Epideictic acrobatics won’t do; the Prime Minister should subject himself to credible investigations beyond the CBI

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh’s assertions that he is ready for interrogation by Central Bureau of India in matter of coal scam seems like epideictic acrobatics to hoodwink the people. He has not asked the CBI to include his name for interrogation.

By this time, he should have placed himself for interrogation on records by convincing his fidgeting colleagues that he is, as he has belatedly said, not above the Law. But he has not taken any discernible step in this regard.

He has not yet told the people, if he is not involved with the crime, why did he take so much time to express willingness to be interrogated by the CBI. His motive and modus operandi in causing this delay need be revealed to the public, so that his sincerity can be gauged.

He should, if he is sincere, divulge details of steps, if any, he has taken for fixing responsibility for the missing of relevant files and tell the people clearly, who has stollen or destroyed the files containing notes and orders of concerned functionaries including himself. Mere saying “I am not above law” is of no relevance, because every idiot also knows that nobody is above the Law.

When missing of the files was known and needle of suspicion was pointing at him in public perception, he had asserted that he can’t say where the files had gone, because he was not the custodian of the files.

So, he was aware of missing of the files.

Being aware of the missing of the files, over which people were to look at their Prime Minister askance, in order to keep in tact the glory of the chair of the Prime Minister, he should have immediately taken exemplary punitive action against the last handler of the files, who could have been instantly identified from the ‘File-Movement-Register’ the government maintains. And, he should have ensured that the files are retrieved, if they were not willfully destroyed.

Instead of resorting to epideictic acrobatics that he is ready for interrogation, he should publicly say as to why he has not made his government punish the last handler of the missing files and why he took such huge time to be ready for interrogation. More importantly, he should explain his silence over the swindle worth Rs. 1.86 lakh crores due to his favoring Kumar Mangalam Birla of Hindalco Industries Ltd in coal blocks allocation, as reported by the national auditor. Why should he tell the CBI of this instead of telling the people? Why should there be the necessity of interrogation? Is confession before the people not better than admission on interrogation table?

And why should he be interrogated by the CBI? Is not the CBI dancing to the tune of his government? Is the CBI not denuded of essential credibility during his tenure as the Prime Minister? Who shall believe that the CBI would act independently and impartially in its investigation against the Prime Minister? Situation is so sour, even if the CBI acts independently sans any motive, people will not be convinced that the investigation was proper. And, for this sad situation, who else is responsible than the Prime Minister Dr. Singh?

So, in such circumstances, the Prime Minister should confess every details of his involvement in the scam that has been reported by the CAG to have caused a swindle worth Rs. 1.86 lakh crores; or should accept either of the following two suggestions, in interest of the nation in general and of the dignity of the chair he occupies in particular.

Firstly, he should urge upon the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, because the coalgate investigation is being monitored by the Apex court, to create a ‘Special Task Force’ for the purpose, comprising experienced sleuths from crime branches of all the provinces, who, unlike IPS officers, will act sans any fear for the Central Government, and thus, whether or not Dr. Manmohan Singh is the real culprit could be convincingly found out; and secondly, as an alternative, he should appoint a judicial commission of enquiry to help the people know whether or not he himself is the culprit.

The country has a great precedence of the second pattern.

In a special situation created by Jawaharlal Nehru’s government in the centre, Biju Patnaik occupied the chair of Orissa’s Chief Minister on 23 May, 1961 and immediately indulged in looting the State Exchequer for his personal gain and created a gang of co-looters in his ministry that destroyed all administrative norms and ethics in the nasty game of avarice and aggrandizement.

His misrule being absolutely unbearable, the students of Orissa were the first to rise in revolt followed immediately by the masses.

Biju was forced to quit the chair in midterm, though Nehru, whose many weaknesses he knew, had helped him with a face-saving cover called Kamraj Plan.

But the people went on demanding punitive action against Biju so relentlessly that the Central Government was bound to conduct an investigation into his black deeds through the CBI.

The CBI could not proceed properly, as the State Government of which Biju’s protege Biren Mitra was the Chief Minister, did not cooperate.

Yet in its report, it said that, there were many instances of illegalities which only a judicial inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (No. LX of 1952) can determine.

