Saturday 25 March 2017

ANTI ROMEO SQUAD # U.P




Anti Rameo Squad Morph in to Moral Policing
My warm wishes to all my readers.
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mr. Yogi Adityanath, on 22 March 2017 just after two days of its oath full filled one of its most polarising promise i.e establishments of Anti Romeo Squads in order to control eve teasing. What a positive approach respected CM have and it is really appreciable. These  anti romeo squads come in function with immediate effect and results in to 800 arrests in to Six district. But the question of concerned as a lawyer for me is whether it is really a control on eve teasing or is it moral policing.  There exist every thin line between crime control and moral policing and which seems to be blurred in this  particular instance.
As per the news papers and news channel head line police is raiding in cafeterias, Hotels, Cafes, parks and all other places. Asking couples moving on roads to get separated and in mostly cases they are arresting boys who are moving or sitting with some girl. Before getting in to issue as a lawyer lets us understand the two basic terms and then we will try to find out the dividing line of both.
Firstly what amount to eve teasing ?Eve teasing is a euphemism used for molestation or harassment of a women in public place. Commonly known as street harassment. Word “Eve” is alluded  from the name of very first women on earth as per Bible and word teasing mean disrespecting  such a godly women. So we can very well understand eve teasing is both moral and legal offence rather I will say crime.
On the other hand Moral Policing is a blanket used by some particular vigilant group which act enforce moral code of conduct to other people because they consider that particular act against the morality of the Indian culture. So we can also say that moral policing is also illegal as it tries ti infringe the fundamental rights of all citizens in India.
Known coming back to the present discussion  we will find that police is enquiring each and every couple who is travelling or sitting together is that amount to check on eve teasing, surely not; I think Uttar Pradesh police really do not know the meaning of eve teasing. When someone is travelling with his /her  colleague or fellow friend than its nowhere amounts to eve teasing and you have no right to question me and my fellow person status. As it is the matter of right to privacy and you can not interfere in my right of privacy without any reasonable restrictions. Being a lawyer I will not only impose my views on this I will try to find out the  the answer of some question through our constitution. I will be discussing all questions one by one.
1)      Being a major is it illegal to stay in hotel in India and can police raid on such person without reason?
Instead of giving my personal opinion let me show you the word of law, as written in our Constitution:
Art 15(2)(a) (read as Article 15,Sub-section 2,Clause a): No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to (a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment.
Art 19(1)(d) and Art 19(1)(e)  (1) All citizens shall have the right—
 (d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; (e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India.
Art 21: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. And more over supreme court in many judgment recognized live in relationship so when two unmarried people staying in hotel it is not a offence unless they are not doing some thing else illegal and consistent raiding in hotels and harassing such couples is not control on eve teasing rather it is a moral policing and have to be stopped immediately. (Khushboo v. Kanniammal s.c)
2)      Can police stop couples travelling together or sitting in park or cafeteria ?
 Uttar Pradesh police says that they are continuously visiting coffee shops and parks and having check on couple sitting there. So tell me which coffee shop in Uttar Pradesh will allow a haggler to sit in to its arena, I think no one and it’s the place where two people sit with their consent and when they are sitting with their mutual consent than where the question of eve teasing arise. Are taking nation towards self proclaimed democracy. All fundamental rights are subject to state will, are we living is state to tyranny.
Police have to understand that respected CM of Uttar Pradesh has ordered to check on eve teasing and your duty is to check hagglers and not unnecessarily   interfering in to personal liberty of other. If you keep on doing than it will going to have a very negative impact on the youth. Brothers and sister will start fearing to move freely. Your aim is to make you more safer rather than creating a state of fear in all girls and boys. Youth should feel secure in your presence rather than feeling insecure. Its the high time to draw the clear line of division between eve teasing and moral policing.



Wednesday 1 March 2017

Against ABVP # antinatinalist


We have freedom of speech, Sorry ! you are anti nationalist .

