Complaint against BJD MLA registered for anti-national misconduct

Orissa Police in Khandagiri Police Station, Bhubaneswar has registered a complain against Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik\s blue-eyed boy, MLA Debashis Samantaray, which social activist Dr. Subas Mohapatra has lodged over his brutal attack on a close relation of Pulwama martyr Manoj Behera. The heinous crime has embarrassed Orissa to the core and a Pakistani TV channel has rebuked India by telecasting the visuals of the crime. Sadly, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik has not responded to Mahapatra’s twitter intimation on the sordid misconduct of his close colleague.

We put on records the registered complaint:
Sedition FIR AGIANST BJD MLA DEBASIS AND NAVEEN

Bungling in Bhasha Andolan: FIR in Police

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

FIR has been filed this morning in the Capital Police Station against convener of Bhasha Andolan for financial bungling and other offenses.

The FIR is self- explanatory. For public information the same is published here:

To

The IIC, Capital Police Station,

Bhubaneswar.

 

Sub: Criminal Acts committed by Pabitra Maharatha aged about 40 years, s/o late Laxmidhar Maharatha, residing in a rented house on plot No. 1590/3731, Sastrinagar, Bhubaneswar -1, P.S.  Capital Police Station, P.O. GPO, Bhubaneswar.

 

Sir,

Respectfully I inform that, I am the Chairman of Bhasha Andolan, with its office in the residence of Pabitra Maharatha, Convener (Abahak) of Bhasha Andolan, at plot No. 1590/3731, Sastrinagar, Bhubaneswar.

As a member in the Ministerial Committee on working of the Orissa Official Language Act, 1954, I had researched into why the Act was not being honored and located three lacunae: (1) Absence of penal provisions for its contravention; (2) Absence of Rules to drive the Act ahead including administration of penal provisions as and when provided for in the Act  and (3) Absence of provision in the Act to bestow upon the Government the power to frame and promulgate the Rules. Accordingly, I formulated sets of Legislation for amendment of the Act and creation of Rules and submitted the same on 3.9.2015 to the Government through the Chairman of the Ministerial Committee and the Committee having approved the same, the Government had created a separate website for the purpose and published my draft therein for objection, if any, from the general public. And, the CM had informed the Assembly on 14.12.2015 of the proposed amendment of the Act. But, my stress on penal clause unnerved the CM, as he is not in the habit of using Oriya and steps were taken to derail the Committee. I wrote about this mischief against our Language and invited advice of thinking minds in social media ‘Face book’ and several friends mailed me their ideas. Then, I formulated the Bhasha Andolan and its operational method i.e. a silent march of maximum four persons with black flags in hand everyday at 5 pm to wake up our people to the danger to our Language. The above named Pabitra Maharatha , then working with me in matter of labor unrest in the Samaja newspaper, came forward  to help me in this campaign, which I had gladly welcomed. He roped in Pradyumna Satapathy and a few others.

After 39 days of this campaign, Govt. promulgated an Ordinance on May 21, 2016 causing an amendment in the Act that addressed to my advice in part and removed the lacuna as noted at point (3) above. The other two lacunae remained unheeded to, necessitating expansion of our campaign to enhance moral pressure on the authorities to further amend the Act and adopt the proposed Rules.  Funds were necessary for our movement.  We decided to publish relevant literature in support of the movement in shape of a souvenir and generate funds for its publication as well as for our campaign by roping in advertisements for the same. The said Pabitra Maharatha was given the principal and overall charge of the printing and publication thereof.

Instead of any other printer/publisher he published it under his own banner ‘Sabdasparsha’ by engaging ‘Duduli Process and Offset, Bapujinagar, Bhubaneswar to print it.  It was, captioned ‘Bhasha Pain Gana O Ganamadhyama’, printed and published and got inaugurated in a function on November 30, 2016. Profit and losses arising out of the matters connected with printing and publishing of the souvenir were to be enjoyed and borne by the Bhasha Andolan and not by Pabitra Maharatha. Lest there be any loss, as Chairman of the movement, I had campaigned for the advertisements and a price tag of Rs.500/- per copy was allowed on the souvenir, so that, the income from the selling of the same could be taken by Pabitra Maharatha for his labor in preparing the print-material, when the advertisement revenue minus the Press charges and the cost of paper, was to come to the movement for use in its expansion scheme.

