India Elections 2009 Results – Live Blogging

With the votes set to be counted for the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, here is what Offstumped is looking forward to today.

#1 Will the BJP overtake the Congress as the single largest party and if so by what margin ?

#2 Will Andhra turn in a hung assembly and if so how will the power equations be re-writtent by the voters. Specifically can the TDP manage the numbers with TRS and others or does the Congress have an outside chance by roping in Chiranjeevi’s PRP ?

#3 Will Orissa turn out a hung assembly. Specifically can Naveen Patnaik’s BJD manage the numbers with others or will he be compelled to a suicidal embrace of the Congress. Will Orissa become the next Karnataka for the BJP ?

#4 Will Maharashtra continue to deliver a split verdict or has the BJP-Shiv Sena combine turned the corner in this key large state ?

#5 Will Tamil Nadu’s unusually high turnout mean a AIADMK sweep or will it be a split verdict for Tamil Nadu’s revolving door politics ?

Specific bellwhether seats of interest are

#1 Mandi in Himachal Pradesh which has voted for the party that has formed the government last 6 elections. A BJP loss here would be ominous

#2 Will Dumka in Jharkhand vote against JMM/Congress/RJD

#3 Will Mayurbhanj in Orissa vote against BJP ?

#4 Will Nandyal in Andhra vote against Congress ?

#5 Will Mahabubnagar in Andhra surprise the TRS by dumping KCR ?

#6 Will Peddapalle in Andhra vote against the Congress ?

#7 Will the BJP sweep Rajmahal, Godda, Jamshedpur and Giridih in Jharkhand ?

#8 Which of these 3 Gujarat bellwhether seats will BJP wrest or retain – Anand, Bulsar, Banaskantha ?

#9 Which way will Kangra in Himachal Pradesh go ?

#10 What about bellwhether seats in Chattisgarh (Mahasamund), Maharashtra (Ahmednagar), Punjab (Jalandher), Rajasthan (Sikar), West Bengal (Dum-dum)

#11 How many of the bellwhether seats in Orissa of Aska, Phulbani, Bolangir, Sambalpur, Deogarh, Sundargarh will go to BJP ?

#12 Finally will any of the 4 bellwhether seats of Tamil Nadu Vellore, Chidambaram, Coimbatore, Nagappatnam fall to the AIADMK lead alliance ?

Also catch all the action via Offstumped on

- Twitter

- Live analysis and debate on this Internet Panel

PS: As this goes to press, a short email exchange with reliable quarters in the BJP reveals fairly high confidence, fingers crossed.

Filed under: CNN-IBN Boycott, Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharma-debates, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, India Lok Sabha Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped, Offstumped on Twitter, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, War on Terror, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Open Letter to Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta

Eminent Delhi based public intellectual and former member of the National Knowledge Commission Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta today wrote a curious op-ed in the Indian Express titled “The Politics of Hurt“.

This open letter is addressed to him with the intention of obtaining some answers.

Dear Dr. Mehta

It was interesting to note that public intellectuals such as yourself can take a political stance in public 48 hours before the nation goes to polls.

But then your political stance reflected in this op-ed in the Indian Express is curious for a couple of reasons.

It is clear that you definitely dont want to vote for the BJP. It is also clear that you definitely do want to vote for the Congress.

But then Sir where you are emphatic in your rejection of the BJP you betray no conviction at all in your endorsement of the Congress. In fact you dont even hazard to say in as many words that you support the Congress despite betraying your sentiments towards it.

Why Sir this intellectual timidity ?

Why Sir do you need to dedicate 95% of your column for the case against the BJP and leave only a few sentences to make a less than convincing case for the Congress ?

Why Sir do you need the BJP excuse to make your case for the Congress ?

In fact less troubling than your critique of the BJP is your curious case for the Congress.

What “idea” exactly Sir are you referring to when you say

They attack the Congress in the name of an idea of what the Congress should be.

Your hopes for the so called “ideal” the Congress represents would have carried far greater credibility and conviction if you had dedicated your column to describing that “ideal”, rather than dedicate the entire column to venting out your disgust towards the BJP and Mr. Advani.

In fact doing so you seem to betray emotions that suggest the exact opposite. You Sir seem to be more hurt and disappointed with the BJP than you are motivated and excited for the Congress.

I dont propose to make a case for the BJP in this letter but I find this suggestion by you even more curious

longevity of the Congress is a sign that there is something about it that is worth salvaging

If memory serves me right, the only occassion when this nation saw you take a public stance on principle and convictions was when you resigned from the National Knowledge Commission on the issue of OBC Reservations in Institutions of Higher Education.