Hi to my all readers, i am shocked, sadden, heartbroken. Having no words to express my feelings and I can only be in mental peace after expressing my feelings and this is the best place to do so. My blog is on very sensitive issue that is nationalism and anti nationalism. My freedom  of speech visa a vice rational criticism of the government.
Delhi university student Gurmehar Kaur started the campaign last week against the ABVP (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad) and she was compelled to take off the campaign. Before understanding the above issue lets us peep in to the root cause of this campaign.
Violent clashes broke out between Left-affiliated AISA and RSS-backed ABVP at DU's Ramjas college on 22 February 2017 over a seminar invite to JNU students Omar Khalid and Shehla Rashid which left "several students and three teachers injured. The clash broke out when a group of students and teachers tried to take out a march demanding action against ABVP for alleged vandalism and also disruption of a seminar. Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad had  locked down the college's seminar room and pelted stones in protest against the invitation to the JNU students who were to address a seminar calling them "anti-nationals". The college authorities decided to withdraw the invitation which irked a section of students and teachers who planned the protest march to Maurice Nagar police station demanding action against ABVP members for the "vandalism". The ABVP members, however, did not allow the march to proceed and allegedly locked the students and teachers inside Ramjas college while AISA members tried to barge inside the premises to "rescue the captives".The two JNU students were invited to take part in a session during a two-day seminar on 'Culture of Protest' organised by Wordcraft, Ramjas college's Literary Society.
After the above act gurmehar kaur started her campaign against ABVP where she got trolled badly on internet being called anti national. So the question of concerned is how she  become anti national.  Did it mean that any person who will speak against RSS and BJP or there backed wings will be declared as anti national. Lets me not be so emotional I am a lawyer so I should try to find the answer through law not through my sentiments. Here the issue of contention is that Whether raising a voice against particular group of people or  disliking ideology of particular political party can be ground to declare you anti national.
Constitution of India provide all Freedom of speech and expression with reasonable restrictions and  existence of sedition in India is always be considered as indivisible    part of   freedom of speech and expression. As it always matter of contention what amount to reasonable for the purpose of article 19 and where sedition charges are to be impose. We have to understand that where the circumference of reasonableness of Article 19 ends, sedition laws starts. Supreme court in kedarnath singh v state of bihar 1959 clearly held that sedition law is constitutional and provide that  since the word ‘sedition’ by itself is not included as one of the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), the Court could uphold section 124A only if it was brought within the ambit of ‘public order’. It made a clear distinction between strong criticism of the government and those words which excite with the inclination to cause public disorder and violence. It also distinguished between ‘the Government established by law’ and ‘persons for the time being engaged in carrying on the administration. Later on clearing the view supreme court in  S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram 1989  held that for bringing sedition in to the domain of public order  the expression of thought should be intrinsically dangerous to public interest. The anticipated danger should  not be remote  it should be proximate. Again Supreme court in balwant singh v state of Punjab  in 1995 held that “Over sensitiveness sometimes is counterproductive and can result in inviting trouble. Raising of some lonesome slogans, a couple of times by two individuals, without anything more, did not constitute any threat to the Government of India as by law established, nor could the same give rise to feelings of enmity or hatred among different communities or religious or other groups.
Coming back to the recent matter, what Gurmehar Kaur did  she simply started the campaign against a political thought and express that she did not like views of ABVP and therefore she stand against it, How this act became so aggressive that all start thinking that she is speaking against the nation. So is it ABVP who will decide that what is national and what is not. Not they can not, what is actually going on is some thing different.The attack at Ramjas College in Delhi is one episode. It is linked to the assaults at India’s premier university – Jawaharlal Nehru University – and to the many attacks on students from Jadavpur University (West Bengal) to Central Universities in Hyderabad, Haryana and Jharkhand. The ruling party’s student wing – ABVP – has been emboldened to intervene violently in any attempt by students to have open discussions about matters that the Sangh Parivar deems to be inappropriate. This is thuggish censorship.  The Sangh Parivar wants to use ‘reforms’ to college admission policy and to the policies on student life as a way to engineer the student body. They want to disallow progressive politics and allow only the politics of violent cultural nationalism. The people chosen by the ruling party to run academic and cultural institutions show that they care little for competence and are driven by a narrow political agenda. Blind obedience and conformity are preferable to them than robust and rich political debate on the campuses. The Sangh Parivar’s agenda is to close the Indian mind and destroy intellectual flexibility. Leaders of colleges who are sympathetic to the Sangh Parivar have emboldened non-academic agents to use violence against students and faculty who want to hold conversations around controversial themes – Kashmir, the Sangh Parivar, caste violence, misogyny, and class apartheid. This intimidation is the opposite of what a university and college must be – namely, a sanctuary for conversation and debate over the very issues that are most contentious. No progress is possible in a country if young people are not permitted full freedom to discuss difficult issues, pressing issues, issues that will matter to them long after the political leadership in the country has passed on.  oh! Again being little sentimental actually it is not my over zealousness rather it my heart pain that every time comes out.
If Gurmehar Kaur is anti national than what about those who gave her open warning of rape and death. I agree this 20 year girl was knowing the consequences of her campaign, she was not knowing that she is no more living in democracy her freedom of speech has already been taken. She forget that some people draw their ideologies from North Korea and these people have firm believe that what they think, what they say, what they eat, what they drink is only national any one doing things other way is anti national.
You believe that there should be open discussion about peace between India and Pakistan as war take thousands of life # you are anti nationalist.
They say we should have a diplomatic relations and war only kills# they are nationalist.
You say have a democratic thought, all are equal# you are anti nationalist.
They say only Sang parivar is true follower of democracy   # nationalist.
You say I want to eat   Meat # you are anti nationalist
They say  you cannot eat without our will # nationalist
You say who kill Gandhi ji  was anti nationalist # you are anti nationalist
They say he was the real patriot  # they are nationalist.

I know if this post reaches up to some people than I will be also facing sedation soon. But being a lawyer it is my duty to show mirror to the world. Though I tried to write only on legal prospective but this time was not able to control my emotions. But I will be writing on this topic again with complete legal prospective.

Thankyou for reading