Internal Security Watch

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Dec 2010 10:31

^^Wasnt Nepali a "sarkari/IB gangster"? Isnt Rajan also supposed to be a "patriotic" don?

Why are they bumping each other off instead of targeting the scum D-gang?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 25 Dec 2010 10:40

Deal home-grown terror with sensitivity: PM to IPS recruits

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/deal- ... ts/729192/

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Dec 2010 10:56

^^ Not sure how is terror dealt with sensitively?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 25 Dec 2010 11:21

Homegrown terror bigger threat: PM

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Homegrown ... 42545.aspx

"Handling terrorism driven by outside forces or sent to India is easy, but that’s not the case with the terror modules found within the country," he added.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 25 Dec 2010 17:07

sum wrote:^^Wasnt Nepali a "sarkari/IB gangster"? Isnt Rajan also supposed to be a "patriotic" don?

Why are they bumping each other off instead of targeting the scum D-gang?

Did Bharat Nepali fake his death to ward it off?

By: Poornima Swaminathan Date: 2010-12-25 Place: Mumbai

After rumours of the Don's death last week, sources say he staged it, in typical gangland custom, for a longer life

Gangster Bharat Nepali is resorting to an age-old underworld superstition to ensure a longer life staging his own death.

Over the last week, there have been unconfirmed reports that Nepali was killed by underworld don Chhota Rajan's henchmen in Thailand.

However, intelligence agencies said that Nepali is very much alive and is shuttling between Malaysia and Thailand.

In the underworld circles, gangsters often float rumours about being killed and then orchestrate their own death. This, they believe, will ensure a longer life for the gangster, sources said.

"Several dons have done this in the past, including Rajan and Dawood," said a source, who has been tracking the underworld closely.

"They go into hiding and spread rumours about their death. This is believed to give them a longer life," he added.

Nepali has been under tremendous pressure over the last year, after forming a breakaway gang of his own, following a spat with don Chhota Rajan, who he used to work for earlier.

He announced his entry into Mumbai's mafia with a bang: with the sensational killing of advocate Shahid Azmi, the lawyer representing 26/11 accused Fahim Ansari, and then Farid Tanasha, Rajan's trusted aide.

Since then, Rajan's men have been baying for his blood and Mumbai Police and intelligence agencies have been tracking his activities closely.

The recent arrest of Bunty Pandey too turned on the heat on Nepali. Pandey, a notorious extortionate was nabbed last month in Vietnam and deported to India.

Currently in the Crime Branch's custody, he is believed to have parted with valuable information regarding Nepali's activities and gang strategies.

Intelligence agencies are keeping a close watch on Nepali and his movements, said sources.

Who is Bharat Nepali?

He began in the underworld as Rajan's driver. In 1998, Rajan ordered Nepali to kill Nepali parliamentarian Mirza Dilshad Beg, who allegedly had links with the ISI. It was a fallout of the rivalry between Rajan and Dawood Ibrahim.

Nepali then broke away from his mentor to form his own gang, citing differences. He now portrays himself as a patriotic don.

A native of Uttar Pradesh, he is behind the killings of advocate Shahid Azmi, gangster Farid Tanasha, and allegedly, Jamim Shah, owner of Nepal-based Space Time Network.

AbhishekD · Post by **AbhishekD** » 25 Dec 2010 17:21

It is so strange how hindus tend to forget their history. The persecution is just forgotten within 3-4 generations. It is kept within the caste or the community, but never learnt on the widespread scale. If an atrocity would have happened in north bengal, hindus in south bengal wont know it and would not want to understand the phenomenon and in a matter of few decades they will forget it and continue to live as if nothing had happened.

The same process is happening in Punjab also. Though in Sikh religious literature, the atrocities are ingrained so for a Sikh it is next to impossible for them to forget islamic atrocities, but for hindus the atrocities we remember are that of Kansh mama or Ravan or some such illusory figure and we continue to concentrate of them. We need to develop our history and make hindus aware of islamic atrocities.

Finally hindus of west bengal have shown no tendency to fight back this overt aggression against them. They have meekly surrendered. Even in Bangladesh, they surrendered and found the first train out of bangladesh to India. The demographic transition undergoing in bengal is due to islamic aggression. The rapid change in demography in 4 northern districts of bengal is nothing but covert islamic aggression at a slower pace, where land after land and village after village have been taken over slowly and completely islamised. Hindus will mourn this later.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Dec 2010 22:47

ramana wrote:I don't know what purpose is served by not revealing the nationalities of the four LeT terrorists. Let me clarify. By keeping this information hidden, suspicion of Muslim men (from their names) between 20 to 30 years in Mumbai will be increased.

Being LeT members they could be most likely Pakis and if so it should be made open so that there is less chance of pickinng up random Muslim youth and increase further alienation.

They are no longer sure of the nationalities of LeT - they could be "state less". They could even be Indians. The instruction to be "sensitive" gets an added meaning here. It is not just about being supposedly more discrete about "right wing" but also about protecting any indigenous "Muslim" connection from being evident.

disha · Post by **disha** » 26 Dec 2010 07:12

Regarding Binayak Sen verdict, Sorry if already posted: http://www.dailypioneer.com/306255/Spur ... k-Sen.html

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 26 Dec 2010 08:48

Thx for posting that disha.

Excerpting, for posterity:

A fair assessment of the curious case of Binayak Sen would be incomplete without mentioning his admirable efforts to take healthcare to the poor, impoverished tribals of Chhattisgarh. Undoubtedly, Rupantar, set up by him and his wife Elina, has done remarkable work. Not many alumni of Christian Medical College in Vellore would give up lucrative careers at home and abroad to tend to the sick and the suffering in the interiors of Bastar. But somewhere along the line, the healer became an ideologue and a partisan in Chhattisgarh’s war against Maoists, choosing to align with Left extremism over apolitical humanism.

His active association, if not collusion, with Maoists came to the notice of authorities in 2006-2007. Narayan Sanyal, a veteran of the Naxalite movement and an influential member of the CPI(Maoist) Politburo, on the run from the police, took shelter in Raipur in 2005 to evade arrest and direct the murderous insurgency from his hideout. Sanyal was arrested on April 7, 2006 and sent to Raipur Jail where Sen met him frequently. Admittedly, the meetings took place with prior permission from jail officials. Sen was a known face among jail authorities as he regularly visited undertrial prisoners, offering to help them in his capacity as PUCL vice-president and counselling them on custodial rights. It is only natural that he should have easily gained access to Sanyal without raising doubts.