The practice of Reservations in India is about as long as the post Independence Congress Party. So should we take it that your objections to OBC Reservations are at odds with this notion that longevity is somehow the yardstick for the worthiness of an idea.

If one were to extend the same longevity yardstick to just about every social ill from Dowry to Caste based identity politics that continue to survive in India, does their long life make them ideas worth salvaging ?

I dont want to even go into your selective defense of election time rhetoric from Sonia Gandhi, its less than honest and you know it. It would have been ok if you were transparent about your partisanship for one would have taken it as all is fair in war and elections.

But then Sir you purport to give intellectual cover to Sonia Gandhi’s partisanship while being less than forthright about it.

In doing so you Sir have diminished your standing as a Public Intellectual.

I am not troubled by your dismissal of the BJP’s next tier of leadership. But I am extremely troubled by your seeking hope in the next generation of the Congress’ leadership based on its age while leaving unstated your implicit endorsement of Rahul Gandhi as successor to Manmohan Singh.

It stumps me what idea and ideal you hope to salvage by taking comfort in the prospect that the heir apparent’s only claim to the top office are his last name and genes, is younger than his political rivals.

In closing let me just say that the danger to India is not from its illiterate masses in remote villages who may choose the BJP  out of their own wisdom of lack of. 

But the real danger Sir is from public intellectuals in New Delhi who lack the courage and conviction to be forthright in their partisanship and from those who seek to provide intellectual cover to sycophancy and subversion of the original intent of the Constitution.

Yours Sincerely

An Aam Admi who admires your occassional intellectual brilliance but is deeply disappointed with your lack of conviction.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, India Lok Sabha Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Open Letter to Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta

Eminent Delhi based public intellectual and former member of the National Knowledge Commission Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta today wrote a curious op-ed in the Indian Express titled “The Politics of Hurt“.

This open letter is addressed to him with the intention of obtaining some answers from him.

Dear Dr. Mehta

It was interesting to note that public intellectuals such as yourself can take a political stance in public 48 hours before the nation goes to polls.

But then your political stance reflected in this op-ed in the Indian Express is curious for a couple of reasons.

It is clear that you definitely dont want to vote for the BJP. It is also clear that you definitely do want to vote for the Congress.

But then Sir where you are emphatic in your rejection of the BJP you betray no conviction at all in your endorsement of the Congress. In fact you dont even hazard to say in as many words that you support the Congress despite betraying your sentiments towards it.

Why Sir this intellectual timidity ?

Why Sir do you need to dedicate 95% of your column for the case against the BJP and leave only a few sentences to make a less than convincing case for the Congress ?

Why Sir do you need the BJP excuse to make your case for the Congress ?

In fact less troubling than your critique of the BJP is your curious case for the Congress.

What “idea” exactly Sir are you referring to when you say

They attack the Congress in the name of an idea of what the Congress should be.

Your hopes for the so called “ideal” the Congress represents would have carried far greater credibility and conviction if you had dedicated your column to describing that “ideal”, rather than dedicate the entire column to venting out your disgust towards the BJP and Mr. Advani.

In fact doing so you seem to betray emotions that suggest the exact opposite. You Sir seem to be more hurt and disappointed with the BJP than you are motivated and excited for the Congress.

I dont propose to make a case for the BJP in this letter but I find this suggestion by you even more curious

longevity of the Congress is a sign that there is something about it that is worth salvaging

If memory serves me right, the only occassion when this nation saw you take a public stance on principle and convictions was when you resigned from the National Knowledge Commission on the issue of OBC Reservations in Institutions of Higher Education.

The practice of Reservations in India is about as long as the post Independence Congress Party. So should we take it that your objections to OBC Reservations are at odds with this notion that longevity is somehow the yardstick for the worthiness of an idea.

If one were to extend the same longevity yardstick to just about every social ill from Dowry to Caste based identity politics that continue to survive in India, does their long life make them ideas worth salvaging ?

I dont want to even go into your selective defense of election time rhetoric from Sonia Gandhi, its less than honest and you know it. It would have been ok if you were transparent about your partisanship for one would have taken it as all is fair in war and elections.

But then Sir you purport to give intellectual cover to Sonia Gandhi’s partisanship while being less than forthright about it.

In doing so you Sir have diminished your standing as a Public Intellectual.

I am not troubled by your dismissal of the BJP’s next tier of leadership. But I am extremely troubled by your seeking hope in the next generation of the Congress’ leadership based on its age while leaving unstated your implicit endorsement of Rahul Gandhi as successor to Manmohan Singh.

It stumps me what idea and ideal you hope to salvage by taking comfort in the prospect that the heir apparent’s only claim to the top office are his last name and genes, is younger than his political rivals.

