|

May 28, 2017

India: Stiffer cow slaughter laws may save cattle but what about people? (Aakar Patel)

The Times of India - May 28, 2017

[by] Aakar Patel

When did you first read stories of cow vigilantes? When did Indian Muslims first begin to be killed over this issue and when did we first begin to brutalise Dalits over it?

I suspect that like me you did not read of cow vigilantism before this government signalled intent and then state governments like Maharashtra and Haryana began introducing laws in March 2015.

This triggered something that began the violence, and Mohammed Akhlaq was murdered in September 2015. So what did the change in laws trigger? Why did you not read of cow vigilantism in India before that, if the cow has always been holy and revered by Hindus? And why are we reading so regularly about it these days that barely a week goes by without incident?

I’ll come to that in a bit. Now that we are aware of causality, we should be concerned about the fallout of a new law that the government introduced on Friday, May 26.

In brief, the rules allowing how cattle (including buffaloes) may be sold for slaughter have been changed to make it very difficult, if not impossible, to conduct a meat business.

Where the sale may happen, who may make the sale, why the sale is happening and what sort of animal may be sold, all of this is being regulated. And it will have to be reported, meaning those dealing with cattle now have to do lots of paperwork.

Ostensibly the reason is to control disease and hygiene, but you have to be particularly innocent to believe that.
There will, of course, be an economic fallout of this. I am not discussing that here.

The fallout that I’d like to focus on is that of the violence that it is guaranteed to bring down on Muslims and Dalits. To turn to the point made at the start.

What did the change in laws trigger and why did the gau rakshaks suddenly turn violent and why are they not stopping their violence? To understand that, let us look at a similar country (so similar that it used to once be India).

Blasphemy was once a religious crime that produced no violence in Pakistan. From 1927 to 1947 (in all of undivided India) and from 1947 to 1986 (in Pakistan), a total of only seven cases of blasphemy were registered. But in the 25 years after 1986, over 1,000 cases were registered in Pakistan, mostly against minorities.

And many of the accused are today lynched by mobs before trial or even arrest.

What changed in 1986? The law. What used to be an offence punishable by a jail term of a few years was changed to an offence punishable by death.

This change in the law highlighted, emphasised and criminalised the ‘otherness’ of minorities that were already hated and despised. Non-Muslims, who are 4% of Pakistan’s population, are 57% of those charged with blasphemy. The change in law legitimised the violence.

The same thing is happening in India under the BJP’s legal and RSS’ cultural gau raksha programme. The Hindutvawadi will be loath to accept the parallel though it is obvious. He may not even understand the causality.

Union minister Nitin Gadkari said on May 25 that though he supported gau raksha, he did not support gau rakshaks. In his words: “they’re not our people.” Of course, they’re not.

Those made apoplectic by distinctions between good terrorists and bad terrorists now make a distinction between good Hindutvawadis and bad Hindutvawadis. How difficult is it to understand that if you keep pushing gau raksha what you will get is gau rakshaks?

This understanding of causality seems to be missing in the BJP. They will rouse a mob of lakhs and then be surprised when it pulls down a monument and 2,000 Indians are killed.

A member of Parliament, Paresh Rawal (disclaimer: he is a family friend of 40 years) casually encourages violence against a dissenting writer in a country where rule of law is weak and where there is news of lynchings and mob killings every week.

One could well suspect that it is not stupidity or ignorance of causality that is the motivation, but something more cynical and bordering on evil.

In March this year, Gujarat announced a change in the sentence for cow slaughter. From seven years in jail, the cow murderer would now get a life term. The conviction rate in India is pretty low and it’s unlikely to be a deterrent. But it will be helpful in encouraging gau rakshaks.

In August 2016, the Prime Minister nobly offered that gau rakshaks should kill him instead of Dalits. I was moved to tears. But if he really wants to stop violence he should consider what started it. It is indisputable that gau rakshak violence was triggered by the gau raksha laws.

That’s why, in the matter of Hindutva’s continuing cow obsession, I will predict one fallout of the new law of Friday: more animals may or may not be saved but more Indians will certainly be slaughtered.

