TIT-FOR-TAT DIPLOMACY OF INDIA WITH PAKISTAN WILL NOT WORK ! Baluchistan and Kashmir cannot be equated

Will the tit-for-tat diplomacy of India under much-hyped 'DOVAL DOCTRINE" with Pakistan work? Baluchistan is not Kashmir. Unnecessarily raising the issue of  atrocity in Baluchistan by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his Red Fort speech, will rather harm India. Baluchistan issue cannot be equated with Kashmir problem between Pakistan and India. Baluchistan is integral part of Pakistan since independence of both India and Pakistan. But Kashmir always remained bone of contention among the people of Kashmir, Pakistan and India since its accession with India by Maharaja Hari Singh. Any encouragement of Baluchs  by India to create problem will be considered interference of India in the internal affairs of Pakistan ! Kashmir issue is still hanging fire on International platform---UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION (UNO).

 A book--Not War, Not Peace by George Perkovich and Toby Dalton (Oxford University Press,2016) has described, "The American scholar Christine Fair reported that in 2009 she visited the Indian mission in ZXaedan, Iran and concluded that it was an element of a broader covert action program me against Pakistan. I can assure you they are not issuing visits as the main activity ! Moreover, India has run operations from its mission in Mazar-i-Sharif (through which it supported the nothern alliance)and is likely doing so from the other consulates it has reopened in Jalalabad and Kandahar along the border. Indian officials have told me privately that they are pumping money into Baluchistan.Reports and allegations of Indian covert involved in Baluchistan and elsewhere invite distinction to be made and debated. India, like other states and sympathetic outsiders, could draw a line, between providing funds, logistical support, and political encouragement to dissident groups in Pakistan and alternatively providing equipment, training and operational support for violent action. Pakistan naturally would oppose both categories of interference.......From this brief survey, it is safe to say that India has not been purely abstemious in the use of covert agents and actions against Pakistan. This is especially evident when Afghanistan is included along with Pakistani territory as the area of operations for Indian agents--page 147-149.."

Ongoing crisis in Kashmir in the wake of Burhan Wani's murder on July 8,2016 set the entire areas aflame. Days after the crisis erupted in Kashmir, Narendra Modi took the familiar route of blame Pakistan. On the advice of Doval, Modi opened Baluchistan front and on August 12, 2016, Modi said, " Time has come that Pakistan will have to answer to the world about the atrocities being committed on people in Baluchistan and  Pakistan-Occupied -Kashmir (POK) Will the world shut eyes to the Indian part of Kashmir ?. A fine invitation to the internationalization", that India dreads. Since than Baluch rebel leaders  leaders are coming and going Delhi for united resentment against Pakistan over Baluchistan atrocity. They have also opened front in London against Pakistan,. More over , India has begun to develop cold feet. These squabbling Baloch leaders will ruin India's relation with China as well as Iran. Amid India's haughtiness in the affairs of Pakistan, in August 20, 2015, the Special Assistant of President Barack Obama, Peter R Lavoy, asserted , : Jammu and Kashmir is disputed territory.. There was no change in U S position." To this day, United Nations maps carry the legend--"The final Status of Jammu and Kashmir has not been agreed upon by the parties. Kashmir cannot be put on  par with Baluchistan !"

While the final Instrument of Accession was signed by the Khan of Kalat (princely state of Bakuchistan) on Mrach 27, it was placed before Jinnah on March 31,1948 and he accepted it.' There was no kind of resistance to the accession......(Dushka H Saiyid, The Accession of  Kalat: Myth and Reality, Strategic Studies, page 43). "Many in India claim that Pakistan forcefully occupied Baluchistan in 1948. But facts are different from fiction. There were four princely states ruled by Baloch leaders in 1947 under  Nawab Akbar Bugati, grand father of Brahmdarg Bugti, who is these days rebel.Akbar Bugti, who not only voted for Pakistan but also helped Mohammad Ali Jinnah' s Muslim League........"The Outlook has commented, " Time will prove the speech of Modi on Baluchistan was one of the biggest mistakes,,,,,The Indian PM tried to internationalize Baluchistan but in fact he internationalized hatred between India and Pakistan and helped the hate-mongers--OUTLOOK, September 5)" The result is that India cannot question Kalat's status status nor the Durand line and the Pakistan cannot question McMahon line either ( Partition Proceedings, Vol.-three, Excerpts Committees, nos..three-eleven, Government of India press, 1948, Pages-226-230).