The campaigners whose picture were placed in the souvenir along with reports of their participation had to be supplied with a copy of the souvenir free of cost and all the libraries including the State Library and State Archive were also to be supplied with copies thereof for consultation and reference by scholars/ researchers.  When he circulated a few copies on the day of its launching, he did not supply the souvenir to activists who participated in the campaign and to the Libraries/Archive, pretending always that the payments against the advertisements have not materialized , as a result of which he was unable to bring all the copies from the Press.

While thus keeping us  in dark about whether or not the Advertisement revenues are collected, he declared on 7.6.2018 that, he has incurred a loan of Rs.8 lakhas for the Bhasha Andolan, which, unless settled, he would commit suicide along with his wife and daughter. I sent him a message to apprise the members of the details of the accounts so that collective mind could be applied to settle his problem and decide on ways of raising the deficit, if any. Correspondingly it was also aimed at finding out if there was any surplus to be utilized for expansion of Bhasha Andolan. He is playing hide and seek and is not producing the accounts. On the other hand, he is propagating that, he has sustained heavy loss in publishing the souvenir, despite his failure to render the accounts called for from him. It now transpires that he has printed and published volumes of the same souvenir where there is no trace of the advertisements in order to give the impression that no income has been fetched from commercial space-selling, when he has, through his organization Shabdasparsa has published the souvenir by borrowing Rs.8 lakhs, which the Bhasha Andolan must pay him failing which he would commit suicide along with his wife and child. This being a serious situation needs investigation and legal action.

On my rough estimation, the income from the advertisement would exceed the expenditure by at least Rs.30 lakshs.

Pabitra has misappropriated the heavy surplus. He was entrusted with the earnings from advertisement and had dominion over it. He has dishonestly misappropriated it against the implied contract to the effect that, he will collect the advertisement cost, meet the expenses out of it, give proper accounts and return the surplus for the use of the movement.

On 8.6.2018, when I asked him in a mail to submit the accounts, his reaction was evasive and acrid. I mailed Pradyumna Satpathy whom he had projected as our President and we had accepted under the circumstances, to call a meeting of members to take stock of the situation.  He urged upon me to wait till July 16 as from that day the postponed Black Flag campaign of Bhasa Andolan was to resume and then we can meet and work upon the accounts. Surprisingly, on the said day, i.e. 16.7.2018, both Pabitra Maharatha and Pradyumna Satapathy did not participate in the Black Flag campaign and made a false propaganda in a press conference that the campaign has been postponed sine die. Thus the accounts of the movement is not being placed before the members, both the Convener and the President – Pabitra Maharatha and Pradyumna Satapathy respectively, having acted to hide the accounts.

Thus, Pabitra Maharatha, responsible for the souvenir and answerable on the accounts, in whose residence the office of the movement functions and in whose custody all the papers and books of accounts and documents are kept, has deceived the Bhaha Andolan and now dishonestly induces it to deliver Rs.8 lakhs to him. He has cheated and thereby dishonestly induces to deliver such amount. And, Pradyumna Satapathy is hand-in-glove with him.

On the aforesaid premises, I request your goodself to register a case against Pabitra Mohan Maharatha , and grant me a copy of the FIR and conduct a detailed investigation into my allegations and oblige.

Yours Faithfully,

(Subhas Chandra Pattanayak)

Chairman, Bhasha Andolan, Orissa

Residing at: VR 32, Unit 6, Bhubaneswar-1

Bhubaneswar,

7.8.2018

Police moved for action against TATA and JSL

Pernicious pollution caused by TATA Steel and JSL is dragging at least 10,000 people of Vyasanagar, Jajpur into unmanageable health hazards annually, as per allegation raised before the Police seeking immediate action under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

In a signed complaint addressed to the IIC of Jajpur Road P.S., President of Saheed Bhagat Singh Yubak Sangha, Vyasanagar Sri Rajendra Biswal , Secretary Hemant Kumar Dhir and several members including Niranjan Ghadai, Pradeep Kumar Mohanty, M. Pattnaik, Chandramani Samal, Malay Biswal, A. Nayak, Satyakam Mohanty have alleged that both these industries are “spreading” life threatening dusts in the entire area by open-air transportation of fly-ash of their respective power plants where intentionally they do not use the de-dusting system in sharp disregard to legal stipulation.

