ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

J & K conundrum: Himalayan blunder rectified

J & K conundrum: Himalayan blunder rectified
Highlights

Last week proved to be historical for the country as the long-pending cancerous issue of Jammu and Kashmir got resolved at one stoke.

Last week proved to be historical for the country as the long-pending cancerous issue of Jammu and Kashmir got resolved at one stoke.

The people in general and of Jammu and Kashmir in particular are awestruck with this sudden development while rest of the world is looking with batted breath and astonishment at India.

The protagonists of the Himalayan State are obviously beleaguered at the abrupt ending of the much-hyped issue of right of self- determination of the J&K people.

So far most of the people all over the world were made to believe by assiduous propaganda that J&K had nothing to do with rest of the country and it was an independent entity.

It was also proclaimed that hell will fall if anybody attempted a solution favourable not only to India but also to the local people of that State.

Some educated, confused and sycophant voices are raising irrelevant questions of legality and Constitutional impropriety. They conveniently forget that the Deed of Accession signed by the erstwhile ruler of J&K, Hari Singh, was unconditional and absolute.

Subsequently, that the 'temporarily' Article 370 was inserted into the Constitution of India at the behest of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru much against the spirit of the Deed of Accession and wish of the people of India including J &K.

Similarly, Article 35A to was inserted subsequently as a result of the arm-twisting tactics of some self-proclaimed Muslims leaders with an oblique view to benefit the latter and perpetuate their family rule.

Therefore, there is no water in the argument that the people of J&K did not want the complete merger of their State into India. On the other hand, with the enactment of law recognising merger of the hitherto neglected and isolated State, the first step towards unification and integration of that State has been successfully taken.

Further, there cannot be any comparison between carving out a new State and doing away with the 'temporary' Constitutional provision, called Article 370.

Hence, there is no question of following the procedure prescribed under the Constitution for creating a new State. Meanwhile the premier statutory body of lawyers, the Bar Council of India (BCI) too, has congratulated the government on "the historic and landmark decision to scrape Article 370 of the Constitution of the India.

"The BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra said in a statement that this step could have been taken only by a bold, magnetic, daring and unparalleled leader like Narendra Modi ably assisted by the Home Minister Amit Shah.

Thus, the Himalayan blunder committed seven decades ago has been undone. Indeed, this is the time for rejoicement, exultation and celebrations notwithstanding the opposition by the vested interests within the country and breast-beating by Pakistan.

This is also the time for the countrymen to stand firm and united like a rock and send a strong message to the world at large that India is and will remain united forever.

Case of sedition against tribals

Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay of the Jharkhand High Court while rejecting to quash an FIR against four tribals for allegedly posting seditious post on Facebook supporting 'Pathalgadi' movement observed that it is a prima facie case of sedition and waging war against India. ' Pathalgadi' is a tribal tradition of erecting stone slabs to demarcate the area of their village's jurisdiction.

The allegation against the petitioners was that they had incited Munda tribals in Khunti village to attack police on June 26, 2017. In the melee that ensued four policemen posted as security guards of an MLA were abducted by villagers.

Finally, Secretariat building to be demolished

The failure of last-ditch efforts by the petitioner in the PIL pending before the Telangana High Court having failed, now the demolition of the Secretariat building, is certain.

It will be razed to the ground in due course. Already the process of shifting various departments has begun and is expected to be over in a short period.

Judge who ordered stripping off a cop transferred

A 58-year old constable of Agra police who was allegedly forced by a Judge to take off his khaki shirt, belt and beret and stand in his courtroom for over half an hour, just because the cop, who works as a driver, failed to give pass to the judge's car.

After UP DGP tweeted in support of the cop and Agra SSP wrote to the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court, the Judge was transferred.

After the incident, the humiliated constable, Ghure Lal, met Agra SSP and handed him his resignation letter seeking voluntary retirement citing trauma of 'public humiliation" he suffered .

Next day, taking cognisance of the incident UP Director General of Police Om Prakash Singh tweeted, "we have taken the issue of ordering a constable in uniform to disrobe in a court seriously and taken it up at the appropriate level. We stand by the dignity of every police personnel and appeal to the society to respect the honour of uniformed forces."

It is high time that the people occupying coveted posts in public life and administration learnt a lesson or two on respecting the human values.

Five-month reprieve for archbishop

The Bombay High Court in its recent order has directed the police that no coercive action shall be taken against Mumbai Archbishop cardinal Oswald Gracias and two auxiliary bishops till it hears their petition to quash a special court's order to probe their role in a case of alleged sexual abuse of a minor by a priest in November 2015.

A bench of Justices Ranjith More and Bharti Dongre recently heard a petition by the cardinal and two bishops, Dominic Savio Fernandies and John Rodrigues to quash a May 7 order of a POSCO Act court that directed the police to investigate whether they "conducted and inquiry and despite having received knowledge did not give information to the police" under Section 19 of the Act.

Section 19 deals with reporting of sexual offences and Section 21(2) prescribes imprisonment up to a year if a person in charge of an institution fails to report an offence.

The priest, FR Lawrence Johnson (52), is facing trial. In February, the minor's father had sought action against the three accused Godmen.

YouTube facing threat of heavy fine

You Tube, owned by Google is likely to be fined a multi-million-dollar penalty by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) over its handling of kids' information.

According to unconfirmed media reports, Google has reached a settlement with the agency. The FTC was reportedly investigating YouTube for violating a Federal law designed to protect kids and their data online.

Concerns have been raised about how YouTube collects minors' information and also about comments from paedophiles that have plagued the site.

The settlement would resolve a probe into whether the Google video service broke the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which makes it illegal to collect information on minors and disclose it to others without parental permission. It is pertinent to note that a group of activists last year had asked the FTC to look into the matter.

YouTube introduced a kid's app in 2015, but older children tend to watch the main site, according to a report earlier this year.

Show Full Article
Download The Hans India Android App or iOS App for the Latest update on your phone.
Subscribed Failed...
Subscribed Successfully...
More Stories


Top