With regards to Jammu and Kashmir, on August 13,1947, Kashmir's prime minister Janak Singh---no friend of Pakistan--opined " the bulk of Muslims will not accept a decision to accede to India." However, the instrument of accession of Jammu and Kashmir was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in jet-set speed on the pressure of Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru and his  home minister Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel. People of Kashmir led by Sheikh Abdullah had opposed the accession and was in favor of independent country.. Amid the melee , war between Pakistan and India broke over Kashmir. The matter was internationalized, The UNO intervened. Sir Girija  Shankar Vajpayee, the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs, in a letter to the U N  Commission for India and Pakistan on November 21, 1949, spoke of "Government of India's determination to abide, in the matter of accession, by the freely declared will be  of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Should that will be against the state continuing to be part of India, if and when it comes to be expressed in a constitutional way under conditions of peace and impratiality, the representation of the State in Indian Parliament would automatically cease and the provision of the Constitution of India that govern the relations of the State of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union f India will also cease to operate.."

Since then Jammu and Kashmir issue is hanging fire among the people of the State, India and Pakistan. Modi government must think to drop Baluchistan card and work for a settlement of Kashmir in both its dimension, external and internal.

WOMEN ARE NOT SAFE IN THE WORLD !

Countries in the world are not safe for women ! Violence against women and public  harassment to girls is very common and these are widespread problem. Documented facts say that women across the globe fear and experience all manners of sexual violence in public spaces. There are lot of instances from lewd and verbally abusive remarks, touching and groping to rape, there are innumerable instances in some of the safest cities. " Such evils have restricted the freedom of movement  of girls and women, leading inability to study, work and participate in the community and recreational activities, the women's right activities said" commented Anupama Katakam in a recent article. Medhavince Namjoshi from Vacha, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that works with adolescent girls, says, "The enormity of  the problem has to be understood and the issue has to be addressed on mature and massive scale."

The Action Aid UK, this year has conducted survey across four countries has many shocking data on India.The study says that four of the five women in India experience some form of sexual harassment of violence. The north in India is the least safe for women in the overall figures. The average shows a staggering 74 percent of women in the north having experienced harassment. At 67 percent, the south is not far behind. Seventy percent of the women in the north were harassed on the street, says the study. In the north-eastern region, 63 percent of the respondents said they faced harassment while returning after dark.Staring seems to be most common form of harassment. Sixty-two percent of the respondents had experienced it. It may be relatively mild form of abuse, yet uncomfortable and should not be dismissed.Being followed came in second at 53 percent. Insults- name calling and wolf-whistling polled 43 percent and 44 percent respectively. Sexual comments polled 38 percent, groping 38 percent, and indecent exposure 34 percent. The north recorded the highest percentages in all categories.


The Action Aid UK study says respondents in the 18-24 and 25-34 age groups have emerged as most vulnerable:92 percent and 87 percent of them, respectively, have said that they feel at risk in the cities. Additionally, 84 percent of women between 25 and 34 experience some manner of public harassment. Seventy-nine percent of the women surveyed in the age group of 18 to 55 say they have been publicly harassed. The survey reached out to 502 women living in cities across India. Sahjo Singh, director, programmes and policy. Action Aid in India says, " A girl's or woman's ,movements are seriously hampered by unsafe public areas. This can have an effect on many aspects, including the main one of earning an income. It required a a collaborative effort between the state and volunteer agencies to ensure safer spaces. The system and processes have to reform for us to see improvement."


The survey mainly set in two categories:" location of harassment and type of harassment. Public transport was the most unsafe of public spaces, said close to 65 percent of  the respondents. Among working women (18-24) and 25-35), 67 percent  and 70 percent said this. The next most unsafe things was returning home from work after dark;58 percent of the respondents said they had had experiences.Fifty eight percent said they had been harassed while waking on the streets. In this category 73 percent in the 18-24 age group had experienced abuse. Approximately 40 percent of the respondents felt unsafe and had experienced harassment in parks and other public spaces for leisure activities. About 30 percent of the student categories polled said they dealt with harassment on university campuses; 42 percent said they had to tackle harassment on the way to schools and colleges."