A sequence of events leading to the arrest, on May 6, 2007, and interrogation of a Kolkata-based Maoist activist, Piyush Guha, who was ferrying money for Sanyal and whose wife and brother-in-law are lodged in a West Bengal jail for their association with Left-wing extremists, revealed the nature of Sen’s role and the extent of his involvement. He was arrested by Chhattisgarh Police on May 14, 2007, on the charge of acting as courier for Sanyal, carrying messages and letters from him. Later, the arrest and interrogation of another Maoist, Bikash Bhattacharya, in Bihar provided the police with further clues and information about Sen’s involvement.

Investigations also revealed that Sen had arranged for Sanyal’s rented accommodation, vouching for his ‘credentials’ to three landlords, and helped him open a bank account. A letter was found at his residence, said to have been written by a senior Maoist leader, thanking him for his services. Sen was charged under the IPC, the UAPA and the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act of 2005 that provides a legal framework for the State Government’s anti-Maoist operations. Along with Sanyal and Guha, he has been held guilty of the charges, barring that of waging war on the state, and given a life sentence, the maximum punishment for seditious activity.

Instead of getting distracted by the raucous chant of activists and anarchists, we should remember three points. Sen was tried in an open court under laws that are equally applicable to all citizens of India; it was a fair trial, he had access to the best lawyers and at no stage was he starved of either legal advice or funds. This is in sharp contrast to the kangaroo courts where those who refuse to obey the Maoists’ diktat are summarily tried and executed. Those held ‘guilty’ by these ‘people’s courts’ are poor Adivasis and Dalits who are denied the right to appeal, a right Sen can exercise under the very laws which his supporters are now vociferously denouncing. If the higher judiciary finds the trial court has erred, Sen’s conviction will be set aside.

There's been mischiveous, malicious cam-pains alleging 'there's zero evidence', 'its all circumstantial onlee' etc. False, period. Only.

Third, it’s a war being waged by the democratic Republic of India against those who want a totalitarian People’s Republic of Maoistan. In the first 10 months of this year alone Maoists have killed 577 civilians and 260 security forces personnel; they have lost 137 cadre in encounters. In this war, we can choose to be either with the state or the Maoists; there’s no halfway house because the future of our freedom, our liberty, our open society and our democracy is at stake. Binayak Sen exercised his choice.

Amen.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 26 Dec 2010 17:35

Pakis arrested near Lakshadweep
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article981139.ece

An unidentified ship with over 25 Pakistani and Iraqi nationals on board has been detained off the coast of Lakshadweep by security agencies after it illegally entered Indian waters.

Sources privy to the probe said the ship had sailed into the waters and was cruising towards an unknown destination when it was challenged by the Coast Guard and the Navy. It has been anchored off the Lakshadweep coast.

The initial suspicion was that it could have been moving towards the Maldives, which, according to Indian intelligence, is now being preferred by terror groups based in Pakistan. However, the sources did not rule out that it could have been moving towards any of the unoccupied islands in Lakshadweep or Daman and Diu areas.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 27 Dec 2010 05:04

Gangster Bharat Nepali alive, confirm intelligence agencies

The news of the ‘killing’ of underworld figure Bharat Nepali last week left the intelligence agencies and the Mumbai crime branch in a tizzy.

They launched into verification of facts as soon as word spread that assailants had shot down the gangster near a mall in Bangkok. It now turns out it was just a rumour spread by the henchmen of fugitive underworld don Chhota Rajan. Nepali is alive and kicking.

Underworld sources close to Nepali have confirmed to the intelligence agencies that the news of his killing was the handiwork of the Rajan gang. He was not pumped with six bullets as rumoured.

The crime branch and the intelligence agencies had refused to comment on the matter earlier as there was no official confirmation regarding the incident or Nepali’s death. The gangster has been on the radar of the Rajan gang after he allegedly bumped off Farid Tanasha, a close associate of the Bangkok-based don.

An underworld source, who was questioned by the agencies, told the police that the Rajan gang was in a state of panic as Nepali had remained incommunicado for some time.

“According to the source, Nepali had stopped all communication and contact with his gang members over the past one month, and this led to fear among the Rajan gang because they did not know what Nepali was up to. To make Nepali surface or to identify his location, the Rajan gang spread this rumour about the killing,” an intelligence officer said.

Another indication why the news of Nepali’s death could be untrue, said an officer, is the underworld gangs always claim responsibility for the killing of any rival gangster. “They like to tom-tom the killing and claim responsibility to establish their supremacy.’’

The officer further said that this was a common ploy used by gangs. “If you see the pattern, every few months there is news in the media about Dawood Ibrahim or Chhota Rajan or Chhota Shakeel’s death or their arrest,” the officer said.

However, as far as Nepali is concerned, what has got the intelligence agencies worried is no one has been able to ascertain his location. “Even underworld sources do not know where he is now. This is an indication that Nepali has gone off the radar and is probably planning and plotting a major hit somewhere,” the officer said.

Sources said Nepali parted ways from Rajan in 2005, however, friction between the two increased after the killing of Tanasha in Mumbai in June this year. Rajan has been planning to avenge Tanasha’s death, said a central intelligence officer.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 Dec 2010 09:09

Yet another fake historian who is making noises in favour of the Fake Gandhians who want to over throw the republic.

Not to question why

The most outrageous part of the fartical

Sen's conviction happened in a court subject to intimidation by a government run by (and I use the word advisedly) paranoid politicians (helped by sometimes paranoid police officers). His conviction will and should be challenged. As it stands, however, it is a disgrace to democracy. His brave wife commented on the verdict that if "one who has worked for the poor of the country for 30 years, if that person is found guilty of sedition activities and conspiracy, when gangsters and scamsters are walking free, I think it's a scandalous situation". Any reasonable Indian would concur.

Ramachandra Guha is the author of India After Gandhi: The History of the World's Largest Democracy. The views expressed by the author are personal.

sum · Post by **sum** » 27 Dec 2010 09:25

When all the jholawallahs erupt and international orgs like Amnesty chip in to comment on the "poor Indian judicial system", one can be sure that Dr.Sen has big backers and isnt as lilly-white as made out to be...

