Orissa Congress Chief is Partially Correct: Congress Leaders Sabotaged the Congress

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

By openly alleging that some of the Congress leaders have sabotaged the party in election, President of Orissa Pradesh Congress Committee Sri Jayadev Jena has conceded defeat even three weeks before the EVMs are to come to the counting tables. He is partially correct; because he has limited his allegations only to some unidentified Congress leaders of Orissa, whereas it is the central leadership of Congress that has sabotaged the Congress in Orissa again.

This election had tremendous possibilities of victory for the Congress. Everywhere there was a strong undercurrent against Naveen Patnaik. By orientation, people of Orissa are averse to the communalist BJP. Hence BJP was not supposed to benefit from the undercurrent against Naveen. On the other hand, none of the other parties – mostly, personal attires of Pyari Mohan Mohapatra (Orissa Jana Morcha), Soumya Ranjan Patnaik (Ama Odisha), Aira Kharavela Swain (Utkal Bharata) – and left parties with no serious approach to the election, were not expected to win. So, it was only the Congress that could have acquired most of Orissa Assembly seats this time.

But for Sonia Gandhi, Naveen was not to be defeated. Like every time since Naveen Patnaik has occupied Orissa, the so-called high command of Congress has sabotaged the electoral prospects of Congress in Orissa. Members of the Congress Party in Orissa are yet to decode this mystery.

Riding on sympathy wave on death of Biju Patnaik, a wave that, in fact, in order to show his magnanimity as chief Minister, J. B. Patnaik had created by eulogizing on the man whom people had disdainfully thrown into the dustbin of time, Naveen had given such a misrule, that, the people had started repenting for having him elected.

The astute politician J. B. Patnaik, in his new avatar as PCC chief, was quite efficiently and effectively steering the campaign against malfunctioning of the BJD-BJP government and many members of the cabinet, who had founded the BJD, were also getting disillusioned and irritated over the preening prince of Bijudom.

The situation had become so anarchic that the whole of Orissa was rising against Naveen.

At that juncture, Pyari Mohan Mohapatra had come to his rescue.

He had advised Naveen to dismiss some of his ministers, notwithstanding them being founder members of BJD, by giving an impression to the public that they were dismissed on grounds of corruption.

This single trick gave a new twist to public thinking on Naveen Patnaik, as they compared Naveen’s action against his close colleagues on allegations of corruption with J.B.Patnaik’s corruption-raj wherein fellows like Indrajit Ray and Basant Biswal were given full protection. This had immediately turned the rising public aversion to Naveen Patnaik into strong public admiration for him.

Yet, his conduct as Chief Minister was too deficient to fetch for him a fresh mandate.

POSCO had already put its eyes on Orissa by then; and for Sonia-led Congress, in that context, continuance of Naveen in the Chief Minister’s chair was more important than victory of its own candidates.

Congress high Command ensured defeat of the Congress in Orissa, not only by jettisoning J.B. Patnaik from the leadership of the province, but also by giving tickets to tainted fellows whom Naveen had dismissed on grounds of corruption.

In order to help Naveen rule the roost, Congress High Command had then appointed a lightweight Jayadev Jena as PCC Chief and used fellows like the Madhya Pradesh scrap Digvijaya Singh to damage whatever semblance of determination was still alive in Orissa PCC leaders to fetch victory for their Party.

Naveen recaptured power, simply because, there was no real opposition to him from the Congress.

However, when the lightweight Jayadev Jena, sans any ability to know how deep was Congress high command’s secret agenda to keep Naveen in the Gadi of Orissa, succeeded in bridging the gap between rival groups of the party and a new hope for success of Congress was discernible in the political horizon, he was suddenly replaced with K.P.Singhdeo, to save the people from the tyranny of whose family, the Congress Party spangled with the Communists in freedom movement, had made spellbinding sacrifices, Baisnab Patnaik absorbing the bullets and Baji Raut entering into martyrdom.

Promulgating himself as “soldier of Sonia Gandhi”, Singhdeo created such a climate that the election was lost to the Congress, when it was sure to win, had Jayadev Jena not been removed.

The Congress members and admirers were shocked to the core; but none of them could dare to confront the central leadership with this reality.

It was clear that KP was killing the Congress.

