JD(S) once again banks on first family members to deliver for party in Karnataka LS polls
Bengaluru (PTI): A striking feature in the candidates list for the April 26 Lok Sabha elections in Karnataka is the presence of members of Janata Dal (Secular)'s first family.
Former Prime Minister and JD(S) patriarch H D Deve Gowda's son H D Kumaraswamy, son-in-law C N Manjunath and grandson Prajwal Revanna are all in the fray.
While state JD(S) chief and former Chief Minister Kumararaswamy is contesting from Mandya, Prajwal Revanna is seeking reelection from Hassan.
However, Manjunath, an eminent cardiologist, is contesting from Bangalore Rural on a BJP ticket, as per the arrangement between the alliance partners.
With the entry of cardiologist Manjunath into the poll arena, at least nine members of Gowda's immediate family are or have been in electoral politics.
Gowda is a Member of Rajya Sabha from Karnataka, while Kumaraswamy is an MLA from Channapatna, which comes under the Bangalore Rural Lok Sabha constituency.
ALSO READ: Health Minister Dinesh Gundurao accuses PM Modi of governing through lies for 10 years
Kumaraswamy's wife Anitha had represented Ramanagara as MLA in the previous assembly, and Nikhil, who is the JD(S) youth wing leader, had unsuccessfully contested the 2019 Lok Sabha polls from Mandya and 2023 assembly polls from Ramanagara.
Gowda's elder son and former Minister H D Revanna - father of Prajwal - is MLA from Holenarsipura, his wife Bhavani Revanna was a member of the Hassan Zilla Panchayat. Their other son, Suraj, is an MLC.
The Gowda family currently has its representation in all the four major houses of public representatives- Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council.
This will be for the second consecutive time in the Lok Sabha elections, when three members from Gowda's family are in the fray from constituencies of the old-Mysore region (south Karnataka), which is considered to be the party's stronghold, because of the dominance of the Vokkaliga community here, to which they belong to.
Gowda (Tumkur), Prajwal Revanna (Hassan), and Kumaraswamy's son Nikhil (Mandya) had contested the Lok Sabha poll in 2019, but only Revanna emerged victorious. In fact, he was among the only two candidates from the then ruling Congress-JD(S) alliance, who won; the other being D K Suresh of Congress from Bangalore Rural.
As part of the seat-sharing deal in this Lok Sabha polls in Karnataka, the BJP would contest in 25 constituencies and the JD(S) in the remaining three - Mandya, Hassan and Kolar. JD(S) has fielded M Mallesh Babu from Kolar.
In the 2023 assembly polls, three members of the Gowda family had contested - Kumaraswamy (Channapatna), H D Revanna (Holenarasipur), and Nikhil Kumaraswamy (Ramanagara). In the 2018 assembly polls, both Kumaraswamy and Revanna had won.
Kumaraswamy, who had then won from two seats - Ramanagara and Channapatna - vacated Ramanagara, which his wife Anita Kumaraswamy subsequently won in the bypolls.
According to some political observers, the perception in some quarters about JD(S) being too family-centric is one of its major drawbacks.
James Manor, University of London professor, who has been a keen observer of Karnataka's politics, during a webinar ahead of assembly polls last year had said, family-centred politics is causing discontent and leading to desertion. "JD(S) suffers from over-centralisation and dictatorial leadership."
However, Kumaraswamy has time and again defended family members contesting polls stating that , "....our family members will contest where we don't have a capable candidate, to protect the interest of our party and its workers."
However, the JD(S)'s dynastic party image has always been used by its political opponents to target it.
Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister and state Congress president D K Shivakumar, had a dig at Gowda for fielding his son, grandson, and son-in-law, and asked "Were there no other candidates (in JD(S))?"
"None of them is going to win...JD(S) is a party that has lost strength. If it is really strong, why did they make their son-in-law contest on a BJP ticket?" he said.
Some political analysts held the view that JD(S)' inability to grow beyond the Vokkaliga dominated old-Mysore region - other than certain select pockets of north Karnataka - is seen as among its other key drawbacks.
Speculations are already rife in JD(S) circles that Nikhil is most likely to be the party candidate from Channaptna assembly segment, in case Kumaraswamy wins in Mandya.
Ahead of assembly polls last year, differences in the Gowda family had come out in the open with H D Revanna's wife Bhavani wanting to contest from Hassan, but Kumaraswamy had opposed it and finally gave the ticket to local leader H P Swaroop and ensured his victory.
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.