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 27 Dec 2010 19:14

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?706486

Judgement Convicting Binayak Ridiculous: Sachar

Describing the judgement convicting rights activist Binayak Sen for sedition as ridiculous and unacceptable, former chief justice of Delhi High Court Rajender Sachar today said that civil liberties of people were in danger and there is need to act now.

"There can't be a greater nonsensical judgement than this. I am ashamed belonging to the judiciary that such a ridiculous judgement was delivered," Sachar, former President of People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), who was here, told mediapersons today.

Talking about Gujarat, Sachar said that in a democracy, the rule of law persists, not the will of an individual.

"Some chess champions gathering, roads being built, these are the normal activities of a government. There is nothing surprising about it," Sachar said, adding that if a government does not do this, it should be termed as incompetent.

He further said that if somebody criticises the government activities or its chief minister, it does not amount to insulting the state of Gujarat. "The state is far bigger than any individual," Sachar added.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 27 Dec 2010 19:16

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?706502
Intellectuals Appeal for Binayak Sen's Release

Expressing shock over awarding of life sentence to rights activist Binayak Sen on charges of sedition, over 80 intellectuals including Noam Chomsky today demanded that his appeal be heard "expeditiously" with "enlightened reason" and sought his immediate release on bail.

They claimed that Sen never resorted to violence or incited anyone else to do so. On the contrary, as a doctor and a human rights activist he stood up in defence of the rights of downtrodden, said a statement signed by Romila Thapar, Prabhat Patnaik, Ashok Mitra and Mushirul Hasan among others.

"Yet he has been handed down this sentence whose savagery is unbelievable," it said.

Sen, Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal and Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha were sentenced to life imprisonment last Friday for colluding with Maoists to establish a network to fight the state.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 Dec 2010 19:21

A CT- the conviction could be meant to be overturned on appeal, for the purpose of making the the Maoists look like wronged heroes. Such psy-ops have happened before.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 27 Dec 2010 19:35

^^ It could also be a ploy by ITALIAN MAFIA to get all lefty anti-national forces to join hands with them against communal, heartless BJP Govt. which convicted a humanitarian, kind soul who is working for the poor and never involved in any violent act.

Just watch.. In a week or two, the western press will be writing about how right-wing, hindu BJP falsified evidence and convicted an innocent man.

With all scams, the lefty anti-nationals have not been coming out boldly to vouch for ITALIAN MAFIA. So they need to be taught a lesson and be reminded about their fate if BJP comes back.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Dec 2010 20:06

Binayak Sen is a "soft target" for the state in its battle against Maoist insurgency, and as such this judgement is strategically, tactically (ignoring the legal dimension) stupid..

Binayak Sen does not wield the gun, hence he cannot "deliver" the gun-wielding insurgents..He does not belong to the top decision-making appratus of CPI(Maoist), so his incarceration does not act as a deterrent either...On the contrary, this conviction only gives a lot more propaganda points to the Maoists, both in the urban mainstream discourse as well as in the tribal heartland where the real battles for hearts and minds have to be fought..Here is a doctor (gold medallist from CMC, no less) who by all accounts (including Kanchan Gupta!) has done signal service for the most neglected people for 2 decades..He is not an underground operative like Kobad Ghandi, he does not wield a gun like Kishenji - and he has been sent away on a life term...Will the Maoists need a better story to tell in order to prove how cruel the Indian state is?

In terms of the strategic dimension of the fight against Maoists, as ajai sahni put it brilliantly, by hanging someone who is nothing more than a sympathiser, no deterrence is being created, only more questions are being invited...

From a political perspective, all anti-insurgency efforts in India have involved co-opting the mainstream, overground sections of the aggrieved populace as a prelude to final settlement with those wielding the gun...Longowal, the Naga Hoho council, AASU - Binayak Sen falls in the same category of people/organisations...These sections cannot deliver peace, that can only be delivered by those wielding the gun...But coopting them starts chipping away at the support base of those wielding the gun...Summarily going after them on the other hand, serves no purpose..It does not deter those with guns, and complicates public opinion on the merits of the case...

All told, its a massive self goal for the Indian state...going by what is there in the papers, the evidence seems to thin to stand scrutiny in a higher court, and exoneration there is likely to give some more brownie points to the Maoists...

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 27 Dec 2010 20:32

Somnathji, the lower judiciary is not so compromised, or even so feckless as not to know when to convict and when not to. Why do we give greater credence to the utterances of a few newspapers and news channels, (which have proved themselves to be easily purchased), than to a conviction in a constitutionally valid court of law? How can we say that the blathering of a few talking heads is of more import than the judgement of a sessions court?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Dec 2010 20:48

ASPuar wrote: How can we say that the blathering of a few talking heads is of more import than the judgement of a sessions court?

ASP-saab, forget the media..Go to the raw data - read the judgement (its not very long, about 90 pages I think)...Even to a non-legal mind like me, grounds for conviction look amazingly thin (evidence includes a letter from Ilina Sen referrgin to ISI

, btw, she was referring to the Indian Sociological Institute)..But its more than just the conviction...Its also the severity of the sentence - Life term? For being a "sympathiser"? We didnt do that even with Laldenga, or Jagjit Singh chouhan..Surely they were far more dangerous to the Indian state than a doctor who harbours left wing sympathies? Compare the sentence with the one doled out to Union Carbide honchos - 2 years?! Or for that matter to any of the worthies who cocked a snook at the entire state apparatus (Parliament, Executive and Judiciary) on 6th Dec 1992? Not comparing the events/crimes in question - they are all controversial, simply the fact that the sentencing seems so disproportionate even if one assumed that the conviction was on solid grounds...

But most importantly for the state, how nicely does it queer its pitch in the battle against Maoists while doing zilch for the actual fight?!

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 27 Dec 2010 21:06

somnath wrote:Binayak Sen is a "soft target" for the state in its battle against Maoist insurgency, and as such this judgement is strategically, tactically (ignoring the legal dimension) stupid..

