full of green and shady sal trees.
The garden and its tranquil environs were owned by both the Sandyas and the Kolias clans. King Suddhodana, father of Gautama Buddha, was of the Shakya dynasty belonging to the Kshatriya or the warrior caste. In 249 BC, when the Emperor Ashoka visited Lumbini, it was a flourishing village. Ashoka constructed four stupas and a stone pillar with a figure of a horse on top. The stone pillar bears an inscription which, in English translation, runs as follows: “King Piyadasi (Ashoka), beloved of devas, in the 20 year of the coronation, himself made a royal visit, Buddha Sakyamuni having been born here, a stone railing was built and a stone pillar erected to the Bhagavan”.
Lumbini then remained neglected and forgotten for centuries. But in 1895, Feuhrer, a famous German archaeologist, discovered the great Ashoka pillar while wandering about the foothills of the Churia range. Further exploration and excavation of the surrounding area revealed the existence of a brick temple and a sandstone sculpture within the temple itself, which depicts the scenes of Buddha’s birth. But there was great damage, which Feuhrer could not explain, except speculate that the place was once ransacked.
Historian Bhuban Lal Pradhan believes that it was Sikandar Lodi (1489-1517 AD) and Aurangzeb (1668-1701 AD) who were mainly responsible for the ravage and subsequent desertion of the Lumbini and Kapilavastu regions. Nepalese rulers were helpless and even Mukund Sena (1782-93 AD), who ruled the region from Palpa, could do nothing to recover the religious glory of the site and the result was that this holy place was lost in the dense forest that grew over it. Later the name of Lumbini gradually changed to Rummindei and then to Rupandehi, the present name of the district.
Since Feuhrer’s discovery, several excavations have been conducted and a large number of ancient relics have been brought to light which reveal that Lumbini was an important place of Buddhist pilgrimage even during the time of the Mauryas. Now China is leading a project worth $3 billion to transform the small town into a premier place of pilgrimage for Buddhists from around the world. Little Lumbini will have an airport, highway, hotels, convention centre, temples and a Buddhist university. It’s not all about philanthropy, but also to undermine the Dalai Lama’s influence in South Asia.
Romila Thapar, India’s most respected historian, believes that because Buddhism challenged the very structure of the caste system, it was not liked by the upper castes who did not let it flourish. She also points a finger at the “policy of assimilation” of Hinduism, such as stating that Buddha is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.
But Romila Thapar is wrong. If it can be said that Adi Shankaracharya’s preaching the five-fold path of bhakti got the Buddhist converts back into Hinduism, the reality is that Buddhism in India was wiped out by Islamic invaders and that Lumbini, the birthplace of Gautam, suffered greatly in the process.
08 July, 2011
Francois Gautier targets Manu Joseph 's deep rooted prejudice
From: Francois Gautier
Date: 2011/7/8
Subject: your article in the New York Times
To: josephmanu@gmail.com
Cc: letters@nytimes.com, editorial@nytimes.com, nytnews@nytimes.com
Sub: your article in the New York Times (Link)
Mr. Manu Joseph,
I am journalist like you: correspondent in South Asia of the French daily Le Figaro for ten years, now editor of La Revue de l’Inde (Editions l’Harmattan, Paris) the only magazine solely dedicated to India in the French speaking world (20.000 copies per issue).
Subject: your article in the New York Times
To: josephmanu@gmail.com
Cc: letters@nytimes.com, editorial@nytimes.com, nytnews@nytimes.com
Sub: your article in the New York Times (Link)
Mr. Manu Joseph,
I am journalist like you: correspondent in South Asia of the French daily Le Figaro for ten years, now editor of La Revue de l’Inde (Editions l’Harmattan, Paris) the only magazine solely dedicated to India in the French speaking world (20.000 copies per issue).
Also a writer, author of a dozen books in French and English. Amongst them ‘The Art of Healing (Harper Collins, 2010), The Guru of joy (Hay House USA, 100.000 copies sold), La Caravane Intérieure (Paris, Les Belles Lettres).
I am a too born Christian. My father, a very good man, was a devout catholic; my uncle was the parish head of the famous church Saint Jean de Montmartre.
