Posts Tagged ‘indira’

WOW !!! WHAT A CULTURE … of Nehruvian Congress … !!!

The elections of Karnataka state Assembly are over.

The election result produced a hung assembly

BJP got 104 Ssats, Nehruvian Congress got 78 seats, JDS+ got 38 seats and others got 2

Now as per the guide line prescribed under Sarkaria Commission report, the Governor is supposed to invite the leader of the first single largest party to form a government provided it has submitted the claim.

Supreme Court Approval:

It is specifically mentioned in the report, this first single largest party should be invited to form the government. Any alliance formed, after the poll results, would be over looked. Supreme Court too, had approved this criteria.

The BJP leader had submitted his claim.

The Governor of Karnataka state, invited the leader of the First Single largest party viz. BJP who had secured 104 seats.

What is the view of INC (Indian Nehruvian Congress)?

When the vote counting was in progress, and the Nehruvian Congress realized that it has no scope of getting sufficient seats to qualify as the first single largest party, and it has also realized that BJP is to get qualified as a first single largest party, Nehruvian Congress announced that it would support the 3rd single largest party to form the government. i.e. the leader of 3rd single largest party must submit its claim to form the government.

This looks very much funny

Nehruvian Congress is well known for its corruption, fraud, lies and scandals. It was also known to the Nehruvian Congress leaders that if it submits its claim to form the government, then JDS (Janata Dal Secular) would not support the Nehruvian Congress. That is why Nehruvian Congress tempted JDS to submit its claim to form the government. Nehruvian Congress propagated heavily its opinion under its so-called democratic understanding that the BJP should not submit its claim. BJP which is the First Single Largest Party if submits its claim it would be immoral, undemocratic and murder of democracy. If the Governor invites the 3rd Single largest Party viz. JDS, it would be full of moral values, democratic and constitutional.

That is according to Nehruvian Congress, the Governor of Karnataka state must reject the claim of 1st Single Largest party. 2nd largest party is not willing to submit its claim hence the governor must invites 3rd single largest party to form its government.

Does this not look ridiculous?

It may look ridiculous, but Nehruvian Congress has its own “Humpty Dumpty Dictionary” to define political terminologies.



The governor has to use his/her discretion as to who can form the stable government.

More the number of parties more to be prone to unstable.

Parties having less number of seats can form an unstable government. A well-known evidence is available in Indian political history. To keep the first single largest party away from forming the government, 2nd and 3rd and 4th single largest parties supported the  fifth single largest party to form the government and the leader of the fifth single largest party was having the strength of one seat. It was the leader himself.

Here, in the case of the Karnataka election, the situation is not exactly the same. But if the two post-election allied parties where the party having small seat strength becomes the leading party then they are more prone to give unstable government. Otherwise also they have no well thought out, program, discussion, mutual understanding of the issues and policy matters. They are more prone to get collapsed. Had they been pre-poll alliance they could have settled, issues and policy and could have prepared common minimum program. There could be a differences among elected members and can have serious problem in post poll alliances.

 Nehruvian Congress had never clear concepts about democracy. It is beyond their brain. JL Nehru was self-recognized socialist. “Socialist” means traditional communist. However there is little difference between the ideology of JL Nehru and Communist. By virtue of vicinity of MK Gandhi and his struggle for independence from British through the non-violence and democratic way, JL Nehru was not in position to talk of autocracy. Let us keep this topic away, but inherently Nehruvian Congress believes in autocracy. It appears like that.


If you have a say, if you are heard, if you are honored, if you are replied then you are living in a party honoring the democratic values.

But in a post-poll alliance, there is no scope for a member to submit his SAY, no chance to be heard, no scope to be replied. Leave aside the point of being honored.


Nehruvian Congress does not understand the meaning of Pre-poll alliance and post-poll alliance.

Party is formed by its principles and policy. Like minded persons form a party. Give a name to the party. An alliance with some other party, is a policy matter. Before taking a decision on any matter, related with policy, it is mandatory in democracy, to discuss the matter in a general body meeting, so that the members can submit their SAY. Then a resolution is to be passed.

What to talk of general body? A resolution approved by the then Nehruvian Congress ministry in power, was torn out by Rahul Gandhi the prince of Sonia. Sonia is the wife of Rajiv Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi was the son of Indira Gandhi, Indira Gandhi was the daughter of Jawahar Lal Nehru and Jawahar Lal Nehru was failed in ICS competitive examination of British, the father of Jawahar Lal Nehru Moti Lal Nehru. Moti Lal Nehru was one of the founder member of Indian National Congress. This Moti Lal Nehru asked Mahatma Gandhi to settle JL Nehru in politics.

When India was on verge to get independence, the central working Committee had called for the proposals for the post of Prime Minister. No provincial Committee had put forward the name of Jawaharlal Nehru for PM-Ship in 1946, despite of this, Jawahar Lal Nehru did not withdraw his candidature for PM-Ship, despite of Mahatma Gandhi brought this point to his notice. Jawaharlal Nehru ignored the verdict of his party and gave an indirect message that if he would not be made leader of the party he would generate a split in the party. At that time India was facing crucial issue  of maintaining united India after independence. At that crucial time JL Nehru indicated symptoms of breaking of the party. This became the basic culture which was put forward by Nehru. The daughter of JL Nehru, viz Indira Gandhi, not only degraded heavily, but murdered not only the political values but also the social values of the Indian politics.

Despite of serial defeats Nehruvian Congress is not ready to improve its culture. The leaders of Nehruvian Congress feel that they have all liberty to blame anybody on any issue and can abuse anybody by any name.

The governor of Karnataka invited the leader of 1st single largest party to form the government. The Nehruvian Congress party went to the Supreme Court at midnight and challenged the governor’s decision, as being undemocratic and unconstitutional. Nehruvian Congress asked the SC to put a stay on the governor’s decision. The Supreme Court did not give any stay on the decision of the governor, and it also rejected demand. Further the court asked the governor of Karnataka to appoint a provisional Speaker of the house to conduct voting of the elected members to see if the invited leader possesses the clear majority or not on the floor of the Assembly.

The Governor appointed Mr. Bopaiah as the speaker from the elected members of house.  

Nehruvian Congress started agitation against the order of Supreme Court. Called the governor by abusive words and further threaten the country that there would be blood shed on the roads.

Nehruvian Congress also challenged the appointment of provisional speaker viz. Mr. Bopaiah stating that the provisional speaker is a bias one on the record and not even he is the senior most.

As for allegation “Bias” it had been already decided by the SC and the allegation was set aside by the Supreme Court long back in some other case.

As for the seniority it is difficult to understand the logic of the Nehruvian Congress leaders. According to the Nehruvian Congress, the definition of the seniority is the oldest member among all the other members in the house.

Funny part is that nowhere such definition existed. Even in Government services the seniority is based upon length of service in the same cadre. Mr. Bopaiah had completed more than two terms as MLA and he was the speaker twice.     


Nehruvian Congress leaders are heavily active on calling by names the person they dislike, irrespective of the post occupied by the targeted person. The targeted person could be an ordinary MLA, a MP, a Minister, a Chief Minister, the Prime Minister, a Governor or even a Supreme Court Judge too. Nehruvian Congress leaders belong to a dynastic party where a person belonged to the Nehruvian dynasty, is only honorable, none else unless he/she is faithful to the dynasty.

RaGa says our party possesses a school of thoughts, we believe in love, we believe in uniting the nation, we have sacrificed for nation, we care for democratic rights of people, we care for poor, whereas the BJP leaders have no principles, they hates others, they divide the nation, none of them have fought for independence, they are autocrat, they do not care for the poor mass.

Actually all these statements very well applies to themselves. We do not need to go into the proof. The very recent approach of its one of the leaders under a discussion on TV channels, proves that how much hypocrisy they possessed. E.g. A leader calls Narendra Modi a murderer of democracy because he attended the marriage ceremony of the daughter of Nawaz Sharif and gave a saree in gift to his wife in Pakistan. Recall, Indira Gandhi had gifted a portion of POK (which was captured by Indian military in the Indo-Pak war 1971) to Bhutto under Shimla Pact. The same Nehruvian Congress woman had put 66000+  persons inclusive of veteran Mahatma Gandhians, behind the bars for indefinite period without any existence of the offence at their end and without any prosecution.

Nehruvian Congress men are calling the Governor of Karnataka a dog. When this was opposed in a TV Channel under a discussion, the leader was not found apologetic, but he defended “I love dogs” and then diverted the matter. Means if you love dogs, there is nothing wrong, you have permit to call a dog to anybody. This is the logic of leaders of Nehruvian Congress.

What is the fault with other animals? We love every animal. All the animals are innocent, thankful and lovely. It may be cow, horse, donkey, pig, or a fox too. Should we call these leaders of Nehruvian Congress a fox or a donkey? But I think that would the insult of these animals.

Further, look at this …

Nehruvian Congi leaders called him NIKKAMMAA in 1997 then toppled him

Nikkammaa means USELESS. ” निकम्मा”

Now they want to oblige him by tempting his son to become the Prime Minister. This is the level of their words.

