Should the subsidy on Haj be withdrawn? Yes

Check out: Video: Haj Pilgrims vs Amarnath Pilgrims & Taxing Hindus for Haj subsidy

Should the subsidy on Haj be withdrawn? Yes
9 Sep 2006, 2323 hrs IST

B N Shukla, Petitioner against haj subsidy

Indeed, the subsidy should be withdrawn. First, because it’s against constitutional norms and second because it’s increasing the gap between the Muslims and people of other faith. Articles 14, 15 and 17 of the Constitution provide equal status to all Indians.

These articles also restrict the government from giving benefits to a particular faith at the cost of others. But every year, the government spends over Rs 300 crore on over one lakh Hajis. Special flights are run. AC Haj houses have been built across the country.

They are provided free food and lodging during their trip. However, no such subsidy is given to others. A Hindu do-es not get a subsidy to visit Amarnath or Mansarovar. Sik-hs don’t get special assistance to visit Nankana Sahib.

Buddhists get no help for visiting Sarnath and Christians, too, do not get anything to visit Ro-me. Then why only Muslims? The reason: all the political parties believe in vote bank politics. Critics may say special arrangements are made by the government for Kumbh Mela, Amarnath yatra etc.

But the fact is, the government only looks after the administrative arrangements, which it does for all festivals irrespective of religion. It’s the duty of the government to maintain law and order. Every visitor to Kumbh Mela has to buy a ticket. The free kitchens are run privately.

Special trains and buses are run for Kumbh Mela, but people have to buy tickets for travelling. It’s not subsidised. Even Islamic countries do not give subsidies for Haj.

There would have been no issue if similar subsidies were given to non-Muslims, including those whose religious plac-es are situated outside India. In fact, I’m not in favour of any subsidy for pilgrimage to anybody because it puts a huge pressure on the exchequer.

Some may argue that the Haj subsidy is actually a discount, as the government-owned airlines get bulk business. Then why is such a discount not given to others who travel in large numbers during their pilgrimage season? Haj subsidy is only for Muslim appeasement.

Politicians are out to appease them. It’s evident from the way they organise iftar parties. Ironically, no one is ever seen hosting lunches for little girls during Navratri.

My writ petition was filed in ’95, when two of my friends were killed in a landslide on their way to Mansarovar. Th-at’s when I realised that the go-vernment makes no arrangements for Hindu pilgrims.

It was pending before the HC for 11 years. The government never replied to the notices. Now that a interim order has been issued, there is a flutter.

As told to Ashish Tripathi

Indian Muslims using Karipur airport to smuggle weapons

Kerala, Saturday, Jan 21, 2006
Smuggling of weapons rampant in Malabar

Karipur airport is now a conduit for smuggled weapons, writes Biju Govind

The seizure of weaponry in an unaccompanied baggage from the Karipur airport last week reveals that smuggling of weapons into North Kerala has been going on through this route for a long time.

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) had seized a huge carton containing parts of various types of guns and other materials, including a part of .22 rifle, 12 magazines, sets of trigger lockers, two rifle rest and pellets. Many of these packets have labels of a company in the United States.

Intelligence officials say that the baggage was lying at the cargo section of the airport for over a month. Sleuths have also arrested a person hailing from Palakkad in connection with the case. A court in Kochi dealing with these cases has remanded him to judicial custody at the Viyyur Central Jail in Thrissur district.

Officials have not been able to find out for whom the weapons had been brought to the State. One of the versions given by the accused during police interrogations is that weapons had good demand and would fetch handsome profits.

Senior officials of the Central agencies say that one thing is clear — Karipur airport has become a transit point for smuggling weapons into North Kerala. Besides, there is a demand for weapons in the State. Since rifles and semi-automatic sub-machine guns are available in the open market in many countries, these can easily be dispatched to India via ports and airports, they point out.

The Central Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) have stepped up their surveillance after the DRI officials seized the weapons at the Karipur airport.

Some of the cargos transporting agencies have also been put under the scanner for the purpose. Reports of intelligence officials suggest that weapons have been smuggled through the airport under the cover of bringing toys from foreign countries. Electronic sensors and guns are being brought from Mumbai.

Most cargo consignments arrive at the airport as unaccompanied baggage and these are usually claimed only after a few weeks. The police suspect cargo delivery agencies are behind the operation of smuggling out the unaccompanied baggage from inside the airport.

Earlier, intelligence officials had warned about these activities. But Customs officials seemed to have turned a deaf ear to the warnings. Doubts have also been raised against them for being hand in glove with the smugglers.

Meanwhile, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officials from its Chennai and Kochi offices are still carrying out raids at the airport.

Earlier, the State’s intelligence wing and the IB had apprised the CBI about the nefarious dealings taking place at the airport.

