Gadkari: BJP’s PM candidate?
Looks like Narendra Modi’s authoritarian behavior is not only creating problems in the country, but also within his own party where the voices of dissidence are increasing. Initially when Advani criticized Modi and his modus operandi in certain terms, he was silenced successfully.
Now when Advani shares stage with Modi or comes face to face with him, he stands in all humility. Some sort of a fear is writ large across his face. After this Yashwant Sinha, Shatrughna Sinha and Arun Shourie revealed the grace mistakes Modi was committing, before the nation.
These trio were the ones who told the country that Bofors is nothing compared to Rafael defence deal. It was only after that the opposition parties took up Rafael issue against the government. Though Modi had failed completely in administration, no one could dare question him.
Normally when a leader fails, the very premise creates another leader. But BJP seems to think Modi’s blunders can be covered with their lies. Hence Modi’s wrong decisions are being tolerated with some selective blindness.
But this cannot go on for a long time. Gadkari’s statements are indicating that Modi’s days ahead are not as easy. Just when everyone is hesitant to project themselves as the future leader to replace Modi, Gadkari has come forward to take up the mantle. He has already made a few statements to make Modi uncomfortable within the party. These statements are somewhat like the lava waiting to erupt.
In the recent times, a speech made by Gadkari went viral. In that, he is heard saying “BJP wasn’t expecting to get a landslide majority in the Lok Sabha elections last time. So we promised heaven and earth during our campaigns. Now we are struggling hard to fulfil those promises.”
This gives out many meanings. One primary conclusion being the BJP leaders themselves didn’t think this election would bring them a total victory. Hence the party made lofty promises in campaigns. And another aspect is the party being unable to fulfil them.
On one hand we have bhakts insisting everyone to believe that Modi has moved the mountains. With Gadkari accepting that they fell short of fulfilling promises, it’s a loss of face for the Modi camp.
Coincidentally Gadkari exploded another bomb in the recent times. “The public will punish us for promising things that we are unable to fulfil.”
These are his messages to Modi and Amit Shah indicating the next elections are not an easy deal. He has also indicated that Modi has been a failure in his administration. Which means, many people are miffed with Modi in the face of elections.
And another statement by Gadkari has been very resounding. In a training camp for ABVP activists, he has addressed a person who has not borne the responsibilities at home such as family, employment etc. The person in question seems to have said
he hasn’t taken any major responsibility.
Gadkari tells that man something very important. “First and foremost, take care of your family. Don’t push them into helplessness. Those to take care of home can care for the country. If someone does not take such responsibilities, what can he do for the nation?”
This advice has created ripples in the Modi camp. Gadkari’s words carry multiple meanings. And every meaning sounds true. Youths are taking to streets for politics and landing in jails caught in the crossfire of politics. They are being misinformed about nation-building exercise. Most of the party workers are living like a menace to both home and nation.
Nation building exercise has to begin from home. We have to be good family members first and then work for the betterment is the nation. All activists across parties have to take these words by Gadkari seriously. Mahatma Gandhi took care of his family while he also performed duties towards the country. No other PM felt his family was a problem for him. They took their family members along. But the whole failure of Modi lies where he disowns his family. This is the message Gadkari has given to the nation.
How can someone who rejects his wife take care of the country? If he did not want a wife, he shouldn’t have married in the first place. Once he is married, the woman is his responsibility. But then he left her without even giving her a divorce. If he had at least divorced her, she could have had an opportunity to remarry.
But he did not even allow her that chance. He kept all these details hidden from the EC since this was not mentioned even when he was the CM of Gujarat. He mentioned it only when it became inevitable. This shows that he has a deep complex about the woman he married. At least after being a PM, he could have given her some justice.
A man who was a failure in his own life, and unable to understand his wife’s challenges will never make for a good administrator. This is the point Gadkari is trying to make.
As a result of all this, it is easy to summarise that Gadkari is all willing to replace Modi as PM candidate. In the circumstances of BJP not getting majority, deciding on the PM candidate would be a challenge. If hopeful coalition partners support Gadkari, this mega balloon called Modi would be burst.
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.
Bhojshala complex registered as 'mosque' in old revenue records: Muslim side to MP HC
Indore (PTI): The disputed Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque complex has historically been registered as a 'mosque' in revenue records and available sources don't clearly mention any Saraswati temple established by then-king Raja Bhoj, the Muslim side has told the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex located in Dhar district is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
During the hearing before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on Wednesday, Qazi Moinuddin questioned two PILs filed as intervenors in the Bhojshala case by an organisation named Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual.
Moinuddin claims to be a descendant of Sufi saint Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti and the 'Sajjadanashin' (spiritual head, guru, or successor of a Sufi shrine, khanqah, or religious site).
The PILs state that Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and only Hindus should be granted the right to worship at the disputed complex.
Moinuddin's lawyer, Noor Ahmed Sheikh, claimed in the court that his client's ancestors, who are descendants of Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti, have historically held titles to the complex, and the site was also recorded as a "mosque" in government revenue records.
He contended that those associated with the management of the Kamal Maula Mosque, located within the complex, have been in "continuous and peaceful occupation" of the site for a long time.
Citing Muslim law, Sheikh argued that in the case of religious property, particularly a mosque or its related properties, officials such as the Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli (person entrusted with management, maintenance, and administration of a Waqf), and their descendants, not only have the right to intervene, but also have the right to manage and use such a structure.
Citing provisions of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the Muslim side's lawyer said the term "in-charge of the property" is used in this law, which makes it clear that the person or party who has been in charge of a property for a long time has rights over it.
During the hearing, Touseef Warsi, the lawyer representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar, claimed that Hindu parties in both PILs had made "misleading representations" regarding historical facts before the high court.
He further claimed that available historical sources do not clearly mention the existence of a Saraswati temple established by Raja Bhoj, the legendary king of the Parmar dynasty who ruled Dhar from 1010 to 1055.
The ASI, a central government agency, has adopted three different positions in the lawsuits filed regarding the Bhojshala dispute, changing its answers from time to time, and this situation raises serious questions about judicial scrutiny of the complex, Warsi submitted.
He raised objections regarding the ASI's process of scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex, carried out on the HC order in 2024, and the method of videography and requested the court to examine these objections.
The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Thursday.
The HC has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.