Howsoever feeble, voice against imposition of her “soldier” by Sonia on members of the Pradesh Congress gathered audible proportion and lest the secret agenda of Sonia to help the POSCO agent in power in Orissa get exposed, hoodwinking assurances were given to Orissa Congress members that no more the leadership would be imposed from above.

They were told to elect their own President and the process started from the block level.

But when the process had reached the final stage and only the PCC President was to be elected, it was clear to the Congress high command that Lalatendu Bidyadhar Mohapatra was sure to win. His election as PCC Chief was sure to be most disadvantageous to Naveen.

So, at the last moment, just before the election of the PCC chief, a Sonia emissary stymied the election and shepherded the PCC members to adopt a resolution authorizing Sonia Gandhi to decide who should head the PCC.
And eventually Sonia appointed Niranjan Patnaik to head the PCC.

Patnaik, though a seasoned politician, had also no idea that any strong campaign against Naveen was not to please Sonia to whom the South Korean POSCO was not to be displeased.

Jagdish Tytler was used to destroy the effect of the spectacular rally Niranjan had organized after taking over the PCC reign. Lest the rally be viewed as appropriate expression of mass resentment against Naveen’s misrule and a turning point in favor of the Congress, Tytler instigated enthusiasts to make force-entry into the Assembly, even as anti-Congress agent provocateurs were in their notorious best. Despite this, the legislative wing of the Congress was very ably exposing the Naveen misrule and to cite an instance, had devastated Naveen in the matter of pulse scandal. Sonia sent Tytler again to leash the legislative wing and to the utter frustration of every Congress MLA, their just steps against Naveen were forced to be withdrawn.

And, when election 2014 was due, Niranjan was discarded to revive Jayadev Jena as PCC chief!

Situation was made so sour that the Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh had to leave the Congress at the verge of election to seek an asylum in the camp of Naveen!

This site has all along exposed the motive of the Congress High Command based on circumstantial evidences. There are many disquisitions in these pages on this subject. But I would like you to peruse the following essays to get necessary glimpses of how the central leadership of Congress has continuously sabotaged the Orissa Pradesh Congress to ensure safe continuance of Naveen Patnaik in power. Jayadev Jena will specifically gain if he wants to find out who has really sabotaged the Congress in Orissa. Here are the essays:

Congress is confused
Elections ahead: Congress versus Congress in Orissa

Congress in suicide mode: Bizarre business in Orissa politics

Congress emerges as a party of contradictions in Orissa
Agents of foreign interest flock together: Congress denies tickets to active opponents of Naveen
Election of PCC Chief stopped since Lulu would be disadvantageous to Naveen
Tytler’s visit was meant to suppress the legislative conscience of CLP members

Plutocracy_a Specimen is Orissa: Study it and get ready for a revolution

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Orissa is reduced to a state of inanition by Naveen Patnaik inasmuch as more than half a crore, at least 5,967,215 persons as per the list of beneficiaries under Public Distribution Scheme, are suffering from continuous slow starvation, who just thrive on subsidized rice at the rate of Re.1 per kg; when as many as 63,759 persons are identified as paupers having not even this abysmally little purchasing power to have rice at Re.1, for which they are given the rice they need free of cost under the Annapurna scheme. “This initiative” confesses the State government “helps to mitigate the maladies of hunger, deprivation and poverty. AAY scheme specifically caters to the need of the poorest of poor people living in urban & rural areas, who face difficulties to buy essential commodities even at a relatively lower price”.

When UNDP puts the figure of poor in Orissa at 15.32 million based on data of 2009-10, a CLAP project finding on “State of Children in Orissa” shows that, the State has the “highest percentage of Infant Deaths and Neo-Natal Deaths among the States of India. The IMR for the State is 83 per 1000 live births. The Neo-Natal Mortality is 61 per 1000 live births. 54.4% born in Orissa are underweight. 20.7% of Children below 3 years of age are severely underweight and another 54.4% are moderately underweight”, attributing this sordid reality to severe malnutrition and continuous slow starvation.

In such a State, against 147 Assembly seats, 217 multimillionaire (crorepati) candidates, have been fielded by non-Communist political parties, who have also fielded 324 declared criminals, most of whom are charged with serious crimes like murder, attempt to murder and rape.

In Naveen babu’s regime, Orissa was blackened through mandate 2009 with 18 MLAs and 3 MPs who could not be punished, as criminal cases against them continued to limp, because prosecution did not dare to pursue those cases in right earnest.