“We have had enough of giant coal power stations spewing poison into the air night and day. Smog, acid rain, Toxic mercury, and fine particles embed deep in our lungs. They are literally killing us.” they have alleged.

We put below the copy of their complaint and urge upon the government to immediately intervene.

Indian Parliament showed no concern for the soul of India; President should refuse assent to the Juvenile Justice Bill 2015

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Majority of the members of Indian Parliament have shown no concern for the soul of India, as has been established by passing of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill, 2015 on 22nd December in the Rajya Sabha completing its parliamentary course that had got the stamp of adoption in the Lok Sabha on 7th May. It is such a mockery of legislation, having not paid any heed to cries of India for justice to its soul – Nirbhaya, that, the President should do good by refusing the Bill his assent.

Had Jyoti Singh of New Delhi not been brutalized by a gang of satyrs in December 2012, too savage and severe for medical science to save her life, this Bill would not have been generated at all. Her indomitable will to live to see the bruits punished by her motherland had kept her alive till in utter despair she allowed her breathe to pass away. Her desire to see the criminals punished did not die with her death. We the People of India took her to be the symbol of our tortured yet courageous entity by calling her Nirbhaya, the soul of India.

It was soon found that the youngest of the criminals that brutalized Nirbhaya was juvenile, four months to cross the age of 18 years.

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 (as amended in 2006) was protecting him from punishment applicable to adult criminals. Hence, as demanded by whole of India, the Bill in question was conceived to reduce this age limit to 16 from 18 to give justice to Nirbhaya by punishing the youngest and yet the severest savage.

When the Bill was drafted it was inherently defective meant as if to ensure escapement to this young bruit. It was a haphazard draft very much in need of vetting in a Parliamentary Select Committee. The age factor was creating confusion. The approach was not based on criminology of rape. Before leaving the House in protest, Sitaram Yechury, leader of CPI (M), had rightly asked, “Today you are demanding the juvenile age to be reduced from 18 to 16 ; what if tomorrow a 15-year old commits a horrendous crime?” Members, who passed the Bill, did not bother about the question. Had the Bill been sent to Select Committee, members thereof might have stumbled upon the angle I am pointing to. But that did not happen.

The members did not bother to make the new law applicable to the juvenile criminal because of whose savagery Nirbhaya had lost her life. Minister-in-charge Maneka Gandhi had made it clear in the House that the Bill won’t be retrospective. Sad, the members could not catch even then that the main purpose of going for the new law was going to be defeated. They did not bother about this mischief.

The Supreme Court refused to intervene, because, by applying the old law of 2000 to set free the criminal in absence of any law to keep him under the Court’s clutch any further, the High Court had committed no illegality.

Before passing the Bill, the Rajya Sabha was aware of this. It was aware of the fact that unless given retrospective effect, the core purpose of engagement with the Bill before it was to be lost. It should have woken to the occasion and made the Bill retrospective. Had it acted diligently and passed the Bill in time with retrospective effect, at least from December 16, 2012 the day on which the horrendous crime having shocked the country had necessitated this new Law, the bruit that according to government has not reformed, could not have been put back in the society, to the panic of the society, as has been done.

It is better for the President, in the circumstances, to refuse his assent to this Bill, so that legislative wisdom may get a new chance to do away with the wrong the lawmakers have committed in this case in the aspect as discussed above.

Justice Pasayat’s conduct questioned

Justice Arijit Pasayat’s assertion that terrorists have no entitlement to human rights is condemned by human-right-activists.

Golak Bihari Nath of Gatantrik Adhikar Surakha Sangathan and Pramodini Pradhan of People’s Union for Civil Liberties in a Press realease on 14th December have questioned the motive of the former judge of the Supreme Court of India.

We publish here the contents of the Press Release with the hope that Justice Pasayat would explain his position, as his reported remark has serious ramifications.

Here is what the two have said:

The former Supreme Court Judge Justice Arijit Pashayat’s statement that terrorists and notorious criminals should not be given any human rights consideration, as reported in various newspapers, is unacceptable.

It is shocking when a former judge of the Supreme Court carries such an attitude.

His comments are in disagreement with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which India is a signatory. The Declaration clearly states that “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence” (Article-11).

Right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial judiciary is also guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

In view of this, the comment of Justice Pasayat that ‘the terrorists and notorious criminals are not entitled to any human rights consideration’ is completely against the accepted values and principles of Indian Constitution as well as the United Nations’ Charter of Human Rights.

