- 6 weeks ago
The big talking point of this episode of News Today is the political controversy surrounding the opposition's Vice Presidential candidate, Justice Sudarshan Reddy.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening viewers, you're watching News Today at 9pm. I'm Preeti Chaudhary, our big talking point this evening.
00:08Amit Shah questions Justice Reddy, who is the vice presidential candidate for the opposition.
00:15He questions the vice presidential candidate's credentials, especially when it came down to the verdict that he gave on Salwa Judu.
00:22Also, Telangana Chief Minister Rebant Reddy will be on the show with us, answering back to what the Home Minister said.
00:32And two counts. One, on Salwa Judu and the pick of the opposition of Justice Reddy as their vice presidential candidate.
00:39And of course, number two, the contentious criminal unit our bill.
00:43So he is our newsmaker of the day, joining us at about 9.30pm.
00:47But first up, allow me to take you through the headlines.
00:52Opposition SLAM's vice presidential pick, Justice Sudarshan Reddy, says outlawing state-backed anti-Naxalite militia movement, Salwa Judu, shows his reality.
01:06Claims Reddy snatched self-defense from tribunes.
01:09Prime Minister Modi's strong message as Trump's 50% tariff looms, says will protect small farmers, cattle rearers and businesses against global financial policy made of economic selfishness.
01:30Vipen Bhati objected to Nikki Reels promoting her beauty parlor, victims-in-law sent to judicial custody.
01:48BJP shares Congress poll data to take on Rahul Gandhi's vote-chori chance as Congress vote share in 2024, highest in last 35 years.
01:57Inside details of Delhi Chief Minister Assault Probe, Rekha Gupta's attacker plan to use knife scoped-out Supreme Courts as sources.
02:14Kolkata Police files charge sheet in RG Cor vandalism during anti-rape protests.
02:20Several leaders from left, including CPIM, named in charge sheet.
02:27Rajasthan government orders two-day ban on non-vegetarian and egg shops, slaughterhouses to remain shut across state for two religious festivals.
02:40Supreme Court orders five comedians, including Samai Reina, to apologize for mocking disabled persons, says right to dignity trumps free speech.
02:48Astronaut Shudhanshul Shukla gets hero's welcome in Lucknow, meets UP Chief Minister Yogi, announces state will launch a scholarship in Shipsnail.
03:03All right, viewers, today the Home Minister, in his latest interview, took a dig at the Opposition Alliance's Vice Presidential Candidate, Justice Sugarshan Reddy.
03:22He hit out at the former Supreme Court judge, saying that the verdict by the bench headed by him banned Sulwajudum, which hurt the fight against Maoism.
03:32Listen in.
03:32The race for the vice-president polls is heating up.
03:42Home Minister Amit Shah has launched a sharp attack on the opposition's candidate, Justice Sudarshan Reddy.
03:50Shah targeted the former Supreme Court judge over the 2011 verdict that outlawed Sulwajudum, a citizens' group armed by the Chhattisgarh government to take on Maoists.
04:02The bench that delivered the verdict included Sudarshan Reddy.
04:08According to Shah, banning Salwa Judum set back the fight against Maoists by many years.
04:36He claimed that Maoist terror could have been resolved by 2020 if not for this judgement.
04:46Salwa Judum was a group of civilians formed in 2005 in Chhattisgarh to counter the Naksalite insurgency.
04:53It was initially presented as a local resistance movement, operating as an auxiliary force alongside the state police.
05:01The group consisted mainly of tribal youths recruited as special police officers.
05:06They were armed and trained with support from the Chhattisgarh government.
05:11Later, there were allegations that civilians were being illegally armed and they were responsible for human rights violations.
05:20In 2001, the two judge bench of Justice Sudarshan Reddy and Justice SS Nijjar, in its verdict on a PIL, held that Salwa Judum was illegal and unconstitutional.
05:34The court ordered the disbanding of Salwa Judum.
05:37The use of tribal youth as special police officers in anti-Naksal operations was banned.
05:43The court also directed the withdrawal of all arms and ammunition from these SPOs.
05:49Further, the Supreme Court called for investigations into charges of human rights violations linked to the group.
05:56The court emphasized that the state cannot arm civilians for vigilant justice.
06:03Opposition's vice-president candidate Sudarshan Reddy played down Amit Shah's charge.
06:11We don't disturb this judgment.
06:14But we don't do anything else from it.
06:17So it's done.
06:19It's done.
06:20It's done.
06:21It's done.
06:22It's done.
06:23And what's the Supreme Court judgment of Naksalwadi?
06:28I understand.
06:29They are building narrative.
06:31And they have the right to build narrative.
06:34Meanwhile, 18 former judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts have issued a statement describing Shah's remarks as unfortunate.
06:46The former judges said the 2011 verdict nowhere supports either expressly or by implication Naksalism or its ideology.
06:56Their statement added that prejudicial misinterpretation of a judgment of the Supreme Court by a high political functionary
07:03is likely to have a chilling effect on the judges of the Supreme Court and shake the independence of the judiciary.
07:10The letter ends by saying that it would be wise to refrain from name-calling during the VP election campaign.
07:20While the vice-president election is expected to be a symbolic one,
07:24as the NDA has adequate numbers on its side, the campaign has taken a new turn with the Home Minister's accusations.