I also live in India and am married to an Indian from Delhi. But the comparison stops there. I have respect for India’s ancient culture and would never dare running it down the way you did.
The history of respect and devotion to Gurus is a very ancient tradition and is something that is both spontaneous and natural to millions of Indians. I have also interacted for many years with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and observed that he is engaged in countless charity works, both in India and abroad; that he gives selflessly his time to others, never getting angry, never getting impatient, in the nearly 20 years I have known him. His Sudarshan Kriya technique has brought joy, energy and well-being to millions of people, including me – I would recommend it to all journalists, who are subjected to so much stress and unhealthy life styles.
What I have also observed during my many years in India is that not only both the Hindus and Indian media will never run down the Pope or Indian bishops, but will even go to churches, even if they are Hindus, because they recognize that God takes many forms and incarnations. But apparently you, and many other Christians in India, do not reciprocate this respect.
What you have indeed shown is that your Christian identity takes precedence over the impartiality you should show as a journalist. With no direct knowledge of the Art of Living foundation, or of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s work, you have used the power of the Word, to slander your own culture, that too in such a prestigious publication as the New York Times, taking advantage of the innocence and ignorance of India of most of its readers.
Shame on you!
27 June, 2011
Lumbini and Kapilavastu Buried in Obscurity: The Islamic Connection
Above: Extract from Lumbini, Kapilwastu, Dewadaha (1979) by Bhuwan Lal Pradhan, Research Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal. Download / View Full Extract
26 May, 2011
Teesta Setalvad 's ex-associate Rais Khan writes open letter to Justice P.B. Sawant
Above: Sonia Gandhi presenting the Rajiv Gandhi National Sadbhavana award to Teesta Setalvad
Ahmedabad, 25th May, 2011
Rais Khan Pathan, former associate of Teesta (Javed) Setalvad and an accused in the Pandarwada mass grave exhumation case, criticized Justice P.B. Sawant for favoring Teesta and heading “Committee for Defense of Teesta Setalvad & Justice in Gujarat.” The committee was formed on 23rd May 2011 in Mumbai by Sawant, Desai and former Gujarat Chief Minister Suresh Mehta. The very interesting note of Pathan sent to Mr. Sawant is presented below.
Dear Mr Justice PB Sawant,
I am deeply distressed to write this Open Letter to you as I would be calling into question certain facts to a Judge who was once part of the Supreme Court of India and who has the rare distinction of practiced all branches of law.
I, as an ordinary social worker, am truly perturbed that you addressed a press conference on 23rd May 2011 at Mumbai after forming a dubious body “Committee for defense of Teesta Setalvad & justice in Gujarat” in support of Teesta who has often been seen to be toying with the majesty of law and was pulled up by the Supreme Court itself for taking her grievances in the ongoing Godhra riot cases to an international human rights agency at a time when the apex court itself was monitoring the progress of the investigations. She has been repeatedly stepping on the toes of the law unmindful of the consequences & cheating her own people for her selfish gains.
In the past you had been closely associated with Medha Patkar, a social activist of dubious character who has been finally unmasked when the SC reprimanded her for filing false affidavits and misleading the court. The apex court even cautioned all courts across the country not to be swayed and be careful when entertaining her (medha) petitions.
You have participated in seminars and discussions in favor of naxal sympathizer Binayak Sen who was convicted on the charges of sedition and recently granted bail by the SC.
Is this habit of yours (that you always side with the wrong people), has now forced you to support Teesta?
You will recall that you visited Ahmedabad in April 2002 along with Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer & Justice H Suresh & K.G. Kannabirayan , President PUCL etcc… & stayed in Karnavati club for conducting an inquiry of Gujarat riots under the banner of Concerned Citizens Tribunal. During your stay in the club, I met you on number of occasions as I was the Chief Co-Ordinator for bringing all the victims and witnesses from various part of the state to Ahmedabad for deposition before you. I still remember that before victims and witnesses were sent to depose before your panel, they were tutored by Teesta Setalvad and Sohel Tirmizi in an another room of the club. I am an eye-witness of that proceedings.