In closing let me just say that the danger to India is not from its illiterate masses in remote villages who may choose the BJP  out of their own wisdom of lack of. 

But the real danger Sir is from public intellectuals in New Delhi who lack the courage and conviction to be forthright in their partisanship and from those who seek to provide intellectual cover to sycophancy and subversion of the original intent of the Constitution.

Yours Sincerely

An Aam Admi who admires your occassional intellectual brilliance but is deeply disappointed with your lack of conviction.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

India Elections 2009 – Countdown begins

The die is cast people with the election commission announcing a 5 phase poll from April 16th to May 13th and counting of votes on May 16th.

In addition to daily posts on developments in the election campaign Offstumped will have the following coverage.

#1 Track Instant Offstumped Reactions via Twitter, you can also subscribe to the Twitter XML feed. One of the features of Twitter is to distribute soundbites via SMS, consider subscribing to mobile phone updates if you can afford it. Nothing work best to spread the word around, than SMS.

#2 Today’s YouTube/Online Video Pick will highlight the most compelling election videos online. You can find them on the sidebar

#3 Today’s News/Op-ed Pick will highlight the most compelling news story or op-ed piece of the day. You can also find this on the sidebar

#4 Report Live/First Hand will be a place where Offstumped Readers in different parts of India can post first hand experiences and anecdotes from events that attend. Some of you have already done that from the recent Friends of BJP event featuring Arun Jaitley.

#5 Offstumped Current Projection will be this blogger’s take on the various projections by drive-by psephologists and will appear on the second side-bar.

#6 Offstumped on Scribd for background data from Election Commission and Press Information Bureau site for Elections 2009

An important part of the coverage will be “Rahul Gandhi Watch”.

There is a lot of debate on what this election ought to be.

Many voices of prudence believe this election was the BJP’s to lose and it didnt capitalize on the poor state of the economy and the bungling of internal seurity.

Many other voices in the Delhi based media believe this election is the Congress’ to win having pulled off a 5 year term.

This blogger has a different opinion.

Whether we like it or not we dont have a national election and we will not have one till either a single emotive issue dominates the election going-in or we opt for a second Republic to directly elect the Chief Executive.

In the absence of a single overriding national issue this will come down to a deeply personal and at some level emotional choice that every voter has to make.

This blogger has made his choice on the basic fundamental issue of values and Dharma.

We may debate endlessly on whether either of the parties has an economic model or a sound approach for security.

But there is one issue on which there is no ambiguity and the distinction is stark.

Mr. Sudheendra Kulkarni writing in his blog framed it very well saying its “Vanshbhogi versus Karma Yogi“.

The Congress has repeatedly demonstrate that it lacks basic values when it comes to ethics or Constitutionality – Pratibha Patil, Navin Chawla, Cash for Votes,  Governor’s actions in Goa, Meghalaya and Jharkhand.

It is on this fundamental distinction that the Congress must be voted out if not anything else.

Filed under: CNN-IBN Boycott, Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Constituent Assembly, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped on Twitter, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat, surveys

More on the Jalgaon case and Pratibha Patil

JALGAON MURDER CASE

? CBI wilts under intense questioning by Bombay High Court

? Court not satisfied with CBI?s investigation of the role of Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of Smt. Pratibha Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil, ?masterminds? in the murder of Congress leader Prof. V.G. Patil

MUMBAI ? 14 October 2008

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today had a difficult time answering questions raised by a division bench of the Bombay High Court hearing a petition by Smt. Rajni Patil, widow of Prof. V.G. Patil, president of the Jalgaon District Congress Committee, who was murdered on 21 September 2005.

Smt. Patil, in her petition filed in the Bombay High Court on 17 July 2007, has accused that the real conspirators behind the crime are Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of the President of India Smt. Pratibha Patil and a political rival of Prof. V.G. Patil, and Dr. Ulhas Patil, former Congress MP from the city. She has also held that although Raju Mali and Raju Sonawane were the actual assailants, Damodar Lokhande and Leeladhar Narkhede were the intermediaries who gave them the ?supari? at the behest of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil.

The Bombay High Court admitted the petition and has been monitoring the investigation by the CBI.

In June 2008, the CBI filed a chargesheet against Mali (who died in mysterious circumstance while in judicial custody in April 2007) and Sonawane. Shri Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for Smt. Patil, had argued that the CBI was acting under political pressure to exonerate not only the two ?masterminds? but also the two ?intermediaries?. He then filed comprehensive Written Submissions showing the involvement of all four in the murder.