Sadly as the central government was under the grip of the Congress Party, instead of a Judicial Inquiry as recommended by the CBI, a Cabinet Sub-Committee was formed to enquire into the allegations against Biju and the same Sub-Committee made a farce of enquiry and tried to protect him.

The Prime Minister appealed the Parliament to forgive him as he and his protege Biren Mitra were already punished by being made to relinquish their offices.

This had enraged the people of Orissa so much that they punished the Congress Party in the 1967 election for having not punished Biju for his misdeeds.

R.N.Singhdeo became the new Chief Minister of Orissa heading a coalition with Jan Congress founded by Harekrushna Mahtab. In honoring the promise made in election manifesto, he appointed Justice H. R. Khanna of the Delhi High Court as the Judicial Commission of Inquiry against alleged felonies perpetrated during the period from 23 June 1961 to 8 March 1967 by Biju Patnaik and his colleagues including his two successors: Biren Mitra and Sadasiv Tripathy.

This Judicial Commission of Inquiry was appointed on 26 October 1967 under Orissa Government Home Department Notification No.813.

When the State Government was in the process of appointing this Commission of Inquiry, on 27 June 1967, Sadasiv Tripathy along with 24 MLAs and MPs of the Congress Party, had submitted a memorandum to President of India for enquiry into acts of corruption and impropriety alleged against R.N.Singhdeo (then the Chief Minister), P.M.Pradhan (then the Deputy Chief Minister), S.N.Patnaik (then a Minister), Banamali Patnaik (then a Minister), Santanu Kumar Das (then a Minister), N. K. Choudhury (Ex-Chief Minister) and Dr. H.K.Mahtab (Ex-Chief Minister).

On receiving the memorandum from the President, the then Home Minister of India, Sri Chavan sent the same to R.N.Singhdeo for action as he would deem proper.

Singhdeo immediately put the memorandum to administrative examination and as the allegations were prima facie sans any merit, he told Sri Chavan that if he desires, the State Government would go for a judicial examination of the allegations by a sitting judge of a High Court or the Supreme Court of India.

The central Home Minister replied that, as a sitting judge may not be diverted for such an enquiry, the CM may have the enquiry through any retired judge of any High Court or the Supreme Court.

Justice J. R. Mudholkar, a retired judge of the Supreme Court agreed to enquire and find out which of the allegations seemed prima facie correct, so that a regular Judicial Commission of Inquiry could be appointed to enquire into those specific allegations.

Accordingly, a Special Judge post was created in G.O.No. 292-EC on May 3, 1968 and Justice Mudholkar was appointed in the said post as a Special Judge to conduct the fact-finding enquiry, Findings of this commission were held to be genuine by the Orissa High Court in Harekrushna Mahtab vs the Chief Minister of Orissa case on 23 September 1070.

Thus, it is clear that a Chief Minister of Orissa R. N. Singhdeo had enquired into allegations against himself by a special commission headed by a former judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice J. R. Mudholkar.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should follow this precedence and subject himself to necessary enquiry by a Judge, instead of CBI, to allay all suspicions about his involvement with the crimes against the country in the scamosphere.

This is, I repeat, more essential for protecting the dignity of the august office he holds.

Reshuffle in Central Cabinet has Significance for Orissa

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

In a system, where the ruling party members compete to exceed each other in loyalty to a particular family, staying in or going out of a cabinet berth does not merit any mention. Yet, the 28 October reshuffle in the central cabinet attracts attention; because it has certain significance for Orissa.

For the last 12 years it is ruled by a particular person – Naveen Patnaik – who heads the ruling party as well as the government. This has given birth to sycophancy in the ruling party. And, sycophancy has gone up to such shocking extent that a senior member of the cabinet, S.N.Patro could pronounce in a public meeting that he feels himself fortunate by having Naveen Patnaik as the “master” and is proud of being his servant (Chakara)!

People of Orissa are severely embarrassed over such shameless sycophancy practiced by the ministers and fellows appearing as leaders of BJD, the party that had managed to get their mandate in 2009.

Before 2009, Naveen was the Chief Minister for two consecutive terms. But, as he was then heading coalition governments partnered by BJP, there were some obstacles to his running the government like an autocrat. When Samir De, for example, was very vociferous in disagreement with him on many occasions in the cabinet meetings, Juel Oram, beyond the cabinet, was a severe critic of the CM’s wrong steps.