Anupama says in his article, " the state needs to address the problem Mumbai and Chennai have been listed among the safest cities in India. A Quality of  Living Survey, conducted by a private consultancy firm released released in February 2016 rates Hennai as the number one among Indian cities. Mumbai has held the 'safest city' position for decades but in is now grappling with the problem of women's safety.........If such deterioration continues , Mumbai will lose its safe city tag."Sanchal Velkar, programme coordinator for the Youth Change and Safe City projects Akshara, an NGO in Mumbai said," when we interviewed 5,000 women in Mumbai as part of the a study on women and public safety in 2011, 95 percent of them said they had experienced staring, pushing, lewd comments and groping in public transport. The problem is that most of the time the women ignores it and so it is not addressed."

In a study conducted by Akshara, Sneha Velkasr said, "public transport was the critical areas of concern in Mumbai. Akshara created a database in 2015 of 522 women and interviewed that extensively on their travelling experiences; 317 were regular commuters while 175 said that they were occasional commuters. Here are the results: staring-56.13 percent, commenting-51.34 percent, unwanted touch-60.92 percent. Some women also named more serious forms of sexual harassment; stalking-29.69 percent, flashing-14.37 percent, pinching-20.50 percent and griping- 15.52 percent. The Ashkara report says, that the percentage of women, who preferred to ignore the harassment meted against them in public places, Many would also hesitate to take action against the harassers for fear of their actions might provoke more harassment."

TALE OF TWO STATES---BALUCHISTAN (PAKISTAN) AND JAMMU AND KASHMIR ( INDIA) !

Many things and events remind one about the history ! Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently raised the issue of human rights violation in Baluchistan, a so called state of Pakistan , even going to the extent of referring to the Baluch freedom struggle. But Modi forgot to mention such barbarism in Jammu and Kashmir in India. A recent book--A PRINCELY AFFAIRS-The Accession and Integration of the Princely states of Pakistan,1947-1955---, authored by Yaqoob Khan Bangash, Oxford University Press, Karachi, has vividly scripted Pakistan's excesses in suppressing Balooch separatists. And at the same time, separatists continue to find support in Kashmir in India.

Significantly both of these areas--Baluchistan (now in Pakistan) and Jammu and Kashmir (now in India) were parts of princely states before their integration into Pakistan and India respectively. A columnist Vikhar Ahmed Sayeed has written in The Frontline "thus,it is useful to understand the nature and the process of accession of these states to find long-term solutions to the situation there in both India and Pakistan. The story of princely states of India, including Jammu and Kashmir, is fairly well documented, Barbara N Ramusack's The Indian Princes and Their states (2004) is a comprehensive work that discusses the nature of the princely states in India."

The book-A PRINCELY AFFAIRS-The Accession and Integration of Princely states of Pakistan, 1947-1955, has moreover, same tale to tell. The book looks at the events surrounding the accession of Kalat (that forms the large parts of Baluchistan province) apart from several other states, including large entities such as Bahawalpur that bordered  India.Bangash's research identifies the flowing states: Kalat (now part of the province of Baluchistan): Bahawalpur (now part of Punjab); Khairpur (now part of Sind); Chitrral , Dir, Swat and Amb (now in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province); and Hiunza and Nagar (now part of the disputed Gilgit-Balistan region) in Pakistan. After the formation of Pakistan, all the princely states, mentioned above did accede to it but not before Bahawalpur and Kalat seriously considered the idea of independence.

Bangash, in the detailed chapter in the book, explains the circumstances under which the state of Kalat (Baluchistan) became part of Pakistan. There was a nascent democratic nationalist movement in Kalat before it became part of Pakistan. The Kalat  State Nationalist Party (KSNP) even joined the All -India State People's Conference in 1945 when Jawaharlal Nehru was its president. On the other hand Muslim League could never gain a lot of support in Baluchistan. Bangesh writes, " The democratic ideals of the Khan (of Kalat) and the KSNP was not eager to join a Pakistan-led by the Muslim League and preferred either a relationship with India or, in agreement with the objective of the Khan, complete independence". Support of a democratic movement, led by Khan  gained momentum in Kalat even led the formation of Parliament. Kalat's parliament even felt that the state should not accede to Pakistan just because Balochis are Muslims". This resistance was broken by Pakistan government  forcibly, which sent its forces to overrun Baluchistan and ensured succession. Later Pakistan enacted ESTABLISHMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN ACT 1955 to include Kalat as state of Pakistan.