On 6 October 2008, the CBI filed a supplementary chargesheet naming Lokhande and Narkhede also as the accused. The agency informed the Court that, with this latest chargesheet, it had completed its investigation and wanted the Court to end its monitoring of the same. In the hearing on 10 October, Shri Jethmalani had argued that, in exonerating G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil, the CBI was again engaged in a cover-up under pressure from powerful and highly placed individuals.

The division bench comprising Justice F I Rebello and Justice Ashutosh Kumbhakoni had assured the petitioner on that day that they would examine all the statements and documents furnished by the CBI so far. It also allowed the petitioner to file an additional affidavit on 14 October.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the Court asked CBI Counsel Shri U.D. Salvi a pertinent question arising out of the witness statement of Smt. Rekha Mali, wife of the deceased principal assassin. According to her, Raju Mali, while in jail, had asked her in early 2006 to contact G.N. Patil for assistance in getting bail. She has affirmed that she met G.N. Patil, who assured her that bail would be granted to her husband within a short period.

The Court asked CBI Counsel: ?If G.N. Patil had nothing to do with the case, why did Raju Mali ask his wife to meet him for bail and why did he give her assurance in the matter? And did the CBI interrogate G.N. Patil to get his response to Rekha Mali?s statement??

CBI Counsel admitted that the agency did not interrogate G.N. Patil in the matter. At this point, the Court observed: ?When a major witness says something important and the agency does not even follow up on it, how can you be satisfied with your own investigation? And if you cannot satisfy the Court, how can you satisfy the petitioner who has lost her husband??

The CBI also had no satisfactory explanation when the Court asked questions about the ?motive? behind the murder.

In addition to the petitioner, two other crucial witnesses ? Shri Rajiv Patil, former Working President of DCC Jalgaon and Shri Avinash Bhalerao, President of the District Youth Congress Jalgaon ? also filed affidavits today. All three have questioned the CBI?s contention that G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil had nothing to do with the murder.

Interestingly, the CBI had used the witness statements of Shri Rajiv Patil and Shri Avinash Bhalerao as the basis for naming Lokhande and Narkhede as the accused, while absolving G.N.Patil and Ulhas Patil.

The matter has been adjourned to 21 November to enable the CBI to give an explanation on the questions asked by the Court and also to file its reply to the affidavits of Rajni Patil and others.

Filed under: Pratibha Patil

Rashtrapatil’s Parivar and the CBI – Saga continues

More developments in the Jalgaon Case that called into question Pratibha Patil’s interference with law enforcement in Maharashtra allegedly to protect her brother. This latest development comes on the heels of the Mumbai High Court rapping the CBI while asking it to complete investigations by 25th July. The details of these developments are?below courtesy Shri Sudheendra Kulkarni.?

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) faced tough questions in the Bombay High Court in the sensational Jalgaon Murder Case, which hit the headlines in the run-up to the election of the President of India last year. ?We are not happy with the pace of the investigation,? remarked the two-judge bench comprising Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar? and Justice S. Majumdar, when the case came up for hearing in the court today. ?How much more time do you need to complete the investigation?? the judges asked, reminding the agency that the case was transferred to it from the state CID in February 2007.?The case pertains to the murder of Prof. V.G. Patil, president of the Jalgaon district unit of the Congress party, on 21 February 2005. Since then, Smt. Rajni Patil, widow of the deceased, has been fighting a courageous legal battle. The Bombay High Court admitted her writ petition in July 2007 and began to monitor and supervise further investigation of the case by the CBI. ?Smt. Patil has contended in her petition that the murder of her husband was due to a political conspiracy hatched by his rivals in the local Congress unit in Maharashtra, Dr. G.N.Patil (brother of Smt. Pratibha Patil) and Dr. Ulhas Patil (a former Congress MP from Jalgaon). According to her, the duo engaged two intermediaries, Damodar Lokhande and Leeladhar Narkhede, to get Prof. V.G. Patil eliminated. She has named Lokhande and Narkhede as the persons who hired the two assassins, Raju Mali and Raju Sonawane, who were arrested and subsequently chargesheeted by the police. ?Mysteriously, Mali died in judicial custody on 7 April 2007, just a day before the CBI was scheduled to interrogate him. ?Accusing the state CID of being tardy and unwilling to probe the role of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr.Ulhas Patil, Smt. Patil petitioned the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court to transfer the case to the CBI. Her plea was not only accepted but the court also took cognizance of ?the alleged complicity of influential political leaders?.?Shockingly, the CBI too has been making every effort to cover up the truth in the case, as is evident from the fact that when it filed a supplementary chargesheet in the court of the chief judicial magistrate, Jalgaon, on 10 June 2008, it mentioned only Sonawane as the accused. Clearly, this was an attempt by the CBI to limit the complicity in this crime to the least important person in the conspiracy.?Jethmalani?s impassioned argument ?When the case came up for hearing in the Bombay High Court today, Shri Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for Smt. Rajni Patil, presented an impassioned argument that, even as the widow of the murdered Congress leader was being made ?to run from pillar to post? in search of justice, the CBI was trying to protect those ?against whom there is already plethora of evidence?. Shri Jethmalani also pointed out that the investigation had suffered due to ?suppression of evidence? and gave the example of the eye-witness statement, recorded by the CBI on 25 May 2007, of one Rambhau Pawar, in which the latter has given a graphic account of the murder. ?According to Pawar (who was used by the police to identify Mali and Sonawane when they were arrested), he tried to intervene when the crime was being committed but as he approached the assailants, Mali shouted at him: ?Yahan se bhag? nahin to tera bhi yehi hal karege. Hamare bahut lambe haath hain. Hamare peechhe netaon ke haath hain. Bharosa nahi hai to jaan le ki hamare peechhe Ulhas Patil, G.N. Patil, Ramesh Chaudhary (a local Congress MLA) ke haath hain?.? Pawar had written the whole incident in his personal diary which was subsequently seized by the CBI. This vital evidence was not included in the first chargesheet filed on 22 December 2005, nor did the CBI take cognizance of it to include the names of Lokhande, Narkhede, Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil in the second (supplementary) chargesheet it filed on 10 June 2008.?In his detailed written submissions before the Court, Shri Jethmalani presented the following important pieces of evidence, showing the involvement of Dr. G.N. Patil, Dr. Ulhas Patil, Lokhande and Narkhede:?