07:32With Piyush Mishra, Bureau Report, India Today.
07:39Alright, so the questions that we are posing before we go into our debate this evening.
07:43Let's take all these questions to our panelists this evening joining me, Mr. Hitesh Jain, member 23rd Law Commission of India.
07:48Sanjay Hager, Senior Advocate and Supreme Court.
07:55I want to immediately cut across first to Mr. Hitesh Jain.
08:02Mr. Hitesh Jain, Mr. Hitesh Jain, the fact is today there are many former Supreme Court judges who signed a copy,
08:13which clearly seems to suggest that, you know, and I'll just quote the text which has been signed by many former Supreme Court judges.
08:20The statement of the Union Minister, Mr. Ramit Shab, publicly misinterpreting the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Salwa Judoom case is unfortunate.
08:35The judgment nowhere supported or expressed support for Naxalism or its ideology.
08:38While the campaign of the Office of the Vice President of India may be ideological, it can be conducted civilly and with dignity.
08:42Criticizing the so-called ideology of either candidates should be issued.
08:49Prejudicial misinterpretation of a judgment of the Supreme Court by a high political functionary is likely to have a result of the Supreme Court in the Salwa Judoom case.
08:57The judgment nowhere supported or expressed support for Naxalism or its ideology.
09:02While the campaign of the Office of the Vice President of India may be ideological, it can be conducted civilly and with dignity.
09:07Criticizing the so-called ideology of either candidates should be issued.
09:11is likely to have a chilling effect, Hitesh Jain.
09:14These are very strong words, worded by nobody else but by former judges of the top court of the country, the Supreme Court.
09:23Well, I am not surprised by the statement issued by the former judges because they have been a part of many of the statements that have come in the last five years.
09:34Unfortunately, what is worrisome is that when they speak about judicial independence, chilling effects,
09:40judicial independence is not weakened by any political debate.
09:45It is weakened when the former judges of the court, they are behaving as a political activist.
09:51Well, if you will look at the statement of Justice Reddy, also I am glad he said that, you know, they are trying to, Mr. Amitsha is trying to build the narrative, so be it, and I am ready to face.
10:02But unfortunately, I mean, the former judges have, I think, taken too far.
10:08This is a political campaign, there is an election, and once you are contesting the election, you must have broad shoulders and you should be ready to face the criticism.
10:17Secondly, as far as the judgment is concerned, this is not the first judgment which has been criticized.
10:22The same activists have criticized the judgments of the Supreme Court, whether it is Ram Mandir or whether it is 370, they have criticized in the past.
10:30So, does that mean to say that when you are criticizing the judgment of the Supreme Court, or when the judge is sitting on the bench and you are criticizing the judgment, it will have chilling effect.
10:38But Mr. Judd, criticizing, criticizing the judgment is one thing, would you reckon criticizing the judgment is one thing, or attacking a judge for a particular ideology or a perceived ideology is another?
10:51Well, I don't think there was any attack on the judge personally, it was attack on the Salwa Judom, and the statement of Home Minister was very clear, that had that judgment would not have been there, Naksalism was on its last legs, and there would not have been any Naksalism.
11:06And according to me, and one more thing, Preeti, he is now a political candidate.
11:11He is no longer a retired, he is no longer a sitting judge.
11:15And once you have entered, and I want to make one more thing, I want to remind these judges, the same lot of people who have written the letter, where were they when Justice Guga's judgment were criticized when he became a Rajya Sabha MP?
11:27Where were they when Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyayi became the judgment of the, when he became the MP elected by the citizens of West Bengal?
11:34They were ready to criticize, oh, you were passing the judgment that was facing the judgment, government and all?
11:39Is that not, I mean, is that not a hypocrisy?
11:42I mean, like idea is that I can understand if fairly you are making a criticism.
11:47And by that logic, the logic they are giving is that you should not criticize the judgments of the court, it will have a chilling effect.
11:54By that logic, if a person is sitting on the bench, then so long as the judge is on the bench, one should not criticize the judgment, it will have the chilling effect.
12:03So, someone should say, I mean, like, are we not for a free speech, fair criticism, what about that?
12:09Okay, I'm gonna, you know, what I'm gonna do is, I'm gonna circle back to you.
12:12And the question that I will ask you is, in your legal opinion, because one, if you look at the finer points of the judgment way back in 2011,
12:19on what was challenged was the legality of Salwa Jadoom and what the judgment was.
12:25But before that, I want to bring in Sanjay Hegre, senior advocate, Supreme Court.
12:29Sanjay Hegre, you know, if it gets too hot in the kitchen, you should leave.
12:34The fact is, ultimately, this comes in the realms of politics.
12:37He's a candidate of the opposition parties, and it's par for the course.
12:44Well, the point is that when you get into politics, you can expect criticism of various things.
12:54But politics also doesn't give you a license to say anything.
13:02The normal law is that you can attack a judgment, but you cannot attack the judge personally.
13:09Here, the attack on the judgment is that the judgment promotes Naxalism.
13:16That we would have got rid of the Naxals, but for this judgment.
13:21That is crossing a line.
13:23Now, the other thing I heard Mr. Jain say was that, look, he's no more a judge.