Congress has to wait for the full process of JDS is invited and proves its majority on the floor of house. Failure of Yadurappa is not enough.

Shirish M. Dave

There is poem in Gujarati, where a Camel says: “Here in this world no body is straight;

Parrot’s beak is not straight, crane’s neck is not straight, Dogs tail is not straight, Elephant’s trunk is not straight, Buffalo’s horns are not straight, Tiger’s nails are not straight … “ On hearing this,  the fox said to the camel, that as for other animals only one limb is not straight, but as for you, all your eighteen limbs are not straight.

Nehruvian Congress is like Camel.  

Read Full Post »


Just to create fake controversies, and to divert the attention of the public from the achievements of BJP Government lead by Narendra Modi the pseudo seculars are making noise.

During this short period of 18 months the BJP government has gained a lot of prestige abroad. It has made remarkable changes on foreign policies and local governance.

Due to this reason the Anti-BJP leaders have become terribly upset. They feel politically insecure. However during the last Bihar Assembly election they could realize that the hope to remain politically alive has not become zero.

They have gained a confidence that they can manufacture even fake controversies and can very well create a negative atmosphere for BJP and Narendra Modi.

It is a matter of research as to how the middle level BJP leaders have not prepared themselves to hit back the controversy manufacturers.

Let us read the records of Nehruvians, as to how much had they tolerated opposite views and given respect to human rights !!


(1) 1946-47 None of the provincial Congress Committee had proposed the name of JL Nehru for the post of PM. Despite of this, JL Nehru did not withdraw his candidature. This matter was brought to his notice by Mahatma Gandhi. To avoid partition of Congress party, MK Gandhi had to take assurance from Sardar Patel that he would keep the Congress intact and he would not claim for the PM post.

(2) 1947-50 Nehru did not respect the advice of Sardar Patel on foreign policy with China.

(3) 1948 Nehru had abused Sardar Patel on his action on the matter of Hyderabad issue.

(4) 1948 Nehru did not like to respect democratic procedure of taking a decision only after discussing the matter in Cabinet. He took the issue of Kashmir with UNO, without discussing it with his cabinet.

(5) 1952-1962 Nehru never respected the oppositions’ point raised in the parliament on the military infiltration of China into Indian Territory.

(6) 1950s Nehru did not respect the moral aptitude on Jeep Scandal to protect his beloved VK Menan.

(7) 1956-1959 Nehru did not respect the Congress working committee’s decision on Bombay State.

(8) 1956 Nehru as a PM did not respect the neutrality on the dispute between two states. E.g. Maharashtra and Gujarat.

(9) 1962-64 Nehru did not like to respect the qualification, seniority and genuine right of others to succeed him on the post of PM. He acted, out of way and cunningly to see that Indira Gandhi who was less qualified, less dignified, less learned, less experienced, less honest … become his successor for the post of PM.

(10) 1962 Nehru had no respect towards parliament and towards his own oath. He had taken an oath before the parliament that he would not take any rest till he recapture the lost land of India to China. His oath was simply a fraud.


(1) 1956-1964 Nehru was highly intolerant towards his competitors. Due to stupid foreign policy and stupid defense policy of JL Nehru, China could achieve a cake walk victory over India. China captured 91000 square miles of Indian land. Nehru was solely responsible for the defeat of India. In respect of his failure and to owe the moral responsibility JL Nehru was supposed to resign. JL Nehru had not own his moral responsibility. Contrary to this when he noticed that Morarji Desai is trying to become his competitor for the post of PM, Nehru could not tolerate Morarji Desai. JL Nehru removed him from his Cabinet.


(1) 1968 she had no respect towards party’s constitutional procedure. The working committee of her party had approved and recommended the candidature of Sanjiv Reddy for Presidential election.

(2) 1968 she had no respect to her own oath. She signed the candidature form of presidential election in 1969, she made campaign for the opposite to party’s candidate.

(3) 1968 she had no respect for the dignity of her own colleagues. As an understanding with the working committee, Morarji Desai had to be absorbed in Cabinet. But without consulting the party president Indira Gandhi removed Morarji Desai from her cabinet.

(4) 1968 She had no respect towards moral values in politics. There were lot of allegations on her doubtful integrity. But she did not resign.

(5) 1975 She had no respect towards verdicts given by court of law. She ignored the verdict of HC on her disqualification.

(6) 1975-1977 She had no respect towards constitutional provisions, human values and democratic rights of others. She imposed emergency and suspended even natural rights of citizens. Her governments representative told on oath before the court of law that during emergency, government can even kill a person at government’s will.

(7) 1972-75 she had no respect towards truth. When she was making statements before the Allahabad High Court on a case against her unfair practice in election and abuse of power, she told 14 lies on oath before the court.

(8) 1975-1976 She had no respect towards humanity. She had put 60000+ citizens behind the bars even without existence of any offence.

(8.1) 1972 She had nullified the victory achieved through the sacrifice of Indian soldiers and people of India. She, under Simla pact, handed over even the land of POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) to Bhtto. This land was captured by India in the Pak-India war .

(8.2) 1972 She had disrespect towards her own promise of executing a packing deal with Pakistan to resolve all the issues with Pakistan. She had very good and full scope to execute “The Package Deal” with Pakistan. She willfully ignored it.

(8.3) 1972 Indira Gandhi disrespected even the constitution. To hand over a part of India, to the enemy or to any of the other countries, is against the constitution. That is our Indian cnstitutioin does not permit such transaction of land. POK is a part of India as per Indian Constitution, one cannot hand over a part of India to any other country even with an affirmation of the total MPs. To do like this India has to form a new constitution committee and a new parliament.

(8.4) 1980-83 Indira had disrespect towards the nation. She had joined hand with Bhinderanwale. She had supported terrorism and naxalite movement.

(9.1) 1968-1984 Indira had no respect towards her own words and oaths. She had promised to send back the 10000000+ (more than one crore), Bangladeshi infiltrators. But she did nothing. Her oath was simply a fraud.

(9.2) 1967-1984 Indira had no respect for truth. She floated a lot of fraudulent rumors to misguide mass with the help of her government owned media.


(1) 1968-69 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to accept the candidature of a person (Sanjiv Reddy), proposed by the working committee of her own party. Resultantly she put up her own candidate viz. VV Giri for presidential election in 1969.

(2) 1972 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to accept the leader elected by the state legislature party members for the post of CM. Indira always asking to accept a person of her own choice. Viz. 1972 Gujarat Assembly members had proposed Chimanbhai Patel with majority, as CM. But Indira Gandhi rejected him and imposed Ghanshyambhai Oza, who was not even an elected member of the assembly.

(3) 1972-1984 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance even if a leader of her own party, if he takes credit of his good work and good achievement. She can tolerate a leader only and only even if he/she gives credit to herself (Indira Gandhi), what had been achieved. E.g. VP Singh, Hemvatinandan Bahuguna and many others were removed by her from her cabinet for this reason only.

(4.1) 1968-77 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to opposite view and opposite voice. She abused even veteran Gandhians like Jai Prakash Narain.

(4.2) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and therefore she had imposed emergency for indefinite period.

(4.3) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and Indira put 60000+ persons behind the bar for indefinite period.

(4.4) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and Indira impose censorship on private media too, to suppress them by force.

(4.5) 1975 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and she even suppress the High Court judgments which were against her government,

(4.6) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and she asked every type of associations, to pass a resolution in its meeting, that the association had supported emergency.

(4.7) 1978 Indira had no tolerance to remain without political power. She instigated Charan Sing to topple democratically elected government of Morarji Desai. She supported Charan Sing and then she betrayed him.


(1) 1984 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect towards democratic procedure. He, without looking into the propriety of the President invitation to take an oath as the PM, he took the oath, without the resolution of the working committee and the cabinet of the party and the government respectively. In fact he should have refused to take the oath in absence of such resolutions.

(2.1) 1984-1989 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for the human rights. He avoided action against his party lead carnage on Sikhs.

(2.2) 1984 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for human rights and humanity. He gave a smooth passage to Anderson to runaway safely from India. Anderson was the culprit of Bhopal Gas Hazard.

(3) 1984-89 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for morality. He was involved in Boffors scam. He had written and forwarded an instruction chit through Madhav Singh Solanki a minister of his cabinet, to Swiss Government to go very slow on the matter of investigation related with Boffor Kickback.

(4) 1986-1988 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect towards nation. He gave a smooth passage to Ottavio Quatrochie to run away safely from India.



(1)The GANG does not like to respect anybody else as “Number One” in the party. Sitaram Kesri was manually lifted and driven out from the seat of the Congi-President.

(1.1) The GANG does not respect the personality of opposite party.

(1.2) The GANG does not respect the achievement of the government of opposite party,

(1.3) The GANG does not respect the constitutional provisions. The GANG paralyses the functioning of the parliament.

(1.4) The GANG does not respect the very purpose of the parliament which is to discuss the matters and exchange the views to arrive to a decision.

(1.5) The GANG disrespects the natural right of opposite party (BJP leaders) to present their side on the floor of the parliament on the allegations made by the GANG.