• A detailed analysis of the mobile records of the calls made by Dr. G.N. Patil, Dr. Ulhas Patil, Lokhande, Narkhede and Mali to one another during the days prior to, and after, the crime, as also on the day of the crime itself. The dates and timings of these calls coincide with significant events pertaining to the conspiracy.

?

• A letter written by Mali and Sonawane from inside the jail on 3 January 2006, mentioning the names of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil;

?

• Raju Mali?s interview to a reporter of Aaj Tak TV channel, which telecast a comprehensive report on the murder case in February 2006.

?

• Two statements of Rekha Mali, wife of Raju Mali, dated 18 September 2007 and 27 September 2007, in which she talks about Narkhede?s frequent visits to their house one month before the crime and the ?closed-door? meetings between Narkhede and her husband, when she was not allowed to come in. Both Rekha Mali and her brother Bhaskar Mahajan are also on record stating that, when Raju Mali was in judicial custody, they used to receive money from Lokhande, Narkhede and Dr. G.N. Patil, who also paid the fees of the lawyers for Mali and Sonawane.

?

• Statement by a witness that the mobike that Mali and Sonawane had used on the day of the murder had been sold by him to Narkhede.

?Narco tests: CBI?s double standards ?In the last hearing in the matter on June 16, Justice Khandeparkar had asked why the CBI had not so far conducted narco analysis and polygraph tests on Lokhande and Narkhede. The CBI counsel had contended that the agency was awaiting the Supreme Court?s verdict on the validity of such tests as investigative tools. Reacting sharply to this evasive response, the judge had remarked, ?If the CBI can conduct such tests on the suspects in the Arushi Talwar case, why not in this case? Why are you adopting double standards ? one standard in Delhi and another in Maharashtra? Or are you doing so only in this particular case??? ?Today the CBI engaged none other than Gopal Subramaniam, additional solicitor general, to be its counsel in the case. When Justice Khandeparkar asked Subramaniam about narco tests on Lokhande and Narkhede, the counsel said, ?It has been the practice of the CBI to take the consent of the persons concerned before conducting narco tests. In this particular case, the agency has not been able to get their consent.? Once again, this prompted the judge to administer a rebuke to the CBI: ?I know of two instances in Maharashtra alone in which the CBI has conducted narco tests without the consent of the persons concerned.??The judge also remarked, ?Even without narco tests, there is sufficient information on record already for the agency to investigate the role of others.??In the final para of the written submissions on behalf of Smt. Rajni Patil, Shri Jethmalani quoted the following lines from a recent speech by Smt. Pratibha Patil, President of India:??The Petitioner can do no more? than quote from a speech delivered by Her Excellency, The President of India, Smt. Pratibha Patil,? on the occasion of the inauguration of a seminar on judicial reforms organized by the Confederation of? the Indian Bar on 23.2 2008,? in New Delhi.???The care, diligence and empathy with which the judiciary protects, even a lone individual who has truth on his side invests? the judiciary with a superior purpose and a higher moral authority……………a very heavy responsibility is cast on the judicial fraternity to uphold the majesty of justice in all its magnificence.? Courts are respected as temples of justice and the judicial fraternity regarded as custodians of law? and dispensers of justice.? This precious trust cannot be allowed to be eroded.? ?