13:33He's a politician.
13:36What is the impact when judgments of the court are criticized as having effects by a senior constitutional functionary?
13:48A senior minister, it sends a message that if your judgment is not liked, no matter how many years after your retirement, we will still come after you or we will still attribute motives to you.
14:05That is the chilling effect that the statement speaks of.
14:10Just to take you back into history, President Eisenhower, for instance, did not like the desegregation judgment where white kids and African-American kids had to go to the same school.
14:25But he said once it's a judgment of the Supreme Court and I am president, I have to honor it.
14:32All right.
14:33But Mr. Higre, I'll go back to Mr. Jain.
14:35But, you know, on what is being contended that the Home Minister never said that he was trying to promote the Maoist ideology or Naxalism.
14:42He, in hindsight, says that particular judgment at that point of time, if had not disbanded the Salwa Judum, could have led to the end of Naxalism much earlier than now.
14:55I think he made a statement…
14:57No, no.
14:58Can I get Mr. Higre to respond to it?
14:59I'll come to you, Mr. Jain.
15:00Just a minute.
15:01Go ahead, Mr. Higre.
15:02See, these are the ifs and buts.
15:05And why was it necessary for the Home Minister to make it at this particular stage when the author of the judgment was contesting for political office?
15:15Justice Reddy also gave the judgment on black money, for instance.
15:19And on the black money thing, the Home Minister and his party went to town promising Acche Din and telling people that lots of money would come into their bank accounts.
15:30Now, you cannot take a judge's one judgment out of context just because he is contending for political office against your preferred candidate.
15:44Okay.
15:45I want to bring in Mr. Jain into this conversation because if you're going to hark back to history and if one is going to read that the Home Minister tried to misconstrue something, in effect,
15:57to say that Justice Reddy, somewhere down the line, weakened India's fight against Naxalism.
16:03Mr. Jain, the case of Nandini Sundar versus State of Chhattisgarh, 2011.
16:07It dealt only and purely, and correct me if I'm wrong, sir, with the legality of the Salwa Judum, which at that point of time was a state-sponsored militia designed primarily to counter Naxalite insurgency.
16:20The petitioner then, and that's important, had challenged only the legality of the Salwa Judum, an anti-Naxalite militia there.
16:28It was alleged that the militia engaged in unlawful activities such as force displacement, torture, and killings.
16:35And the movement violated fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution.
16:41The Supreme Court bench, it wasn't Justice Reddy alone, had ruled, declaring Salwa Judum unconstitutional, reaffirming that the state cannot sanction extrajudicial violence and must respect the rule of law.
16:56When you look at that ruling, Mr. Jain, as an astute lawyer like yourself, would you reckon that this was actually a good ruling in that time?
17:05Well, Priti, we are not debating today whether Salwa Judum is a good ruling or a bad ruling.
17:11What we are debating today is few former judges of the court have turned up as a political activist and they are saying,
17:18Oh, heaven will fall if you will criticize when a person has become a...
17:22Not really, sir. We are also debating...
17:25Fair point. Mr. Jain, we are also...
17:27You cannot criticize the judge because he is a candidate because it will have a chilling effect.
17:33Fair point, sir. Fair point, sir. That's one part of the debate.
17:36That's one part of the debate which we addressed...
17:38See, in my view...
17:39Mr. Jain, that's one part of the debate which we addressed earlier on.
17:42There is also a part which clearly, in hindsight, views...
17:47You know, I am not making anything up because it just views that the judgment by justice ready at the time...
17:53Fair point. So, in my respectful opinion, that was a bad judgment because Salwa Judum is a policy and the Supreme Court...
18:02And there is a lot of debate over there as to whether the court should interfere in the matters of policy.
18:07So, that is my view on that judgment. I don't consider this judgment as a correct judgment.
18:10And I agree with Mr. Shah that at that time, it was a thought-after policy and the court should be very careful when they are entering into the domain of the policy.
18:20Yes, they have a right to decide. They can state the law, but to interfere in the policy.
18:26It's like same thing. Tomorrow, suppose there have been delays in the courts.
18:32Tomorrow, we have been talking about...
18:35I mean, I am the member of the Law Commission.
18:37The first Law Commission was dealing with the issues of delay.
18:40The 23rd Law Commission, after 70 years, is also deciding about the issues of delays.
18:45And suppose tomorrow, the politicians will say that we will start delivering the judgment.
18:49Can you enter into the domain of the judiciary?
18:51Can you decide the policy for the judges?
18:53Now, nothing doing. You will decide within three days or 30 days or like this.
18:57So, it is a question of policies. One can have a view.
19:00But I am on the larger issue.
19:02I think the judiciary has a broad shoulders. I think Justice Reddy also has a broad shoulders.
19:08But unfortunately, what I want to point out, all these signatories to the letters, they are compulsive contrarians.
19:15You have seen their track record in five years. They are so picky.
19:19Every six months, they should declare themselves as a political activist and don't call themselves as the former judges of the court.
19:26Okay. I'm going to bring in your counterpart, Mr. Hegre, in this debate.
19:30But at that point of time, that judgment clearly was a conflict of power when it came down to how do you set boundaries of state power?
19:38It's something which is not new when it comes down to the judiciary.