Binayak Sen is an overground worker for the maoists providing an communications channel between arrested maoists and those maoists still at large. The stupidity lies in the brain of the person who calls such a brilliant choking of a communication channel as stupid, maybe the person shouting stupid wants the judge to recant this welcome decision and free this terrorist and thereby putting the lives of more people in danger of this terrorist masqueradering as a doctor. I hope the judge ignores such cries from stupids and increases the sentence of the terrorist to death sentence, this commie swine needs to hangs to be an example for other swines.

somnath wrote:Binayak Sen does not wield the gun, hence he cannot "deliver" the gun-wielding insurgents..He does not belong to the top decision-making appratus of CPI(Maoist), so his incarceration does not act as a deterrent either...

This does act as a deterrent, note the cries of the maoists, the barrel of the gun laced with chilli powder has been thrust up their collective rectums,

Enjoy the show, these terrorists wanted to rule over india with the barrel of the gun and now a judge has twisted their barrels

somnath wrote:On the contrary, this conviction only gives a lot more propaganda points to the Maoists

somnath wrote:Will the Maoists need a better story to tell in order to prove how cruel the Indian state is?

If the Indian state was cruel they would have shot this maoist pig and left his corpse to be eaten by street dogs but Indian state gave him a fair trial and the judge found binayak guilty, So stop crying and ask binayak to hire a better lawyer and stop supporting terrorists.

somnath wrote:All told, its a massive self goal for the Indian state...going by what is there in the papers, the evidence seems to thin to stand scrutiny in a higher court, and exoneration there is likely to give some more brownie points to the Maoists...

Yet another stupid comment, the judge on behalf of the indian public gave a collective kick in the face of the maoists, both underground and overground, for killing, murder, pillage and terrorising the public that these commie swines have undertaken in the name of the liberation. All right thinking minds welcome this decision, only the friends of the maoists are sad which is good too.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 27 Dec 2010 21:21

Somnath, I disagree. As per 124(A) of the IPC, all that is needed is "visible representation" of disaffection towards the Government to be branded seditious. Visible representation was proved or so the Raipur Sessions and District Court thinks. There is a higher court to disagree, if you like. The maoists may yak endless about how 124(A) goes against the grain of freedom of speech, but fact is, law is the law. Just because the law is not applied to Gautam Navlakha or Arundhati Roy, does nt mean that Sen is guilt-free. Too many people have taken advantage of the more or less liberal fabric of India to say anything and everything under the sun.

In 1975, under MISA, anyone could get arrested and that is the setting under which "civil liberties" in India came to the fore. It was the INC under Indira Gandhi that prostituted civil liberties for self-aggrandizement. Even the Supreme Court went with that at that point (read Hans Raj Khanna's chronicles if you want). These very same civil liberties union have now been hijacked by people who openly go against the law because UAPA is unconstitutional this that. The very same Rajinder Sachar who claims UAPA is unconstitutional was working to ensure that the Constitutional rights are not mis-delivered when he was a Judge of the Delhi High Court. Why this hypocrisy?

The hypocrisy extends further too. When the maoist nutjobs cite the 22 Nobel Prize winners' support, implicit in their claim is that 22 > the law of the land. Coming from a maoist people, who believe in egalitarianism, the hypocrisy is a bit too rich for people to follow? Maoism will lose steam when people realize the hypocrisy and when the middle class gets bigger and bigger. Hearts and minds battle is all bunkum.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 27 Dec 2010 21:23

Interestingly, all sorts of comparisons are being done. Well, one apt comparison is to compare this with the case of Prof.Warrier's son Rajan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.V._Eachara_Warrier
Please read, quite heart rending

http://www.ahrchk.net/pub/pdf/mof.pdf
While, this dyed in wool red Binayak Sen is given all the luxury that the state can afford, with due process of justice being followed.
Where were all the human right watchers, NGOs, shedding tears for Rajan. But now every NGO, seculars, and red brigade members are crying over roof top about miscarriage of justice, what not. Remember Rajan, pause, why no NGOs stepped forward to get justice for Prof.Warrier?

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 27 Dec 2010 21:30

Stan_Savljevic wrote: Just because the law is not applied to Gautam Navlakha or Arundhati Roy, does nt mean that Sen is guilt-free. Too many people have taken advantage of the more or less liberal fabric of India to say anything and everything under the sun.

This is becoming a new strategy that is being peddled by top honchos over the last few days. Even the Nobel winner Amartya is peddling the same theory. One should not prosecute/indict/sentence the thief of today because a thief was not caught in 345 BC. The media gladly carries the theory with an acceptance.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 27 Dec 2010 21:57

To add to what I wrote, you can express disaffection to the Government in a democratic way. That is called elections. If you express disaffection in the form of armed overthrow of Government and anarchic actions, that is sedition. When someone is charged with sedition and one Court claims that the case is solid, that is a pretty serious crime. Contrary to being liberal, one has to be apprehensive of such people. How many people in India get charged with sedition? Because proving it takes effort. Binayak Sen had the bestest of defense counsel, everyone from Ram Jethmalani to Fali Nariman seem to be itching to defend Binayak. So what is the extra-Judicial course of action that sympathizers of Binayak want? The media is trying to act the Jury here. Sorry, but we dont have a Jury system in India, even if RM wants that. We have Courts to decide cases. Disagreeing with a Court opinion is contempt of that august body. Anyone disagreeing can be pulled to the same Court and be charged a fine or even be imprisoned. There is a logical recourse: appeal to a higher Court, not whine. In short, OBEY the laws of the land.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Dec 2010 00:40

Sedition is about overthrowing of the rashtra/state and not the government. Claiming to overthrow by a means not sanctioned in the rashtra is subverting the rashtra - which then comes under the Brit derived Indian sedition laws. Disaffection against the government is not restricted to only showing in the elections, it can be peaceful assembly and demonstration, or shouting about it as much as feasible in any medium of expression - as long as such expression is not breaking other laws [ obstructing an ambulance say].

Even talking of people's writings which are associated with theories of "overthrow of state" is not sedition - as set out in a early Naxal period Gujarat High Court ruling over the banning of a certain book espousing Maoist thoughts.
Any law which is applied selectively and conveniently for the government loses its legitimacy in eye of the public. The learned judiciary themselves have tried to stress this point many times.