Just on that pattern there was a similar  Act in India-States Reorganisation Act of 1956. Significantly, govt of India , after independence, also usurped Jammu and Kashmir, which was a princely state. Despite serious objection of even the then National conference Leader and political stalwart of J&K Shiekh Abdullah, people of J&K and King of J&K himself had also vehemently objected the forcible occupation of Jammu and Kashmir and got instrument of accession signed by King of J&K Raja Hari Singh. India has  had also sent military to capture Jammu and Kashmir to merge the state with India. Sardar Patel and Pundit Jawaharlal played nasty games to capture the Jammu and Kashmir. Much hue and cry was raised at international forum and India had accepted UN resolution to hold plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to decide the fate of Kashmir and its people. In the process, a war with Pakistan also broke out over Jammu and Kashmir accession and a huge portion of Kashmir became 'Azad Kashmir' still being controlled by Pakistan.People of J&K wanted to remain an independent state. Now the situation has completely changed in Kashmir and the state is sitting on volcano. People of state demand 'azadi' from India. Since the so called accession of J&K in India, Government of India had sent huge forces to the state in the name of tackling the situation. But the situation became graver and graver gradually and now on the flash point. Rape, loot , murder in encounter have become order of the day in Jammu and Kashmir by Indian security forces. Over 50,000 people have been killed by security forces of India in Jammu and Kashmir since its accession to India

Similar situation is prevailing in Baluchistan state of Pakistan. Pakistan's security forces are maiming Balochas. Baluchistan is also sitting on volcano and Balochas are demanding 'azadi' from Pakistan. The author of the book, in his concluding  chapter, uses his research on the princely states in Pakistan to ponder the idea of Pakistan state. He quotes from Mohanned Ali Jinnah, famous  August 11, 1947, speech in which he articulated a universal idea of Pakistan of  Pakistan citizenship rather a than a state based only on religious identity. In this speech , Jinnah had articulated," You are free, you are free to go your temples, you are free to go your mosques or to any other places w of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion of caste or creed, that has nothing to do with the business of the state." Jinnah died the next  year, and the Pakistan state took an Islamic turn with the objective resolution being adopted by the Constituent assembly in March 1949.  By the time Pakistan's first Constitution came in effect in 1956, the bureaucracy and the military had a  stranglehold on the princely states. Although geographical integration into Pakistan was complete, social integration was yet to happen. In Kkalat, especially, with the lack of space for political activities, much of the underground Balochis discourse turned against Pakistan.Bangesh, in his book, concludes, ""Therefore, by the time of the much-lauded inauguration of one unit in October 1955, Pakistan has achieved only 'notional' sovereignty in the states, no national discourse had been developed, national identity remained uncontested, and the state and society remained in a constant state of flux. These issues still haunt Pakistan."

'JUSTICE' HAS BECOME 'COMMODITY' IN INDIA !

'

'JUSTICE' has become 'COMMODITY' in INDIA ! AND the judges and politicians are biggest 'suppliers and buyers' of the system. Perhaps, it is only because of that both the Supreme Court and Union Government want 'Supremacy and hegemony" in the appointment of judges for both the Supreme Court and high courts for their 'smooth sail' of their 'nefarious activities' to bend or destroy the system for their 'enlightened self-interest'. And the poor people are crying for justice in India. Moot point appears that both the Supreme Court collegium and Union Government have become funniest in one aspect at least-that is to accommodate the relatives , and kith and kin of  of both judges and politicians, solely to subvert the Judicial System in the country.

Following the revival of the collegium system after scrapping NJAC,, enacted by the Parliament,of the Supreme Court to appoint judges, the Chief Justice of India Justice Thakur is crying for the approval of the appointment of judges to fill up la huge vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court as well as high courts by the Union Government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. On the other hand, Union Government is crying wolf that recommendations of the Supreme Court's collegium are binding on the government only if they are backed by consensus among the  collegium members.