19:42That's all I'm saying. I want to bring in Justice Hegre. Justice Hegre, do you concur with what Mr. Jain said?
19:47I'm not a judge. I'm not a judge.
19:49Mr. Hegre, go ahead.
19:51See, what did the judgment hold?
19:54The judgment said you can't create any Tom, Dick and Harry into a police officer authorized to do police functions, which includes violence on behalf of the state.
20:04What was the Salwa Judum? The Salwa Judum was a set of people who were entirely outside the purview of law, as it were.
20:12They were not appointed regularly and they were given a blank check.
20:17You can't have a vigilante organization doing your police functions. Tomorrow, say some random Sena or some random Dal starts policing, maybe interfaith marriages, for instance. Can you have that?
20:34But Mr. Hegre, this wasn't a random Sena. This was clearly the Chaktisgarh government supported this.
20:40Supporting a Sena, Salwa Judum was a private organization, which was given special...
20:47By tribal, yes, the local tribal, yes.
20:49So, that was why the court struck it down. It is not as a matter of policy. It is as a matter of constitutional law that it was struck down.
21:00Now, nobody ever debated Salwa Judum, rightness, wrongness.
21:05Sixteen other judges have weighed in on that and have said that we are not going to change the judgment.
21:13As recently as... Are you ascribing motives to the entire sixteen judges just because one of them happens to now be candidate?
21:24Okay. I'm going to leave it at that. Right. I appreciate it.
21:28A simple message. Respect judgments. And do not disrespect individual judges for your political motives.
21:37All right. I'm going to just let it rest. I appreciate you heard both sides of that story.
21:42We're going to just leave it at that. But not just that, because you heard what the Home Minister said very clearly.
21:48Now here, what Rewant Reddy says, who is the Chief Minister of Telangana, in an exclusive interview to India Today,
21:54spoke out on Home Minister Ramit Shah's attack on the opposition vice presidential candidate.
21:59He also made his stand clear on the Modi government's bill to sack ministers who spend 30 straight days in jail.
22:06Here's the exclusive interview.
22:14Is Mr. Rewant Reddy now trying to build a line with Chandrubabu Naidu to support your vice presidential candidate,
22:22who is the son of a soil from what you say. I have given an appeal to everyone,
22:33Telugu-speaking community. Telugu-speaking community in even Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Gujarat.
22:41Some of the MPs are there from Telugu-speaking language.
22:44MPs are from different places.
22:46So I have told,
22:47Hindustan in India, most people speak Hindi.
22:51And then Telugu.
22:52So this is an opportunity to get us.
22:56Why don't we unite?
22:58We have to appeal to them.
23:00We have to appeal to them.
23:01Naidu, Pawan Kalyan, Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy,
23:04Chandra Sheikkar Rao,
23:05who is my political opponent,
23:07and M.I.M.
23:08We have to appeal to them.
23:09We have to appeal to them.
23:10We have to appeal to them.
23:11We have to appeal to them.
23:12We have to appeal to them.
23:13We have to appeal to them.
23:14We have to appeal to them.
23:15We have to appeal to them.
23:16I am a responsible and we have to appeal to them.
23:19I am not doing internal politics.
23:24I am not doing internal approach,
23:26or otherways,
23:27backdoor politics.
23:28I am not doing open.
23:29I have to appeal to them.
23:31Did you not take off your phone?
23:32No.
23:33Chandra Babu, Naisuji, you should support them?
23:35It's a moral obligation for everyone.
23:55Telugu speaking community, moral obligation.
24:00It is not political obligation.
24:02He is also not from Congress Party.
24:09India Alliance has proposed him.
24:12He is a legal and judicial constitutional expert.
24:17He has got highest integrity in Telugu speaking states.
24:22So, this is a right person, a faithful person who understands the responsibility,
24:29who tries to protect the responsibility, if they are confident,
24:33then the responsibility of their own.
24:35So, this is why I try to give you a commitment.
24:38Sudarshan Reddy Ji is one of the best candidates.
24:42He can protect our rights.
24:44So, this is why I try to give you a commitment to the responsibility of the government.
24:51So, this is why Sudarshan Reddy is a constitutional expert.
24:54So, this is why I try to give you a commitment to the responsibility of the government.
25:00So, this is why I try to give you a commitment to the government.
25:02Thank you very much.
25:26Yes, this is a strategic political move, this is a moral obligation move.
25:30Who is the question of asking, am I not mentioning anything and anything.
25:35Because, you are the responsibility of asking, if you ask questions as well, you cannot
25:40ask.
25:41You can understand such directly, in the regime can understand such the same ability to
25:46change people, which is not the lowest that you understand.
25:49If you have any decision to change, if you are Tamil or Telugu or someone else, they
25:56So, this is why the people who are responsible for the lost and the people who are making a decision.
26:03It is not India versus India, it is a fight between the people who are making a decision and the people who are making a decision.
26:18So you have good things to say.
26:47Do you think that we are going to go with the NDA, they will have a rethink?
27:02I don't know.
27:03I don't know.
27:04I don't know.
27:05I don't know.
27:09I don't know.
27:10I don't know.
27:11But I don't want to do underhand deals or backdoor politics.
27:17I don't know.
27:18I don't know.
27:19I don't know.
27:20I don't know.