If it was applied equally strictly to those supporting Kashmiri separatists, or those apparently from the "media" [ engaged in a legitimate overground profession just like Vinayak Sen in the "course of which" they "happen to meet Maoists"] who managed to have special communications to meet Maoist leaders without state presence, are also then automatically involved in "carrying" information from one Naxalite to another - then the judgment would have obtained greater legitimacy.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 28 Dec 2010 00:54

It could be applied to all those but in this case he carried the communication to someone in the jail and also assisted in other means of support (safe house, bank account/money) while Sanyal was on the run. Is it not active abetment? Why should it matter if someone else is not yet imprisoned for similar offence.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 28 Dec 2010 00:58

somnath wrote:
ASPuar wrote: How can we say that the blathering of a few talking heads is of more import than the judgement of a sessions court?
ASP-saab, forget the media..Go to the raw data - read the judgement (its not very long, about 90 pages I think)...Even to a non-legal mind like me, grounds for conviction look amazingly thin (evidence includes a letter from Ilina Sen referrgin to ISI , btw, she was referring to the Indian Sociological Institute)..But its more than just the conviction...Its also the severity of the sentence - Life term? For being a "sympathiser"? We didnt do that even with Laldenga, or Jagjit Singh chouhan..Surely they were far more dangerous to the Indian state than a doctor who harbours left wing sympathies? Compare the sentence with the one doled out to Union Carbide honchos - 2 years?! Or for that matter to any of the worthies who cocked a snook at the entire state apparatus (Parliament, Executive and Judiciary) on 6th Dec 1992? Not comparing the events/crimes in question - they are all controversial, simply the fact that the sentencing seems so disproportionate even if one assumed that the conviction was on solid grounds...

But most importantly for the state, how nicely does it queer its pitch in the battle against Maoists while doing zilch for the actual fight?!

Where is the ISI letter in the Judgement? I tried to find it but couldn't, the Judgement was in Hindi and I read thru it. If possible, could you let me know the page #? Thanks in advance

Also, my assumption is that the Public Prosecutor mentioned about ISI in his prepared final remarks, and withdrew the remarks against Ilena Sen about ISI after it was pointed out and it never entered the Judgement, hence curious about this ISI passage in the Judgement.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 28 Dec 2010 01:45

Somnath, read the following and please justify your "flimsy evidence" categorization. The media is barking despite not knowing enough about the case. The only people who can comment intelligently are people who have seen the chargesheets, the defense, the Public Prosecutor's replies, the Judge's remarks, etc. DGP Vishwa Ranjan clearly said that the Judge saw not just one incident, but a holistic view of all the evidences presented and then came to the conclusion that Binayak Sen was a maoist empathizer. If you dont trust the civil bureaucracy in this country despite massive "evidence" (all kindsa associative maladies are here -- all the known maoist outlets such as People's march, Indian vanguard, Sanhati, etc. are pulling up for Binayak, known maoist sympathizers such as Gautam Navlakha, KG Kannabiran are going nuts on TV, known leftist "intellectuals" are signing petition after petition), when will you believe the system, when it is gone to the dogs? Ok, forget rhetoric, please read the stuff below.

Why did Binayak Sen claim to be a relative of Narayan Sanyal in a few of the jail meetings?

In paragraphs 54 and 55, the judgment cites the statement of one S R Thakur, the then deputy jailor at Raipur jail, giving the dates of 12 meetings that Sen had with Sanyal in jail. Thakur says that Sen claimed to be a relative of Sanyal and wanted to discuss “household matters”. Jailor P K S Chauhan (Para 56) gives another set of 19 dates on which Sen met Sanyal, again posing as a relative.

How about Rupantar helping Shankar Singh and Amita Srivastava?

Sen contended Shankar was employed by Rupantar - an NGO founded by his wife Ilina. He didn’t dispute that he and Ilina knew Amita Srivastava whom the latter had helped find a job in a school.

In Para 59, the order cites the statement of Deepak Chaubey, one time landlord of Narayan Sanyal. Chaubey says Sen accompanied Sanyal posing as a relative when he came looking for the house and that he had given the house to Sanyal because Sen was a “respectable citizen” of the town. In the following pages, the statements of some other witnesses are mentioned in which Sen and his wife Ilina are said to have helped “hardcore Naxalites” Shanker Singh and Amita Srivastava in getting jobs, rented accommodation and bank accounts.

Here is one of the additional chargesheets filed by the Chhattisgarh Police:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=141148787428

Dr Binayak Sen’s income from medical work is stated to be Rs 60,000. On 19.05.07, during the search of Dr Binayak Sen’s house, no evidence was found of medical examination room, patient examination table,stethoscope, medicines, BP machine, patient treatment register, and patient visitng time. Dr Binayak Sen is a doctor only in name, the treatment is non existent, and this is only a way of turning Rupantar’s money into income, and using his brains to work together with Narayan Sanyal and others for CPI Maoist and naxalite organizations. This is not clearly stated in the IT returns, which have Dr Binayak Sen’s signature.This paper refers to savings of Rs 10,00,000. The above information is provided by the IT Commissioner, Raipur.
...
Shrimati Shoma Sen, was sent email by Shrimati Elina Sen, who runs Rupantar, to Dr Binayak Sen. This is mentioned in the CPU print. Shrimati Soma Sen is a lecturer in Nagpur, and she has admitted in her statement before Hon Court of Shri BS Saluja that her husband was arrested in a naxalite case in Pana and is presently lodged in Hyderabad Central jail in a 15 year old naxalite case. It is clear that Dr Binayak Sen is connected with Tushar Kanti Bhattacharya and his wife Soma Sen.
...
The name of this dangerous accused Prafull Jha is mentioned in the print of the CPU of Dr Binayak Sen, and it is mentioned that he is paid a sum of Rs 2500, and Malti is paid Rs 1500. Malti has admitted that she is the wife of Gursa Usendi, alias Vijay, who lives in the forest and works for Naxalites. Dr Binayak Sen is in direct contact with such dangerous Naxalites.
...
The airtel mobile number of accused Dr Binayak Sen is 9893224291, and his residence phone number is 0771 2422875. Madhav Sanyal, brother of Narayan Sanyal has phoned on his number and phones to him from dr Binayak Sen numbers are as follows:
1. 919433140168 to 9893224291 dtd 22.01.07
2. 919433140168 to 9893224291 dtd 22.01.07
3. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
4. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
5. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
6. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
7. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
8. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 30.01.07
9. 919433140168 to 9893224291 dtd 03.02.07
10. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 16.03.07
11. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 16.03.07
12. 0771-2422875 to 919433140168 dtd 17.03.07
13. 0771-2422875 to 919433140168 dtd 17.03.07
14. 0771-2422875 to 919433140168 dtd 17.03.07
15 0771-2422875 to 919433140168 dtd 17.03.07
16. 919433140168 to 9893224291 dtd 19.0307
17 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 19.03.07
18. 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 29.03.07
19. 919433140168 to 0771-422875 dtd 29.03.07
20 9893224291 to 919433140168 dtd 29.03.07
21 919433140168 to 0771- 2422875 dtd 29.0307
...
In Book 3 of the print out of Dr Vinayak Sen’s computer, pqge 299 mention is made of Bijay, alias on behalf of Kisan Sangharsh Samiti Vijay alias Gursa Usendi saying that the police and officers are engaged in a dangerous and violent war against the people .The said Bijay alias Gursa Usendi is the husband of Malti arrested in DD Nagar crime no 14/08 and is the president of the Dandakaranya zonal Committee, who always issues press statements on behalf of naxalites.
...
Print book no.15 page 252 of the DVD of the CPU seized from the house of Dr Vinayak Sen. His wife writes-
Dear Comrade
I have just received Com Kusumlata’s letter. It is unfortunately not possible for me to attend the drafing committee meeting on march 26 at numbai,……cont.
Please Stay in touch re further developments in this regard.
Ilina Sen
...
Investigating Officer
BBS Rajput
Additional SP
Dt Raipur (CG)

