Hate speech case against Hindtuva leader who called for Muslim boycott transferred to Mangaluru
Mangaluru: According to a report by The News Minute, an FIR registered against Chandru Moger, the coordinator of the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, regarding a hate speech incident from 2022 has been transferred from Bengaluru to Mangaluru. The transfer took place on May 17 when the Sanjay Nagar police in Bengaluru handed over the case files to the Urwa Police Station in Mangaluru for further investigation. The investigation revealed that the hate speech video originated from a Sanatan Sanstha office in Mangaluru.
During the investigation, the Bengaluru Crime Branch contacted Twitter to obtain information about the IP address associated with the system that shared the video. It was discovered that the IP address was traced back to Mangaluru.
The FIR filed against Chandru Moger includes charges under various sections of the IPC, such as promoting enmity between different groups and criminal intimidation. In the video, Moger made controversial statements accusing Muslims of having a monopoly over the fruit business and alleging that they would spit on fruits and bread before selling them. These claims are part of the false propaganda known as "thook jihad" in Hindutva circles.
ALSO READ: Belthangady Mahila Cong files police complaint against MLA Harish Poonja for remarks on Siddaramaiah
Various political figures, including former Karnataka Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy, had criticized Moger's statements. Kumaraswamy denounced the directive issued by the Hindutva unit to boycott purchasing fruits from Muslims as a betrayal against the country and farmers.
Despite initial inaction by the police, Sheikh Zia Nomani, the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Bengaluru spokesperson, lodged a complaint on April 6, 2022, at the Sanjay Nagar police station, seeking the registration of an FIR against Moger for defaming the Muslim community and inciting communal hatred and violence. The FIR has now been transferred to the Urwa Police Station in Mangaluru.
Mangaluru City Police Commissioner Kuldeep Jain confirmed the transfer of the FIR but stated that no one has been questioned in the case thus far. The investigating officer, Sudarshan, mentioned that the investigation is in its early stages and no significant details can be provided at this time.
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.
Karnataka Assembly passes bill on Palace Grounds amid opposition protest
Bengaluru, Mar 6 (PTI): The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed the Bangalore Palace (Utilisation and Regulation of Land) Bill, reaffirming state ownership over 472 acres and 16 guntas of land here, amid protests by the opposition BJP.
During the discussion, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government would have to provide Rs 200 crore worth of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) for each acre of land, which means that for 15 acres, Rs 3,000 crore worth of TDR would be issued.
“If we accept it, then this 2-km stretch of road will become the costliest road in the world. If we accept it then how are we going to develop the city in later stages? How will you carry out development works?” asked Patil.
He also pointed out that this question was raised not only under the Congress government but also during the previous BJP regime.
However, the BJP-led cabinet has opposed the project.
ALSO READ: Budget session: Law Min. HK Patil introduces Microfinance bill in Karnataka assembly
“Suppose we agree to it then, what will be the valuation of the 472 acres? It will be lakhs and lakhs of crores of rupees. Can we accept?” Patil wondered.
The Minister said the government had previously exercised its executive powers to issue an ordinance, which was approved by the Governor. Now the government is bringing a bill with two amendments.
“In this bill, we have made provisions either to develop or drop the road development work,” Patil explained.
However, BJP state president B Y Vijayendra and BJP MLA Arvind Bellad opposed the move, alleging that the government was targetting Yaduveer Krishna Datta Chamaraja Wadiyar, the scion of the Mysuru royal family, and the BJP MP from Mysuru-Kodagu constituency out of political vendetta.
“We talk of 472 acres of Mysuru Maharaja but here there are many Maharajas who too own 400 acres, 500 acres and thousands of acres of land, which is known to everyone,” Bellad said.
He slammed the Congress government, saying political power should not be misused for personal vendetta.
“Why (the then Deputy Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah brought the law in 1996 pertaining to the Bangalore Palace? Why are you setting eyes on the Bangalore Palace?” he asked.
Vijayendra charged that Wadiyar won the election on BJP ticket so the state government realised that it should acquire it.
“This bill has been brought for political vengeance. We are not discussing whether Rs 3,000 crore is exorbitant or not but the moment Yaduveer became MP, the state government woke up. You should be ashamed. This house should not be used for political vendetta,” he said.
Intervening, Minister Priyank Kharge said Vijayendra should not have raised it because the intention behind building the road was noble.
According to him, the BJP too had the same plan when it was in power.
He sought to know whether thousands of crores of rupees be spent on a road which should have cost significantly less.
In response, BJP MLA B A Basavaraj (Byrathi) said issuing TDR will not be a burden on the state government and appealed to the ruling Congress to reconsider its stance.
Minister Ramalinga Reddy too explained that the Karnataka government acquired the entire land way back in 1996.
The Mysuru royal family went to the High Court, which gave ruling in favour of the state government. The royal family then approached the Supreme Court, where the case is still going on, the Minister pointed out.
“The final judgment is pending in the SC to decide whether the acquisition was right or wrong. If the SC says it’s the royal family’s property then let it be so. If the order is in the state government’s favour then we can take a decision. The bill is only about it,” Reddy explained.
Speaker U T Khader then called for a voice vote and the bill was passed by the Assembly amidst opposition BJP’s discontent.