27:21I don't know.
27:22I don't know.
27:23I don't know.
27:24I don't know.
27:25I don't know.
27:26I don't know.
27:27I don't know.
27:28I don't know.
27:29You will support whichever, be it NDA or the opposition, whoever gives free urea to the
27:35farmers.
27:36So, let you, let the,
27:37unhoon has directly bola hai ki,
27:39let CM of Telangana give free Uriya and I will support.
27:42Oh, paagal hai.
27:44Paagal ban ga hai.
27:45Uriya dhena hai, Government of India.
27:48Uriya batna hai, Government of Telangana.
27:51Government of Telangana cannot give Uriya.
27:54We don't manufacture, we don't import.
27:56Government of India,
27:58they have their own manufacturing units
28:01and Government of India has to import.
28:05So, saab saab kyiun nahi kya raha hai,
28:07am India candidate ko order dalene wala hai,
28:09am Modi ka patta bolke,
28:11kyiun ye chupa ke chupa ke,
28:13pichle chunau mein bhi loksaba mein,
28:15in loog organ donation se 8 seat jita hai na,
28:18Telangana mein.
28:20Phaili bar B.R.S. party shuru hoonne ke baad,
28:2320 sal mein, 2001 to 25 years mein,
28:27ek bhi seat nahi jita ho party parliament mein.
28:31Itna kamzor hooghe,
28:32joh kshetr se, KCR or Harish Rao,
28:35do nehi woh medak parliament kshetr se,
28:38MLA se,
28:41woh seat bhi BJP nye jita liye.
28:46Harish Rao joh,
28:47har bar hun 60, 70, 1,000,000 quarts se,
28:50jit te hai unke assembly kshetr se.
28:53Iz bar BJP ko majority hai,
28:55woh assembly mein.
28:56So, basically, you are saying that BRS is going to support the NDA.
29:02This is an eyewash.
29:04They are looking for an excuse.
29:07I see.
29:26So, this is an eyewash.
29:56So, this is an eyewash.
30:26So, this is an eyewash.
30:56So, this is an eyewash.
30:58So, this is an eyewash.
31:00So, this is an eyewash.
31:02So, this is an eyewash.
31:04So, this is an eyewash.
31:06So, this is an eyewash.
31:08So, this is an eyewash.
31:10So, this is an eyewash.
31:12So, this is an eyewash.
31:14So, this is an eyewash.
31:16So, this is an eyewash.
31:20So, this is an eyewash.
31:22So, this is an eyewash.
31:24So, this is an eyewash.
31:26So, this is an eyewash.
31:30So, this is an eyewash.
31:32So, this is an eyewash.
31:34So, this is an eyewash.
31:35So, this is an eyewash.
31:36So, this is an eyewash.
31:37This is not COVID or this is not any other virus. This is an ideology.
31:55The government can say that you are defending the Maoism.
32:05We are not defending the Maoism.
32:08We are defending the Maoism.
32:10That is why Indra Ji has brought the Agriculture Sealing Act.
32:14What did the Naxalwadi say?
32:16We have brought the land to the poor.
32:18We have made the law for the poor.
32:21The Agriculture Sealing Act, the 1,000 acres of land, land, land and land.
32:31We have brought the whole Congress Party.
32:34We have brought the Board of Booming.
32:37In 2006, the Forest Right Act, we have brought the land.
32:44We have brought the core ideology.
32:48The core ideology.
32:49The core ideology.
32:50The core ideology.
32:51The Congress Party has addressed it.
32:52That is why the Naxalwadi will be reduced.
32:55To give the poor, to give the poor, to give the poor, to give the poor.
32:58Basically, you are saying the ideology is not going anywhere.
33:01It can be a little lower.
33:03It can go underground.
33:04Up and down, it is there.
33:06But you cannot eradicate it.
33:07That is what I am telling you.
33:09That is what my statement.
33:10It is not COVID or it is not any other virus.
33:13If you are going to give some injection, it is going to clear everything, which is not correct.
33:20CM Saab, you spoke of constitutionality and constitution.
33:27On the last two days, there was a lot of chaos in Parliament where the Government tabled the
33:33130th Constitutional Amendment Bill.
33:35Uss bil ke tahit, if a CM, if a minister, prime minister is also in the ambit.
33:42Agar if you are arrested for over 30 days for a crime which requires five years of prison,
33:51you will automatically have to step down.
33:54Kya apko kursi chhodni padegi tis din ke baad?
33:57Preeti ji, can I quote one issue?
34:00Amit Shai ji, when Gujarat was a minister of government,
34:06he was arrested for some time.
34:09He was arrested for a lot of days in jail.
34:11He was saying that I had to leave the prison himself.
34:13No question of the prison.
34:15After that, the Supreme Court was arrested.
34:18He was saying that it was a false allegation.
34:22Jep Amit Shai ji co arrrested who had起こ gujate suprring court case cuttnæ ke baad,
34:29Matthi innocent ho houve, I innocent jail ko ga.
34:32Unni ka hi cutka taazur bhai,
34:35Eisah in innocent ministers ko,
34:37Chief Minister cup kisi false case mene pasa dhke tis din a girl jail mene rake toh,
34:41Us kya baad hao kursi chođnæ ke baad.