Amid such controversy, there are sharp differences among the member -judges of the collegium of the Supreme Court over the question in public the lack of transparency in the functioning of  the collegium. Recently, one of the members of the collegium Justice Jasti Chelameswar of the Supreme Court became the first sitting judge and member of the Supreme Court's collegium to question in public the lack of transparency in the functioning of the collegium. In a letter to the Chief Justice of India  Justice Thakur, Justice Chelameswar refused to take part in the collegium meetings until it evolved a proper procedure to records its minutes. However, in three-page letter, he suggested to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) that the record recommendations of the colleagues be sent to him in writing so that he could record his views and return them to him for onward submission to the government. With such development, Justice Chelameswar's protest against collegium's style of functioning has brought to the surface the resentment within the collegium to the absence of any semblance of transparency and openness in its its decision -making process. 

On the other hand, the Union Government is disputing the Memorandum of Understanding for implementing the appointment and transfer of judges of the SC and high courts. The union Law ministry is harping that recommendations of the collegium are binding on the government only if they are backed by consensus. If there is any dissent within the collegium, the CJI is expected to communicate such dissenting views, along with the recommendations to the government. If there is dissent in the collegium regarding a recommendation, the government can ask the collegium to reconsider it in the light of reservations expressed by the dissenting member. The collegium has to reiterate the recommendation by consensus; only then it is binding on the government. In the light of Justice Chelameswar's protest, the union Law ministry is flexing its muscles for confrontation with CJI, resulting into deadlock over the functioning of the collegium.

 However, CJI has promised that Justice's Chelameswar's views will be thrashed out. In the process CJI, who is expressing anger over the stand of the Union Law Ministry, has warned the centre that court would consider withdrawing judicial in some cases , at least !

In the meantime, huge number of vacancies of judges is hampering the already worrisome backlog cases. According to the "State of Indian Judiciary:A Report", brought out by Dakash, A Banglore-based non-governmental organisation, there are currently 17,95,036 pending cases in the high courts. Judicial observers compliment Justice Chelameswar for his boldness in seeking the reform of the collegium even while serving on the bench and interacting with the colleagues on a daily basis although they may have been unhappy with him. One reason, surprisingly, mentioned in the collegium that recording the minutes of the collegium meetings is that the grounds for rejecting a candidate should not be made public. Is it not funniest ?

V Venkatesan has written in the Frontline " the collegium system has certain aberrations which have so far evaded public scrutiny. One such aberration came to light when a former CJI, during his term in office, wrote to all the high court chief justices to ensure that when they recommended district judges for high courts, their performances during the previous three years was assessed by a committee of judges other than members of high court judges......."

There are only three vacancies in the Supreme Court with an approval strength of 31, the number of vacancies in the high courts as on September 1 is alarming. The combined approved strength in the 24 high courts is 1,079, which is inclusive of 771 permanent judges and 308 additional judges. Of these, 485 positions are vacant. The number of vacancies include the posts of 268 permanent judges and 217 additional judges. Additional judges not be appointed in a high courts that has vacancies of permanent judges. Currently  all the high courts, except that of Meghalaya, have vacancies of permanent judges. The Karnataka and Calcutta high courts have the highest number of vacancies of permanent judges-25 each. The Punjab and Hrayana high courts and the Hyderabad high court have 22 vacancies of permanent judges each. The Allahabad and Bombay high courts have 16 such vacancies each, while the madhya Pradesh and Madras high courts show 19 and 18 vacancies respectively. The collegium system is itself violating its norms, One case is that in Patna High , a few months back that additional judges have been appointed when there is already existence of  vacancies of permanent judges!

Apart from that, Poor are left ti fend to get justice while rich and the highest get justice according to their wishes or will. Shall the system survive in the present circumstances in India ? Is it not million dollar question ?




REFERENCESS: THE FRONTLINE FORTNIGHTLY MAGAZINE

SEDITION LAW IN INDIA : MISUSE BY SUCCESSIVE GOVERNMENTS !

MUCH TALKED ABOUT use or misuse of sedition law is making headlines these days in India! IN fact sedition law and its incorporation in ( Indian Penal Code ) IPC Section-124-A was first enacted by British Parliament in 1860s for India especially when India was enslaved by Britishers. And successive India governments, after independence, have used and misused the law  for enlightened self-interest, mainly to stifle the voices of dissent !