This happens in plutocracy where mafia rules the roost.

In plutocracy corrupt politicians whom people really hate get elected because elections become Hobson’s choice. And in this process they use the administration and machinery of election like the Election Commission in the Center and Chief Electoral Officers in States. This technique is glaringly evident in Orissa.

The ruling party here is named after Biju Patnaik, more a mafia than a democrat. All officially instituted welfare projects are named after the same Biju Patnaik which is a ruling party design to keep the voters too dazzled to differentiate between the Biju Janata Dal and Biju-named projects. As a result, BJD appears as the provider of their welfare, though all the Biju-named projects are created with and funded by the State exchequer.

A fare and non-plutocratic election machinery – the EC, India and CEO, Orissa – should have banned all advertisements in media and mention in electioneering of every official project named after Biju since the very day of commencement of preparation for election, if Orissa voters were to use their unbiased, unprejudiced, uninfluenced, free wisdom in casing their votes.

I had pointed out the malady much earlier on 5 March 2014 and 9 April 2014, but it did not happen.

Over and above this, several instances of heavy cash being carried in vehicles engaged in electioneering of ruling and non-communist parties, as located by stray officials sans any punitive action, indicate to what extent the election is made undemocratic, which proves that, the election which our innocent people believe to be a democratic process of their mandate, has become a plutocratic phenomenon, where they elect their enemies only as their representatives.

These plutocratic politicians do not allow their voters to know even their election manifestos.

bjpAs is well known, the BJP, which is aspiring to capture India by exploiting people’s wrath against Manmohan Singh-Sonia misrule, had not issued its manifesto till closure of electioneering in Orissa for the first phase of election. When it released its manifesto, the total copies thereof were only 1000 when Orissa has a total of 2.88 crore voters.

bjdThe BJD had no more copies of manifesto than what was necessary for release to the Press. It disdainfully disobeyed the election law to print the numbers of the copies of the manifesto which it circulated only to members of the Press at Bhubaneswar. We did not get a copy of BJD manifesto in any of its electioneering camps and none of its slogan-raisers or campaigners candidates could give us a copy either, which establishes that the ruling party of Orissa had no scheme of equipping the people with the election manifesto.

congressThe Congress had limited its manifesto to 10,000 copies as against 2.88 crore voters of Orissa too, when its offshoot Ama Odisha had printed only 500 copies. aop

So, for all these non-Communist parties, planting candidates in all/almost all the Assembly constituencies of Orissa, seeking of mandate on the basis of manifesto carried no meaning. They have made the election a farce and a medium of plutocracy in the guise of democracy, and nothing else.

Read the scenario and find the specimen of plutocracy in Orissa and be ready to fight against whosoever forms the next government with such treachery and foul play, if you really love your motherland and wish it stay a democracy.

A violent class war is inevitable, as from now on, plutocracy will tighten its grip to further imperilment of the poor, perishing under slow starvation and silently suffering the ignominy of thriving on Re.1 per kg rice.

Your post-election responsibility is to try to forestall the violent class war by building up a non-violent revolution to force the government(s) to put a ceiling on private property, so that concentration of wealth in hands of a few shall stop and corruption caused by unlimited avarice of the rich and aspirants for richness would shrink to obliteration and enough funds shall be available for all round development of all Indians.

Get ready.

Gang of Giriraj Singh could not have infested India had Congress heeded to CPI advice of 1942

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

The Communist approach to 1942 Quit India call has remained an enigma to many even today. While supporting the preamble of the August Resolution of the All India Congress Committee, all the 13 Communist members in the AICC had, as per Party decision, opposed the operational part thereof so tellingly that, even though the amendment they wanted had failed, Mahatma Gandhi had, in his concluding speech, congratulated the Communists for their courage of conviction. The Communists had insisted that the decision should be addressed “to achieve all-in national unity for the purpose of forging mass sanctions to secure the end of British domination and the installation of a Provisional National Government and with this end in view to make an earnest effort to effect agreement and joint front with the Muslim League.”

This approach had evolved on deep study of the global situation vis-à-vis India. When the first phase of the war (September 1939 t0 22 June 1941) with USA-backed-Anglo-French ‘Allies’ in one side and German-Italian-Japanese fascist ‘Axis’ on the other side, notwithstanding which side wins, was to give victory to imperialism, the 2nd phase, precipitated by Hitler Germany’s malicious attack on the Soviet Union, had become a people’s war against fascism.