What is worrying is when a person with such prejudice about ‘terrorists’ and ‘criminals ’occupied a position in the highest judiciary of the country, what kind of justice would have been delivered to people presumed as ‘terrorists’ and ‘criminals ’by that person.

Acquittal of Salman Khan makes people look askance at Judiciary: Supreme Court should take note of it

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

A man died and four persons were fatally injured under the wheels of actor Salman Khan’s uncontrolled car while sleeping on a footpath of Mumbai in the night of 27 September 2002, according to what the area magistrate had recorded the eye-witness accounts of Khan’s bodyguard Ravindra Patil. He was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment by the Sessions Court. But a single judge bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed that order and acquitted him completely of all the charges. This has shocked the people.

What was the eye-witness account? What had Patil deposed before the Magistrate?

According to him, Salman Khan and actor Kamaal Khan had gone to hotel (JW Marriott) when Patil was waiting in Salman’s Land Cruiser. They returned at about 2.15 am. Salman drove the car despite Patil’s advice that he should not drive when drunk. “He was drunk and was driving … at the speed of 90 to 100 kilometers per hour. Before coming to the junction of Hill Road, I told Salman to lower the speed”, Patil had stated under oath before the Magistrate. He had further stated, “He could not control his motor car while taking the right turn and it went on the footpath. The people were sleeping on the footpath. The motor car ran over (them)”.

This was almost the same as Salman’s friend and companion Kamaal Khan had told the Police on October 4, 2002. He had stated: “On the night of September 27, 2002, I went to meet Salman at his residence and we planned to have dinner outside. Salman, his bodyguard and I went out in a Land Cruiser to Rain Hotel at Juhu. His brother Sohail and his bodyguard came in a different vehicle. We had reached the hotel around 11 pm and it was very crowded.

Salman, Sohail and I had snacks at the service counter. After about an hour or two, we left for JW Marriott Hotel in the white Land Cruiser. After spending some time there, we left.

Salman sat to drive the vehicle, while his bodyguard sat next to him. I was behind the driver’s seat…Salman was driving and we started to head to his house. We were heading from St Andrew’s Road to Hill Road. While taking a right turn, Salman lost control of the car and it went on the steps of a building and crashed into a shutter. I heard shouts and people gathered around the car. The crowd was shouting ‘Salman come out’. Some were trying to help the injured. When we got down, people pushed us. Salman’s bodyguard told the people he was a policeman, which calmed down the crowd.”

When Police did not produce Kamaal Khan as witness in the Sessions Court, Patil met death in a pathetic condition during pendency of the case.

Now the High Court has concluded that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of Salman.

In its words, “For the reasons separately recorded in the judgment and order the following operative order is passed:

ORDER:
1) Criminal Appeal No.572 of 2015 preferred by appellant Salman Salim Khan is allowed;
2) The impugned judgment and order dated 6th may, 2015 passed in Sessions case No. 240 of 2013 is hereby quashed and set aside;
3) The appellant-accused Salman Salim Khan is acquitted of all the charges. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled;
4) If the fine amounts which are imposed in view of the impugned judgment and order, are already paid, the same shall be refunded back to him……….”

Of what value then are the eye-witness Statements of Salman’s body guard Patil before the Magistrate and of Salman’s friend and companion Kamaal Khan before the Police?

The High Court has of course directed Salman to execute a PR.bond under Section 437-A of Cr.PC. This Section requires the accused, before conclusion of the trial and before disposal of the appeal, to execute bail bonds with sureties, to appear before the higher Court as and when such court issues notice in respect of any appeal or petition filed against the judgment of the respective Court and such bail bonds shall be in force for “six” months.

What shall happen if the State of Maharastra does not prefer any appeal in the Supreme Court?

The very question is tormenting.

The matter looks like using law for covering up a very serious instance of illegality. Looking at askance the judiciary in such a situation would not be unnatural. Whether or not the State of Maharastra prefers appeal against the High Court order, the Supreme Court should do justice to the people of this dazzled country by instituting a special investigation into this case from its beginning to end and passing necessary orders after such investigation.

Justice should appear justified.

Let the Supreme Court ensure this.