(2) The GANG disrespects BJP leaders.

(2.1) The GANG addresses opposite party leaders with abusive words. Like “Maut kaa Sodaagar”, “Godse’s progeny”, Communal, Manav Bhakshi, Pishaach, Chaay Waalaa, Intolerant …

(3) The GANG does not have tolerance to any opposite view to Congi’s governance.

(3.1) The GANG could not tolerate Anna’s agitation. Anna Hazare was abused and alleged by all spokespersons of the Congi

(3.2) The GANG could not tolerate Baba Ramdev’s agitation. Baba Ramdev was also abused and manhandled. A lot fraudulent allegations were made on him. Congi had executed investigations too, but found nothing against Ramdev. Despite of this, Congi never thought of submitting apology.

(3.3) The GANG could not tolerate participants’ personality. Kiran Bedi was also alleged and abused. The investigations were carried out but no guilt was found on making money by Kiran Bedi,

(3.4) The GANG had no tolerance to the functioning of the opposite party. The GANG is in habit to manufacture fake controversies.

(4) The GANG does not have any respect for the human rights of Hindus:

(4.1) The GANG willfully neglected the human rights of Hindus in Kashmir, North East and some pockets of South India.

(4.2) The GANG does not have respect towards the rule of law that everybody is equal before law.

(4.3) The GANG has willfully discriminated the Hindus’ human rights.

(4.4) Kashmiri Hindus had been threatened to be ready for the death unless they adopt Muslim religion. They were told either to adopt Muslim religion or to vacate their houses and leave Kashmir. The threat was announced through loud speakers, from Mosqs, pamphlets pasted on the doors, publications through the news paper, writing on the walls and through every means.

(4.5) The Muslims of Kashmir in joint venture with the GANG, had given a dead line date in advance about the carnage they were going to execute.

(4.6) The GANG had committed cognizable offences, as it kept mum, took no action, done no arrest, registered no FIR, initiated no investigation and no prosecution.

(4.7) The GANG kept total non-transparency on the prolonged carnage. It was a cognizable disrespect of protection of human rights of Hindus of Kashmir.

(4.8) The GANG happily watched the murders of 5000+ Hindus, and the migration of 50000000+ driven out Hindus from their houses.

(4.9) The GANG paid no heed on the issue of the rehabilitation of the Hindus. These Hindus are living in substandard living condition since last 25 years. This is nothing but a continued terrorist attack sponsored by the GANG.

What does this GANG want?

The GANG wants Hindus and pro-BJP inclusive of BJP persons should tolerate as under:

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE all the injustice and discrimination applied upon them inclusive of end of their lives and carnage executed by the GANG.

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE even if the GANG curtails suspends or dismisses their human rights.


HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG manufactures any fraudulent and fake controversy, rumor or allegation upon them,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE even if the GANG does not use its sense of proportion and or it does not use its sense of relevance while alleging

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG condemns the views of them on historical events even without material

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG terms the material conclusion of existence of some historical character as fake and fictitious and the GANG avoids discussion



HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG simply shouts while discussion on TV channels and consumes most of the time

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG simply shouts and disturbs them while they submit their replies

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG openly tries to divide society by caste, religion, language and region,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG stops them and abuses them for speaking against Nehruvians’ frauds, blunders, scams, scandals, stupidity or whatsoever,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE as the GANG persons are not supposed to tolerate any thing whatsoever against them, even if the allegations are proved in Court of Law. This is because the Gang has full liberty to express inclusive of anti-national, derogative to Indian culture or whatsoever.

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE as the GANG persons are not supposed to respect any of their right inclusive of human rights or natural rights or constitutional rights whatsoever.

Shirish M. Dave


Intolerance, Nehruvians, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv, Sonia, Congi, BJP, Narendra Modi, Emergency, Censorship, Media, Pseudo, Secular

Read Full Post »

GIVE HIM A TIME I have received an email from one of my learned friends, on some points which are generally being used to pass blame on BJP and Narendra Modi by many as a failure of BJP government.


1 why no difference appears because of Modi whom we feel connected with the soil of India whereas all formers were Muslim/Communists or Christian/Communists anti nationals ?

(1)What I feel that all the problems and issues arise out of negligence, ignorance and thereby failure of Government in the fields of education and employment.

The Nehruvian Congress has no vision right from Nehru. Its ideas on management of land and productions are not worth to debate. I have watched the making of Modi in Gujarat. He was quite an unknown person to the people of Gujarat till he was made a CM of Gujarat in 2001.

A very well established leader viz. Keshubhai Patel was The CM. He was a failure to the public expectation. BJP was losing ground in Gujarat. Ahmedabad Corp election was lost by the BJP. There was a severe earth quake in Gujarat on 26-01-2001. BJP CM was a failure. Media was making fun of Keshubhai.

Some how, by the grace of God, Narendra Modi was appointed as CM by Bajpai.

Narendra took hold of bureaucracy. He suspended several senior officers and set Gujarat to normalcy.

There was a lot of internal fights within BJP. Most leaders of BJP inclusive of Keshubhai where against Modi. They were trying to let him down. But Modi had achieved mass popularity. Media was also against Modi. Modi had discontinued the special treatment to media. A very senior writer of Gujarati literature, published an advertisement asking people to submit their opinion whether Modi should continue as CM or not. People had to use the advertised form to cast their opinion and to forward the opinion with their own postage charges. Modi got 87% votes in favor. However Keshubhai and others continued their fights. They were failed. Modi also won Ahmedabad Corp.

Then it was 2002 riot case. He handled it successfully despite of all odds. He defeated all his rivals without breaking BJP. How? Simply by encouraging education, cottage productions and infrastructure developments. Development brings employment. Infrastructure development brings developments in other fields. If there is a good governance then all these can happen if one has a will.

The changes would become visible by the time of next election. Because infrastructure projects are in pipe line. During Nehruvian Cong rule a tender used to take 3 years to get finalized. It is not the case with the BJP.

2  Indians have given Modi all supper powers still he has no media which speaks good about him expect Sudarshan who is not much known . NDTV is dead antinational . Others are owned by foreign powers . Why Modi failed to rescue  our media ?

(2) Modi has no super power as per constitution. BJP has no absolute majority in LS, and no majority in RS.

Nehruvian Congress knows how to misguide people and how to degrade those who oppose them. Nehruvian Congress has become expert in dividing people by religion, caste and language.

In 1956 Nehru himself had said that if Maharashtra would get Mumbai, he would be happy. By telling this, he gave a message to Marathi people that Gujaratis are the obstructions for Marathi people in getting Mumbai. In fact Gujarati and Marathi lived together for centuries. Narendra Modi has generated a parallel media of print and TV. This is social media. Hence those who love India have to be active on social media to defeat this paid media.

3 If Modi has power to change constitution why he has not put a ban on cow slaughter and free not guilty saints from prison ? . Now he has lost supports from Sadhus community .

(3) BJP has no absolute majority and has no power to change constitution. Modi might be not in favor to take risk.

If Asharam is falling under Sadhu, then most Sadhus must not fall under that category. Shri Shri Ravishankar, Ramdev, and many others are true Sadhus. They do favor Modi. Rest too, would extend favor when they would generate a sense of proportion and sense of priority.

BJP ruled states are doing progress on the ban on cow slaughter.

4 Modi had promised to get black money back in 100 days and every body will be much better . now when he could not do it was not his responsibility to explain poor Indians who are still eagerly waiting . Now they feel cheated .

(4) We have to think with sense of proportion. Nehruvian Congress willfully failed to constitute SIT, despite of the order of SC for 3 years.

Narendra Modi constituted SIT within 3 days. SIT is headed by SC judge. We should have faith in SC and SIT.

Since BJP has no absolute majority it cannot make drastic changes. If ordinance is issued, it can be challenged in SC. Modi does not want to take a risk to give a chance to the media. Media belongs to the pseudo secular gang. It is always ready to abuse Modi by twisting the matters.

Nehruvian Congress and its allies want to create controversy on every matter. Nehruvian Congress has avoided black money issue for six decades, despite of this, Anti-Modi gangs have become able to confuse the learned people on black money issue. They have become successful to create negative image for Narendra Modi and BJP to some extent. Most learned people have lost the sense of proportion. Should we become a part of it?

Please go through my blog “क्या आप भारतके होतैषी है? और फिर भी क्या आप इनमेंसे कोई एक  वर्गमें भी आते हैं?” at https://treenetram.wordpress.com/2015/01/04/%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE-%E0%A4%86%E0%A4%AA-%E0%A4%AD%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%87-%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%88%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%80-%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%88-%E0%A4%94/

5 Because of these blunders Modi will lose in next election. It is not a blunder at all.

(5) To term it a blunder and to create a negative atmosphere for BJP, is the strategy and trap made by Nehruvian Congress and Anti-Modi (BJP) gangs.

How to tackle this strategy, the way out to it, depends upon us and our sense of proportion to understand and to realize the same.

The pseudo secular gangs are no way better than BJP and Narendra Modi.