34:44Kya ohone waale hai ?
34:45You should keep this.
34:46Dusra bat,
34:47foreign
34:53foreign
34:59foreign
35:05foreign
35:11foreign
35:15foreign
35:25foreign
35:39foreign
35:41But, sir, it was an argument which was made on the floor of the house.
35:46There is something called moral constitutionality.
35:48There are many examples.
35:50Adwani Ji, take it, Amichha Ji has given it his example.
35:53Lalu Ji also take it, which is in your case.
35:55That you step down taking moral responsibility.
35:59And if you are in jail, if you are CM and you are minister, how do you serve?
36:03People serve.
36:04Priti Ji, if we are in jail, if we are in jail, if we are in jail, we are in jail.
36:11If we are in jail, it is not in jail.
36:13Amit Bhai is.
36:15The Prime Minister Modi Ji is.
36:17In that jail, it is Modi Ji.
36:18No, no.
36:18People say that Jaurala Lhehuri Ji has done anything, so no, no.
36:23Walabhai Patel has done it.
36:26Amit Shah Ji has done anything, so no.
36:29The country's prime minister Modi Ji is.
36:31When you just put everything on the war,
36:38when you are in jail, and when he is president of javala Lhehuri Ji was.
36:40Walabhai Patel Ji was the president of the one who should work.
36:42Whatever he did it.
36:45The Prime Minister did it.
36:48The conditions of the government of Jaurala Lhehuri Ji has done it.
36:49When the Donald Trump has done it,
36:52when the government of Jaurala Lhehuri Ji has done it,
36:54when the president of Jaurala Lhehuri Ji has done it,
36:55when the Prime Minister has done it,
36:58when it's all in Japan,
36:59where more than the president of Jaurala Lhehuri Ji had done it,
37:01So you're saying if it was Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government, you would have moral constitutionality
37:08had some meaning.
37:09In this government, it doesn't have any meaning.
37:10Is that what you're saying?
37:11Yes.
37:31It is my medal.
37:52Badge of honor.
37:57Everything is in public life cases.
38:04It is not any other personal cases.
38:06I fought for the people, I fought for the people, I fought for the people, I fought for
38:11the people.
38:12I fought for the people, I fought for the people, I fought for the people.
38:16Those are the cases that I have made for the government.
38:19But the fact is, cases are, so he says that the chief ministers have so many criminal cases
38:24have to worry about this law, because this is the hour of reckoning.
38:31My karma philosophy ko jyada maanta ho.
38:34Karma?
38:35Karma mein kuch hai toh koi nahi hata sakte ho.
38:38Are you spiritual sir?
38:39Spiritual?
38:40Religious?
38:41What spiritual?
38:42I believe on spiritual.
38:43Do you believe?
38:44Are you religious?
38:45Yeah, yeah.
38:46It is not religious.
38:47I respect my religion.
38:48But you're more spiritual?
38:50Not most spiritual, I used to take that.
38:55Okay.
38:56My karma philosophy ko my jyada janta ho.
38:58My, my, my, chote gaun se nikla.
39:00Myra karma mein nahi like toh ma mukye mantri nahi bantta ho.
39:03Toh age mahi, jhaan par bhi mera journey hai, wo log kuch bhi samaj ne deo, jitna bhi criminal
39:10cases, jit din criminal cases laga hai, ah, BRS wale, toh wo log samjai in ko khatam kar di hai.
39:17Asamblee chunao 2018 mein merah ghar toh ke murek, mujhe kidnap kiye, EBS corpus file kiye,
39:24wo case mein, ah, SP suspend ho gye te, election commission of India.
39:28Mujhe hara diye, 18 mein.
39:30Toh, tien mehen mein, pir mahi, log sabah member ban kar, Delhi a ghe.
39:35Toh, mera rajniti pura khul ghe.
39:38So, Delhi pura jan pahichan ho ghe.
39:41Log sabah mein merah neta log mujhe dhe ke, toh, kongres ke adhiksh bana hai, kongres adhiksh
39:47banne ke wujhe se mujhe kaam kaane ka aur ziadha mokha mili.
39:51Mukkepantir bhi ban gay.
39:53Toh kiske hatme hai ye?
39:56Do you believe in karma?
39:57Yes, definitely, definitely.
39:59Nahi nahi, har kisi ka bhi ye ye, ap jo karega, apko ho he milega.
40:03But the bill you think is...
40:05It's wrong.
40:07Particular, the time, the person, who is introducing that bill, that is the biggest thing.
40:17All right, do watch that entire interview.
40:22It's over an hour long, every issue covered, and you can watch it on my show, UnPolitics,
40:27on this weekend, 9pm Saturday, 8pm Sundays.
40:30With that, I want to quickly shift focus to this one particular story, which is highly disturbing.
40:36A brutal murder that has shaken the soul of the nation, where a 20-year-old young girl, Nikki Bhatti, was burned alive,
40:43allegedly by the very family she was married into.
40:46This happened in front of her five-year-old child and her sister.
40:51Her only crime, not meeting their never-ending demands for dowries and making reels for Instagram.
40:5828-year-old Nikki Bhatti was burnt alive, allegedly, by her husband and in-laws for dowry.
41:12The gruesome murder in Great Anoida has left the nation in shock.