But the coalition with the BJP quashed, the third phase of Naveen Raj has become such a phase of unrestrained misrule that even his closest ally Pyari Mohan Mohapatra, the man who had caused quashing of the coalition, has come out openly against him. Evolution of Jan Morcha is indicative of how people of Orissa are eager to get rid of this government.

Congress begins rescue operation

This eagerness was marked in massive participation of the people in the ‘Occupy Assembly’ rally of the Congress on September 6. This rally revived organizational morality of the Congress to the chilling chagrin of Naveen, who, since May 29 internecine revolt in BJD, is in a state of nervousness.

But, like in all previous critical junctures, the Congress high command has commenced its operation for his rescue with the reshuffle in the central cabinet.

Congress MPs from Orissa are quite competent and experienced and unlike Salman Khursid, they are non-controversial.

Ram Chandra Khuntia is a renowned labor leader and a polished person. Bhakta Charan Das is a former union minister with a much unblemished career. Hemanand Biswal is a former chief minister with enough experience in administration. Any or all of them could have become better than many the Prime Minister has taken in as ministers. The lone minister from Orissa – Srikant Jena – has earned the distinction of being a non-controversial and capable minister in Singh’s council. He has distinguished marks as a central cabinet minister prior to joining Singh as a Minister of State. And, in his present position, he has not done any wrong to be denied of elevation to cabinet rank.

Why then Singh has not taken any of them into his cabinet when he knows and has declared that this is the last reshuffle before the next election? This is because; the Congress High Command wants a message to be delivered to the people of Orissa that none of Congress leaders of the province is suitable for ministerial positions. For Naveen’s benefit, such a message was essential.

Had Orissa got its legitimate share in the central cabinet, the Congress in the province, which was just waking up, could have got the much needed impetus to offer the people an alternative. But, that would have troubled Naveen Patnaik, the paragon of pro-globalization intentions that match with that of the Prime Minister. So, no new challenger to Naveen’s position was to be promoted through the reshuffle.

History of Congress sabotaging Congress in Orissa

Sabotaging the provincial Congress unit by the Congress High Command to ensure continuance of Naveen Patnaik as Chief Minister is not new.

Replacement of Jayadev Jena with K.P.Singhdeo as PCC President just before the 2009 general election is an instance.

Singhdeo is the son of the ill-famed king of Dhenkanal, Shankar Pratap, under whose tyranny the youngest martyr of India Baji Raut had lost his life.

Though a Marxist like Veer (The Brave) Baishnab Pattanayak was leading the revolution, it is the Congress under the banner of which the people of Dhenkanal had compelled the tyrant king to abdicate his throne. So, replacement of Jena with the son of the same Dhenkanal king was the worst shock the Congress rank and file in Orissa had to absorb before facing the voters. It could not, exactly as calculated by the Congress high command.

Jena, initially not considered in Orissa as the correct choice to head the PCC, had, with tremendous perseverance and dedication to his responsibility, boosted up the morality of Congress rank and file and ushered in a remarkable team spirit, which was promising enough to net in electoral success. Therefore, he had to go, under circumstances created by super-sycophants of the Congress high command, for whom continuance of Naveen Patnaik as Orissa’s Chief Minister was more necessary in the cause of plutocracy propounded by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

With Singhdeo at the helm of affairs, as calculated, the Congress in Orissa was too demoralized to gain popular support.

Singhdeo’s appointment as PCC chief just before the election was a great boon to Naveen Patnaik.

Similar boon was also granted to him by the Congress high command when Naveen was seeking mandate for the second time. Dig Vijay Singh was appointed to boss over electioneering in Orissa. Politicians dismissed by Naveen from his cabinet and BJD on corruption charges were given party tickets. Congress was rejected even when people were crying for relief from Naveen’s misrule.

Omission of Orissa’s distinguished MPs from inclusion in the cabinet and denial of elevation to Orissa’s lone member in the council of ministers to cabinet rank makes us convinced that the Congress High Command does not want the Congress in Orissa to come to a challenging position against the BJD supremo.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) while supporting the Left attempt in Rajyasabha to expose how Man Mohan Singh government is guilty of treachery against the country in the matter of nuke deal with USA has summed up the alert national reaction in saying that for friendship with Bush, Prime Minister Singh has sabotaged India. To quote BSP, “Bush sey yaari hai, desh sey gaddari hai”.