In spite of the rampant smuggling of weapons to North Kerala, the police department seemed to sitting idle over the investigations of several cases. Police personnel have not bothered to investigate the procurement of arms by organisations even after the seizure of weapons at Karipur airport.

The police teams constituted to nab the culprits in connection with the seizure of 45 gelignite sticks at the cloakroom of the State-owned Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) bus station have not made any headway in the investigations in the case. The Texgel 80 batch of the gelignite sticks had been manufactured at the Industries Explosives Limited at Kadpadi in Tamil Nadu.

A sub-agent of explosives, hailing from Malappuram, was arrested for stockpiling these banned explosives. Frequent raids are being conducted at granite quarry sites and residences of sub-agents in Malappuram and Kozhikode districts.

But the police are still clueless about the culprit who had kept the gelignite sticks at the cloakroom.

Jamia Encounter affidavit: Cops submit detailed account to court

Cops to court: men we killed were militants
Krishnadas Rajagopal,  Oct 16, 2008

New Delhi, October 15 : Chief of Special Cell Karnal Singh gives court a detailed account of the Sept encounter
Delhi Police’s first sworn affidavit on the September 19 encounter — a minute-by-minute account of that morning which will provide grist to the official chargesheet later — was submitted before the High Court on Wednesday.

The affidavit by Joint Commissioner Karnal Singh said the story of L-18, Batla House, started with a knock on the front door of flat 108. It was six days after the serial blasts in Delhi. At the door was Special Cell Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma and his team.

They were there to conduct a raid — an operation that germinated from a specific tip-off on September 19 that one Atif alias Bashir, resident of Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh was “presently residing at Batla House, Jamia Nagar, Delhi”. He was “involved in the serial blasts”, the affidavit said.

“The team knocked at the main door of the flat and disclosed its identity but the occupants did not respond,” Karnal Singh mentioned in his statement. The team found the door bolted from inside. “Thereafter the team tried the other door of the flat and found it unbolted. The team members entered the flat through the side door to apprehend the suspects,” narrated Singh in his statement before a Bench of Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar.
At this juncture, Singh specified the team had only meant to “apprehend” the “occupants of the flat”. But “the occupants opened fire to evade arrest. The team members also fired in self-defence… “ Singh said.

Singh added that Sharma and Head Constable Balwant Singh were injured in the “cross-firing”. The affidavit then goes on to address the “occupants/inmates” of the flat as “militants”.

“Two other militants — Junaid alias Ariz and Shahzad Ahmed alias Pappu — escaped from the flat by firing on the police,” Singh said. By then, Atif alias Bashir, had “sustained bullet injuries” and was removed along with another, Sajid, to a hospital.

Mohammed Saif from Azamgarh and the only one apprehended that day spilled out the names of his friends to the police, the affidavit stated. Singh records the recovery of an AK-series rifle with two magazines containing 30 live rounds each “from the far end right side room of the flat”. Two pistols of .30 calibre were “found lying near the injured militants”.

Affidavit on Jamia encounter
Express News Service,  Posted: Oct 16, 2008

The FIR accuses the “militants” of offences under Sections 186 (obstructing the duty of a public servant), 307 (attempt to murder), 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter a public servant from his duty), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from his duty) and Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC. The suspected terrorists have also been accused under Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. While Section 186 attracts a punishment of imprisonment up to three months or a maximum fine of Rs 500, Sections 332, 353 attract three and two years of imprisonment, respectively. Section 307 serves the maximum deterrent of imprisonment of 10 years to life. If found guilty under all the Sections, the accused would face punishment under all the Sections concurrently.

Calls operation a ‘raid’
According to the affidavit, the Special Cell team had come to L-18 in search of Atif alias Bashir. Intelligence inputs, informers and technical surveillance/ analysis had earlier “revealed” his involvement in the serial blasts. The affidavit says the intention of the police was to “raid” the flat, matters turned ugly when the “occupants” fired at them, forcing them to reciprocate in “self-defence”.

Inspector Sharma’s role
Contrary to earlier reports, the affidavit does not mention a recce. Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma and his team were right at the main door of flat number 108, L-18, Batla House, from the start of the “raid”. The rest were covering from the ground floor. When a knock and a push on the front door, bolted from inside, did not elicit any response, the team gained entry through an “unbolted side door”. The firing started immediately. While Sharma and Balwant Singh were caught in the “cross-fire”, two of the “militants” escaped “by firing at the police party”. There is no mention in the affidavit about the duo’s exit route and the waiting posse on the ground floor.

‘Occupants’ or ‘militants’?
Paragraph three of the affidavit uses several terms to identify the men inside L-18. At the point when the police knock on the flat door, the men are described as “occupants of the flat”. The next sentence catapults their identity to “suspects” who shot at the police to “evade arrest”. In the following sentence, the men are back to being “inmates of the flat”. From the sentence that describes the wounds of Sharma, the affidavit remains firm on the description of the “occupants” as “militants”.