This war, however, was offering a great opportunity for emancipation of the peoples all over the world from autocratic dictatorial exploitation based on fascist terror. So the peoples were to gain their real freedom if fascism was defeated on the basis of united action of the peoples against the fascist forces in the second war.
This particular approach was most relevant to India as the mischief of some of the Congress top brass and Congress financiers had already drove a menacing wedge into its population comprising the Hindus and the Muslims, the naked picture of which is available to us in Pandit Motilal Nehru’s 1926 letter to his son, that forms a highly referable part of the book ‘A Bunch of Old letters’ published by Jawaharlal Nehru.

Unity of all the Indians, particularly of both the Hindus and Muslims as the major segments, and participation in the war as one people, was essential for safety of the territory of India on achieving her independence.
But the Congress played to the tune of the fascists and by the strength of majority in AICC, rejected the amendment advanced by the Communists and executed the foresightless resolution that ultimately, after the war, divided the people and precipitated partition of India, the ancient land of knowledge and humanitarianism, on communal lines, that still continues to deny emancipation to the people as bloody fascists have gathered unrestrained strength to even fight elections armed with brutal fascism to the extent of openly threatening to throw out into Pakistan whosoever opposes Narendra Modi!

The correctness of the 1942 stand of the Communist Party of India has been fully proved by political independence of India in 1947 and liberation of China in 1949 and also by emergence of socialist states belonging to the peoples that gave birth to a new era. This was possible only because of victory over fascism that had weakened imperialism by the end of the war. Had the Communists’ advice to join the peoples of the world in the war as an united people against fascism been heeded to by the Congress in 1942, fascism in India could have been completely extinguished by August 1947 and the pack of Giriraj Singhs could not have raised their fangs of fascism and the country could have been saved from capitalistic terror.

The passionately patriotic appeal of the Communists to the Congress not to discard the historic responsibility of uniting the people of India with the peoples of the world then fighting fascism, instead of pushing the country into chaos by a Quit India call to the British when it was in war against fascism, attracts our attention in the pages of “Forward to Freedom” (February 1942) published by the underground headquarters of Communist Party of India.

In clarifying the Communists’ stand, it notes, “There has been a shift within the vicious circle of stalemate itself, from the policy of Gandhian negation to a policy of political inaction. The compromising tendency of the national bourgeois leadership expresses itself in waiting for imperialism to make a move. Their reformist tendency expresses itself in not even thinking of a mobilization of the people. The national leadership leaves the nation without a lead, without a direction, without a course of action that will enable the nation to realize its destiny through its strength, through its own action”

This speaking piece of Communists’ collective wisdom, expressed through the pen of the legendary P. C. Joshi, unequivocally says, “We Communists opposed the slogan of National Government during the imperialist war. We advocate now as the only way out for the nation during the people’s war. This is so because of the different aims of the war in two periods, because of the changed objective reality.

“Formation of a National Government will mean the exact opposite to what it meant during the imperialist war. Then it would have been a Government of National Surrender, today it will be a Government of National Advance. A National Government during the peoples’ war enables the Indian people to tell the peoples of the world: We have brought India into your war, because it is our war too.”

Had the Congress leadership heeded to these words of political wisdom evolved in the underground headquarters of the Communist Party of India in 1942, the people of India, as a whole, could have joined that war against fascism. And, had it been so, and had a National Government in India been possible during the period of that war, the country would never have fallen in the trap of the “Malaviya-Lala gang” that Birla was funding, as Motilal Nehru had informed his son in 1926 (Jawaharlal Nehru, A Bunch of Old Letters, 1958, p.47) as well as the British bureaucrats; and partition of India could not have occurred and the occasion would never have come for fascists in hot pursuit of power to threat the Indians that do not subscribe to their notorious design with banishment from their motherland.

Reaching the crux and locating the soft threads of patriotism and responsibility for the peoples in the fabric of politics is not always easy. Yet, it is a patriotic necessity that whosoever loves India must try to fulfill.

My Pride as an Indian did not allow me to vote

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

I did not vote yesterday. My pride as an Indian did not allow me to vote, because thereby plutocracy could have earned my approval, when I have been opposing it to the best of my ability.

I am happy that, many people are not voting. Most of them are averse to voting, because by voting, they are not getting any good government. In fact, plutocracy never gives a good government.