We have to remember that Nehruvian Congress has ruled for six decades with majority period of absolute majority.

BJP has never ruled with an absolute majority. Now also, it is ruling with normal majority that too in LS only.

6 So , how India will save herself from wicked Congies and  Muslim/Christian powers to hijack our country ?

(6) As and when Hindus are attacked intellectually, Hindus have to hit them back.

Hindus have good weapons to fight. It is easy for Hindus to hit them back as these Muslim and Christian leaders have basic falsehood and cunningness in their philosophy and actions respectively.

When they attack on us physically, we should take legal action and to expose them, to give wide publicity. We must make such events as  international issue. There is no shortage of weapon to fight intellectually against Nehruvian Congress, pseudo secular, Christian priests and decisive forces of Muslims.

The nationalists should always hit them back repeatedly on their culture, character and their evil actions. They have no defense at all.

e.g. Nehruvian Congress:

Nehru’s Blunders on policy with China, Kashmir, Pakistan, Tibet, Burma, Ceylon etc… no end, including telling lies before parliament.

Indira’s blunders, scams, cunningness for power, negligence on the issue of sending back the Bangadeshi infiltrators, Introduction of Vote bank politics, telling lies before court of law, Simla pact, Union Carbide deal, Emergency, antisocial activities, generating cross border terrorism and what not?

Rajiv Gandhi’s inaction and improper handling of Bhopal gas hazard, making smooth pass for Anderson.

Sonia’s anti-national activities, giving smooth path to Daud to run away, allowing his gang to do all the anti-social activities, unconstitutional actions and a lot scams executed openly. Besides this, her party’s willful failure of reinstatement of Kashmiri Hindus. Denial of natural rights, Human  rights and constitutional rights of Hindus, her negligence on securities of Hindus’ rights everywhere.

Pseudo secular and media: Spreading rumors against Hindus, neglecting Kashmiri Hindus for 25+ years. This is a grave offence of keeping mum on massacre of 3000+ Kashmiri Hindus and keeping them in exile from their own state and houses. They are living in tents from 1990, till date. Hindus should make continuous, wide spread and big noise on this criminal negligence. All the leaders like Nehruvians, Kashmiri leaders like Omar, Farukh, Mufti, separatist leaders IAS officers etc… should be arrested on unbailable warrant, put to jail and convicted for willful negligence of human rights.

Christian priests: An investigation team should be constituted in each state to see as to how the Hindus were converted to Christianity.

Muslim separatists and caste politics: Most Nehruvian Congi leaders and whosoever have played or encouraged vote bank politics to divide India on the basis of caste, religion, so called race and language, should be prosecuted.

E.g.  Akabaruddin, Azamkhan, Mamata, Nitish, Laloo, Karuna, MMS, Sonia … Even without creating any controversy the Nationalist lot of India can hit these virtually anti-nationals, very hard and continuously.

As and when any of the above leaders speaks against BJP government and otherwise also, they should be bombarded by us through print media and social media. Media should be flooded with our attack.

At this stage, when the anti-national elements are alive and making efforts to derogate BJP to create a negative atmosphere, the people who think themselves nationalists, should not touch any non-issues like as to who was responsible for partition or like that…

We must also know that an enemy is never a small. National enemy can never be pardoned.

BJP has to follow Kautilya. BJP has not to follow Prithviraj Chauhan.

Kautilya has said wisely that it is better to have an intelligent enemy than to have a foolish friend.

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Nehruvian Cong, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv, Sonia, blunder, scam, lies, SIT, BJP, Narendra Modi, Negative atmosphere, Anti-Modi gangs, pseudo secular gangs

Read Full Post »

Supreme Court of India has to interpret laws in true spirit of the human rights

Nehruvian Congress a political party of India had ruled India for more than six decades with small breaks. During these six decades, it has ruled 30 years with absolute majority. 2 years with absolute autocracy, and remaining period with majority.

Despite of this, it has made more than 100 amendments in the Indian Constitution, In the name of public interest.

Was it necessary?

When this Congress party is addressed as Nehruvian Congress, there is a purpose.

You cannot say this Congress as “Indian Nation Congress Party” though on record it is like that.

This name has given, and still it gives, a very wrong message that this is the same Congress Party that gave big contribution, to make India independent from foreign rule.

This matter has been discussed by me in Gujarati language on my website (TreenetramDOTwordpressDOTwwwDOTcom)

If it has to be told in brief, than we can say that a person is identified by its culture. Culture can be identified by its behaviour. The behaviour is experienced or being experienced or it is on record.


Suppose you are A and the other is B.

A and B both had respect for each others.

A is communicating with B.

B suddenly stopped communication with A. A got confused.

It was an insult indirectly but direct. A felt so.

Instead of being emotional, A asked B. B kept mum.

The reason was unknown to A. Even though A is open at  heart, there was no way for A as to how A can correct itself? B has to be transparent.
A cultured society maintains democracy and transparency.

A human is prone to commit mistake and error, knowingly or unknowingly.

The democracy provide scope for correction of individuals. To ask the other person for a clarification is the democratic cultured mindset. If the a behaviour or belief of A or B is not liked to B or A as the case may be. This thing to get clarified is advisable.

Because after all, all of us are here for pleasure and spread pleasure.

One cannot hurt a person and boycott that person without asking that person to clarify.

What applies to person to person (He to She, He to He, She to She or whatsoever) that applies to political parties too.

This is universal. If the cap fits to She or He can review her/his action. This is necessary to give a chance to a person to correct itself. This is called democratic and humanitarian mind set.

Here the subject is the so called Indian National Congress Party.

Let us come to the point of above Congress.

This Congress has always been run by Nehruvians after the independence since 1947. The Congress had been founded by Hume, a British, in nineteenth century. It was a party of white collars. When MK Gandhi came to India and he joined the Congress, he made it open for the whole mass of India irrespective of caste and economical status.

The intention had been changed from “Acting as an agency to be interface between British and people of India” to “Home Rule” and then to “Complete Independence”.

MK Gandhi thought that without involving mass, India cannot achieve proper independence with the tool of Non-violence. This was the culture of Congress at that time. In nineteen thirties, it had also passed a resolution that India would be a democratic country and it will have a written constitution.

The big question is what is democracy?

According to MK Gandhi, the definition of democracy is the political system under which “the truth is heard and the truth is honoured”. MK Gandhi more specifically called “Rama Rajya” means the way Lord Rama ruled India.

Who was Rama?

Rama Rajya

Rama was a king emperor of India walked on this earth, some 6000 years back from now.

What were the main political features of Rama.

(1) The ruler (king) has to rule as per the accepted legal and social traditions prevailing in the society.
(2) The ruler has only executive authority,
(3) Ruler is not authorised to make any change in the rule and traditions,
(4) The authority for making any change in a rule or tradition is the people
The group of preacher (teachers) will decide the method of finding out the way to decide peoples desire to change.
(5) The preachers (Teachers) will have no executive power.

We know the details of life of Rama and his wife Sita.
How did people behave?
How did Rama behave?
How did the group of teachers headed by Vashishtha behave and what was the result?
How did Rama honoured the controversial truth which was against a tradition (which still prevails in the democratic countries of world ) which he could not challenge to prove it as a falsehood?
The challenge had come from a very lower class poor person. But it was honoured by Rama.
Rama has been taken as an incarnation of Sun God (Vishnu), not because he won a lot wars. Rama was taken as an incarnation of Sun God because he discharged his duty very efficiently. He maintained law and order in democratic way.

Now here, in the present period, who has to act as a Rama? Who has to act as the team of teachers? Who has to propose reforms?

The head of the elected representatives are Rama.

We have a method of electing representatives under Indian Constitution. Off course the elections have to be proper and fair.

But the system was no fair enough for four decades. In 1988, VP Singh appointed Shesan as the Chief Election Commissioner, who enforced election provisions provided under law, very firmly. Till then, unless there was a flood against Nehruvian Congress, the Nehruvian Congress had never faced a defeat.

But after the enforcement of law strictly, the Nehruvian Congress could not get clear majority at any time.

This means, rules are there, but the interpretation has either not been made properly by the ruler in execution


the Supreme Court has not been asked to interpret the law,


the Supreme Court has not intervene of its own, to interpret any rule which could not protect the constitutional rights of citizens.

In fact, if the Supreme Court of India interprets the provisions of the Indian Constitution, in relevance to the human rights and natural rights, there is no need to enact further Acts.

Now let us look at the democratic rights based on and prevailed under the rule of Rama.

(1) The ruler has only executive authority: Why?
It is natural that some body has to take the responsibility of execution of rule.

(2) Ruler is not authorised to make any change in rule and traditions: Why?
Because if ruler is authorized to make changes, then the ruler will make the changes which are beneficial to that ruler only.
This has been very well experienced by India, during the rule of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Nehru and Rajiv Gandhi.
As for changes made in laws, by Indira NehruGandhi, one can write a thick Book like epic “Maha Bharata”. We will look into it, on the day of anniversary of “Emergency imposed by Indira in 1975.