My questions to you are not frivolous in the least nor do I intend it to be so. Permit me to refresh your memory on cases filed against Teesta Setalvad by her own people. These cases have become legion and if you go through patiently you will realize how serious the charges are for an honest appraisal. Few examples are given below:
1) Yasmeen Banu Sheikh: A prime prosecution witness in Best Bakery Case in her affidavit dtd 17/06/2010 to the Chief Justice Mumbai H.C. accused Teesta Setalvad for forcing her to lie in the Trial court at Mumbai & stated “ Teesta setalvad made me to give false testimony in the Best Bakery case by luring & misguiding me”. She narrated how after her deposition she was thrown out from the house where she was kept for 11 months. When Mumbai H.C. had not taken any cognizance on her affidavit, she filed a writ petition in the Mumbai H.C. to re-examine her in the interest of justice
2) Qutubudin Nasiruddin Ansari whose photographs with folded hand became face of Gujarat riots, in a letter to the Collector Ahmedabad on 7th July 2009 stated that he was sent to Ahmedabad by an NGO (obviously by Teesta’s CJP) and later to Malegaon but came back to Ahmedabad because now everything is normal in Gujarat and now he is happily settled here. This person was too was cheated by her.
3) Madina Banu: A witness of Naroda Gam case during her deposition in August’ 2010 before the SIT as well as in the court of Additional Session Judge disowned parts of her affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court saying she was not raped though she spoke of being raped by the mob in her affidavit to the S.C on the prodding of Teesta.
4) Zahira Habibulah Sheikh: A star witness of Best Bakery case filed a criminal complaint against Teesta Setalvad that she was forced by Teesta to give false deposition. She was kept confined illegally in 2003 and Zahira has not only accused Teesta but also her other associates in Baroda
5) Nanumiya Rasulmiya Malik: A witness of Naroda gam case no. 203/2009 during deposition in August’ 2010 before SIT as well as before Additional Session Judge disowned certain parts of his affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court through the CJP of Setalvad. Nanumiya denied seeing any rape or murder on 28th Febuary’ 2002 which was mentioned in his affidavit in S.C.
6) Imran Pathan: A witness of Naroda gam case too disowned certain parts of his affidavit denying seeing any rape or murder though in his affidavit to the SC had vouched for mass murder & rape in Naroda gam area.
7) Rafiq Malik: A witness of Naroda gam case during his deposition in September ‘2010 retracted like above mentioned witnesses saying he did not see any rape or murder on 28th Febuary’ 2002 though his affidavit said it differently.
8) Zahid Kadri: An educated Muslim leader, of Ahmedabad in his affidavit dtd 28/05/2010 to the Chief Justice of India, blamed Teesta Setalvad for using him for her selfish games in the name of helping him in getting justice for his son, who was killed in the police firing during the 2002 riots. Mr. Kadri in his affidavit has blamed Teesta for misguiding poor Muslims in the name of religion & collecting money in the name of helping riot victims.
9) Pandarwada Case:
a) On 27th December 2005, on the instructions of Teesta Setalvad, I along with others dug-up the graves near Panam river closed to Pandarwada without permission. An FIR was filed against me & others. Though everything was done on her instructions she never supported us. I alongwith Gulam kadri, sikander Abbas were arrested and send to jail for no fault of ours. Out of 9 accused persons, 5 persons namely myself, Gulam kharadi, Sikander Abbas, Kutub shah Diwan, Jabir Mohammed recorded statement U/s 164 of CrPC before the magistrate & narrated the true story of how we were forced to do this act by Teesta Setalvad. The Pandarwada police has already filed the first charge-sheet against us. Teesta managed anticipatory bail for herself but never bothered for us.
b) Rahul Singh a Senior Journalist working with Headlines Today, New Delhi is one of the witnesses of this case who reported the story, at that time. Mr. Singh who is an independent witness in this case in his affidavit dtd 18/02/2011 to the I.O. Lunawada categorically mentioned that “I met Raiskhan & others, spoke to Teesta & visited Pandarwada as a part of my journalist duty, however at no point of time during my interaction with Rasikhan & telephonic conversations with Teesta Setalvad, I was ever told by them that they have not taken permission from the authorities to exhume the bodies & that they knew that the body so buried by the police near Panam river at the outskirts of Lunawada town, were buried with proper procedure”. Mr. Singh also stated that “he has not given any interview to any magazine/newspapers on the subject & whatever has been published in my name was without my knowledge & concurrence”. Teesta planted stories in various newspapers in his name.