People mistake plutocracy as democracy, as both the systems are based on votes.

In plutocracy, political parties are led by the rich; the rich and/or agents of the rich get fielded as candidates by the parties of the rich; elections legally become too expensive for the poor to aspire for a seat in any house of representatives, as a result of which only the rich or the agents of the rich represent the poor and on capturing power, act against the poor, as governance under such representatives is set to support and serve only the rich, not the poor. The rich take to their ownership the natural resources of the nation by using the state power; displace people from their habitats and life-sustaining lands for private industries and the rich by using state terror; loot the exchequer for multiplication of their properties while throwing tiny amounts like orts at people in the grassroots in the name of their welfare; force the workforce to digest the ignominy of thriving on subsidized cereals like a-rupee-per-kg-rice, on a bid to survive slow-starvation. And they continue to do this by planting a set of the rich and or agents of the rich against another set of their own, making election a Hobson’s choice that continues the rule of the rich.

This plutocratic design is to be defeated.

And, it can be done, only if the method of occupying power by the rich – the elections – is shunned.

Communists’ Contribution to India’s Independence: A few words

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

In the history of India’s freedom movement, the 1942 ‘Quit India’ call of Gandhiji is to stay forever a turning point that ended the role of Gandhian non-violence in the struggle for independence.

Even if not deliberate, it was an act of failure on the part of Gandhiji and his blind yes-men in the Congress Party to read the motive behind ‘Operation Orient’ that had metamorphosed into the machination of fascist design aimed at engulfing India before it become a free nation.

“What was the grand fascist plan in 1942 which they called Operation Orient?” Pursuing this question, Dilip Bose in his well documented disquisition captioned ‘1942 August Struggle and The Communist Party of India’ has informed.

“Japan had occupied Rangoon by 8 March 1942 and was waiting for the other prong of the fascist wing to advance through Stalingrad to India via Persia and Afghanistan. Today we know in detail that this “Operation Orient” failed because the heroic Red Army fought almost a superhuman battle to block the German Nazi Army at Stalingrad. The fiercest battle took place at Stalingrad between November 1942 to the 1st week of February 1943 when Field Marshal Von Paulus of Germany surrendered to the Red Army. Therefore, August 1942 was taking place exactly when Stalingrad battle was taking place in full fury.”

Thus, it was essential for the people of India to rise up as a nation against fascism and it was essential for the Congress to lead the nation in this regard, as “the progressive forces of the world are now aligned with the groups represented by Russia, Britain, America and China” to quote the resolution of the Congress Working Committee held in December 1941 at Bardoli.

But the rash call of Gandhiji to the British to quit India, with the most unscientific support of Congress top brass to the said call not only deserted the collective wisdom expressed in Bardoli, but also denied the Indians to be one with the forces fighting “the grand fascist plan”.

While supporting the preamble of the Quit India resolution that aimed to “defend India and resist aggression with all the armed as well as the non-violent forces at its command, together with Allied Powers”, the Communists opposed the operative part of the resolution concerning the “struggle” aspect, because, the envisaged ‘struggle’ in the prevailing context could mean a struggle against the allies against fascism.

Britain being one of the allies, the Quit India call at that juncture was to provoke the British to repress the Indian leadership for staying unperturbedly addressed to the war. In Communist perception, that was to render the necessary leadership unavailable to Indians in the peoples’ war against fascism.

In fact, in an open letter dated 26 July 1942 addressed to the Congress leadership, it had raised the question: Is it not plain enough that to start your ‘struggle’ is just to play the game of the imperialists and the bureaucrats? What will happen if and when you start the struggle?

“They will quietly put you and thousands of active Congress workers inside jails and sanctimoniously declare that it is their unfortunate duty to be able to save India from the fascist invaders.

“They would have divorced you from contact with the people who need you and every patriot in their own midst more than ever before. It is your historic responsibility to organize our people for national resistance. And here you will leave them leaderless and at the mercy of the mad bureaucrats”, the letter had warned.

This exactly had happened.

There was “wholesale arrests of the Congress leaders” by the end of the night of August 9, 1942, which Gandhiji had to indicate in his letter to Viceroy Linlithgow, dated 23 September 1942.

In this situation of sudden absence of leadership, with passion for freedom having already been ignited, the people of India suffered the worst of repression and torture in the hands of the British imperialists and bureaucrats.