India: 7 men of Vishwa Hindu Parishad held for setting Banjara man’s truck ablaze in Bhilwara

The Times of India

7 VHP men held for setting Banjara man’s truck ablaze in Bhilwara

TNN | Updated: May 27, 2017, 11.34 AM IST


JAIPUR: Seven men of Vishwa Hindu Parishad were reportedly arrested for settling ablaze a truck in Bhilwara late Wednesday. In an FIR registered at Kachhola thana of Bhilwara on Thursday, truck owner Chandu Nadawat, of traditionally nomadic Banjara community, said his driver and a helper had loaded six oxen which were to be taken to farms in Bhilwara from their home in Rajsamand . Soon as they left with the oxen at around 10.30 pm on Wednesday, a large crowd stopped them near toll plaza and questioned about their whereabouts.

Nadawat told TOI that the men had demanded Rs 5,000 to allow his driver to cart the oxen safely. When his driver pleaded to not having that much money and refused to pay, the men got incited. The driver and helper then attempted to ride off, but were slowed down as the vehicle got stuck in a ditch. A large crowd then gathered at the spot and unloaded all six animals. The driver and helper were beaten up, and they somehow managed to escape into bushes nearby under the cover of darkness.

In the FIR, complainant states that the men, while unloading the animals, called each other Mohan, Nandlal, Ramlal, Bhagchand, Sanwarlal, Prabhu, Naresh, Lokesh and Dinesh.

Mahaveer Meena, the police officer who has been appointed as investigating officer in this case, did not answer TOI's phone call.

Narpat Singh Shekhawat of Vishwa Hindu Parishad said, "Those transporting animals often do it without any legal documents. It is our effort to save animals." Asked about why VHP did not trust law enforcing agencies to do whatever was necessary to prevent illegal ferry or slaughter of cattle, Shekhawat said he would find out details of this case and abruptly cut the conversation.

Nadawat told TOI he was threatened with death even as he took a complaint to police. "Seven of the VHP men had been arrested. A crowd gathered at the police station seeking their release. Policemen had to rush me into the thana to keep the crowd from letting their ire loose on me."

Director General of Police Manoj Bhatt also did not respond to TOI's call.

Vigilantes In India: Protecting Sacred Cows, Promoting A Hindu Way Of Life | Julie McCarthy - National Public Radio

npr.org

Vigilantes In India: Protecting Sacred Cows, Promoting A Hindu Way Of Life

May 2, 2017

Julie McCarthy

A buffalo market in central Rajasthan, India. Drivers ferrying these animals to slaughterhouses have been intercepted and accused of transporting cows, an animal many Hindus consider sacred. A new report from Human Rights Watch says that this devotion to protecting the cow has contributed to recent vigilante violence.
Julie McCarthy/NPR

In India, Hindu nationalists have swept recent elections, and flush from victory, stand accused of using vigilantism to promote a Hindu way of life for all Indians.

At a buffalo market outside the town of Nasirabad in central Rajasthan, transporters say Hindu vigilantes have targeted them on rumors that they have sold, bought, or killed cows for beef.
Asia
Hindu Nationalists Blamed For Igniting Culture War

Mohammad Salim is a driver at this market with its forlorn-looking animals corralled beneath a canopy, twitching in the scorching heat. Salim is a Muslim, like many of the men who work at this hardscrabble market. He was carrying buffalo to slaughter two weeks ago when he says he was stopped outside New Delhi, the Indian capital.

"A car intercepted me," Salim says. "And a girl got out and said – 'what's in your truck?'"

Soon some 15 men were on him — self-appointed cow protectors, according to Salim, who insisted he was transporting cows. They beat him and stole his money. The police who came to the scene extorted more, he says. He is paid less than $40 a run.

"I have been doing this for seven years, and I was never attacked before," says the bruised 32-year-old Salim. "Now it is happening. And we're scared." Older drivers have quit.

Salim Qureshi, the secretary of the market, says even farmers have stopped bringing their old buffalo to sell for fear of falling afoul of the cow protection outfits lying in wait. Business is down 75 percent, he says.

Traders and transporters in Nasiarabad blame Yogi Adityanath, the newly elected chief administrator in the neighboring state of Uttar Pradesh. Like Prime Minister Narendra Modi, he's a self-avowed Hindu nationalist. The creation of a Hindu Rastra, or state, is a central tenet for this Hindu priest. In a new report, Human Rights Watch cited his devotion to protecting the cow as contributing to the recent vigilante violence.