(3) The authority for making any change in a tradition is the people: Why?
It is only the people are suffering. They are suffering due to any law or tradition and the rule is defective and required to be modified to meet with the protection of human rights. That is why the proposals should also come up from the mass. the mass includes teachers, experts, leaders of political parties etc… They cn come up through media or/and common platforms. Then political parties will draft a bill in consultation with experts and put it before public through the party’s election manifesto. If that party wins the elections, then the bill can be passed in parliament.


(4) The group of preacher (teachers) will decide the method of finding out the way to decide peoples’ desire to change the law: Why?

This is in fact drafting a bill. Supreme Court can re-examine or ask an expert committee to review the draft or bill or law.

(5) The preachers (Teachers) will have no executive power. Why?
Executive power has been entrusted with the ruler. And if preachers are entrusted with executive power then they become ruler. In these circumstances the ruler will get the power to change the law. In fact we want to deprive the ruler from using the power of making changes in the law, unless it has been proposed or permitted by the mass.

We want a system which enables the truth to be heard and honoured.
We do not want to promote old type of Rama Rajya. We want Rama Rajya where Sita the wife of Rama too gets justice.

How did Nehruvian Congress fail to provide justice to the mass by not protecting human rights?

In 1950-s, there were some scandals. But the then Prime Minister Javaharlal Nehru told the parliament that “we will not attend the scandals. You put before the public. Public would decide in the next election.”
A poor lot was remaining poor. JL Nehru introduced reservation for lower class, instead of providing employment with dignified salary to all poor mass. This was the foundation of Vote Bank politics.

MK Gandhi had said in his book, written somewhere in 1930-s, to first concentrate on cottage industries and education. But Nehru overlooked.

MK Gandhi had asked complete prohibition of liquor, to prevent the poor and illiterate mass from domestic economical anarchy. But Nehru ignored it.

Contrary to this, the successive government encouraged the relaxation in Prohibition on Liquor enacted under British Rule in Bombay State.

In many other ways, the Congress existed before independence lost its character after independence. That is why person like me address this Congress as Indian Nehruvian Congress Party, in place of Indian National Congress Party.

Why did Supreme Court fail to supervise the human rights?
There was no provision in Indian Constitution to take up the issue before the Court of Law, unless some one is affected adversely by any act or whatsoever.

P. I. L.
The First Non-Congress Congress government headed by Morarji Desai, enacted the provision of “Public Interest Litigation”.

This provision provides, any citizen to go before the High Court of a state or before the Supreme Court to declare specified law as null and void, as it is harmful to human right. Supreme Court would either ask the Government to amend the law suitably or to drop it or to re-frame it.

But why there should be a Public Litigation Act? In fact it is inbuilt in democracy that any law becomes null and void if it harms a human right.

Information Act
Why this act is needed?
You have appointed a servant to whom you pay against the duty you have asked to perform.
Now suppose you gave him some money to purchase some vegetable.
You have the right to tell that person as to what he has to purchase and from where he should purchase, how he has to purchase and how much he has to purchase.
When he comes back, it is your right to ask the person, to tell you the full information. It is the right of the person who gave the earned money for a purpose to a person who has been employed on payment.
Now what did the Congress do?
It restricted the right by enacting the act and provided lot exceptions. The act became nail-less to great extent.

Consumer Protection Act
You have the full liberty to select the item, the amount, the way and the quantity to spend the money you have earned.
The right to selection, the right to quality, the right to know the contents, the right to compare the prices, the right to enjoy options, the right to have the record of your purchase. All these rights are inbuilt rights under human rights.

Right to “call back” the elected representative.
This act yet not been enacted.

But it can be interpreted as inbuilt right to human right.
You are selecting your representative to represent and execute, your view, desire, security and welfare.
You are paying the representative for that duties.
There is a system of payment by Tax. This is called public fund.
There is a system for selecting person. This is called system of elections.
Somehow jointly, you have selected a person of your geographical area for 5 years.
Now suppose this person increases its own monthly payment without your permission,
Suppose this person shows negligence on your security,
Suppose this person hides the facts,
Suppose this person making joint ventures with your recognized enemy,
Suppose you have lost faith in this person and you feel to terminate its services.
Definitely it is your inbuilt human right to terminate the services of this person at any time as soon as you feel that this person is not faithful.
Terminate the services of a person whom you have elected is termed as “Call Him/Her Back”.

This “Right to call back” has not been enacted yet. But such right to call back is inbuilt right in democracy.

How to call a person back if there is no system constituted in the Indian Constitution.

Let us take an example:

In 1971 Nehruvian Congress had won 140 seats out of 163 seats of Gujarat State Assembly.
The said government lost the faith of public. Its governance was full of scandals and frauds. People of Gujarat were highly dissatisfied by the government. It became a hot issue of discussion as to how to call, all the elected members of the state assembly, back.

People had to lodge a wide spread agitation and asked the representatives to resign. But Nehruvian Congress Members did not pay any heed and did not resign.

All the opposition party members had resigned. There was a very big mass movement in Gujarat. This was known as Nava-Nirman-Stir (A movement for Reconstruction of State Assembly). It is a long story as to how it became successful and at what cost.

But how to achieve this success, without loss of blood?

What do we do in a normal housing society?

20 percent members can ask the president of the society to call for an extra-ordinary general meeting with an agenda.

Here, in the “Call them Back” case,  20 percent voters of that area can submit an affidavit before the Election Officer, asking the election officer to conduct a vote of confidence in respect of the elected member.
If the representative secures 50+ percent of the votes polled, he would be continued as the representative, otherwise by-elections would be conducted for that assembly seat.

This means that only interpretation or directives are required for fulfillment of any human right, from the Supreme Court.

Shirish M. Dave

Tags: Democracy, Rama, Rajya, Rule, Law, act, enact, person, party, Nehruvian, MK Gandhi, Indira, Nehru, India, human rights, natural right, Information, consumer, election, representative, fraud, faith, preacher, teacher, executive, power

Read Full Post »



Is it that Kapi Sibbal is illiterate?

Three years back at the time of general elections campaign, Kapil Sibbal of Nehruvian Congress had announced that he would give “Akash Tablet” to all the youths at the rate of Rs. 3000/-.

Many youths had deposited money for “Akash”.

Nehruvian Congress came to power again in 2009. The days have been passed, the weeks have been passed, moths have been passed and years are passing. Now a time has come that again the general elections have become due (at any time), but no “Akash” had come down to meet the youths on the earth. Narendra Modi pointed out this fraudulent promise of Nehruvian Congress leader in one of his lectures.

Narendra Modi further said that Nehruvian Congress has a habit and culture to give false promises. It gives false promises not to only to common men, but it gives false promises to youths too. Such type of practice, generates bad moral values in youths. This is dangerous for a nation.

In reply to this Kapi Sibbal forwarded one Akash Tablet to Modi, instead of fulfilling the promises given to the youths of Delhi. Kapi Sibbal further abused Narendra Modi, and asked him to be a cultured leader. This means that to point out the false promises of Nehruvians, is a bad culture and to make a false and fraudulent promises is a good culture according to Nehruvian Congress culture.


JL Nehru had taken an oath in 1963 before the Indian parliament that he would not take rest till he would re-capture the land snatched by China during the war in 1962. Now if Narendra Modi would point out this point, the Nehruvian Congress would forward a photo of lost land to Narendra Modi and further it would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and cultured.


If Narendra Modi would point out the oath taken by Nehruvian Progeny Indira Gandhi of “I will remove the poverty” in 1969, then Nehruvian Congress leaders would send Rs.60/- (the daily wage of NAREGA) to Narendra Modi, and ask him to be a cultured person.


If Narendra Modi would point out the promise recalled before a foreign news channel by  Indira Gandhi in 1970 that all the infiltrators came from Pakistan will be sent back to their country, the Nehruvian Congress leaders would send some Bangladeshi Muslims to Gandhinagar and further the would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and cultured.


Recall the statement of Nehruvian Congress ruling Cabinet made during the pre-India Pak war period of 1971 that “India will not give return the land won by India if any war is imposed on India by Pakistan”, and after winning the war with the great braveness of Indian soldiers, it was announced by the Indira Gandhian Cabinet that Pakistan will have to sign a package deal and will have to meet the demands as under:


What was the PACKAGE DEAL”?

Reimbursement of all the expenses incurred by India due to this war on India imposed by Pakistan,

Return of the land of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, so that the Issue of Kashmir ends up,

Take back the all the infiltrators and refugees came from Pakistan in India,

Settlement of property cases of Hindu refugees came to India from Pakistan in 1947-48,

Deportation of anti-social elements that had committed crimes in India and taken shelter in Pakistan,

All the fishermen and whatsoever Indian prisoners available in Pakistan jails will have to be released,  

“No war pact” with India,

No hatred and propaganda against India in Pakistan,



Unless Pakistan signs this pact, then only the Prisoners of War (90000 soldiers who were fed by India with due respect from 1971 to 1972) and the land won by India during the war would be returned to Pakistan.


But what has been happened in Simla pack?