In these pages there are deep discussions on how the nuke deal was contrived by USA to provide a “bonanza” to the traders of that country and how in the words of their policy makers, it was entirely in interest of USA. Even the fact sheet presented by US administration after signing of the deal says that the deal will lead to increased trade and create new jobs and investment opportunities for U.S. companies. So, the deal is basically in interest of USA.

Prime Minister Singh and colleagues in the central cabinet have told us blatant lies that the deal is in India’s interest. When according to important American Senators the deal is “so much in interest of USA” that it would bring a bonanza for US trade and commerce, it should have been proper to know exactly how much in proportion to USA interest Indian interest is to be served by the deal; but Prime Minister Singh did not dare to place the reality before the country.

On the other hand, as orissamatters.com exposed, it was a must for the Indian Parliament to approve the text of the Hyde Act as well as of the 123 agreement before the deal was signed. Singh is guilty of hiding this stipulation from the Parliament as well as from the nation.

Even though the deal is “so much in interest of USA”, the US Senate on October 2 adopted it with 13 members voting against it irrespective of party affiliations. Earlier on Sept 28 it was adopted in the House of Representatives with 117 members voting against it. Remarkable is, when 120 Democrats voted for the Bill, 107 Democrats voted against. Of the Republicans, 10 had voted against.

Thus, there was free voting on the acceptability of the deal in the US House. But, Prime Minister Singh played fraud on the peoples of India and never allowed voting on the deal in the Parliament. He was sure, the Indian Parliament would never have approved the deal and therefore, all nasty tricks were used to avoid a voting in the Parliament on the nuke deal. And, the way the so-called confidence vote on his government was organized is to stay forever the darkest spot on Indian democracy.

There is no wrong therefore in saying that Prime Minister Singh has, for friendship with Bush, betrayed India.



Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

In a principled battle against pushing India into the hegemony of USA under the cover of the controversial 123 Agreement, the Left parties have succeeded in stymieing the nuclear deal, which, according to Senator Joe Lieberman “is so clearly in the interests of the United States” and in estimation of Reuters, is a “bonanza for U.S. Firms”; but according to Prme Minister of India, Dr. Man Mohan Singh is “signed, sealed and is non-negotiable”.

That the Indian National Congress has agreed with the Left that the Agreement should be reviewed and vetted by a joint committee is enough indication of the fact that good sense prevailing the Congress has refused to accept the Prime Minister’s version that the nuke deal with USA has been “signed, sealed and is non-negotiable”. It has also shown that it has distanced itself from the Prime Minister’s assertions that it is “not possible to renegotiate the deal” and the Left may “do whatever they want to do, if they want to withdraw support, so be it”.

After tormenting the entire country and using electronic media to pop up stage-managed ‘opinion polls’ speculating more resolute victory for Congress and defeat for the denigrators of the nuke deal, the Left and the BJP in the elections if withdrawal of support by the Left results in resignation of the Government necessitating a mid-term poll, Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh has now agreed to act according to the “finding” of the joint party committee. Accordingly a statement has been issued yesterday by the Central Government that says, “The operationalisation of the nuclear deal will take into account the committee’s findings”.

So, it is a victory for the left. And the Left deserves gratitude of the nation for having blocked a fraud that was all set to be played on our people.

But this victory is not the victory of the people of India. Victory of our people lies in the victory of our Parliament. We have a Prime Minister that denies this victory to our Parliament. In the entire matter of nuclear deal, he has left our Parliament with only one option; i.e. to acquiesce into the agreement he has “signed and sealed”. In other words, he wants our Parliament to be a passive partner in running of our democracy in autocratic manners. So, even if the deal fetches support of the Left after being vetted by the joint committee, the Parliament would stand defeated if it will not be allowed to decide the fate of the said deal through votes.

