UP govt stubborn like child, can frame me in another case: Kafeel Khan up on release from jail
Lucknow/Mathura: The Uttar Pradesh government, instead of observing 'Raj Dharma', was indulging in 'Baal Hatth' or childlike-stubbornness and could frame him in another case, Dr Kafeel Khan said after being released from the Mathura jail.
The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday quashed Khan's detention under the National Security Act and ordered his immediate release. Following the court's order, Khan was released from Mathura jail late on Tuesday night.
"Mathura jail administration informed at around 11.00 pm that Dr Kafeel will be released, and around midnight, he was released," Khan's lawyer Irfan Ghazi told PTI.
Speaking to PTI after his release from the jail, Khan thanked the court.
"I will always remain thankful to all my well-wishers, who raised their voice for my release. The administration was not ready for release, but because of the prayers (duaa) of people, I have been released."
"In Ramayana, Maharshi Valmiki had said that the Raja (king) should act for 'Raj Dharma'. In UP the 'Raja' is not doing 'Raj Dharma' but is doing 'Baal Hatth' (being stubborn like a child)," Khan said.
He also said he was apprehensive that the government can frame him in any other case, and claimed that he and his family had to face many hardships as the state government was "after" him because of the oxygen issue in BRD Medical College.
Khan said he now wants to help flood-affected people in Bihar and Assam.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh, passed the order on a petition filed by Khan's mother Nuzhat Parveen.
The petition alleged that Khan was granted bail in February by a competent court and he was supposed to be released on bail. However, he was not released for four days and the NSA was subsequently invoked against him. Hence, his detention was illegal, the petition argued.
Khan was in jail since January after he delivered an allegedly provocative speech at the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) during the anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) protests in December last year.
Kafeel Khan had hit the headlines for the first time in 2017 after the deaths of several kids due to lack of oxygen cylinders at Gorakhpur's BRD Medical College, where he worked as a paediatrician.
Initially, he was hailed as a saviour for the children for arranging emergency oxygen cylinders. However, later, he faced action along with nine other doctors and staff members of the hospital, all of whom were released on bail.
A state government probe had cleared Khan of all major charges, prompting him to seek an apology from the Yogi Adityanath government. The doctor had alleged that an institutional failure had led to the deaths of the children.
He subsequently faced threats, cases and even his family members were attacked, which the doctor dubbed as political vendetta on the part of the state government.
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.