Before I discuss in detail the sedition law, enacted by British Parliament and its fall-out in India, I want to mention that the first person to be convicted under Section-124A was a prominent Nationalist leader, Bal Gangadhar Tilak. His newspaper--Kesari-- had carried a report on Shivaji......Tilak was charged with sedition before Bombay High Court in Queen Empress vs Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1897). Tilak was imprisoned in Burma jail from where it became a boon for Tilak as he authored the famous book---Geeeta Rahashaya---, a critical appreciation of Bhagwad Geeta.

Since than much hue and cry was raised over sedition law. After the independence of India from foreign yoke, the framers of the Constitution decided to adopt the model of the Irish Constitution in specifically enumerating exceptions to the right to free speech. In early draft of the Constitution that were circulated within the Constituent Assembly(CA) 'sedition' was set out as one such exception to the right of free speech. During debate on the floor of the CA, a champion of the 'free speech" K M Munshi moved an 'amendment' to remove the word 'sedition; from the exceptions. Abhinava Chandrachud, in an essay in The Frontline, has written, although the historian Granville considered Munshi to be one of the 'strongest advocates' on the 'limitation of rights', Munshi by contrast, mounted one of the greatest defence of the right of free speech. He argued  in the CA that the view taken by the Federal Court ion Majumdar's case was the correct one. It was partly because of his 'efforts' that  'sedition' was finally deleted as an exception to the right to free speech in what would become Article 19(2) of the Constitution. 

"....Shortly after the Constitution came into being, in November 1950, The Punjab High Court held Section 124-A to be unconstitutinal. However , thereafter the first amendment to the Constitution was passed in 1951 and the words 'public order' were inserted as an exception to the right to free speech. Soon , in Kedar Nath vs state of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 955) the Supreme Court held that Section 124-A was vakid restriction on the fundamental rights to free speech.Even so, the court accepted the view adopted by Chief Justice Gawyer in Majumdar's case. Kedar Nath was a communist, who had made a fiery speech in Bihar in which he said, among other things: We believe in that revolution....which will come and in the flames of which the capitalists, zamindars and the Congress leaders of India, who have made it profession  to loot the country, will be reduced to ashes."

The SC  had held that Section 124-A was aimed at 'rendering penal only such activities as would be intended, or have a tendency, to create disorder or disturbances of public peace by resort to violence.' Merely arousing 'bad feelings or feelings of enmity or hatred towards government would not be considered sedition.

Chandrachud has further written, "In 1941, the Federal Court in India attempted to bring the Indian law of sedition in the lines with Enlgish counterparts. A case was brought befire it by Niharendu Dutta Mazumdar, a member of the Bengal legislature, who had, in the words of the Federal Court, made a 'violent' forthy and irresponsible' speech criticizing the Governor and Ministry of Bengal for their inaction during the Dacca riots. Chief Justice Maurice Gwyer sdopted the post -1832 English law of sedition libel in order to interpreet Section 124-A of the IPC.'The act or words complained of must either incite to disorder or must be such as to satisfy reasonable men that their intention or tendency.' Mazumdar was, however, let off as the court did nit consider his speech 'as inciting those who heard it...to attempt by violence or by public disorder to subvert the government.'"

The court had considered the intention and tendency of speech for framing anybody under sedition law.  Under the present circumstances of imposing sedition law in indiscriminately in India Chandrachud has aptly written, " policemen who investigate complaints of sedition must therefore ask themselves a simple question: Does the speech which has been called into question merely express hatred, contempt or illwill against the government, or does it incite others to commit acts of insurrection, rebellion or public disorder? It is only when a speech falls in the latter category that it can be considered as constituting the offence of sedition. Merely raising anti-India slogans, reprehensible though this may be, would by itself be insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section-124A. A public interest petition has been filed in the Supreme Court by non-governmental organisation--Common Cause--, seeking, among other things that before any FIR is filed or arrest made by the police under Section 124-A, the Commissioner of Police or Director General of Police must certify that the test in Kedarnath has been satisfied."

Before 1832 the English law of sedition had provision that a person could be convicted for sedition for saying anything that brought the government into 'hatred or contempt' or even for merely raising 'discontent or disaffection' against the government. Later it was changed to some extend. The original draft of the IPC was drawn up in 1837 by the Indian Law Commission headed by T B Macaulay.Section 113 of this draft made it an offence to 'excite feelings of disaffection against the government................But it was not included in final draft version of the draft of the IPC in 1860.......they considered British India a  was a laboratory where they could test how a code would function.......Finally an amendment was introduced in British Parliament in 1870 and Section 113 of Macaulay's draft was inserted into code as Section 124-A. It appears that British government though t of revolution in India for independence and thus 'treacherous section was inserted to curb the freedom of speech in India that time.

