Hubballi: Locals allege police high-handedness triggered stone pelting
Muslims didn’t gather at Hubballi mosque for Friday prayers, say locals
Hubballi: The stone-pelting incident at Hubballi that the police blamed on Muslims who gathered for the Friday prayers in defiance of the lockdown was actually triggered by the police themselves, locals have claimed.
Overzealous policemen entered the mosque by wearing shoes and assaulted the staff, sparking off tension in the predominantly Muslim area of Aralikatti Oni, off Mantoor Road, according to several residents.
Over a dozen people, including some women, have been arrested over the incident that the media quickly blamed on lockdown-defying Muslims.
Speaking to Vartha Bharati, several residents said the incident was incorrectly portrayed as a result of the police stopping Muslims from offering Jumu’ah prayers at Masjid-e-Hazrat Bilal.
Currently only Muazzin (One who gives call to prayers and stays inside or nearby the mosque) and Imam (One who leads the prayers at mosque) are allowed to offer prayers at mosque and congregational prayers are suspended due to country-wide lockdown due to Coronavirus spread.
Aslam, the muazzin of the mosque, recounted how it all started: “I was alone in the masjid and giving azaan (the call to prayer, as giving Azaan is allowed and only congregational prayers are banned). Some policemen just barged into the mosque wearing shoes and started beating me up”.
The police then took Aslam to the Town Police Station, along with the mosque’s chairman (mutavalli) Dawal Nadaf and a local resident named Basha, who were both standing outside the mosque.
Shaista, an eyewitness, confirmed that the police beat up Aslam, Nadaf and Basha before her very own eyes and took them all to the police station.
“I and my sister pleaded the police to spare them. But the police were so brazen that they dragged my sister by her hair and took her away,” Shaista said.
Local Congress leader Altaf Halwoor, who said he also witnessed the incident, said the police later warned the three men and dropped them back at about 150 metres from the masjid. By then, an angry mob, including several women, had gathered there. A woman then started abusing the police. A police constable retaliated by brandishing his lathi, Halwoor said.
“Women and some young men started to pelt stones at the police as a retaliation for their atrocities” Halwoor said, adding that many local residents, including women, and police personnel sustained injuries.
Scared of police department and their atrocities, many residents have locked their houses and moved elsewhere.
Police, have, however, denied the allegation that they beat up anyone at the mosque.
Hubballi Town police inspector M S Patil claimed that when the muazzin was giving the azaan, people started gathering there, violating the lockdown.
“When our officers asked them not to gather there and offer prayers at home, they abused them and started throwing stones,” Patil told Vartha Bharati.
The inspector said that a total of 13 people have been arrested so far over the incident under IPC sections 324, 353, 504, and 332.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