Within four months from August 9, according to statement of the Home Member in the Central Assembly, 60,229 persons were arrested, 18,000 detained under Defence of India Regulation, 1630 were injured in firing by the police and military that had also killed 940 Indians in encounters.

In admitting the loss occurred by not heeding to the Communists’ advice, though advancing a face-saving statement, the Congress in its 1945 bulletin captioned ‘The Struggle and After’, had to say, “The earnest appeal made by the AICC at its last meeting held on August 8, 1942 for creating conditions necessary for full cooperation with the United Nations in the cause of world freedom was ignored and the suggested attempts to solve the Indian problem by negotiations were answered by the government by an all-out attack on the Indian people and by subjecting an unarmed India to many of the horrors which accompany an invasion.”

However, the history stands witness to how in absence of Congress leadership it is the Communists that had led the post August 9 ‘revolution’ for freedom that overwhelmed the brutal repressions unleashed by the British with the supreme sacrifices, a tiny sample of which has been quoted supra from the statement of the Home Member in the Central Assembly, forcing the imperialists to seriously think of leaving India.

What was at best a ‘struggle’ in the plan of the Congress, was transformed into an indomitable ‘revolution’ by the Communists and, in fact, August 9 is not known as ‘August Struggle’, but is known as ‘August Revolution’.

And, this most heroic phase of India’s revolution for freedom was not based on Gandhian non-violence.

Be it Baishnav Pattanayak’s armed attack on citadel of Shankar Pratap – the tyrant royal ally of the British – at Parjang in Dhenkanal or RIN revolt at Bombey, every instance that really expedited independence after the expected incarceration of the Mahatma and all his men in the Congress following the August resolution, was radically violent, sharpened by the concept and support generated and given by the Communists.

If erudition inspires one for progress, it may be gainful to peruse the pages of history of India’s freedom movement post August 9, 1942 to know how sharp and specific was the Communists’ strategy to expeditiously expel the British from our soil.

In fact, the last phase of Indian freedom movement that had expedited our independence, was led by the Communists, not by the non-Communists.

Reflecting this reality, after the British had to quit India, the Manchester Guardian had noted in an editorial on 11 October 1947, “It may be hard to disentangle whether the British action was based on high principle or on a less glorious desire to retreat to shelter before the storm broke”.

British Labor Minister A. V. Alexander had written on July 18, 1946: “I am certain, we should have faced a position of uprising and of bloodshed and disturbances in India and with a future military commitment that no one could at present overcast”.

This was official admission of the British that the aggressive phase of Indian freedom movement that had forced the British to quit was not the non-violent movement led by Gandhiji, but the brave war of patriotism the Communists had ignited and guided and waged against imperialism.

When Viceroy Lord Linlithgo had written on August 16, 1942 that the Communist Party of India was “practically lining up with the Congress”, the Government’s report on the 1st Party Congress of CPI, (Bombay 1943) had noted that the Communist Party was “solely interested in the speedy and violent overthrow of British rule in India”, as it’s paramount aim was “liberation from imperialist enslavement”.

See the Advertisements of Naveen Patnaik; See the Reality

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

The Sun was cutting through Bhubaneswar, the Capital City of Orissa, with its piercing rays.

Public Works Department was repairing a government quarter through a contractor.

With the 3 months old child on her flanks, a mother was toiling to earn her food for a day.

And, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik was launching his electioneering with blowing the conch of his success!

Narendra Modi: The issue is human rights of his wife

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

What would be the response of Election Commission to allegation of Congress against Narendra Modi in matter of his affidavit on his marital status is a politico-administrative action to watch.

But on the basis of confession of Mr. Modi that he has married and abandoned his wife after two months of marriage, the issue is human rights of his wife.

Conjugal rights of a married person is a vital part of his/her human rights. Mrs. Modi’s conjugal rights are totally violated as Modi has abandoned her after two months of marriage.

For violation of human rights of any member of human society, the society has always insisted upon action against contravener of human rights and the Human Rights Commission has also taken action.

Therefore, the BJP’s assertion that marriage being a personal matter of Modi, the nation has nothing to worry, is not tenable.

It is a fit case for National Human Rights Commission to initiate action against Modi on the basis of his confession in the public that after two months of marriage he has abandoned his wife, such abandonment having shattered Mrs.Modi’s human rights as a married woman.