Details of my cases against Teesta:
• I Filed a complaint against Teesta on 09/09/2010 to the commissioner of police, Ahmedabad accusing her of hacking of my e-mail account.
• I Filed an application on 30/11/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973, in the court of Additional Session Judge, Mehsana in the Sardarpura Massacre case no. 275/2002 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because all affidavits dated 06/11/2003 of witnesses namely Ibrahim miya rasool miya sheikh, Nazair mohammed sheikh, Hizbul miya sheikh, Ashiq hussain sheikh, Mohammed Sattar sheikh etc…were prepared by Teesta Setalvad & sent to me in my e-mail account for notarization from these witnesses. Contents of the affidavits were in English & were not known to these witnesses.
• I Filed an application on 28/10/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973 in the court of Additional Session Judge, Ahmedabad in the Naroda Gam case no. 203/2009 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because main witnesses of the case namely Nanumiya Rasulmiya Malik, Madina Banu & Imran Pathan distracted from their original affidavit filed in the S.C. through Teesta Setalvad & claimed that various contents of the affidavit are false & were inserted by me without their knowledge.
• I Filed an application on 01/11/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973 in the court of Additional Session Judge, Ahmedabad in the Gulbarg Society case no. 152/2002 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsaan Jafri lied before the court that she has not taken any help from Teesta Setalvad. The court on 3rd November’ 2010 ordered SIT to record my statement. Imtiyaz Khan Pathan a closed associate of Teesta Setalvad filed an SLP no. 7046 of 2010 in the S.C. for stay of order. I filed the intervention application in this case. Fearing that S.C. may pass adverse order, she decided to withdraw the application.
• Justice Nanavati Shah Commision – I filed an affidavit in the Justice Nanavati Shah Commision on 19/10/2010 with a prayer to take appropriate action against Teesta Setalvad who has mislead various courts & forced innocent victims & witnesses to file false affidavits which can lead to prosecution of innocent persons in the on going trials in various courts on the basis of false & fabricated affidavits prepared by Teesta with ulterior motive.
Despite all the above stated facts if you still stand by Teesta Setalvad, the bigger question that one would like to ask you is, if there is an axe to grind in all of this, when universally, after retirement a judge is expected to maintain his decorum and should not hobnob with convicts & dubious characters.
This question is really disturbing me as to how can a learned judge like you, support a person who cheats her own people and her agenda is to earn name, fame and money on the bodies of riot victims?
I am sure you would like to give an honest answer to me.
Rais Khan Pathan
D/A-28, Ajit Residency
Source
Also View: Evidence Against Teesta Setalvad
Rais Khan Pathan, former associate of Teesta (Javed) Setalvad and an accused in the Pandarwada mass grave exhumation case, criticized Justice P.B. Sawant for favoring Teesta and heading “Committee for Defense of Teesta Setalvad & Justice in Gujarat.” The committee was formed on 23rd May 2011 in Mumbai by Sawant, Desai and former Gujarat Chief Minister Suresh Mehta. The very interesting note of Pathan sent to Mr. Sawant is presented below.
Dear Mr Justice PB Sawant,
I am deeply distressed to write this Open Letter to you as I would be calling into question certain facts to a Judge who was once part of the Supreme Court of India and who has the rare distinction of practiced all branches of law.
I, as an ordinary social worker, am truly perturbed that you addressed a press conference on 23rd May 2011 at Mumbai after forming a dubious body “Committee for defense of Teesta Setalvad & justice in Gujarat” in support of Teesta who has often been seen to be toying with the majesty of law and was pulled up by the Supreme Court itself for taking her grievances in the ongoing Godhra riot cases to an international human rights agency at a time when the apex court itself was monitoring the progress of the investigations. She has been repeatedly stepping on the toes of the law unmindful of the consequences & cheating her own people for her selfish gains.