No gain for India,

Indira Gandhi returned all the POW i.e.  90000 soldiers,

Indira Gandhi returned all the land pieces that had won by Indian soldiers,

Indira Gandhi also returned the land piece of POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) on which India had the claim,


On the other hand Pakistan released no Indian soldier. They are still with Pakistan, in 400+ numbers, in Pakistan Jail.


Now if Narendra Modi points out this fraud of progeny and party viz Nehruvian Congress, Kapi Sibbal or any damn leader would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and to behave with good culture.


It is not a surprise so far Nehruvian Congress leader and their allies are concerned. They have possessed all the evils available in the world. You can write a bigger book than the epic Mahabharat. Nehruvians and their party leaders can abuse any leader howsoever he may be great and popular among learned and common, if he/she opposes a Nehruvian and its party, they will abuse him/her without any logic and sense. They have spared none. They can do any damn thing to hide their evils and divert the mind of common mass by talking irrelevant and baseless.


Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Narendra Modi, Akash tablet, Kapi, Kapil, Sibbal, Nehruvian, Youth, election campaign, false, fraud, promise, Simla pact, Indira

Read Full Post »


Hello Governor

Hello Governor

Let us go through some of the actions of Nehruvian Congress Private Limited and its purpose behind those actions.

It is very common among Nehruvians in India to act under disguise of public interest or in the interest of poor people but to have some different purpose behind that action.

Jawaharlal Nehru

1948: Case of Kashmir taken to UNO by Nehru and accepted the date of report to UNO as LOC with an intention (purpose) to show his out of proportion respect towards UNO. In fact it was a political blunder because Nehru had no wisdom and foresight.

1950: Founded Non-alliance Movement with an aim to show the First world (NATO countries) that military alliance is not the solution for world peace. But indirectly it was unregistered alliance with Second World (Communist countries Russia and China)

1952: Accepted sovereignty of China on Tibet. To show the Communist countries Russia and China that he was more aligned to socialism than human rights. Internally he wanted backing of Russia and China against the influence of USA and others.


1952: Puch-sheel treaty with China, to show the world that he loved peace and has soft corner for Buddhism (the vote-bank of Ambedkar).


1953-1962: Non-action on Chinese military infiltration and denial before parliament of India on any Chinese  infiltration in India. To show Russia that he had soft corner towards China and how much faith the people of India had in him despite of his blunders. It cannot be ruled out that he wanted political assistance from Russia in playing political unfair tactics with people of India.


1962: Nehru said “enemy has betrayed us on his Defeat against China due to neglecting security of borders. This statement was made to misguide the people of India to show that he was innocent. When Nehru was asked that when the forward movement of China in India would get stopped? Nehru replied “where and when we would stop them by our strength”. But China had captured 30000 square miles additional land more than what it had claimed in Indian land. China made cease fire of his own and gave back the additional seized land of 30000 square miles out of 92000/- square miles of total seized land.


1963: Nehru took oath “we will not take rest until we recapture the lost land of mother India”. The purpose was to show his sincerity towards mother India. In fact Nehru was a fraud and he made fraudulent statement. He and his progenies knew very well that the lost land was never going to be recaptured.




1963: Kamraj Plan: Nehru spelled purpose to strengthen the party by utilising services of senior leaders. Internally his purpose was to remove Morarji Desai who was his number one opponent.


Indira Gandhi:

Removal of privy-purses of Kings: This was with a view to show that she was socialistic. In fact the privy-purses were in accordance to the agreement signed with them when they handed over their kingdoms to independent India. The annual payment was to getting reduced to end up to zero in due course. However Indira wanted to show her promptness and militancy on establishing socialism to remove poverty.


Nationalisation of 14 leading private banks: Morarji Desai had introduced socialisation of banking. The RBI controls the policy of advances. Hence Morarji Desai was on right path. But Indira Gandhi wanted to spoil the bank employees for her political benefit. Nationalisation of Banks spoiled the administration of all these banks. Banks’ money got utilised for granting no-return loan as per the unwritten understanding. Like this the purpose was in no way effective to remove poverty or to uplift poor mass, but to share loan amount among managers (not always), recommending authority of loan (viz. Nehruvian Congress local leaders) and the borrowers. 1968 to 1984 of further rule of Indira Gandhi no poverty had been removed.


Remove Poverty was a fraud

Remove Poverty was a fraud

Emergency: Indira declared emergency under the plea that her opponents instigating people to revolt against government and there was bulk indiscipline. But in reality her purpose was to retain her power and PM-ship.


Weak deal with Union Carbide: to make India self sufficient on pesticides. In fact under table deal cannot be ruled out as it is a practice of western industrialists to establish such hazardous production units in poor countries so that they can fool the local governments in case of hazard by way of executing defective agreement with purchasable government like Nehruvian Congress of India Private Limited.


Indira had no wisdom to see what could happen consequent to Simla Pact

Indira had no wisdom to see what could happen consequent to Simla Pact

Simla Pact: Bhutto said If I would solve all the problems and issues with India and agree to any such pact, I would be killed in Pakistan, and the agreement would not have any meaning. Indira Gandhi agreed to this as reported by Indira and no issue or problem was solved and converted victory into defeat. Further reality was so-called weak pact had also been made useless, as otherwise also Bhutto had been killed by the successive government of Pakistan. It cannot be ruled out that there could be an undertable deal with Bhutto by Indira Gandhi.

Rajiv Gandhi 

Deal with Ceylon: The aim was to have good relation with Ceylon. But it was complete avoidance of the interest of Tamilians in Ceylon. It was a blunder. Can you imagine that Pakistan would send its military in Kashmir to kill Muslim terrorists?


Every body has to make Nehruvian Congress comfortable in a deal

Every body has to make Nehruvian Congress comfortable in a deal

Boffors tanks: To make India stronger in military. We know the fact.


Anderson of Union Carbide: Rajiv said he would come back whenever we call him under investigation. It was a fraudulent statement. Under table deal cannot be ruled out for giving an easy pass to Anderson.


Man Mohan and Sonia Gandhi:


Harshad Mehta security scam: Man Mohan the then Finance Minister announced that he would take suitable corrective step such that security scam would not get repeated. The purpose was to show to the public that they were innocent. He said it was the fault of system. In fact the designers of the system were themselves. Man Mohan had made several phones to pressurise the then Income Tax Commissioner Vishvabandhu Gupta not to take action.


Though Man Mohan was FM at that time, when he became PM, Satyam scam took place.


Ravan Lila at Ram Lila Maidan: Nehruvian Government says law was taking its own course. In fact the police authority said, it was a political decision.


Jan Lok Pal Bill: Nehruvian Cong leaders say Parliament is supreme and government wants strong Lokpal. In fact the Civil Society was formed in consultation with government and Nehruvian Congress never wanted a strong Lokpal. Nehruvian Congress never tried to discuss on the merits. Arun Jetley had never been replied to the points.


Similar are the cases of Black-red money, Printing of currency notes by RBI, Distribution of Fake currency notes by RBI, Statements related with deportation of Daud, curtailing the scope of RTI act. EVM … there is no end. We can write a bigger book than Maha Bharat on the frauds, scams, scandals and blunders Nehruvians and Nehruvian Congress together with their allies.




Governor appoints Lok Pal in Gujarat: Nehruvian Congress says we are sincerely on Lok Pal. Chronology says the issue has been made political by Nehruvian Congress. Governor and opposition party (Nehruvian Congress of India Private Limited) in Gujarat in joint venture rejected the proposal of ruling party (BJP Gujarat), without any merits and convincing reason. The HC has not gone through the political aspect and aims of Nehruvian Congress. Purpose behind the action is important. The purpose cannot be set aside in jurisprudent.

Do they want to scrap the state government? Let us rent out the State Assembly building.


Shirish Mohanlal Dave



Nehruvian, Purpose, Action, Power, Politics, Jawahar, Indira, Man Mohan, FM, PM, Governor, Gujarat, State Assembly, Rent out

Read Full Post »





It is not correct to say the movement lead by Anna can bring anarchy.

Probably some learned writers are not aware of the “Nav Nirman Movement” launched by the people of Gujarat in 1974.


“Nav Nirman Movement” if viewed with the same spectacle that being used by some political analysts, then that Nav Nirman movement was much more dangerous and should have definitely lead Gujarat and thereafter the nation towards anarchy. Had we observed such result consequent to that “Nav Nirman movement”?


It is possible that some “learned” political analysts might be unaware of the details of the situation under which the “Nav Nirman movement” was launched. One of the many other reasons of their unawareness could be, these “learned” might be walking with perambulator at that time. The other associated reason could be the ignorance on history  as they would not agree to any thing unless experienced personally. There are people including “learned media journalists” who prefer to apply their own intelligence than to study history. Print media can also fall under this category.

 We should understand “Nav Nirman Movement” and the philosophy of “Fast” in politics: This would be more relevant, instead of talking vague; as to how many times Mahatma Gandhi went on fast and for what?

Mahatma Gandhi has very well defined and clarified his weapons of “Satyagraha and Fast”.