Filed under: Pratibha Patil

Presidential sized embarassment – Coming Soon……

Some new developments in the Jalgaon Murder Case, not much media coverage on this but for a couple of odd stories carried by Zee and Sahara Samay. The full wire story is reproduced below.

Mumbai, September 10, 2007: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today assured the Bombay High Court that it would complete its probe into the politically sensitive Jalagaon murder case and report to the court the progress of its work by October 8.
 The case pertains to the murder of Prof. V.G. Patil, president of the district committee of the Congress in Jalagaon, Maharashtra, on 21 September 2005. Rajni Patil, widow of the deceased, has in a petition filed before the Bombay High Court alleged that Dr. G.N. Patil, younger brother of President Smt. Pratibha Patil, is the main conspirator behind the murder. Prof. V.G. Patil, who had defeated Dr. G.N. Patil in the election for the post of DCC presidentship, had levelled serious charges of corruption and misappropriation of funds against his immediate predecessor.
 

The petition came up for hearing before a bench comprising Justices R M S Khandeparkar and V K Tahilramani today. In its earlier hearing of the case on July 17, the court had censured the CBI for its casual approach to investigation and had observed, “It seems that the country’s premier investigating agency is getting corroded from within.”
 On the basis of the initial investigation conducted by the local police in Jalagaon, chargesheets had been filed against four persons: Raju Mali and Raju Sonawane (both alleged assassins) and Damodar Lokhande and Leeladhar Narkhede, both alleged hirers of the assassins. Raju Mali died in mysterious circumstances inside police custody in April 2006. Later, both Lokhande and Narkhede were discharged, and FIRs against them quashed, by a questionable order of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court.
 

Rajni Patil, the petitioner, has alleged that Lokhande and Narkhede were the intermediaries working on behalf of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil, a former Congress MP from Jalagaon. The cause of the murder, he contented, was the political rivalry between her late husband and the two alleged conspirators. The rivalry had come to a head when Prof. V.G. Patil, backed by many office bearers of the DCC, initiated investigation into the alleged financial irregularities by Dr. G.N. Patil in August 2005.
 Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for the petitioner, placed before the court some crucial information, incriminating the alleged assassins, intermediaries and conspirators.
 
Drawing on prosecution documents, he pointed out that on 7^th September — that is, two weeks before the murder — Raju Mali had intimated to both Lokhande and Narkhede that he would kill V.G. Patil shortly. He also stated that a close examination of the mobile call records furnished by the police reveals a pattern in the frequent communication between Mali, Lokhande, Narkhede, Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil.
 

1: On 7^th September, the day when the police have averred that Mali told Lokhande and Narkhede about his plans to murder Prof. V.G. Patil, Mali has made calls from his mobile phone to the mobiles of the two alleged hirers.
 2) On 8^th, 9^th and 10^th of September several calls between Lokhande and Narkhede have been recorded.
 

3) On 14^th September, there is a call from Narkhede to Mali.
 
4) Dr. G.N. Patil has made calls to both Narkhede and Lokhande on 24^th August, 28^th August, 1^st, 3^rd, 4^th, 7^th, 8^th, 11^th, 12^th, 13^th,14^th, 20^{th  ( 6.43 p.m.)}, and 21^st September (9.30 a.m.). Curiously, almost all these are conference calls. Records show that he spoke to both of them simultaneously from his mobile.
 5) The most damning telephone calls are those made on the day (September 20) before the murder and soon after the murder — at around 7.30 am on September 21. Police records show that, at 8.16 am,  Mali made a call from an STD booth to Narkhede’s mobile, stating in Marathi, “The work has been accomplished successfully. Ask Lokhande to pay the remaining part of the money.” A witness — owner of a shop from where Mali made the call — has confirmed this conversation in his witness statement.
 

6) At 9.23 am on the day of the murder, Lokhade gives a ‘missed call’ to Dr. G.N. Patil. Two seconds later, Dr. G.N. Patil puts in a conference call from his mobile to both Lokhande and Narkhede.
 Several witness statements recorded by the police, Jethmalani pointed, show that the motor cycle that Mali and Sonawane used at the time of the alleged crime belonged to Narkhede. In the light of all this evidence, the order of the Aurangabad Bench  of the Bombay High Court to discharge Lokhande and Narkhede and simultaneously quash the FIRs against them has raised grave suspicions of a politically inspired “cover-up” in the case. Rajni Patil has alleged that Lokhande and Narkhede have been discharged in order to shield Dr. G.N. Patil.
 