It would be a blatant wrong to accept that executive powers vested in a Government grant it a carte blanche to make the Parliament a passive witness to its acts. Democracy entails that the Government must be answerable to Parliament. If any deal entered to upon by the Government under executive powers remains above controlling powers of the Parliament, democracy would be defeated. So, in the instant case, the Parliament should first disapprove the Prime Minister’s assertions that the nuke deal is “signed, sealed and is non-negotiable”. This assertion reveals a disposition that is anti-democracy in nature and it would be a defeat of our Parliament if this statement of the Prime Minister is not condemned.

Will the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, who is exploiting the situation to convince USA that neither he nor his party appreciate anti-Americanism, now act as the conscience-keeper of this country – as a Leader of Opposition in a democracy is supposed to be – and goad the issue into a deliberation on answerability of the Government to the Parliament, so that a principled decision of the House could be arrived at to ensure that no decision having global impact on future generations of India, as is the present nuclear deal, could be taken by any Government without prior approval of the Parliament?

If such a decision could be taken, that would be the victory of our people, our Parliament.

Otherwise, despite the instant Left victory, we, as a democracy, will stand defeated.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

In the eve of Independence Day, a friend of mine, Prof. Mrinal Chatterjee, has sent me a panicle of data, one of which is, “Tera India Mahan, Mera Bharat Pareshan” that he has “seen scrawled at the back of a truck”. He has roughly translated it as “Your India is great, but my Bharat is in trouble”.

Dear Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh, while unfurling the National Flag on the day of our independence, can you understand, what does this data cry to communicate?

It cascades down from the trolley of a truck probably owned by the working-for-survival driver himself; because it can never belong to “Your India” group.

Today being the Independence Day, and accidentally you being the Prime Minister, please try, if you can, to understand what does it convey. It conveys the feeling of the tortured citizens of this betrayed Country in its entirety.

Elected by our people the Congress has imposed you on us as our Prime Minister. And, accepted by our people as Prime Minister, you have managed the Country with such precision that it has been clearly cut into two parts in commons’ perception: “Your Great India” and “My Troubled Bharat”. The partition that religious fanatics had precipitated in 1947 was geographical; the partition you have precipitated is mental.

Try to understand in what sobs one must have been drowned while groping about words to coin the cry: “Tera India Mahan, mera Bharat Pareshan”.

You are our Prime Minister. Don’t make Prime Minister of India a stooge of US of America.

You have bound us with US of America in a nuclear deal without approval of our Parliament and you reiterate, the agreement “is signed, sealed and non-negotiable”. Who are you, elected indirectly for a limited period, to sign, behind back of our people, a deal, that you say, is “non negotiable” for all time to come? Have you shown the minimum curtsey befitting a representative to make us people of this Country, your Masters, know, what agreement you were to sign with a foreign Country, before making it “signed, sealed and non negotiable”? Who is your Masters: we Indians or those Americans? You must explain your position.

You could not have been the Prime Minister had the Communists not given you their support. Had you not been the Prime Minister, could you have signed the “non-negotiable” nuclear deal with the USA? When you owe your existence in the Prime Minister post to the Communists, was it not your duty to show them details of the deal before signing the agreement? Now when they raise their objection, you use mass media to challenge them “to do whatever they want to do” and assert, “if they want to withdraw support, so be it”! Is it becoming of a Prime Minister of India, Mr. Singh? Is it political curtsey?

A day ago, in the Lok Sabha, you have made specific mention on your speech of 17th August 2006 in the Rajya Sabha to show us how transparently you have placed before the Parliament details of the deal. I studied your speech. You have not stated anywhere that you have placed before the Parliament the draft of the agreement for the people to see how far was it acceptable. Sitaram Yechury, frontbencher of Communist bloc on whose support you thrive in power, had wanted to know, “whether it is a nuclear deal or a deal concerning civilian nuclear cooperation”. He would never have posed this question had the text of the draft agreement been placed before the House.

Mark his speech. He says, after this aspect is known, the question as to “whether we are being treated as a nuclear weapon State or not being treated as a nuclear weapon State” would arise.

“Do we have the same rights and benefits as the Prime Minister has said?” he wondered and proceeded to say, “if this whole issue is about civilian nuclear cooperation and if it is meant to augment India’s nuclear energy, then I would actually like to know whether any study has been done on the basis of which you are moving towards this option of augmenting India’s nuclear energy. Has the Atomic Energy Commission ever discussed this entire issue?