Fast is permissible when the government believes in rule of law and has respect for the human lives and values, unless government says that it has no respect for rule of law, thereby whatsoever it does is the rule of law.

This Nehruvian Congress has not said that it has no respect for rule of law or it has not rejected the rule of written law. Therefore we have to believe by giving a benefit of doubt, that the government believes in rule of law.


Now suppose government is hypocrite and thereby though it says it believes in rule of law but practically it does not act with respect to rule of law, then what should be done? Is an agitation permissible?

No. Under this circumstance it is not permissible. Because the venue of judiciary is open to get justice.

But suppose, the judiciary is heavily loaded and the justice gets delayed. Then what should be done?

The justice can be delayed due to two reasons. System is faulty or number of judges is less and cases are piled up. In such cases an agitation can be launched for reforms of the system. To have a situation of less number of judges is also a fault of the system.

Now here in case of Nehruvian Congress government, the non-governance or fake governance or ill-governance in India is the fault of the system which is kept  unattended willfully.


During the last eight years, the corruption at high level went to its Himalayan peaks. Nehruvian Congress government initiated actions only when Supreme Court issued directives.   Thereby to constitute the Lok Pal became inevitable.


Controversy which has been created on supremacy of Parliament vs. Supremacy of Civil society is a fake controversy created by hypocrites and vested interest.

Parliament is not supreme. Constitution is superior to parliament. Human values are superior to Constitution. Parliament can enact a law but if that law does not provide justice then that law is treated as null and void.



Here in our case Lok Pal Bill draft prepared by the government was defective.

It was not taking proper care of the public interest and to punish the culprit seated at the top levels of governance.


Anna Hazare cannot file a PIL in SC. Because SC would say it is hypothetical. India needs reforms in system of elective representation. It is a time consuming process. This issue  can be taken up as a second step.


Lok Pal Bill with wide power has become inevitable and it is first step towards reforms. One should compare the quantum of corruption prevailing in India by comparing the quantum of Indian money in foreign banks to that of other developed countries.

Under the prevailing circumstances and the culture of Nehruvian Congress, people of India and Anna Hazare have no option but to go on fast to have a proper draft for Lok Pal Bill.


How an authority of a government can speak on behalf of parliament?

A minister is part and parcel of government. The spokespersons of ruling party are speaking on behalf of government.

The members of parliament are elected based on the comparative voted majority of the people of their respective constituency. They might have been supported by one or other party but they are considered the representative of all the people who voted for them, who did not vote to them and who did not vote for any one. That is, they represent all the people of their respective constituency.

Further when there are hundreds of persons in parliament, who are voted to parliament for the very purpose of presenting the voice of their people, why are they keeping mum? How can a minister talk on their behalf? Let the members of parliament come forward to say their view. The ministers should keep mum. Ministers or spoke persons need not play double roll.


Further it must be clear to the party or group of parties running the government, that the scope of the proposed Lok Pal was not forming a part of party or parties’ election manifesto/s. Thereby no party can take the people for granted on the Lok Pal Bill draft which has been pointed out for its defects.

The Ministry had agreed to have a Civil Society to prepare a draft of Lok Pal Bill. There is no ban on the ministry to accept such draft. The ministry could have invited and entertained discussion on material and merits on Jan Lok Pal Bill. But the government has always avoided the discussion. On the contrary it said to the members of Civil Society as to who are they to press government for discussion!

Now look at one more point. The team Anna has conducted referendum in the constituency of Kapil Sibbal on both the drafts viz. government prepared Lok Pal bill and Civil Society prepared Lok Pal Bill.

What was the result? 80% and above people have supported Jan Lok Pal Bill.

Kapil Sibbal has no courage to conduct referendum in any way. This indicates very clearly, as to where the government Lok Pal Bill stands for its democratic value.

It must be mentioned here that before the submission of the Jan Lok Pal Bill draft to the government, Anna Hazare had made it very clear before the public and before the government that he would not mind if the parliament does not pass the bill, but Jan Lok Pal Bill has to be placed before parliament.

Because, the aim of Anna Hazare is, people should know who are for and who are against the Jan Lok Pal Bill.

Nehruvian Congress wanted to play a crooked game because its conscious is guilty. It refused to submit the draft of Jan Lok Pal bill before the parliament.


The formation of Civil Society was in consultation with the Nehruvian Congress government. Was the Civil Society formed for a fun? Nehruvian Congress should confirm and say “yes, we had formed the Civil Society for a fun”. But Nehruvian Congress is hypocrite and it has floated a discussion on a fake controversy of supremacy. No member of parliament other than minister uses to take part in discussion is a matter of surprise and research.


Democracy means where a truth is honored, irrespective the level from where it has come.

In democracy the decisions are taken on material and merits.

Recall “Ramayana” where Rama and his ministry could not answer the points raised by the washer man. Though the issue was a person matter of Rama, but as per the tradition, king cannot have any different personal law. He cannot have a relaxation in personal law.

Do we want to step back ward than to the level where we were six thousand year back?

We had gone backward many times due to slavery. But now we will not.

Our learned analysts want to break their head to prove some thing else on hypothetical basis, that Anna Team is an extra constitutional authority and cannot issue instructions to parliament. Because if government surrenders to such extra constitutional pressures, it would collapse the system of parliament and can bring anarchy in our country.


It was a Nav Nirman Stir against corruption.




What was the point of corruption?

Contrary to this date there was no list of scams, frauds and scandals. No list of authorities who made money through unauthorized channels was known.

In 1972 after taking the credit on the victory over Pakistanin 1971, Indira Gandhi conducted the due election of Gujarat Assembly. Her Nehruvian Congress secured 140 seats out of 164 seats of Gujarat State Assembly.

Indira Gandhi was in habit of posting Chief Minister of her own choice instead of electing leader of the house through elected members of the party in the hall.

Indira posted Ghanshyambhai Oza. But the elected members were not for Ghanshyambhai Oza. Chimanbhai Patel took the lead and he made Ghanshyambhai Oza to resign. Chimanbhai Patel some how proved his majority before the observer team sent by the Central high command. Indira Gandhi had no option but to surrender to the majority member support to Chimanbhai Patel.

Chimanbhai Patel had sworn in as CM before a veteran Mahatma Gandhian leader and social worker Ravishankar Maharaj. Chimanbhai Patel became the CM against the will of Indira Gandhi though both belonged to the same party i.e. Nehruvian Congress alias Congress (J) means Congress lead by Jagjivanram.





The aim of Nehruvian Congress has always been remained to make money through unauthorized channel. When such money is made the effect is price rise.

The price rise in eatables caused the rise in food bill of an engineering college. This initiated Nav Nirman Stir. It was against corruption. Ground nut oil is a consumable item in Gujarat. It has good production and market in Gujarat. Chimanbhai Patel fixed the price or ground nut oil to Rs. 9.00 per kg and made announcement. But at the very next day the price went to Rs 9=25 per kg.

People smelt corruption. Agitation was launched to remove CM. It went to a critical stage. Ravishankar Maharaj a veteran Mahatma Gandhian and social worker before whom Chimanbhai Patel had sworn in as the CM, he asked Chimanbhai Patel to resign. Ravishankar Maharaj was considered the “Soul of Gujarat”. Next day Chimanbhai Patel resigned from the post of CM. Chimanbhai Patel wrote a book that from where, how and when Indira Gandhi collected money through unauthorized channels from Groundnut Oil Millers.



Agitation was supported by all the associations and Mahatma Gandhian leaders in Gujarat.

Agitation continued. The cause and source of corruption was not only CM but it was the Nehruvian Congress and Indira Gandhi herself. Agitation aimed to dissolve assembly.

Looking to the density of the agitation the members of Jan Sangh and Congress (O) resigned from the assembly membership. In every town and city, area wise Nav Nirman Samiti was formed. Those committees pressurized Nehruvian Congress MLAs to resign.

There were some instances of violence, but by and large the agitation was peaceful.

Jai Prakash Narayan and many other Sarvodaya leaders had visited Gujarat. They were astonished to learn that the agitation was against corruption. Hitherto they had observed agitations in other states for demands to have some government run industry or some big project. Contrary to this, the agitation in Gujarat was against corruption. They were very much impressed and they gave their full support.


Majority of the assembly members had resigned. Assembly was suspended long back. But Indira Gandhi tried to adopt delaying tactics as per her inherited culture. She was under impression that agitation cannot run for indefinite period. Sooner or later people would get tired, and then she would conduct bye-elections to fill up vacant posts.

But she was proved wrong. Agitation continued and it was becoming stronger and stronger. Mararji Desai went on indefinite fast. Ultimately the Assembly was dissolved. No body had raised a point of extra constitutional authority. It may be due to the then learned analysts of politics, were enough learned entities and were not confused by what is written in some books and what is written on the walls.

Indira Gandhi imposed presidential rule. She started making delay in mid-term election, so that she can get sufficient time to divide the people by castes and creeds in Gujarat. KHAM (Kshatrya, Harijan, Adivasi and Muslim) theory put to work.





Again agitation was launched. Again Morarji Desai went on indefinite fast. Then Assembly elections were declared. Janata Front came to power.