In his brief argument, CBI counsel and solicitor general Ghulam Vahanavati assured the court that the case was being probed “vigorously” and would be completed by October 8.
 The court accepted the CBI counsel’s offer and fixed the next hearing on October 8.
 

 

Filed under: Pratibha Patil, Uncategorized

Death of Conviction marks this Presidential Election

The campaigning has ended and the battle royal between the UPA, CPI-M, CPI Nominee and former Rajasthan Governor Pratibha Patil and the NDA Nominee and Vice President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat is all set for 19th July 2007. Offstumped marks the culmination of this bitter battle for the Indian Presidency with some verse.

 

On this momentous Occasion

here goes an appeal to all electoral Collegians

as you mark that ballot with your considered Opinion

reflect you must on what sets apart this Election

Carry you must positive Identification

but you can leave behind that anachronism of a Conviction

 

the outcome, presumed, a foregone Conclusion

the contest, reduced, to a deferred Coronation

the sideshow, stagemanaged, to coerce Abstentions

but persist we must with this farcical Election

for it is important to preserve that Enumeration

to reassure if there still were a few, burdened of Convictions

 

to that odd elector who indulges in conscientious Flirtations

forget not how Pratibha Patil was thrust on you, by Elimination

to arrive at the Lowest Common Moral De-nomination,

Lest you end up looking yourself in the  mirror, day after the Election

the ache hanging over your head, with that dreaded Question

“What was it I bargained, trading my Convictions ? “

 

“That Raisina Hill would see a long overdue Gender Correction”

Allow Offstumped to disabuse you of that flawed Notion

for Pratibha Patil in her Gubernatorial Habitation

while patronizing activism against Patriarchal Discrimination

avoided Taslima Nasreen, shying away from a Formal Introduction

So much so for Women’s Rights and Strength of Conviction

 

“That Maratha Pride would be served with her Elevation”

 Dont delude yourself with the Tiger’s Geriatric Fiction

Pratibha Tai aint no Muktabai, despite the sugar sweet Invocation

45 years of Public Service peddling a politically correct Identification

can someone explain this incredible Electoral Roll infraction

So much so for Maratha Pride and Strength of Conviction

 

“How sorry I am Kalam is not up for Re-Election“

Mr. President one last service to your beloved Nation

The Partisan Politics of the Country desperately need Rejuvenation

May we request you leave behind a little something at your Valediction

your Spirit, may just be the one for your gifted Successor to be in Communion

Lest history judge this election as one that heralded the Death of Conviction

Filed under: Poetry, Pratibha Patil, Uncategorized

India Presidential Election 2007 – Endgame in the Electoral College

The Consitution provides for a Contest not a Coronation

The election to elect the next President of India is now entering the end game. The contenders Pratibha Patil supported by the UPA, Left combine and Vice President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat supported by the BJP, NDA combine offer a stark choice. The third front UNPA Parties comprising of the Jayalalitha’s AIADMK, Chandrababu Naidu’s TDP and Mulayam Singh Yadav’s SP continue to sit on the fence.

Offstumped takes a look at the electoral college as the election nears the endgame.

First a note on the website launched by Mr. Arun Jaitley and the booklet  titled ‘A compilation of reports and articles appearing in the media about the life and work of Smt. Pratibha Patil’ at BJP leader Venkaiah Naidu’s house. Offstumped is gratified that Mr. Jaitley and other senior BJP members, the Pioneer Editor Chandan Mitra, former personal secretary to Giani Zail Singh, Tarlochan Singh, Sudheendra Kulkarni and Rajkumar Sharma found it valuable to quote from Offstumped on the Least Common Moral Denominator that the Congress is aspiring for in this election. However Offstumped would also like to make it clear that it remains an independent voice of an “aam aadmi” with primary focus on the Indian National Interest. Offstumped is not associated or affiliated in anyway with any political party or platform.

The total electors in the 2007 Presidential Electoral College are 4896 of these 233 are from the Rajya Sabha, 543 from the Lok Sabha and 4120 from the State Assemblies. However as we have been told on many an occassion not all electors are born equal and the value of each vote depends on the population of a given state and the number of seats in that state. The total value of the 776 Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha electors is 549408 while the total value of the 4120 state electors is 549474. The winner is also declared in an interesting way based on the total value of the valid votes by dividing it in half and adding 1.

The Congress has been pretty smug about having this election all wrapped up based on the electoral college, the Indian Express reported that the UPA Left Combine has around 5.13 lakh votes while the NDA has 3.54 lakh votes (28,000 of which belong to the Shiv Sena) and the 3rd front about 1.05 lakh votes. In a straight fight on party lines with the 3rd front abstaining Pratibha Patil should be sworn in. However the leader of the Opposition Mr. L.K. Advani in a handwritten appeal to MPs and MLAs has called for a conscience vote opening up the potential for a surprise. The appeal for conscience vote has been criticized by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi  and Senior Member of Parliament Rishang Keishing calling it “invitation for cross-party voting.” and  unethical and unprincipled.