In the past you had been closely associated with Medha Patkar, a social activist of dubious character who has been finally unmasked when the SC reprimanded her for filing false affidavits and misleading the court. The apex court even cautioned all courts across the country not to be swayed and be careful when entertaining her (medha) petitions.
You have participated in seminars and discussions in favor of naxal sympathizer Binayak Sen who was convicted on the charges of sedition and recently granted bail by the SC.
Is this habit of yours (that you always side with the wrong people), has now forced you to support Teesta?
You will recall that you visited Ahmedabad in April 2002 along with Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer & Justice H Suresh & K.G. Kannabirayan , President PUCL etcc… & stayed in Karnavati club for conducting an inquiry of Gujarat riots under the banner of Concerned Citizens Tribunal. During your stay in the club, I met you on number of occasions as I was the Chief Co-Ordinator for bringing all the victims and witnesses from various part of the state to Ahmedabad for deposition before you. I still remember that before victims and witnesses were sent to depose before your panel, they were tutored by Teesta Setalvad and Sohel Tirmizi in an another room of the club. I am an eye-witness of that proceedings.
My questions to you are not frivolous in the least nor do I intend it to be so. Permit me to refresh your memory on cases filed against Teesta Setalvad by her own people. These cases have become legion and if you go through patiently you will realize how serious the charges are for an honest appraisal. Few examples are given below:
1) Yasmeen Banu Sheikh: A prime prosecution witness in Best Bakery Case in her affidavit dtd 17/06/2010 to the Chief Justice Mumbai H.C. accused Teesta Setalvad for forcing her to lie in the Trial court at Mumbai & stated “ Teesta setalvad made me to give false testimony in the Best Bakery case by luring & misguiding me”. She narrated how after her deposition she was thrown out from the house where she was kept for 11 months. When Mumbai H.C. had not taken any cognizance on her affidavit, she filed a writ petition in the Mumbai H.C. to re-examine her in the interest of justice
2) Qutubudin Nasiruddin Ansari whose photographs with folded hand became face of Gujarat riots, in a letter to the Collector Ahmedabad on 7th July 2009 stated that he was sent to Ahmedabad by an NGO (obviously by Teesta’s CJP) and later to Malegaon but came back to Ahmedabad because now everything is normal in Gujarat and now he is happily settled here. This person was too was cheated by her.
3) Madina Banu: A witness of Naroda Gam case during her deposition in August’ 2010 before the SIT as well as in the court of Additional Session Judge disowned parts of her affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court saying she was not raped though she spoke of being raped by the mob in her affidavit to the S.C on the prodding of Teesta.
4) Zahira Habibulah Sheikh: A star witness of Best Bakery case filed a criminal complaint against Teesta Setalvad that she was forced by Teesta to give false deposition. She was kept confined illegally in 2003 and Zahira has not only accused Teesta but also her other associates in Baroda
5) Nanumiya Rasulmiya Malik: A witness of Naroda gam case no. 203/2009 during deposition in August’ 2010 before SIT as well as before Additional Session Judge disowned certain parts of his affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court through the CJP of Setalvad. Nanumiya denied seeing any rape or murder on 28th Febuary’ 2002 which was mentioned in his affidavit in S.C.
6) Imran Pathan: A witness of Naroda gam case too disowned certain parts of his affidavit denying seeing any rape or murder though in his affidavit to the SC had vouched for mass murder & rape in Naroda gam area.
7) Rafiq Malik: A witness of Naroda gam case during his deposition in September ‘2010 retracted like above mentioned witnesses saying he did not see any rape or murder on 28th Febuary’ 2002 though his affidavit said it differently.
8) Zahid Kadri: An educated Muslim leader, of Ahmedabad in his affidavit dtd 28/05/2010 to the Chief Justice of India, blamed Teesta Setalvad for using him for her selfish games in the name of helping him in getting justice for his son, who was killed in the police firing during the 2002 riots. Mr. Kadri in his affidavit has blamed Teesta for misguiding poor Muslims in the name of religion & collecting money in the name of helping riot victims.