41:16The police have arrested the husband, Vipin Bhatti, and his parents.
41:20Nikki and her sister Kanchan married the brothers Vipin Bhatti and Rohit Bhatti in 2016.
41:30According to sources, the husbands disapproved of the reels posted by their wives on Instagram.
41:40Sources say Nikki and Kanchan also had fights with their husbands over their beauty parlour business.
41:45According to the latest details shared by sources close to the investigation,
41:50a fight broke out between Nikki and her husband on February 11 over Instagram reels.
41:56Both Kanchan and Nikki left for their maternal home after the incident.
42:00On March 18, a panchayat meeting was called where it was decided that both sisters won't make any reels.
42:07Kanchan and Nikki returned to live with their in-laws and stopped making reels.
42:11But after a few days, a fresh fight started after the sisters began uploading reels on Instagram.
42:18Earlier, the victim's parents had revealed that they had gifted the grooms a Scorpio SUV,
42:24a Royal Enfield Bullet motorcycle, 450 grams of gold and cash.
42:29They claimed the groom's family demanded another 35 lakh rupees and a Mercedes Benz.
42:35Sources say that along with the dowry demand, Instagram reels could have been a possible trigger for the murder.
42:47Nikki's father says he had given 1.5 lakh rupees to his daughters to start the beauty parlour.
42:53But the in-laws began harassing Kanchan and Nikki for more money.
42:58If somebody told them to the more things, they should be angry.
43:03They will attack the people, and they will burn one day.
43:04The more things they do, they will burn them, they will burn them.
43:14Calls for capital punishment for the alleged killers are getting louder.
43:18A few days ago, a similar incident had left the nation stunned when 25-year-old Radhika
43:37Yadav was killed in Gurugram by her father over Instagram reels and a tennis academy.
43:47Such tragic incidents force us to confront a harsher reality.
43:51Who is truly failing Bharat's betis, leaving them vulnerable and unheard in a society that
43:57promises protection but delivers neglect?
44:03With Arvind Ojha in Noida, Bureau Report, India Today.
44:07Please take a moment just to reflect on all the cliches that you hear of Bharat ki beti
44:14and the daughters of India and who will protect them.
44:17Because there needs to be a larger question and if we don't raise it, we will do the biggest
44:21disfavor to so many women who are growing up watching exactly this.
44:26Because the question, the buck doesn't quite stop when it comes down to the in-laws and
44:31you can clearly see in the heinous crime that they have committed but also where parents
44:36of these girls are concerned.
44:39Because in this particular case, the father today might be in grief of losing his daughter,
44:46but he was no stranger to the abuse that his own daughter had been going through since 2016.
44:51He said that very clearly.
44:53When you know your daughter is being beaten up, when you know she's been harassed for dowry,
44:56when you know there's a constant demand of money, why in the world would you continue to let
45:03her stay with monsters such as this?
45:06There is a larger question, there is a time of reckoning, and if this doesn't prove to
45:11be the instigator of that, that God alone knows what will.
45:15Joining me is Mrunalani Deshmukh, senior matrimonial and family lawyer, Lalita Kumara-Manglum,
45:20former chairperson, National Commission for Women.
45:24Ms. Kumara-Manglum, I'd like to begin with you because we've done ad nauseum shows of monster
45:30in-laws, still dowry deaths happening.
45:33A larger question, Ms. Kumara-Manglum, would you not think need to be asked of parents
45:38who look the other way till an incident like this happens?
45:42Actually, I find fault with the parents more than with, I'm not saying more in this case,
45:49but generally, at least equally, they are at to blame.
45:54First, why do parents give dowry?
45:58Dowry is illegal in this country.
46:00Why do they continue to buy grooms for their daughters?
46:04And then when they find out the daughters are not being treated as they should be, why do
46:09they keep asking them to adjust?
46:12This is a horrible word, I mean, I hate the word adjust, to compromise, to tolerate, and
46:19then say, what will people say?
46:23No, no, no, no, you must adjust, you've been married, you now are a pariah.
46:28All this patriarchal, medieval, horribly anti-women, anti-daughter talk that parents do is also
46:37at blame, and largely to blame where we empower demons like this man today who killed his wife
46:46in front of a five-year-old son.
46:47So, I mean, also, in this case, I was on another show, they have gone to a khab panchayat.
46:55Khabs don't have any women members, are notoriously patriarchal, and they're also illegal.
47:02Why do you go to a khab panchayat?
47:05Third, it has come to light that her sister was told to take a video, instead of dialing 100 and calling for help.
47:12You take a video, I'm sorry, I know the parents are grief-stricken, I don't mean to add to their grief,
47:19but parents of daughters need to take stock of how they treat their own children.
47:25When you marry a child, whether it's a son or a daughter, you have to marry them in such a way that their self-respect
47:33is taken care of.
47:34Marriage is not, I mean, any marriage, any couple has to adjust when they're newly married.
47:39But adjust does not mean that the girl has to put up with any form of mistreatment.
47:46It may just start with, you know, you can't eat at this time of the day, you have to do this, you do,
47:50and then nobody knows where it ends.
47:53To feel regretful after your daughter has been killed is way too late.
47:58Parents also need to be taken to task.