Religious Terror is created by Religions and Weapon-manufacturing Lobbyists: Saswat Pattanayak

Twelve hours ago journalist Saswat Pattanayak in a note shared in social media had written:

“Whereas Islamic terrorism is a reality, let’s not forget that the “War on Terror” is also a religious war. Islamic terrorism may have little to gain other than causing emotional havoc. But the War on Terror, in our names, is a profiteering agenda that causes fear among the victims, unites the jingoists, and financially enriches the weapons-manufacturing lobbyists. In fact, the seeds for terrors have been planted by those very folks who are today implementing the “War on Terror” as a way to viciously perpetuate the cycle while they continue to profit from military-industrial complex and increase defense budgets with a scared citizenry meekly consenting to nationalist rhetorics”.

For whosoever shudders to see the unilateral extinguishment of hundreds of innocent civilians of Paris by a religious terrorist body that shamelessly claims credit for the brutality, in the night of Friday, I post here Saswat’s Face Book Posting:

Terrorists killed 26 and wounded 60 in Iraq yesterday. They killed 43 and injured 181 in Lebanon the day before. They killed 66 and injured 107 in Pakistan last month. And last month alone, 56 Palestinians were killed by Israeli terrorists.

Let’s stand in solidarity with Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan and Palestine too and change our grieving profile pictures across social media accordingly. Let’s hope that Facebook also activates “Safety Check” button for relatives of victims and potential victims of terrorist attacks in each of these regions. Not just for the folks who have relatives in France.

Sadly, this is a wishful thinking. What will happen is branding of those who are condemning selective outrage, as inhuman creatures lacking empathy. The truth is, when people are killed by terrorists in the global South, those are matter-of-factly dismissed as suicide bombings. When NATO terrorists sanction killings of innocent people, they are justified and glorified as a “Global War on Terror” instead – which is now going to be expedited in the wake of Paris, even as it has already killed well over 4 million Muslims so far.

Whereas Islamic terrorism is a reality, let’s not forget that the “War on Terror” is also a religious war. Islamic terrorism may have little to gain other than causing emotional havoc. But the War on Terror, in our names, is a profiteering agenda that causes fear among the victims, unites the jingoists, and financially enriches the weapons-manufacturing lobbyists. In fact, the seeds for terrors have been planted by those very folks who are today implementing the “War on Terror” as a way to viciously perpetuate the cycle while they continue to profit from military-industrial complex and increase defense budgets with a scared citizenry meekly consenting to nationalist rhetorics.

The need in our times is to not “other” people or to isolate “them” as suspects. The need is to come forward as one human race to combat the grounds that facilitate terrorism; to end the growing militarization that romanticizes violence as a tool of justice; to stop revenge politics which promotes retaliation across ideological spectrum.

Contrary to mainstream media claims, Paris did not happen after 9/11 – and neither of those two incidents were attacks on “western values of freedom and liberty”. Paris happened after Baghdad, which happened after Beirut, which happened after Sindh and Baluchistan. Likewise, 9/11 had happened after various militarist interventions in regions that were challenging a unipolar world order following dissolution of Soviet Union.

Yet, the righteous tears are suddenly flowing now and they were not flowing last week, because whether or not we agree, its only White Lives that Matter in the world that is still very much Eurocentric. This is yet another RIP Princess Diana moment – a fetishization of equating race with aspiration for freedom, and the selective emotions associated with such assumption. A convenient alibi to discard the reality that countries in the global South also aspire for freedom from occupation, from the hooliganism of the NATO member states that has not stopped even as there is no Warsaw today.

A historical blunder it would be to forget that it is the United States under Ronald Reagan which funded the Taliban/ Mujahidins so they could destroy a secular Afghanistan under Dr. Najibullah. An egregious oversight it would be to not hold the NATO powers accountable for the birth, rise and sustenance of ISIS – a threat from which the refugees are fleeing for safety, in a region systematically marked by political uncertainties to benefit Israeli hegemony. It was Hillary Clinton’s State Department under Obama administration that refused to brand Boko Haram as a terrorist group because the US was funding it. To kill a leader of Gaddafi’s stature, it was the NATO again which funded Al-Qaeda. In so many ways, ISIS is a direct consequence and is a beneficiary of the funding of hate, instituted by Obama administration and its Saudi allies – in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and well beyond.

To imagine that there will be no backlash at all, despite us thriving in moral and financial superiority at the expense of the wars of our own creations, is to simply dwell in fairy tales. Except, unlike the stories, there are possibly no happy endings in sight.