9) Pandarwada Case:
a) On 27th December 2005, on the instructions of Teesta Setalvad, I along with others dug-up the graves near Panam river closed to Pandarwada without permission. An FIR was filed against me & others. Though everything was done on her instructions she never supported us. I alongwith Gulam kadri, sikander Abbas were arrested and send to jail for no fault of ours. Out of 9 accused persons, 5 persons namely myself, Gulam kharadi, Sikander Abbas, Kutub shah Diwan, Jabir Mohammed recorded statement U/s 164 of CrPC before the magistrate & narrated the true story of how we were forced to do this act by Teesta Setalvad. The Pandarwada police has already filed the first charge-sheet against us. Teesta managed anticipatory bail for herself but never bothered for us.
b) Rahul Singh a Senior Journalist working with Headlines Today, New Delhi is one of the witnesses of this case who reported the story, at that time. Mr. Singh who is an independent witness in this case in his affidavit dtd 18/02/2011 to the I.O. Lunawada categorically mentioned that “I met Raiskhan & others, spoke to Teesta & visited Pandarwada as a part of my journalist duty, however at no point of time during my interaction with Rasikhan & telephonic conversations with Teesta Setalvad, I was ever told by them that they have not taken permission from the authorities to exhume the bodies & that they knew that the body so buried by the police near Panam river at the outskirts of Lunawada town, were buried with proper procedure”. Mr. Singh also stated that “he has not given any interview to any magazine/newspapers on the subject & whatever has been published in my name was without my knowledge & concurrence”. Teesta planted stories in various newspapers in his name.
Details of my cases against Teesta:
• I Filed a complaint against Teesta on 09/09/2010 to the commissioner of police, Ahmedabad accusing her of hacking of my e-mail account.
• I Filed an application on 30/11/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973, in the court of Additional Session Judge, Mehsana in the Sardarpura Massacre case no. 275/2002 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because all affidavits dated 06/11/2003 of witnesses namely Ibrahim miya rasool miya sheikh, Nazair mohammed sheikh, Hizbul miya sheikh, Ashiq hussain sheikh, Mohammed Sattar sheikh etc…were prepared by Teesta Setalvad & sent to me in my e-mail account for notarization from these witnesses. Contents of the affidavits were in English & were not known to these witnesses.
• I Filed an application on 28/10/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973 in the court of Additional Session Judge, Ahmedabad in the Naroda Gam case no. 203/2009 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because main witnesses of the case namely Nanumiya Rasulmiya Malik, Madina Banu & Imran Pathan distracted from their original affidavit filed in the S.C. through Teesta Setalvad & claimed that various contents of the affidavit are false & were inserted by me without their knowledge.
• I Filed an application on 01/11/2010 U/s 311 of CrPC 1973 in the court of Additional Session Judge, Ahmedabad in the Gulbarg Society case no. 152/2002 for examining me as a court/prosecution witness because Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsaan Jafri lied before the court that she has not taken any help from Teesta Setalvad. The court on 3rd November’ 2010 ordered SIT to record my statement. Imtiyaz Khan Pathan a closed associate of Teesta Setalvad filed an SLP no. 7046 of 2010 in the S.C. for stay of order. I filed the intervention application in this case. Fearing that S.C. may pass adverse order, she decided to withdraw the application.
• Justice Nanavati Shah Commision – I filed an affidavit in the Justice Nanavati Shah Commision on 19/10/2010 with a prayer to take appropriate action against Teesta Setalvad who has mislead various courts & forced innocent victims & witnesses to file false affidavits which can lead to prosecution of innocent persons in the on going trials in various courts on the basis of false & fabricated affidavits prepared by Teesta with ulterior motive.
Despite all the above stated facts if you still stand by Teesta Setalvad, the bigger question that one would like to ask you is, if there is an axe to grind in all of this, when universally, after retirement a judge is expected to maintain his decorum and should not hobnob with convicts & dubious characters.
This question is really disturbing me as to how can a learned judge like you, support a person who cheats her own people and her agenda is to earn name, fame and money on the bodies of riot victims?
I am sure you would like to give an honest answer to me.