Offstumped Appeal to electors

Through a secret ballot the Constitution provides for a contest and not a coronation. There are those amongst you from the UPA and Left combine who clearly feel voting for Pratibha Patil would be ethically and morally wrong. If you cannot muster your conscience to vote for Shekhawat you could atleast abstain from voting. Your abstention can make a difference and here is how.

It would take only 70 Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha members from the UPA and Left parties to abstain to dent the UPA and Left electoral vote by 50,000 electoral votes.

Are there not atleast 70 of you across the UPA and Left parties who do not see a moral and ethical issue with electing Pratibha Patil ?

It would take just 50 BSP MLAs in UP to abstain to dent her electoral votes by another 10,000

It would take just 50 Congress MLAs in Rajasthan to abstain to dent her electoral votes by another 6,000

It would take just 50 MLAs across NCP and Congress to abstain to dent her electoral votes to another 9,000, there are definitely 50 of you very unhappy with the Pratibha Patil nomination

It would take just 50 DMK MLAs to abstain in Tamil Nadu to dent her electoral vote by another 8,000

It would take just 50 Left front MLAs to abstain in West  Bengal to dent her electoral vote by another 7500, there surely are 50 of you whose conscience is troubled by the Pratibha Patil nomination

It would take just 25 Congress MLAs in Karnataka, 25 Congress MLAs in Andhra Pradesh, 25 MLAs from RJD, Congress in Bihar to abstain to close the gap and make this race competitive.

So all we are asking for is 395 of 4896 electoral college voters to abstain to redeem their conscience and to be able to look themselves in the mirror and feel right about their action in this Presidential Election.

Are there not 395 electors with a conscience, Offstumped asks ?

Filed under: Pratibha Patil, Uncategorized

"We are not apologetic of our choice" – Also sprach Manamohana

 ”We are not apologetic about her choice. Not only the UPA but the entire country is united about her. We have made the right choice. She is deserving of the high office”. That was Dr. Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India, speaking to a group of women journalists at his residence. defending Pratibha Patil’s nomination for President 

Offstumped’s response to Dr. Manmohan Singh follows below.

We are not surprised Mr. Prime Minister that you are not apologetic, for not being apologetic has been the hallmark of your administration.

Allow me to refresh your memory if I may Mr. Prime Minister.

On July 11th 2006 more than 200 Mumbaikars fell prey to the most heinous terrorist attack on Indian soil in over a decade but you were not apologetic on your choice of response.

On July 12th you said India must “win its war on terror”, but then you were not apologetic on the about face you made 2 months later on Sept 23 2006 when you informed the left parties that “war was not an option”.

On July 14th you said it “cannot be business as usual” but then you were not apologetic when your government and its lackdaisical home minister went about business as usual to see terrorist attacks in Malegaon, Hyderabad and in the Samjhauta Express.

On July 14th also you said “we must must act on a credible strategy”  but then you were not apologetic when on August 15th 2006 you neither exuded credibility nor announced a strategy to act  but instead pleaded helplessness with Pakistan.

Mr. Prime Minister you then went on to attend the G-8 summit where you called for “Zero Tolerance” to terrorism, but then you were not aplogetic  when on your way to Havana you diluted your tolerance to terrorism with qualifiers like Pakistan too is a victim of terrorism.

With 12 months having gone by and not a single individual brought to justice or held accountable for the 7-11 Mumbai Train serial bomb blasts Mr. Prime Minister you continue to be unapologetic for your Executive Delinquency.

But then why should it be surprising. We always knew you were teflon skinned little surprise your conscience is of a synthetic fabric too.

You take issue with the leader of the opposition BJP, Mr. L.K. Advani’s remarks that you were handpicked, well you had the opportunity to go to the people and seek their direct mandate but you chose not do so by taking the electile dysfunctional Rajya Sabha route again.

It is no wonder you are not apologetic to the people of India because you never had to seek their mandate or be responsible or accountable to them.

Come July 11th with what face do you plan to address the victims and the next of kin of 7-11.

Well we know the answer to that one – it would be an unapologetic one.

Offstumped Bottomline: You may not be apologetic for your pusillanimity and inaction but we will not. It is our solemn commitment to the victims of 7–11 that we will not forget their loss and we will not forgive the unapologetic politicians who did not deliver justice to their loved ones.

Filed under: Pratibha Patil, Uncategorized