Parallels
India's Ban On Beef Leads To Murder, And Hindu-Muslim Friction

Earlier this month, a mob in Rajasthan lynched a 55-year-old driver, alleging he was illegally carrying cows. The state of Gujarat, meanwhile, made slaughtering a cow punishable by life in prison. Other states have strengthened cow welfare rules, which are multiplying.

Most parts of India ban the slaughter of cows, an animal many Hindus, who are the majority, consider holy. For Sadhvi Kamal Didi, it's a "giver of life." The president of the women's wing of the National Cow Protection Group, she says her members will take the law into their own hands when the police don't.

"We are not going to allow cow smuggling. And we won't allow them to be slaughtered. Whoever wants to stay here in India, they stay here as a Hindu. This is our country, we should dominate, and things should happen according to us."

"Anyone who doesn't like it," she says, "can go to Pakistan."

Sadhvi Kamal Didi, president of the women's wing of the National Cow Protection Group, says her members will take the law into their own hands when the police fail to arrive on the scene to enforce cow welfare laws.
Julie McCarthy/NPR

Yogi Adityanath founded a group to advance, critics say violently, a Hindu way of life. The Hindu Yuva Vahini– or Hindu Youth Brigade— recently enlisted police to disrupt a Good Friday church service alleging that Christians were converting Hindus. Police found the claim baseless. Nagendra Tomar is a leader of the Brigade and makes similar charges against Muslims.

Speaking through an interpreter he told NPR, "In Muslim-dominated areas of India Hindu girls are lured into having sexual relations" with Muslim men, "and then they convert them."

Historian Romila Thapar says the lack of outright condemnation by either Narendra Modi or Yogi Adityanath of the growing zealotry may have emboldened it. Thapar says the two leaders who rely on the allegiance of Hindu nationalists may feel no need to discourage it.

"Now there is a much greater perception that the majority is in power and the majority therefore can do what it pleases."

But author and historian D.N. Jha says Hindu nationalism cannot succeed in a country whose population is nearly 15 percent Muslim.

"Will we throw them out into the Bay of Bengal?" he says of Muslim Indians. "Why don't these jokers realize this?"

Goats and Soda
The Caste Formerly Known As 'Untouchables' Demands A New Role In India

Thapur sees a larger significance in the current vigilantism that goes beyond acting outside the law.

"It's an alternate claim to being legal," she says. "You defy the laws of the state and you do it on the base of having community support, which you have carefully built up. And that is what gives it, in their eyes, legitimacy."

Cow protection advocate Sadhvi Kamal Didi is in no doubt about where India is heading. And in Narendra Modi she believes man and moment have met.

"For the first time we've got a very good ruler in Modi," she says, "and between the prime minister and Yogi Adtiyanath, we will regain our greatness."

India: Javed Jaffrey’s shayari on intolerance

The Indian Express

Gaay Hindu ho gaye aur bakra Musalman ho gaya: Javed Jaffrey’s shayari on intolerance
At a recent event in Bengaluru, the actor spoke about religious intolerance in the country, quoting a funny, but hard-hitting, shayari.

By: Express News Desk | New Delhi |
Published on: December 20, 2015

[. . .]

Nafraton ka asar dekho,
Janwaron ka batwara ho gaya,
Gaye Hindu ho gayee aur bakra Musalman ho gaya.

Ye ped ye patte ye shakhein bhi pareshan ho jayein,
Agar parinde bhi Hindu aur Musalman ho jayein.

Sukhe mewe bhi ye dekh kar pareshan ho gaye,
Na jaane kab nariyal Hindu aur khajoor Musalman ho gaye.

Jis tarah se dharm rangon ko bhi baant-te ja rahein hain,
ki hara musalman ka hai aur laal Hinduon ka rang hai,
Toh woh din bhi door nahin, jab saari-ki-saari hari sabziyan Musalmanon ki ho jayengi
Aur Hinduon ke hisse bas gajar aur tamatar hi aayenge

Ab samajh nahin aa raha is tarbooz kiske hisse jayega,
Yeh toh bechara upar se Musalman aur andar se Hindu reh jayega.

(Such are the effects of hatred, even animals have been divided,
the cow has become a Hindu, and the goat a Muslim.

Even the trees, the leaves and branches would lose all patience,
if the birds next were to be divided into Hindus and Muslims.