Those are pretty serious charges. From my understanding, Tushar Kant Bhattacharya is one of the big fish of the maoists -- a member of the Central Politburo. (I can easily fish you one of the People's marches with his name there.) Gudsa Usendi is the name used by the spokesperson of the maoists, after Azad (a) Cherukuri Rajkumar was encountered. So much for the saintliness of Shri. Binayak Sen!

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 28 Dec 2010 02:17

ramana wrote:In 1975, INC was in very good position and yet ended up declaring Emergency as the ground shifted from their feet. The current series of scams one bigger than the other leading to loss of confidence in the INC and the demand of opposition for JPC could have similar undesirable impact. Hence the cresendo of Hindu terror is being raised to set the stage in case things go sour.

Probably SC thought it is better to clarify.

SC revisits 1976, says Emergency ruling was wrong

Thirty-five years after the Emergency, the Supreme Court has admitted that it “violated the fundamental rights of a large number of people in this country” by its most controversial decision of 1976 endorsing the Emergency.

In perhaps the first-ever open condemnation of the Emergency, the Apex Bench of Justices Aftab Alam and AK Ganguly stated in their decision, “There is no doubt that the majority judgement of this court in the ADM Jabalpur case violated the fundamental rights of a large number of people in this country.”

It was referring to the 1976 apex court decision in the case of ADM Jabalpur v Shivakant Shukla, where four judges sitting on a Constitution Bench passed a majority verdict upholding the presidential decree proclaiming Emergency. The lone dissent, offered by Justice HR Khanna, later became the law of the land, with the Moraji Desai Government setting right the anomaly by excluding Articles 20 and 21 from the purview of suspension during Emergency.

The 1976 case was unique as it tested the power of courts to challenge the Executive action even during Emergency. The majority view of then Chief Justice AN Ray, Justices MH Beg, YV Chandrachud and PN Bhagwati dealt a death blow to the power of courts to issue writs for safeguarding fundamental rights; thus relegating its status to that of a mute spectator. On the other hand, Justice Khanna observed, “No power has been conferred upon any authority in the Constitution for suspending the power of the high court to issue writs in the nature of habeas corpus during the period of Emergency.”

Upholding Justice Khanna’s dissent as the correct exposition of law, the SC has suggested that “the instances of this court’s judgement violating the human rights of the citizens may be extremely rare, but it cannot be said that such a situation can never happen” as it pointed to the 1976 decision.

What led the court to revisit its 1976 decision was a review petition filed by a death row convict, Ramdeo Chauhan.

His death sentence was upheld by the apex court but his case was taken up by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which recommended to the Assam Governor that the sentence be commuted. On the request of NHRC’s Full Bench, the Governor commuted the sentence to life on January 28, 2002. The apex court found NHRC’s action as “interference in administration of justice” and set aside the Governor’s order. The court’s comment on violation of human rights during Emergency came in the course of hearing on the convict’s review petition.

With Chauhan claiming that he was a juvenile at the time of commission of murder, the Bench allowed the review. It said, “The assumption in the judgement under review that there can be no violation of a person’s human rights by a judgement of this court is possibly not correct.”

The court even upheld the NHRC’s jurisdiction to recommend to the Governor the commutation of death sentence as it formed part of the commission’s “broad” duty to safeguard against violation of human rights under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. “However, it may not do so in a matter which is pending before the court,” the Bench said.

James B · Post by **James B** » 28 Dec 2010 02:25

Karkare was like a God to Indian Muslims: Digvijay

Congress General Secretary Digvijay Singh seems determined to stir the communal cauldron with unabated controversial statements. On Monday at the book release function of senior Urdu journalist and writer Aziz Burney's 26/11 an RSS conspiracy in Mumbai , Singh said that slain Anti Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare was a like a 'God to Indian Muslims'.

Singh also said that though he was present at function of Burney's book, he did not subscribe to its views that 26/11 was a conspiracy by the Hindu right wing RSS.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 28 Dec 2010 04:01

sum wrote:When all the jholawallahs erupt and international orgs like Amnesty chip in to comment on the "poor Indian judicial system", one can be sure that Dr.Sen has big backers and isnt as lilly-white as made out to be...

I know no specifics about the Binayak Sen case (other than the sketchy media accounts), and I am not going to say that his conviction & sentence were wrong etc. (the usual leftist abuse of what they call the Indian "State"). But let us also not fall into the leftist habit of arrogating to ourselves the right to decide which verdicts are acceptable and which ones are not, depending on whether we like the accused or not.