Rais Khan Pathan
D/A-28, Ajit Residency
Source
Also View: Evidence Against Teesta Setalvad
19 May, 2011
Aurangzeb was like Shakespeare: William Dalrymple
Above: William Dalrymple
The uncalled for fascination with Aurangzeb
Francois Gautier
We all admire William Dalrymple for his writing style, knowledge of India and for making Delhi his home. Yet, his fascination for the Mughals, which already made him write the ‘The Last Mughal’ and ‘White Mughals’, is bizarre, to say the least, as the Mughals were the biggest perpetrators of human rights abuses of their time, not only against Hindus and Sikhs, but even against their own kin.
It seems Dalrymple now wants to embark upon a new book about one of India’s most controversial historical figures, Aurangzeb, whom he considers “absolutely fascinating” and “very self aware, very Shakespearean”.
Speaking about the richest Mughal emperor who also had the second-longest reign after Akbar, Dalrymple says: “By the end of it, he does becomes a monster of myths, but his final letters are full of regret and awareness about how much he destroyed of what he had inherited.”
And he adds: “What is little spoken is that he was an extremely generous donor of various ashrams and maths. Just the sheer data that can be gathered about his donations to Hindu monasteries is extraordinary…”
Now is that true? Aurangzeb (1658-1707) was neither the eldest, nor the favourite son of his father Shah Jahan. To ascend the throne, he killed his two brothers, dispatched his father to jail, and subsequently murdered him by sending him poisoned massage oil. He later imprisoned his son (in his will, he admonished: “Never trust your sons”). He was also very cruel to the Hindus, ordering temples destroyed and making sure that the idols of Hindu gods and goddesses were buried under the steps of the mosques (like the Jama Masjid in Delhi) so that future generations of Muslims will trample upon them.
Aurangzeb built a number of mosques on destroyed temples, including Kashi Vishwanath, one of the most sacred places for Hindus. Other Hindu sacred places within his reach too suffered destruction with mosques built on them. A few examples: Krishna’s birth temple in Mathura, the rebuilt Somnath temple on the coast of Gujarat, the Vishnu temple replaced with the Alamgir mosque now overlooking Benares, and the Treta-ke-Thakur temple in Ayodhya. The number of temples destroyed by Aurangzeb is counted in four, if not five, figures. Aurangzeb did not stop at destroying temples; their users were also wiped out.
Muslims suffered as much as Hindus: 90% of today’s Indian Muslims should know that their forefathers were converted by force under Aurangzeb. Even his own brother, Dara Shukoh, was executed for taking an interest in Hindu religion.
The shadow of Aurangzeb still floats upon India: in Kashmir, where 4,00,000 Hindus were made to flee their homeland. India looks like sometimes it is forsaking its Sufi inheritance and letting Aurangzeb’s spirit take hold of it. What will happen once the army goes? Aurangzeb is not only present in Kashmir, his very name still triggers passion on both sides of the Hindu and the Muslim community. Yet, one has just to go through Aurangzeb’s own firmans (edicts), which are still preserved in the Bikaner archives, to know what kind of man he was.
One is also surprised that the Sikh community, particularly the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, has kept quiet. Have they forgotten what Aurangzeb did to them?
Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded because he objected to Aurangzeb’s forced conversions. Aurangzeb, who had never forgiven the Sikhs for having supported his brother Dara, persecuted the Sikhs viciously. In response, Guru Gobind Singh transformed the Sikh community into a military community. Many perceive Guru Gobind Singh as no a warlord with no religious credentials; yet, he was a powerful military general who transformed the Sikhs into a militaristic society.
The Sikh community should debate whether they want to make Aurangzeb a hero or remain close to the Hindus? Why do not the Sikhs in Delhi lobby so that Aurangzeb Road in New Delhi is renamed after one of their gurus?
Indian Muslims too have to make a crucial choice: do they want Aurangzeb’s inheritance to prevail upon Islam in India, or will they invoke Dara Shukoh’s spirit and bring the greatness of Sufism back into India?
As for Dalrymple, let him dwell upon his fantasies. Western Indology is still mired in its olds prejudices and cliches, which make Aurangzeb a hero and Guru Gobind Singh or Shivaji Maharaj mere petty chieftains.
Source
Francois Gautier
We all admire William Dalrymple for his writing style, knowledge of India and for making Delhi his home. Yet, his fascination for the Mughals, which already made him write the ‘The Last Mughal’ and ‘White Mughals’, is bizarre, to say the least, as the Mughals were the biggest perpetrators of human rights abuses of their time, not only against Hindus and Sikhs, but even against their own kin.