48:02In this case, these parents are very grief-stricken now, but I think governments and society must understand
48:11that girls are not there just to be used and thrown.
48:13We are not commodities.
48:15Our daughters are not commodities.
48:17They should have the right to say no.
48:19And in this case, the daughters were working.
48:21They were earning.
48:22Apparently, the husband was jobless.
48:25And still, they went on and on torturing this girl.
48:28And the parents also, in their own way, they added to it by sending her back every time.
48:35Maybe she'd have been alive if the last time they had said,
48:39okay, let's stay a little while.
48:41Let's see.
48:42And tried to reassure her that she had a chance.
48:46Imagine burning your wife in front of your five-year-old son.
48:48What sort of monster that man must be.
48:50And the parents can't have been unaware that that man was such a horrible man.
48:54Why did they keep sending her back there?
48:57No, you're right, Ms. Kumar Amangalam.
48:58Because the fact is, you know, I'm really sorry,
49:00because there will be a lot of people who will be watching this broadcast
49:02and might question us that we are misdirecting our anger, but clearly not.
49:06And I would reckon in this particular situation,
49:08the parents have admitted the father, because the mother hasn't quite said anything,
49:12because clearly, you know, the setup is deeply patriarchal.
49:15She hasn't come on camera.
49:16But the father has come out and said since 2016,
49:19this girl was being harassed for dowry.
49:21She was being beaten up constantly.
49:22And I am very sorry, you know, you might be might be grief stricken.
49:26There might be grief.
49:27But the fact is very clear that you have today played, if not equal part,
49:34then a larger part in murdering or in the murder of your daughter.
49:38And that's the sad reality.
49:39I want to bring in Rinalini Deshmukh.
49:41Rinalini Deshmukh, the fact also remains that even though dowry is banned,
49:46even though there are laws very strict where dowry is concerned,
49:52the onus is always on the in-laws.
49:55The fact that dowry cases have come up.
49:58There used to be, and I still remember many decades ago,
50:01and Ms. Kumara Manglam could add to it, front page news of cylinder bursts,
50:06of young brides being burnt because the lack of dowry used to be an everyday affair.
50:11But we might not call it dowry anymore, but gifts continue to be delivered to the in-laws' doorstep.
50:18Everyone looks the other way, including families.
50:22I think it's a very horrific situation that we are discussing right now.
50:30It's not only about the dowry system.
50:34It's not only about, as Larita Ji absolutely rightly said, that it is about the mindset of the parents,
50:41who have just literally pushed the girl into the well of fire.
50:49And lastly, and more importantly, it is a social evil.
50:52But what I'm trying to say as a lawyer, and I have been working on these matters for quite a substantial point of time.
51:00The fact is, we have laws.
51:03We have social media to influence people as to what is wrong in dowry.
51:09We have instances which have happened in the past.
51:12But what is the result?
51:14You and me and Lakta, she will also bear with me.
51:18Every two months, we come on this channel, on one of the channels, and we talk about it.
51:23And we talk about dowry, and we talk about women is not a commodity.
51:26She's absolutely right.
51:27And we talk about the women's rights equal rights, etc.
51:31The legislation, the constitution, everything.
51:33Everybody has done things to make the rights equal.
51:36But is there, in reality, any of those things which are there?
51:40And today, whom are we to blame?
51:42Lawmakers, executors of law, the family, the social set-up.
51:48All the family set-up.
51:49All the archaic customs that are existing.
51:52Where are you going to do?
51:54Where are you going to plug the holes here?
51:56It's a whole system that unfortunately has got into a rigmarole that we are unable to get out of it.
52:03Today, the in-laws are absolutely to be blamed.
52:07Why are they to be blamed?
52:08Because they have done the most heinous crime.
52:11Number one, burning someone.
52:13Number two, in such a horrific manner in front of the child.
52:16Number three, making down the demands.
52:18There is no way that they can be pardoned under any circumstances.
52:23But what Lalita Ji said, and I endorse her view, is we understand that.
52:27And they are the way and they will be taken to the task as per the rule of law.
52:32But what about the people who could have avoided this happening?
52:35And this could have been avoided by the parents or the family members of the two girls.
52:41And have you realized one thing?
52:44What is wrong in making Instagram reels?
52:47As long as it's not derogatory, as long as it's not in any way defamatory or disparaging to any of these, to the people concerned.
52:55Today, I think the two boys were jealous that they had beautiful girls, beautiful wives, that they were doing so well.
53:04And they are also financially independent.
53:06And lastly and more importantly, how could they get so much of coverage?
53:13How did they get so much of media thing?
53:16So, this is coming out of envy, anger, vengeance, and inferiority, coming to that.
53:24I appreciate both of you for joining us.
53:27We've run out of time.
53:28But the fact is, if anything is going to change, then we need to start doing what is usually the improbable.
53:35I would reckon one needs to even charge the parents today for giving that dowry.
53:39For looking the other way.
53:41Legally, make them liable because one can.
53:44But just by the virtue that they are in grief, doesn't quite cut it because they've played
53:49an equal part in the murder of their young girl.
53:52I appreciate both of you for joining us.
53:56For those of you who think we're taking, or I am taking a rather radical line,
53:59but this is the only way to do it, I feel.
54:01Therefore, saying it.
Be the first to comment