BJP MP Maneka Gandhi triggers false claim on Twitter against Minority-dominated district
Elephant's death due to crackers in Kerala
Referring to the incident of a pregnant elephant’s death caused by explosives in Palakkad district in Kerala, BJP MP and former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi has passed a remark against Malappuram district, where a particular community resides in majority, falsely claiming the incident occurred in Malappuram.
Mallapuram is know for its intense criminal activity specially with regards to animals. No action has ever been taken against a single poacher or wildlife killer so they keep doing it.
— Maneka Sanjay Gandhi (@Manekagandhibjp) June 3, 2020
I can only suggest that you call/email and ask for action pic.twitter.com/ii09qmb7xW
Speaking to news agency ANI, and through her official Twitter handle, she said that Malappuram is notorious for its criminal activities.
It's murder,Malappuram is famous for such incidents, it's India's most violent district.For instance, they throw poison on roads so that 300-400 birds & dogs die at one time: Maneka Gandhi,BJP MP&animal rights activist on elephant's death after being fed cracker-stuffed pineapple pic.twitter.com/OtLHsuiuAq
— ANI (@ANI) June 3, 2020
“Malappuram is known for its intense criminal activities specially with regards to animals. No action has ever been taken against a single poacher or wildlife killer, so they keep doing it. I can only suggest that you call/mail and ask for action”, she took to Twitter to respond to the reports of the elephant’s death.
She also portrayed Malappuram as “India’s most violent district” right after her allegations against incidents in Palakkad and Thrissur districts.
Did the incident occurred in Malappuram? Here's the fact check
According to forest officials, the wild elephant had left the forests of the Silent Valley in Palakkad district and wandered into the nearby village in search of food where she found the pineapple. The explosion left her in searing pain as she was unable to eat or walk properly, because of her injuries. The elephant eventually died standing in a river.
After pointing about the incident in the Palakkad district, Maneka, who is also an animal rights activist alleged that Malappuram, a district where a particular community resides in majority, is India’s most violent district.
Interestingly many Hindi and English media houses such as, including news agency ANI, Times Now, Republic TV, Zee News, India TV, Dainik Jagaran, Hindustan Times, News18, and First Post carried the same and reported that the incident happened in Malappuram district.
Taking its advantage, thousands of twitter handles linked with BJP are spreading Islamophobia under this tweet of Maneka.
Many handles shared the demography data of Malappuram district which shows Muslims are a majority in the population in the district.
Indian Izlamists have a particular hatred for #Elephant, cows, and monkeys because these #AnimalPeople are symbols of Hindu faith system
— Chayan Chatterjee (@Satyanewshi) June 3, 2020
The brutal murder of the pregnant #elephant in Kerala's Muslim majority Malappuram district is perhaps part of this same hateful mindset pic.twitter.com/0LeC9KyQgp
The incident of killing #Elephant took place in Palakkad district of Kerala.
— Aysha Renna (@AyshaRenna) June 3, 2020
Muslim majority district Malappuram has always been a target for the sangh brigade for known reasons.
This 'Animal right activist' has used the opportunity to demonise the people of the district. https://t.co/P3bMa9JTqW
The elephant incident in fact happened in Palakkad district. Maneka Gandhi has deliberately cited Malappuram, a Muslim majority district, and now it's been changed into a communal issue https://t.co/JbneMN7zTK
— Asheem PK (@peekeymon) June 3, 2020
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.
P&H High Court denies anticipatory bail to man accused of replacing national flag with saffron flag
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to Vikas Tomar, who is accused of removing the national flag from a mosque in Gurugram’s Uton village and replacing it with a saffron flag.
Justice Manisha Batra, presiding over the case Vikas Tomar @ Vikash Tomar v. State of Haryana, observed that the allegations against the petitioner were not vague but specific, and supported by conversations between him and other co-accused.
“The gravity of the offence and its potential impact on public order and communal peace cannot be overlooked at this stage,” the Court noted. It further stated that no exceptional circumstances had been presented that would justify granting pre-arrest bail, especially given the “serious communal and constitutional implications” of the alleged conduct.
According to the prosecution, a complaint was filed on July 7 in Bilaspur, Gurugram, reporting that anti-social elements had replaced the national flag atop a mosque with a saffron flag. Audio and video evidence were submitted along with the complaint. Two other accused were initially arrested under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 2 of the Prevention of Insult to National Honours Act, 1971, but were granted bail the same day.
The Sessions Court had earlier denied anticipatory bail to Tomar on July 15, with Additional Sessions Judge Sandeep Chauhan observing that such acts threaten the social fabric in a diverse country like India. He remarked, “Any person of ordinary prudence and slightest of patriotism in his heart would not have dared to commit such a crime.”
Tomar's counsel argued before the High Court that he was not named in the FIR and had no role in the alleged incident. However, opposing counsel representing the State and the complainant contended that Tomar aimed to provoke communal unrest in the region.
Justice Batra, after considering the arguments, concluded that custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary. “No ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out,” the Court held.
Advocate Abhimanyu Singh appeared for the petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Apoorv Garg represented the State of Haryana. Advocate Rosi appeared for the complainant.
The bail plea was dismissed.
