Anarchism at its best to destroy our democracy!

Now it is an old story. Right from the day one when at the Centre the historic change of government occurred in 2014, the crest-fallen Moghuls of modern India, generally known as Congress and its allies, including of course, the communists, former Razakars and lead-role player in partition called Muslim League felt like a fish out of water. True, for these elements losing power meant losing a milch cow. Obviously, unbearable to face the situation, many switched gears and either joined the victorious bandwagon called the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) or formed new parties such as the Aam Admi Party (AAP).

Then began the saga of war against the new government which had 'lawfully' snatched away the bread and butter (and also pizza and ice cream) of these habitual looters of public money.

To our remembrance, the first salvo was fired by the 'Award-Wapasi' gang which was soon followed by AAP. Its top leader, Arvind Kejriwal, sat on a dharna blocking the road leading to India Gate in New Delhi just a few days ahead of the Republic Day. He had gone on record when rejecting a plea by the authorities to clear the way as it was the route for Republic Day parade. He had not only refused to clear the public road, but also asserted: "Yes, I am an anarchist." And this assertion was not a hallow utterance as the subsequent events akin to anarchy proved.

To count a few, repeat performances of Award-Wapasi gang, emergence of Tukde-Tukde gang and gangs supporting convicted terrorists such as Yakub Menon, Burhan Vani, Afzal Guru etc. Then came the mega show of CAA-NRC which culminated into riots in and around the capital city of Delhi. Sadly, due to soft-peddling by the Union government, the anti-national elements boasted a victory in their calculated venture. The anti-national elements determined to throw out the duly-elected government by creating anarchy lost no time to launch the so-called Kisan movement ostensibly 'to oppose the newly-enacted laws'. Foreign based anti-India organisations such as pro-Khalistani and Jihadi elements not only extended financial and logistic support to Rakesh Tikait & Company, but also actively participated in full force culminating into hoisting the Khalistan flag on the Red Fort. The so-called 'peaceful' agitation involved obstruction of roads causing untold miseries to the common man for months together. Again, the soft-peddling by the government preaching 'Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas and Sabka Viswas' embolden such extremist, terrorist and Jihadi elements.

In fact, apart from road-blocking for the months together, these proclaimed anarchists indulged in all sorts of nefarious activities. Opposing the measures initiated by the government to contain the wide-spread of Covid-19, including vaccination, supporting fanatic organisations such as Tablighi Jamat and implementing similar anti-national agenda forming part of the accidently leaked 'toolkit' of Greta Thunberg.

In short, seen in this background, it is clear that now the 'war' unleashed by the anarchists within and out of India has reached its crescendo. Crashing of the military helicopter carrying 14 persons, including CDS Bipin Chandra Rawat and his wife and just a few days prior to that attack on the Minister's car and lynching its passengers at Lakhimpur Kheri in Uttar Pradesh cannot be brushed aside as simple accidents. Obviously, there seems to be much more than what eyes meet.

Therefore, January 5 incident involving none other than the Prime Minister himself should be an eye-opener at least now. The country cannot be run at the mercy of a handful self-serving militant elements. The Constitution of India guarantees peaceful, harmonious, dignified and secured life to every citizen irrespective of caste, religion, gender, creed, language, social or financial status, education etc. The people have a right to demand from the government elected by them as these are bare minimum things; and if the government shows its inability to fulfill these basic expectations of the people for whatever reasons, it has no business to be in the seat of power.

Madras HC on hate speech

In a case of hate speech against a religious community, the aspect of "who gave the speech" is relevant to determine whether an offence is made out under Sections 153 A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code(IPC), the Madras High Court ruled.

In an Order pronounced on January 7, in Fr P George Ponnaiah Vs The Inspector of Police and Others, Justice GR Swaminathan, while agreeing that the petitioner prima facie did outrage religious feelings, distinguished between the comments made by a comedian and those made by a person like the petitioner who is a priest.

However, the observation by the court that the "Who and Where tests matter" in deciding whether the comments attract the provisions of Section 295 A of IPC is likely to generate a debate among the legal fraternity. Because, besides "Who and Where" parameters, other parameters like "Why, When and against Whom" also deserve equal consideration in such a sensitive matter.

Calcutta HC allows Ganga Sagar Mela

Even when most of the courts in the country has reverted back to virtual mode of hearing, the Calcutta High Court on January 7 permitted the State government to hold this year's Ganga Sagar Mela, albeit with certain conditions.

Traditionally, on Makar Sankranti (January 14), lakhs of Hindu devotees flock to the Sagar island in South 24 Parganas district of West Bengal to take a holy dip and offer prayers at the temple of Kapil Rishi. This year, the Mela is scheduled to take place from January 8 to January 16.

Public holiday not a fundamental right

"There is no legally enforceable right that can be said to have been fringed. Nobody has a fundamental right to a public holiday," held a Division Bench of Bombay High Court comprising Justice Gautam Patel and Justice Madhav Jamdar recently.

Dismissing the petition filed by one Kishanbhai Nathubhai Ghutia along with another Vs the Administrator, Union Territory and others, seeking declaration of August 2 as a public holiday as it marks liberation or independence day of Dadra and Nagar Haveli in 1954 from Portuguese rule, the Court held: "To declare a particular day as a public holiday or an optional holiday or not at all is a matter of government policy…As it is, we have far too many public holidays in this country. Perhaps the time has come to reduce, not increase, the number of public holidays."