We we would be silly to pretend that miscarriages of justice don't happen, or that undue influence is not brought to bear on the judiciary. This is less likely at the higher levels of the judiciary, though it does happen--think of the absurd judgment of the justice Ahmadi supreme court about the Bhopal gas leak compensation (after which Ahmadi went on to become trustee of the USD 470M trust for the victims, with no one blinking an eye). Or the travails of Ruchika's family in a dysfunctional and corrupt police-judicial system.

We know that Binayak Sen was convicted under due process of law, but that doesn't tell us anything about whether that conviction was a miscarriage of justice or not. (To be perfectly honest, the accounts of the allegations in the the press make me think there is a very low bar for sedition, to say the least. But then again, I have a low opinion of the integrity and truthfulness of the English Language Media, so I can't be sure.). Kanchan Gupta was right to point out that Sen has the best possible legal counsel available and he will be appealing. We know that the leftists will only accept the results of the appeal only if it goes in their favor (or they might interpret it as a victory for their political clout, because that is the only way in which they can think). I hope that at least here on BRF, we will wait for what comes out of the appeals process and accept it with the grace that marks civilized people as opposed to the lefty political goondas.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 28 Dec 2010 04:13

For those who can follow Hindi, the judgment:
http://www.binayaksen.net/wp-content/up ... ec2010.pdf

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 28 Dec 2010 06:03

Why isn't the Juvenile Journalists & Media pulled up for Contempt of court.
The way they went after ayodhya judgment & B.Sen one.
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articl ... Court.html

2. Criminal Contempt
Under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, criminal contempt has been defined as the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which:
(i) Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court, or
(ii) Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceeding, or ...
Object
There can be no doubt that the purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of law courts and their image in the minds of the public is no way whittled down. If by contumacious words or writings the common man is led to lose his respect for the judge acting in the discharge of his judicial duties, then the confidence reposed in the courts is rudely shaken and the offender needs to be punished. In essence of law of contempt is the protector of the seat of justice more than the person sitting of the judge sitting in that seat.

Burkha & Co are fit case for this

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Dec 2010 07:22

Stan_Savljevic wrote:DGP Vishwa Ranjan clearly said that the Judge saw not just one incident, but a holistic view of all the evidences presented and then came to the conclusion that Binayak Sen was a maoist empathizer.

Stan, this itself is bunkum from the DGP (he at least should know better)..First, criminal cases are tried in court for conviction on specific crimes, not for categorising someone "holistically" as this or that..Second, if all that the DGP was interested in proving was that Dr Sen was a Maoist "empathiser", then establishing "empathy" for a particular group is a bit different from establishing criminal acts..

As for the evidence, I am not a lawyer, but spent a couple of hours going through the judgement yesteday on a lazy Dec day in office (

)..But taking off from your posts first,

Dr Binayak Sen’s income from medical work is stated to be Rs 60,000. On 19.05.07, during the search of Dr Binayak Sen’s house, no evidence was found of medical examination room, patient examination table,stethoscope, medicines, BP machine, patient treatment register, and patient visitng time.

Not even the most virulent critics of the doctor would accuse him of not practising medicine...

As for the gist of the case otherwise, Binayak Sen is guilty of "association" with a certain people alleged to be Maoists, like Tushar Kanti Bhattacharya...Problem is that the person referred here has not been convicted of any crime yet, the cases are still pending in various courts..But Binayak Sen is convicted on grounds of associating with someone who is still an undertrial!

Next, if you look at the narrative of the judgement, it bases itself on the following.. Some journals, and three letter written by Narayan Sanyal were passed on to Dr Sen by the former in jail..Dr Sen in turn passed them over to Pijush Guha who in turn was supposed to pass this over to the Maoists..And this is really the crux of the proof of "criminality" of Dr Sen..Look at the problems now...The entire narrative is based on evidence presented by police officers and one Anil Singh..Pijush Guha himself has contested the fact that he recieved those letters (he claims that they were planted on him by the police)..Crucially, the "star witness" Anil Singh happens to be a passerby who overheard (!!) the conversation between Guha as the police when the former was in custody!!! He as not accompnaying the police as a witness, he wasnt involved in the affair in any manner, but just happened to be a John Doe who managed to eavesdrop on a conversation between the police and a hardcore terrorist in custody!!!

There are more jewels in the evidence presented by the prosecution, including inconsistencies between affidavits filed in the Supreme Court and in the Sessions Court about the location of Guha's arrest (the Chttisgarh police claim in the former that it was the Mahindra Hotel, and in the latter it was Station Road) - and later explains it by blaming a typographical error! (somewhat similar to Shiv Menon' explanation of Sharm el Sheikh as "drafting mistakes"!)..

One can go one and on...Proseution evidence included references to "chimpanzee in the White House" and "ISI" (milindc, you are right, it isnt in the judgement, it was presented as prosecution evidence by the prosecutor)...

But Stan, really the larger question is not of the legal case - it is about the political battle...As I said earlier, going by this logic, Annadurai, Longowal, GS Tohra and a lot of others should have been put away for life imprisonment and more...Mind you, the orthies mentioned here had FAR more political capital on the respective issues they represented than Binayak Sen has over Maosists...The dotor cannot deliver peace as he doesnt wield the gun, his conviction does not deter those that wield the gun either..But it maks the case for and of the Indian state so much more complicated in the political domain..

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 28 Dec 2010 07:34

But you see even the maoists claim that Tusharkant Bhattacharya is one of their Politburo members. And the maoists are banned under UAPA. So by association, anyone trucking with a Politburo member of a banned organization is doing what? Plucking flowers?!

There was no legal clause for arresting Annadurai. Annadurai was seditious when the Indian Constitution legally had allowed separation from the Indian Union. The moment the Indian Parliament voted to make this act illegal, both C. Annadurai and his DMK went back on all that rubbish. In fact that very act was passed to BAN DMK. And once they came to the mainstream, they did nt make two bones about saying that china was wrong in the 1962 war and stealing people's money via elections. Regarding, Longowal, Tohra, Laldenga Hawla and a lot of others, please re-read history. Everyone gave up on violence in return for dropping criminal and seditious lawsuits. It was not a walk in the park. The maoists have NOT. By associating with the maoists, Binayak Sen is INDEED committing a seditious/criminal act.