The sweets are all very confused,
knowing not when coconuts became Hindu and dates Muslim.

The way religion is dividing everything,
that green is now a colour of Muslims and red for Hindus,
Then even that day isn’t far off, when all the green vegetables would belong to the Muslims,
and Hindus would be left with carrots and tomatoes.

Now, here is a conundrum — what does the poor watermelon do?
It’s Muslim on the outside, but from inside a Hindu.)

May 27, 2017

India: How Jayaprakash Narayan Helped the RSS Overcome Its Stigmatic Past (Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay)

The Wire, 11 April 2017

Past Continuous: How Jayaprakash Narayan Helped the RSS Overcome Its Stigmatic Past
By Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay


Jawaharlal Nehru with Jayaprakash Narayan: Wikimedia Commons

One man, considered a demigod by the majority of present-day political leaders, particularly from the ruling establishment, declared 40 years ago, in the course of the watershed elections of 1977, that selecting a prime ministerial candidate before the elections was “not a democratic way of doing things”.

Three months before the assertion, Jayprakash Narayan man was referred to as ‘grandfather’ by the mild-mannered Madhu Dandavate in a cryptic cable sent to L.K. Advani. This was when coded conversations were necessary to escape the scrutiny of censors because India remained under Emergency rule and a good number of opposition stalwarts, including Advani, were still locked up in jails.

Narayan was treated as the patriarch of the Janata Parivar, even though he was six years younger that Morarji Desai, the country’s first non-Congress prime minister. Narayan was also the same age as Charan Singh and six years older than the other claimant in the bitter struggle for the prime ministerial position, Jagjivan Ram. Narayan remains revered as the grand old man of the Janata Party because he took himself out of the race for positions and became its conscience keeper. There is another reason why today’s governing leaders must hold the Janata Parivar in high regard: they owe the party’s inclusion in the mainstream to him.

Narayan, however, was a man of limited vision: despite opposing the pre-selection of a prime ministerial candidate, as is the norm now, he was among the primary catalysts for the merger of non-communist opposition parties without resolving basic ideological divergences.

The Janata Parivar promoted unification between the Congress (O), socialists, Jana Sangh, Lok Dal and the Congress for Democracy because, as he said, the “two party system is the best”. This was almost 15 years before the decision to implement the Mandal Commission empowered marginalised communities with the emergence of several identity-based parties.

Narayan also provided impetus to the idea of ‘one-nation, one poll’ when he advanced the plan to dissolve existing state governments when the Janata government assumed office. Narayan argued that states must be “in tune” with the Centre and that when a new government is formed at the Centre, state governments must resign and fresh polls be held. For all his righteousness and commitment to democratic values, Narayan was inadequate on several matters.

For instance, he declared after Lok Sangharsh Samiti’s formation that Nanaji Deshmukh was to be handed its leadership in the event of his arrest. It didn’t cross his mind that Deshmukh’s appointment would provide undue advantage to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in leveraging the agitation. So deep was Narayan’s anti-Congressism that he gave little thought to the long-term consequences of his partnerships.

The imposition of the Emergency, the ruthless suppression of individual rights, subversion of institutions, Indira Gandhi’s defeat in 1977, formation of the Janata Party government and its subsequent demise, were a series of inter-connected episodes that combined to proclaim India’s first political transition. Forty years later, there is a rare conversation on the political past, when a reference to these chapters is not made. ‘The Emergency’ stands for much more than a presidential promulgation.

While events in 1977 can almost ceaselessly be examined from myriad perspectives, two particularly stand out: firstly, that no political party or leader is infallible and secondly, the events initiated the process of ending decades of political isolation of the Sangh parivar. By including the Jana Sangh in an umbrella anti-Congress party without its members forsaking the ideology of the RSS, the process of its mainstreaming began. Among other reasons, the Janata Party’s split two-and-half-years later was over ‘dual-membership’, underscoring that compromise was made with the sole idea of defeating the Congress.

When Jana Sangh forged political partnership with non-Congress parties to form the Janata Party, secured the highest percentage (31%) of party tickets in the 1977 Lok Sabha polls and Atal Bihari Vajpayee was appointed foreign minister in the Desai government, its leaders completed a project started 15 years before. Begun under Deendayal Upadhyay’s stewardship after the 1962 election, this entailed striking alliances with mainstream and legitimate opposition parties. Previously, Jana Sangh formed alliances with Hindu parties.

