000-tobecategorised

Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ recited at Vira Sathidar memorial event, wife Pushpa & 2 others booked www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/faiz-s-hum-dekhenge-recited-at-vira-sathidar-memorial-event-wife-pushpa-2-others-booked/ar-AA1F9b5z 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/obituaries/vira-sathidar-dead-coronavirus.html

Singing Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ is ‘Sedition’: Nagpur Police Book Organisers of Vira Sathidar Memorial https://sabrangindia.in/singing-faizs-hum-dekhenge-is-sedition-nagpur-police-book-organisers-of-vira-sathidar-memorial/ Sukanya Shantha     May 20, 2025 A group of young cultural activists sang the lyrics of Faiz’s famous poem last week. The police complaint says, 'At a time when the country valiantly fought Pakistani forces, the radical left in Nagpur were busy singing Pakistani poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s poem.' 

 Sathidar, an accomplished actor, prolific writer, journalist, and political thinker, died on April 13, 2021, after battling COVID-19 for over a week. Satidhar was also an Ambedkarite and the editor of Vidrohi magazine. Since his passing, his wife, Pushpa, is one of the organisers of the annual memorial. A committee was formed after Sathidar’s death under the name ‘Vira Sathidar Smruti Samanvay Samiti’ which has been instrumental in organising the annual event. This year, social activist Uttam Jagirdar was invited to speak.

The FIR, filed by one local Nagpur resident Dattatray Shirke, cites a news report aired on ABP Majha, a Marathi channel. The channel was likely the first to find issue in reciting Faiz’s poetry in India. In his complaint, Shirke claims, “At a time when the country valiantly fought Pakistani forces, the radical left in Nagpur were busy singing Pakistani poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s poem.

Shirke further claims that the line “Takht hilaane ki zaroorat hai (a need to shake the throne)” constitutes a direct threat to the government. However, while the FIR quotes the above line, the actual line in the poem is “sab takht giraye jayenge”. The poem was performed by young Mumbai-based cultural activists from Samata Kala Manch.

Despite an ongoing stay by the Supreme Court on the application of sedition charges, the Nagpur police have booked the organisers and speakers under the section. On May 11, 2022, the apex court had issued a historic order, staying all pending trials, appeals, and proceedings under section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code until the sedition law’s re-examination was complete. Since then, the BJP-led government has replaced the IPC with the BNS. However, the new law does not eliminate the sedition provision. Instead, the BNS introduces Section 152, which closely resembles the sedition law without explicitly using the word ‘sedition’.

 बुरे फँसे Arnab Goswami और Amit Malviya, FIR होते ही Republic TV ने माँगी माफ़ी?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqhA-eqYMZc 

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/abhijit-iyer-agrees-to-remove-tweets-on-newslaundry-after-delhi-high-court-rap-101747813388710.html

Newslaundry journalists move Delhi High Court against Abhijit Iyer-Mitra for calling them prostitutes https://www.barandbench.com/news/newslaundry-journalists-move-delhi-high-court-against-abhijit-iyer-mitra-calling-them-prostitutes They have alleged that Iyer-Mitra used ‘vulgar’ remarks by referring to them as ‘prostitutes’ and their workplace as a ‘brothel.’  “By referring to the Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 9 as prostitutes, repeatedly, in a series of posts and articles, the Defendant No. 1 [Iyer-Mitra] has clearly launched a series of scathing and belligerent attacks against the Plaintiffs. As such, the Defendant No. 1 cannot be permitted to disseminate falsities, only with the oblique motive to gain cheap publicity and eyeballs,” the defamation suit states. 

Abhijit Iyer agrees to remove tweets on Newslaundry after Delhi high court rap https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/abhijit-iyer-agrees-to-remove-tweets-on-newslaundry-after-delhi-high-court-rap-101747813388710.html  May 21, 2025 The Delhi high court slammed Abhijit Iyer Mitra over his objectionable tweets on Newslaundry, saying that his choice of words are impermissible in a civilized society.”

An FIR has been registered against BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya and Editor-in-Chief of Republic TV, Arnab Goswami 
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/fir-filed-against-bjp-it-cell-chief-journalist-arnab-goswami/articleshow/121305841.cms  on the complaint from the Indian Youth Congress's legal cell head Shrikant Swaroop B N that the accused have "maliciously propagated the fabricated claim" that the Istanbul Congress Centre in Turkiye is the office of the Indian National Congress (INC).

https://thewire.in/politics/ali-khan-mahmudabads-arrest-reveals-the-political-capture-of-womens-rights-in-india This article explores how Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s arrest exposes the political misuse of women’s commissions—especially in BJP-ruled Haryana, where the Women’s Commission acted swiftly on a tweet while the state reports 19 crimes against women daily. I discuss how BJP’s model of “Mahila Sashaktikaran” is hollow and how “majoritarian genderwashing” is being used to silence dissent rather than ensure real justice for marginalised women.

While the weaponisation of the women’s commission is new, the use of women’s rights to propagate a majoritarian agenda is something which we have seen aplenty in the past decade. ..

majoritarian gender washing is a term used often to describe how regimes, quite intelligently, adopt a language of gender justice in the garb of empowering women while fulfilling the actual intent of sanitising authoritarianism. In India, it has been quite rampant and visible through instances such as criminalisation of Muslim men under the guise of “protecting Muslim women” through moves like the triple talaq ban, or “protecting Hindu women” through “love jihad” laws, or selective invocation of women’s honour on any random day to justify majoritarian control. 

The UP Women Commission reduced “women’s safety” to a question of physical proximity to men. This not only infantilises women by implying they cannot make autonomous decisions about their bodies or professional interactions, but also reinforces deeply patriarchal and moralistic anxieties about women’s presence in public life.

By implicitly targeting professions that employ large numbers of Muslim men – such as tailoring and training – it furthers the ongoing vilification and otherisation of a specific community under the pretext of protecting women.