And regarding DGP Vishwa Ranjan's statement, it is my paraphrasing of his brief response. He said go look at the judgment. The case of an alternative "narrative" or other leftist rubbish does nt arise. The case was presented, the case was argued by both sides, the case was adjudicated. You have a problem, go to a higher court. Dont create a verbal diarrhoea of "narrative" this and "narrative" that. What the leftists cant typically argue in a court of law, they want to argue in the "minds" of people. Laws are written in crystal clear english, you folks have a recourse, why dont you take that route instead of pontificating on the judgmental ability of a Judge, which is a contemptuous act in itself? The utter contempt to pass an arm-chair Judgment on the custodians of the rule of law is exactly what is the problem with India today, not the various attendant storms in a teacup.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Dec 2010 08:10

Stan_Savljevic wrote:But you see even the maoists claim that Tusharkant Bhattacharya is one of their Politburo members

Sorry, criminal conviction does not depend on "claims" made by people about/on others...

Stan_Savljevic wrote:There was no legal clause for arresting Annadurai. Annadurai was seditious when the Indian Constitution legally had allowed separation from the Indian Union. The moment the Indian Parliament voted to make this act illegal, both C. Annadurai and his DMK went back on all that rubbish. In fact that very act was passed to BAN DMK. And once they came to the mainstream, they did nt make two bones about saying that china was wrong in the 1962 war

Not quite...The law allowing secession from the union was repealed AFTER the China war..Annadurai made his famous speech aout being "right up there in the roll of honour to defend the country" in Parliament during the war...the change of heart and attitude was a result of a change in political reality, not a change of law...The change of law followed, and by then DMK was already in the mainstream, there was no question of "banning" them..

Stan_Savljevic wrote:Regarding, Longowal, Tohra, Laldenga Hawla and a lot of others, please re-read history. Everyone gave up on violence in return for dropping criminal and seditious lawsuits

Not quite again...the state negotiated with them even when they had their guns in their hand (it is still doing so with the NSCM)..Of course, Longowal and Tohra never carried guns, but their "empathy" for the Khalistan cause did not prevent the state from co-opting them, or trying to...though Binayak Sen is nowhere in the same stature as any of the above in the Maoist hierarchy..

finally, there is no "alternative narrative"...There is a judgement, for better or worse..and people have a right to criticise that (in the same manner as how they criticise the hopal judgement, or the SAR Geelani judgement by the Supreme court)..
The question really is whether by going after Binayak Sen the state ha achieved ny strategic objective in the fight against Naxals..A lot of people seem to think not, and many of them are not left wingers..Thats all...

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Dec 2010 08:22

One more surprising fact - Narayan Sanyal, whose "association" provides the basis for Dr Sen's conviction, himself was not charged with sedition/conspiracy/memebershp of banned organisation till WELL AFTER Binayak Sen' own arrest under the same charges...

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 28 Dec 2010 08:37

somnath wrote: Sorry, criminal conviction does not depend on "claims" made by people about/on others...

Sorry, you dont follow news then. Tusharkant Bhattacharya, per his own admission, claims himself to belong to the maoist outfit.
http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/ ... cret-talks

Bhattacharya says that, on behalf of his party, he had told the intermediary that they would not speak to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh or Home Minister P. Chidambaram whom they consider mere ‘bureaucrats’ but were willing to speak to ‘mass leaders’ like Digvijaya Singh.

His party is the State Democratic Front of Timbuktu?!

Not quite...The law allowing secession from the union was repealed AFTER the China war..Annadurai made his famous speech aout being "right up there in the roll of honour to defend the country" in Parliament during the war...the change of heart and attitude was a result of a change in political reality, not a change of law...The change of law followed, and by then DMK was already in the mainstream, there was no question of "banning" them..

Unfortunately, you dont believe in English semantics/logic? In the previous post, you claimed that C. Annadurai should have been imprisoned. I claimed that there was no such reason for sedition. Now in the next post, you argue around timelines and claim that the change of law followed the change of policy of DMK. So excuse me, where is the reason to arrest C. Annadurai? Please answer your own question with your own post.

Not quite again...the state negotiated with them even when they had their guns in their hand (it is still doing so with the NSCM)..Of course, Longowal and Tohra never carried guns, but their "empathy" for the Khalistan cause did not prevent the state from co-opting them, or trying to...though Binayak Sen is nowhere in the same stature as any of the above in the Maoist hierarchy..

It is THE state's prerogative to decide who they should parley with and who they should nt. You are NOT the state. You are YOU. If the GoI decides to go after peace with the maoists and un-bans the CPI (maoists), then there is no clause for arbitrary application of UAPA. Till then, what the State does is THE rule. You have a problem, leave the State. Or elect a government that will change these rules and the Constitution. You cannot question the rules or the legitimacy of the state, that is what the maoists do. Are you a leftist or a maoist? Do you believe in the State's primacy or do you believe in the prerogative of a few gun-toting individuals? The choice is yours. The State's choice is being executed.

There is a judgement, for better or worse..and people have a right to criticise that (in the same manner as how they criticise the hopal judgement, or the SAR Geelani judgement by the Supreme court)..

No, you are WRONG. Here is what Wiki states (Know your Civics 101):

However, Indian citizens cannot criticize supreme court judgments (although they are given the right to challenge the court's decision under legal process) and such criticism is punishable by three month imprisonment in jail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... ntry#India
What is your locus standi to criticize the adjudicator of the rule of law of the Indian nation state? Who are YOU? Some Lord Labakkudas?! Just because everyone commits a crime does nt mean that you can also. You may commit, but the State may choose to exercise its prerogative as it deems fit. Why do Indians grow up not knowing their own laws?

The question really is whether by going after Binayak Sen the state ha achieved ny strategic objective in the fight against Naxals..A lot of people seem to think not.

It is a test case and it sets a precedent. Is that hard to follow?

sum · Post by **sum** » 28 Dec 2010 08:47

James B wrote:
Singh also said that though he was present at function of Burney's book, he did not subscribe to its views that 26/11 was a conspiracy by the Hindu right wing RSS.

So, Mr. Diggy attends book launches though he doesnt agree with them?

Will he then attend a book launch of a book called "Nathuram Godse: great martyr" or "MKG : Shot dead or committed suicide?" or " Holocaust: Jewish conspiracy"?

Singh said that slain Anti Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare was a like a 'God to Indian Muslims'.

Sigh.....Scary that the future clown prince has has these same views..