It seems Dalrymple now wants to embark upon a new book about one of India’s most controversial historical figures, Aurangzeb, whom he considers “absolutely fascinating” and “very self aware, very Shakespearean”.
Speaking about the richest Mughal emperor who also had the second-longest reign after Akbar, Dalrymple says: “By the end of it, he does becomes a monster of myths, but his final letters are full of regret and awareness about how much he destroyed of what he had inherited.”
And he adds: “What is little spoken is that he was an extremely generous donor of various ashrams and maths. Just the sheer data that can be gathered about his donations to Hindu monasteries is extraordinary…”
Now is that true? Aurangzeb (1658-1707) was neither the eldest, nor the favourite son of his father Shah Jahan. To ascend the throne, he killed his two brothers, dispatched his father to jail, and subsequently murdered him by sending him poisoned massage oil. He later imprisoned his son (in his will, he admonished: “Never trust your sons”). He was also very cruel to the Hindus, ordering temples destroyed and making sure that the idols of Hindu gods and goddesses were buried under the steps of the mosques (like the Jama Masjid in Delhi) so that future generations of Muslims will trample upon them.
Aurangzeb built a number of mosques on destroyed temples, including Kashi Vishwanath, one of the most sacred places for Hindus. Other Hindu sacred places within his reach too suffered destruction with mosques built on them. A few examples: Krishna’s birth temple in Mathura, the rebuilt Somnath temple on the coast of Gujarat, the Vishnu temple replaced with the Alamgir mosque now overlooking Benares, and the Treta-ke-Thakur temple in Ayodhya. The number of temples destroyed by Aurangzeb is counted in four, if not five, figures. Aurangzeb did not stop at destroying temples; their users were also wiped out.
Muslims suffered as much as Hindus: 90% of today’s Indian Muslims should know that their forefathers were converted by force under Aurangzeb. Even his own brother, Dara Shukoh, was executed for taking an interest in Hindu religion.
The shadow of Aurangzeb still floats upon India: in Kashmir, where 4,00,000 Hindus were made to flee their homeland. India looks like sometimes it is forsaking its Sufi inheritance and letting Aurangzeb’s spirit take hold of it. What will happen once the army goes? Aurangzeb is not only present in Kashmir, his very name still triggers passion on both sides of the Hindu and the Muslim community. Yet, one has just to go through Aurangzeb’s own firmans (edicts), which are still preserved in the Bikaner archives, to know what kind of man he was.
One is also surprised that the Sikh community, particularly the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, has kept quiet. Have they forgotten what Aurangzeb did to them?
Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded because he objected to Aurangzeb’s forced conversions. Aurangzeb, who had never forgiven the Sikhs for having supported his brother Dara, persecuted the Sikhs viciously. In response, Guru Gobind Singh transformed the Sikh community into a military community. Many perceive Guru Gobind Singh as no a warlord with no religious credentials; yet, he was a powerful military general who transformed the Sikhs into a militaristic society.
The Sikh community should debate whether they want to make Aurangzeb a hero or remain close to the Hindus? Why do not the Sikhs in Delhi lobby so that Aurangzeb Road in New Delhi is renamed after one of their gurus?
Indian Muslims too have to make a crucial choice: do they want Aurangzeb’s inheritance to prevail upon Islam in India, or will they invoke Dara Shukoh’s spirit and bring the greatness of Sufism back into India?
As for Dalrymple, let him dwell upon his fantasies. Western Indology is still mired in its olds prejudices and cliches, which make Aurangzeb a hero and Guru Gobind Singh or Shivaji Maharaj mere petty chieftains.
Source
10 April, 2011
India & the World - An Astrological View
Above: India & the World - An Astrological View by K.N. Rao, Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan
28 March, 2011
08 March, 2011
Teesta Setalvad Exposed
Above: Teesta Setalvad 's former colleague Rais Khan has made startling revelations by filing an affidavit before the Nanavati commission... extracts from his first ever TV interview
Also View: Evidence Against Teesta Setalvad
Also View: Evidence Against Teesta Setalvad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