The first success was in 1964 when Upadhyaya and maverick socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia issued a joint statement after the disappearance of the holy relic from the Hazratbal shrine. The non-conditional merger of the Jana Sangh into Janata Party meant its acceptance in the electoral mainstream without debate on its position on secularism and the Sangh’s understanding of Indian nationalism.

A key role in paving the Jana Sangh’s way into Janata Party was played by Narayan. He needed RSS support for the agitation along with backing from other opposition parties. By the time Emergency was imposed, the formation of Janata Party was almost a fait accompli. In the winter of 1974, Babulal Gaur and Sharad Yadav won the by-elections for an assembly seat and a Lok Sabha constituency respectively as ‘Janata’ candidates.

Reservations of just a few had to be ironed out and this was done during time spent together in various jails. Opinions of those like Madhu Limaye and Surendra Mohan on one side and K.R. Malkani on the other, were electorally insignificant and thereby silenced. Malkani changed his stance later but the other two stuck to their guns and eventually felled the Desai government.

By the time Indira called for polls in 1977, the Jana Sangh had overcome it stigmatic past. The RSS and its affiliates, including the Jana Sangh, faced barbs for decades over early Hindu nationalists being influenced by European fascists and on alleged links in the Gandhi murder case. But because the Jana Sangh and the RSS cadre was essential to sustain and advance the total revolution stir, its ideological baggage was overlooked.

Narayan provided the ultimate stamp of approval by signing up for a mutual admiration society with Balasaheb Deoras. In a reciprocatory gesture after the RSS chief declared that Narayan was on the path of Mahatma Gandhi, Acharya Vinoba Bhave and Golwalkar and was a sanyasi, he attended a Jana Sangh meeting and declared to thunderous claps “if you are fascist, then I too am a fascist.” Had Emergency not been declared, the Sangh parivar may have remained the political pariah it initially was.

In the race to provide greater political legitimacy to the Sangh parivar, the baton was again picked up during the 1989 elections that unseated Rajiv Gandhi. By then, the Jana Sangh had morphed into the BJP and had chosen to retain its individual identity while non-Congress and non-Left parties eventually coalesced into the Janata Dal. The push for BJP’s final mainstreaming came from the Left too, as the Janata Dal made seat adjustments on one side with BJP, and with the communists on the other.

Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay is a Delhi-based writer and journalist, and the author of Narendra Modi: The Man, The Times and Sikhs: The Untold Agony of 1984. He tweets @NilanjanUdwin

Secularism and the State - the Nehru Model | Anil Nauriya

Mainstream, VOL LV No 23 New Delhi May 27, 2017

I. The “Nehru Models”: The Historical Nehru Model and the Posthumous Nehru Model

In most circles where opinion-making on behalf of minorities takes place, one of the reasons for appreciation of Jawaharlal Nehru’s approach towards the minorities generally is his statement that majority communalism, that is, sectarianism, is more dangerous than minority communalism. He said that “the communalism of a majority community must of necessity bear a closer resemblance to nationalism than the communalism of a minority group”. (The Tribune, November 30, 1933) This statement must, however, be understood along with his insight expressed on the same occasion that majority and minority communalisms feed off each other. (Idem) His approach is not therefore a blank cheque to minority communities to nurture and nurse their own respective communalisms as some of his majoritarian detractors allege.

One consequence of the focus on this aspect of Nehru’s approach has been that other features of the Nehruvian secular state have not received as much analysis as these deserved. It was hardly ever noticed therefore that there are in fact at least two models that contend for recognition as the Nehru model.

The notion of the secular state that was implemented after independence emerged from the Congress-led freedom struggle. Nehru invariably emphasised the connection between the establishment of a secular state and the “whole growth of our national movement”. (The Statesman, Delhi, July 8, 1951) It is intrinsic to the Gandhi-Nehru framework. It is a model of equality and equal citizenship.