“The Atomic Energy Commission is also under the Prime Minister. At least, the country does not know and the Parliament does not know what their opinion on this entire nuclear deal is and whether such augmentation is feasible or possible”.

Dear Prime Minister, it is clear from the above that you had not placed the text of the draft agreement before the Parliament for perusal, for analysis, for proper information of the Representatives of the people.

You have stated that the deal will benefit India. This statement of yours has made a few Americans oppose the deal in USA. But making the position clear, Senator Joe Lieberman, known for his proximity to President Bush, has said: “There will be debate, there will be some dissent. In the end, it will be accepted and endorsed by strong majority in both houses of Congress because it is so clearly in the interests of the United States”. (Reuters, August 14, 2007)

So in USA voice, the Agreement you have signed “is so clearly in the interests of United States”.

Why have you done this Mr. Prime Minister? Why are you asking us to accept that the deal is in our interest when it “is so clearly in the interest of United States”?

At least, at this stage, tell us, who initiated this deal? You in your Cabinet or the United States? Please place the documents before the public so that we can know as to whether or not you are influenced by USA to sign and seal the “non-negotiable” agreement of the deal.

“Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and the Nuclear Fuel Bank both have serious shortcomings. GNEP requires spent-fuel reprocessing and the use of fast breeder reactors. Both have been shown to be commercial disasters. In addition, FBRs have proved to be very unreliable, uneconomical, and unsafe” concludes Oxford Research Group, under a caption “Too hot to handle?”

Please go deep into this report.

According to you, “primary motivation for India’s nuclear programme was the production of energy, defense came much later”. And, you have said, “Prudence demands that we must widen our energy options”. Though you have admitted that nuclear energy may not provide the final answer, to you, “all development is about widening human choices. And, when it comes to energy security, widening our choices means that we should be able to make effective use of nuclear power”. You are not alone in peddling such a plea. Every country that accepts USA hegemony has been marshalling pleas similar to yours.

In reacting to such a plea, the ORG has warned the British Government, “If a decision to go with nuclear power is taken then the UK will implement a flawed and dangerously counter-productive energy policy – one from which the blowback may be a lot worse than higher heating bills”.

So, Mr. Prime Minister, please think afresh.

“When future generations look back, they will come to acknowledge the significance of this historic deal”, you have told the House yesterday.

You had told the same thing when, as finance minister under Narasimha Rao, you had subjected us to USA propelled GATT in order to render our National Resolution to make India a Socialist Republic inconsequential. You had done that in a way of subterfuge because Narasimha Rao government was not in a position to obliterate this Resolution from the Preamble of the Constitution through an amendment. And, India’s resolve to become a Socialist Republic was not suitable to USA. This subterfuge you have branded as an act of economic reform!

As Prime Minister you have asserted that India has been shining because of the economic reform you had brought in and as then you had said, you say now that “future generations will acknowledge the significance of this historic deal”.

I do not know what the future generations shall say; but to my generation, your so-called reform has divided us so brutally that majority is unable to stop saying, “Tera India Mahan, Mera Bharat Pareshan”.

Take note Mr. Prime Minister, this divide is your contribution.

While unfurling the National Flag, please think of correcting the wrong you have committed. Allow vote on the Nuke Agreement. Allow majority opinion to prevail. Do not ask the Parliament to approve “signed, sealed and non-negotiable” an Agreement with USA. That would be sheer insubordination to Parliament. No proud citizen of this Country would cherish it.

You may gain back the support of the Communists and succeed in making your position solid as you assert. But note, people have started looking at you askance and be sure, if you succeed in obtaining post-facto approval of the Agreement with USA that you have “signed” and made “sealed and non-negotiable”, that shall never help you gain back people’s confidence.

So be honest in real sense. Place everything before the people, as according to the American Senator cited supra, the Agreement “is so clearly in the interests of the United States”.

Ask the people for their fully informed opinion on the deal and act accordingly.

Don’t impose anything, which is admittedly “clearly in the interests of the United States” on our people by shouting that it in our interest. Act as our Prime Minister; do not act as a promoter of American interest.

Correct yourself in such a way that nobody will like to say, “Tera India Mahan, Mera Bharat Pareshan”.