Moreover, it has become a fact that India is yet to keep herself for from colonial rule and the pre-1832 English law of seditious libels now become the law of sedition in India. And Narendra Modi government is abusing the provisions to stifle people's voice

KASHMIR MAY BE AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY!

We Indians must exactly remember the splitting. of Unified Pakistan--East Pakistan and West Pakistan-- within 17 years of independence in 1947.Because of step-motherly treatment, torture and atrocity, committed by the elite political class of West Pakistan on East Pakistan brothers and sisters, A long agitation was launched by the people of East Pakistan under the leadership Sheikh Muzibur Rehman. And at last under the patronage of India led by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi, Bangladesh was created following bloody revolution. And a history was created in the South-East Asia !

Now history is expected to be repeated. Similar things are happening in Kashmir.Kashmir has long history of the 'so called foreign interference' and ignoring of the sentiments of the people of Kashmir. Kashmir was independent country! "Akbar was the first outsider, who destroyed in 1589 the independence of Kashmir. No body had succeeded in doing so before then"-(Nice Guys Finish Second, page 610) Freedom movement" began with the conquest of Kashmir by the Mughal Armies".Akbar's armies marched into Kashmir on June 28, 1586. Mughal rule lasted in Kashmir for 166 years until 1752, when a brutal reign of the Afghan began. In 1814, Maharaja Ranjit Singh invaded Kashmir The Lahore Darbar was betrayed by its Dogra feudatory. Gulab Singh of Jammu, who was in league with the British. He acquired Kashmir by the infamous Treaty of Amritsar, signed on March 16,1846, for Rs 75 lakh. It was aptly, called a 'deed of sale' And last but not the least, after independence, the India Government led by Prime minister Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru and union Home minister Sardar Ballava Bhai Patel had forced and coerced Maharaja Hari Singh, son of late Maharaja Gulab Singh to merge the state with Indian Union. Kashmir became part of India despite opposition of Kashmiris.

Since than Kashmir is practically under seize by India government in the name pf restoring so called peace in the valley.Thousands of Indian security forces were deployed in the valley. In the process, over 25,000 Kashnmiri were killed and many injured and remained paralyzed . Women were raped; children were kidnapped. And in all theses nefarious acts, security forces were involved.. For over last two months, the Kashmir is boiling-unrest and agitation is there in entire Kashmir. And atrocity of security forces are going on. Kashmiris are crying for 'azadi' ! Even on Eid , all mosques and shrines were closed by J&K government, escalating further resentment.

KILLING THE SOUL OF KASHMIR:--Today the situation is getting grimmer and grimmer in Kashmir. Noted Columnist A G Noorani has written in The Frontline, "The Prime Minister Narendra Modi has decided to kill the soul of Kashmir and has provided ample warning that worst is yet to come. The people's revolt will be crushed by military force, deployed under a thick smokescreen of falsehoods to silence whatever little dissent there is in India on Kashmir,delude international public opinion and appease the United States in the name of combating terrorism.The door is shut on any real dialogue on Kashmir with Pakistan or with the people of Kashmir.The real agenda, which is viciously communal, has been laid bare.Worst of all ,Modi has decided, like his natural ally, the U S , to trample on international law.It is reckless game to play buttress power at home.The Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Mehbooba Mufti, is a willing accomplice, using her own brand of rhetoric to deceive her people."

Kashmir always remained an open question. But the India government is branding protesters as terrorists and using brute force to stifle dissent. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had said in the Lok Sabha on March 31, 1955 (Selected works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Volume 28, page -318), "We must always remember that Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied between India and Pakistan. It has a soul of its own, it has an individuality of its own.We cannot, certainly much less can Pakistan, play with it as if it were something in the political game between the two countries.Nothing can be done without the goodwill of the people of Kashmir."