A secular state was thus established and it went beyond the usual European notion of a denominational state whose secularism consisted merely in the separation from the very church to which that state was simultaneously committed. We understood, and rightly understood, a secular state to be a non-denominational state and a state, that was religiously neutral as specified in the Karachi Resolution of 1931. Gandhi, in speaking of a secular state, had also defined it in clear terms in what would now be depicted as a Nehruvian manner, that is, in terms of separation of the state from denominational religion (May 6, 1933; January 27, 1935; January 20, 1942; September 1946; August 16, 1947; August 17, 1947; August 22, 1947; November 15, 1947; November 28, 1947; all cited in my article Gandhi on Secular law and State in The Hindu, October 22, 2003)1

Similarly, when it came to society, as distinct from the state, both Gandhi and Nehru emphasised the concept of equal respect and protection of all religions, thus reconciling the concept of a religiously neutral state with a concept of equal respect for the humanist values that may be located in each religion. For Nehru, “A secular state means a state in which the State protects all religions, but does not favour one at the expense of others and does not itself adopt any religion as State religion.” (The Statesman, July 7, 1951)

And then there is a constructed Nehru model or a quasi-Nehruvian model which is actually a posthumous Nehru model constructed largely after the split in the Congress in 1969. This model resembled but was somewhat different from the actual Nehruvian model. It could not last for more than six or seven years and ended dramatically with the firing at Turkman Gate, Delhi during the tenure of the Emergency regime in 1976. [. . .]

FULL TEXT AT: http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article7195.html

India: AAP leader moves Supreme Court seeking protection of life, citing threat from ‘Right-wing bodies’

The Hindu

AAP leader moves SC citing threat from ‘Right-wing bodies’

Krishnadas Rajagopal
NEW DELHI, May 25, 2017 00:00 IST

On hit list?The AAP leader said communications addressed to Home Minister Rajnath Singh and the Delhi Police chief about the threats had gone unanswered.File photo

Ashish Khetan files plea under Section 32 of Constitution, matter posted for June 5

Social activist and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Ashish Khetan on Wednesday moved the Supreme Court with an urgent plea seeking protection of life, liberty and freedom of speech and expression from “radical Right-wing extremist” organisations.

Receiving death threats

In a mentioning before the Vacation Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and Navin Sinha, Mr. Khetan’s counsel and advocate Sunil Fernandes said his client had been receiving death threats from these organisations.

The court has now posted the case for June 5.

Mr. Khetan said communications addressed to Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh and the Delhi Police Commissioner about the threats had gone unanswered. In his writ petition, he said that even Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal had written to the Home Minister, but to no avail.

The petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution said that “to the utter shock and dismay of the petitioner [Khetan], neither the Home Department under the aegis of Rajnath Singh nor the Police Commissioner, Delhi, had responded to the threats”.

Mr. Khetan, who is vice-chairman of the Dialogue and Development Commission of Delhi, named Sanatan Sanstha, Abhinav Bharat, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, Hindi Rakshak Samiti, Bajrang Dal, Durga Vahini, Sri Ram Sene, Vishwa Hindu Parishad in his petition.

“Such radical organisations have in the last couple of years carried out several murderous attacks on those who do not share their ideology and those who are rationalists, secularists, free-thinkers, anti-superstition and critical thinkers. Many members of these organisations have been convicted for their involvement in mass violence in several parts of the country,” the petition said.

‘Genuine basis’

The AAP leader alleged that such organisations had gained in prominence since 2014 and that the government had failed to discharge its duty to safeguard liberty and free speech.

“These organisations have sought to silence the voices of people like the petitioner by threats, intimidation, violence and even outright murder,” the petition said.

It added that Mr. Khetan had “genuine and reasonable basis” to believe that he would meet a fate similar to noted rationalists and public intellectuals like Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare and M.M. Kalburgi. “He [Khetan] has been threatened that he is next in line,” the petition said.

‘Chilling reminder’

Alleging that these organisations flaunt their contempt for constitutional democracy, Mr. Khetan compared them to organisations allegedly operating in Pakistan.

“They rely on supremacist ideology of their religion and inferiority of other faiths. They take recourse to the bullet rather than informed debate and discussion,” the AAP leader contended.

He added that he had worked on several investigative articles on right-wing extremist organisations during his 17-year career as a journalist.

Mr. Khetan said the threats issued to him were a “chilling reminder of the growing confidence of the anti-national and fascist forces who want to crush all dissent”.

Mr. Khetan’s petition also mentioned that threats had been directed at a CBI officer – Nanda Kumar Nair.