Why doesn't BJP appoint a Muslim as its president: Digvijaya on PM's jibe at Congress
Bhopal, Apr 15 (PTI): Senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh on Tuesday said the BJP should appoint a Muslim as its party president instead of suggesting his party to do so, and added that prominent leaders from the Muslim community held that position in the grand old party in the past.
He also alleged that a "disturbing trend" was being observed in the country wherein minority communities were being treated as enemies and falsely implicated by the BJP-led governments at the Centre and in states.
His statement comes a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in Haryana that if the Congress really has sympathy for Muslims, it should appoint a Muslim as its president and give 50 percent tickets to people from the community.
When reporters asked Digvijaya Singh about the PM's remark, he said, "Muslims had earlier held the position of presidents (of Congress) and we are proud of it. If they (BJP) are so concerned, why don't they make a person from the Muslim community its party president?"
During the pre-Independence period, prominent Muslim leaders, including Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari, Syed Hasan Imam and Nawab Syed Mohammed Bahadur, had served as Congress presidents.
When asked if he feels that a minority community was being targeted, Singh said, "A disturbing trend is taking place in the country where minority communities are being treated as enemies by the central government and in states ruled by the BJP's so-called double engine government."
"They are being falsely implicated, harassed and the constitutional provisions meant to protect their interests are being ignored. In April 2021, when riots broke out at several places, the Supreme Court had issued detailed guidelines on how states should act to control communal violence," the Rajya Sabha member said.
Those guidelines clearly outlined the steps governments must take to prevent such incidents, he said.
On a query about West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's statement that she will not allow the new Waqf law to be implemented in her state, Singh said, "...I want to say one thing, whoever spreads communalism in this country and whether it is radical Hindu, radical Muslim radical Sikh or any sect, action should be taken against them."
He alleged that Indian Secular Front was instigating the Muslim youth there.
"For 10 years (as Madhya Pradesh chief minister), I did not spare anyone spreading hatred towards other religions - be it Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Christian. Because of that, not a single riot or incident of disturbance took place in Madhya Pradesh," he said.
Singh was the CM from 1993 to 2003.
On the issue of a Dalit groom not allowed to sit on a horse during a marriage ceremony in Indore district, Singh said it was a matter of shame for all that untouchability was still in vogue today.
"Yesterday, Chief Minister went to Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar's memorial and gave a long speech in which he talked about following the path as shown by Dr Ambedkar, but even today a groom from a Scheduled Caste cannot ride a horse and cannot enter the temple, this is a crime. Action should be taken against all those people who stopped his entry into the temple and objected to his sitting on a horse."
On the controversy surrounding BJP MLA's son forcibly entering a temple in Dewas district even after it was closed, Singh said even if the people associated with BJP do whatever they want, the police do not take any action against them.
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.
Guj HC schools cops, asks under which law they stop people from videography inside police station
Ahmedabad: A video of Justice Nirzar S Desai of the Gujarat High Court sharply questioning the state government over the legality of prohibiting videography inside police stations has gone viral on social media, reigniting the debate on citizens' rights and police accountability.
In a pointed exchange during court proceedings, Justice Desai asked the state’s lawyer:
"Tell me under which section videography is prohibited. Today we are living in an era of transparency. Assuming police are doing something illegal and a citizen intends to videograph it – which provision of law empowers you to stop someone from taking videography? Under which provision of law have you stopped the accused from video recording?"
The video has sparked widespread public interest, especially in the context of earlier legal interpretations around filming inside police premises.
View this post on Instagram
Background: Courts on videography in police stations
The question of whether video recording inside a police station is a punishable offence has previously been addressed by the Bombay High Court. In Ravindra Shitalrao Upadyay v. State of Maharashtra (2022 SCC OnLine Bom 2015), the Aurangabad bench ruled that such recording does not fall under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, which deals with spying. The court noted that police stations are not categorized as "prohibited places" under Section 2(8) of the Act. Therefore, secretly recording inside a police station cannot be treated as an offence under the Official Secrets Act.