Many reports are pouring up on the present crisis in Kashmir. Well-informed journalist Shankarshan Thakur from New Delhi has written in The Telegraph on August 8, " This newspaper has been given to understand by those close to formulating the strategy in Kashmir that the Centre is inclined to move even further away from political engagement and deploy a stricter security across the Valley. Top army commanders based in the state met Mehbooba Mufti two days ago; they are meant to have discussed contingency plans to deploy the armed forces visibly across the valley and along the national highway to Jammu, a chronic militant ambush zone."Similar report has been published in The Asian Age, written by its Srinagar correspondent Yusuf Jameel, the same day,, which said, " The government is reported to have decided to assign the Army a "bigger and more useful role in resolving the crisis triggered by the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Muzaffar Wani on July 8."Again on August 9, The Telegraph published Imran Ahmed Siddique's report from New Delhi:" Sources in the Union Hiome Ministry said the government intended to act tough and would deploy more armed forces across the Valley to tackle the surge of protests."

NARENDRA MODI'S 'S INDIFFERENCE:-----Are these things giving any signal to solve Kashmir crisis by India government ? Narendra Modi spoke after one month of crisis in Kashmir, a month later on August 9 at Bhabra in Madhya Pradesh and said 'Gullible and simple youths" are being misguided. Statement of Modi is just contradictory to the reports on Kashmir situation in different newspapers of the country. Main question is Kashmir is its people's aspiration--neither about any other country nor about terrorism ! Only need of the hour is to "engage with the people of Kashmir and have a sustained dialogue on Kashmir." with Pakistan and other affected people in Kashmir itself..But these things are not happening ! Modi government is not permitting the U N High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'sad al-Hussein to permit his team access to Jammu and Kashmir and PoK, as he requested Pakistan !"India has very bad record of refusal to the U N 's Special Rapporteurs on Human Rights," commented A G Noorani.The Indian Express has written on August 8, "'Mehbooba Mufti's statement that the violent is senseless appears truly juxtaposition. It is senseless because a five-year-old Nasir Ahmed Khan is found on the street with a needle and sand pierced into his eyes---Kashmir has been independent and existed outside of the Indian nation--state for a long time now. Today, if there is a silver lining amid its time of bleeding and mourning, it is that it inches closer to standing independent of those forces that act, oppress and deceive from within........"

Worse situation is prevailing in Kashmir today since July 8. We must remember Bhagalpur blindings  and subsequent uproars and know that how the people of Kashmir are being blinded? People are shot at in order to kill them and not protesters alone. Police and security forces are raiding hospitals to arrest the agitating and injured people. A G Noorani has written, " This technique was tried out by Latin American dictators. It is being used in Kashmir by New Delhi in the name of democracy. This pattern of security forces' intrusion into hospitals was in evidence after July 8, 2016. Incidentally, we had the demolition of the Barbri Masjid  which L K Advani called' a political offence'; the Malegaon and Mecca Masjid blasts---all of them evaded accountability before the law." Veteran Economist Jean Dreze wrote in The Hindu, " on march 29,2002, " My initial purpose was to study the schooling situation but it turned out to be difficult not to focus on people's overwhelming concern; the endless zulum unleashed by the security  forces.The security forces were rarely out of sight, even in remote villages. As far as local population is concerned, Kashmir is occupied by a foreign army. Everywhere I went, there was sobering tales of harassment at the hands of Indian Army and paramilitary forces; curfews, searches, interrogation, killings of suspected militants and accidental as well as intentional killings of the innocent civilians, to name a few complaints."

Today pellets and bullets are being fired indiscriminately on Kashmiri. Sonia Gandhi has described "a grave danger to the country." The Indian express reported that being afraid of being harassed by security forces, parents are taking their boys with pellet wounds to Amritsar. Security forces are firing guns above the waist on protesters with intention to killing and maiming them.The CRPF admitted that it has fired 3,000 pellets cartridges, each containing 450 metallic balls between July 9 to August 14. Many more atrocities and harassment in Kashmir. Less said is better.

Under present circumstances History will repeat itself, And Kashmir will split from India like East Pakistan split from united Pakistan and Bangaladesh was created, Fight for 'azadi' and international support are  getting momentum and world will see how India lost Kashmir only because of tactless handling of situation by union government led by Narendra Modi.!

J

J: Jammu and Kashmir has received 10 per cent of all Central grants given to states over the 2000-2016 period, despite having only one per cent of the country’s population, analysis by of Central and S