Gujarat agitation instigated Jai Prakash Narayan to launch nation wide agitation. Meanwhile Allahabad High Court set aside the election of Indira Gandhi from Raibareli and it also disqualified Indira Gandhi for six years.

Indira Gandhi imposed emergency and made changes in constitution to re-establish her MP-ship. India learnt a lot lessons from the anarchy created by a party who had absolute majority in parliament. The learned political analysts should learn a perspective culture of party which got elected through a defective and not fully reliable system of people’s representation. They should identify the thick and illusive wall of demarcation of people’s representatives and the people’s voice in reality.




Anna Hazare may be a poorly literate person. But Jai Prakash Narayan was not. Jai Prakash Narayan was a laureate and social scientist. Anna Hazare may not use technical language of social science. But his conclusions are proper and meet the democratic requirements. Anna Hazare has vast experience on the aptitudes, attitudes and aims of bureaucrats and politicians especially that of Nehruvian Congress and its allies.


Indira imposed emergency by which learned political analysts should have realized that Indian political system including the constitution was not able to provide democratic freedom where a truth can get respect irrespective from where it comes. Not only this, whatever comes from the Number One of the ruling party is the only truth and it must be honored at any cost to the nation. The latter has to be termed and has to be realized as anarchy.

Fortunately many veteran Gandhian leaders and thinkers were alive and they could guide the people of poor India on importance of democracy in 1977. The emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi collapsed of its own Burden.




Indira Gandhi along with her party got miserable defeat.

The new government lead by Morarji Desai of Janata Front made changes in constitution so that no mad and power hungry PM can take nation on ban.


Agitation launched by Team of Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev, RSS, VHP or whosoever are more trustworthy than the MPs of Nehruvian Congress. At the most the result would be dissolution of parliament. The dissolution of parliament should come as early as possible if the government really committed to democratic values.

The manifesto of each party should be precise on scope of political reforms.


Following wings should be constituted independent in all respect. Staff and offices.

1     Administrative wing (Government)

2     Legislative wing (Parliament, State Assemblies and local bodies)

3     Investigative wing (Lok Pal & VC & CBI)

4     Judiciary wing (SC, HC & other courts and tribunals)

5     Information wing (CIC & SIC)

6     Census cum Election wing (Central and State Election plus census cum Voters Council Commission which would conduct all types of voters meetings on common cum single platform)

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Controversy, Extra Constitutional, So called Learned, political analysts, Perambulator, Ignorant on history, vested interest, Nehruvian, Indira, Emergency, Ramayana, Supremacy

Read Full Post »


For Nehruvians the politics is a profession. It is a profession for making profit. One may not be qualified for earning money by working very hard to put labor, but has inherited a sizable amount of wealth and some expertise in telling lies before common men (having no common sense) that one can cunningly fooled.

What Nehru possessed was a hunger of power. Since he had taken active part in freedom struggle under leadership of Mahatma Gandhi he had to give respect to democratic values. However internally he did not like to follow democratic values. Probably that is why he chose the friendship with the so-called socialistic countries like Russia and China. And it is an open secret that there is nothing like socialism. Socialism is a super capitalism cum imperialism. The difference between traditionally called imperialism and this socialistic imperialism is that in the latter it is an imperialism of a group leader where he has to provide jerks to his own people to keep his hold in retaining power. The fraudulently made philosophical directives and statements are the weapons.


Let us start with period of Indira Gandhi to give due relevance to the subject matter. Indira Gandhi followed her father’s tactic to hold power. Nehru had formed a syndicate made of different powerful people of different states e.g. Kamaraj and Sanjeev Reddy in South, Sadoba Patil and Sukhadia in West, Atulya Ghose and Kamalapati Tripathi in UP etc…

Nehru removed Morarji Desai under the jerk of Kamaraj Plan. However he could not weaken him in west. That is why formation of a syndicate was inevitable to see that his Indira can be sworn-in as PM at a later stage.

Having a background of an active freedom fighter in a democratic way Nehru could not opt for certain autocratic actions under his disguised democratic face. As for Indira the autocracy was not untouchable. Besides this Indira Gandhi was neither learned nor a well read nor even educated (in real sense). Therefore to use fraudulent philosophical language was not possible for her to misguide the mass. Indira had applied political ways to fool people, the ways communists adopt. I.e. Confuse people on past shortcoming, provide jerks to the mass through media, use intelligences agency for personal benefit.

To eliminate the hold of syndicate, Indira at the first stage had surrendered herself to syndicate and then removed Morarji Desai. To confuse the mass she made nationalization of 14 leading banks. She removed privy purses of kings, which otherwise also were going to be progressively vanished. The mass was illiterate and the most elites were getting driven away by media, as the latter was more interested in jerky news than political analysis.

Indira joined hands with Indian communists also who had welcomed China’s invasion in 1962. Her so-called Tarun Turk-s (young Turks) where heavily active in defaming and abusing Morarji Desai on controversial matters of his son. “Remove oldies and install young” was also a subject matter for public discussion. To check her strength she put her own candidate for presidential election against her party’s regular candidate viz. Sanjeev Reddy.

SUGGESTION OF MORARJI DESAI WAS NOT ACCEPTED: Morarji Desai suggested to remove Indira Gandhi from the party. But the members of Syndicate were hesitating in taking such decision at that stage because it could be termed as undue pressure on voters. Morarji Desai opined that it would be very late if action against Indira would be delayed.

GOVERNMENT MACHINERY USED AGAINST OPPONENTS: When Indira Gandhi found through her intelligence agency that her candidate runs neck to neck she got distributed in the Central hall of the parliament, some handbills having vulgar notes about Sanjeev Reddy. Having support of Communists and some other confused local parties Sanjeev Reddy got defeated and VV Giri got elected in second preferential counting. Since syndicate was not happy it thought to take action against her. The government intelligences were behind the members of the syndicate. Indira showed the taped conversations of syndicate members, which was against her.


Indira called for requisition meeting of general conference of the delegates though its regular scheduled meeting was already fixed during next 6 months. It was known to Indira that regular meeting was not going to help her as she was in minority within the Congress organization.


Indira Gandhi invited every body to join Congress where no eligibility of wearing of Khadi or spinning was required. The All India Radio had become All Indira Radio. It would be announced with name even if a small leader of a tehsil joined Congress-I. Vinoba told, “If you need only numbers, call monkeys also. She declared election.

This was extra ordinary situation in Indian politics where a top leader was talking abusively and passing whole blame on its own people who had worked for the party and for the nation for lifetime. This was a jerk where Indira Gandhi passed the blame in toto on the syndicate leaders including Morarji Desai for all the shortcomings of Congress without specifying anything in particular.


She gave a slogan as “Indira Gandhi Aayi Hai, Nayee Roshni Laayi Hai”, “Garibi Hataao” Every body in Dark about ways on removal poverty. These were vague slogans. But when the most elites get mislead, one cannot save nation from the falsehood. Unfortunately as for Gujarat and elsewhere too, very popular writers got mislead under such decisive Communist type propaganda.

Indira won the parliamentary election by absolute majority.


From 1969 there was internal disturbance in East Pakistan. It was wanting due importance for Bengali and its people. It was not in position to withstand the domination of Punjabi officers in military and bureaucracy. Pakistan was in trouble and under odd situation. Pakistan military ruler lost the people’s confidence. Mujibur Rahman who was Bengali got majority seats in its parliament. But military rulers were not in favor to hand over the rein. Pakistan took full advantage of lawlessness under Indira rule in India. Independence movement of proposed Bangladesh was taking pace. Meanwhile Bihari Muslims who were against Independence of East Pakistan were being driven out of East Pakistan. India had infiltrators of the order of one crore in India. Pakistan was in trouble and under odd situation. Pakistani rulers kept Mujibur Rehman busy in table talk for weeks together and meanwhile shifted coastal military and Air Force in East Pakistan to defeat Bangladesh stir. Indira’s intelligence failed to understand this strategy but the US intelligence conveyed message to Mujibur Rehman to run away from East Pakistan to avoid arrest and to take shelter in UK. Pakistan military attacked on Indian Airports. The Indo-Pak military action was very well due. Jagjivan Ram had already announced, this time if Pak attacks, our military would go deep in the Pakistan. Pakistan was facing problems internally. There was no public support from East Pakistan. There was no straight transport to East Pakistan. It had to go round a way through Ceylon. Indian military defeated Pakistan.


The tradition of Nehruvian was to pass blame or guilt to other collogues and to take credit of victory for own self. Blame of defeat before China was passed on to VK Menan. Failure on economy was given to syndicate members. Indira took full credit for herself on this victory. No credit was given to the then defense Minister Jagjivan Ram. This was in accordance to the tradition established by Nehru.

Indira got victory in various assembly elections. Similarly in Gujarat also her Cong-I secured 140 seats out of 162 Assembly seats. This was a record victory in Gujarat. In earlier election it was hardly 90 under undivided Congress.

To get a political victory is different and to achieve economic development and play role with administrative efficiency is different. Indira Gandhi traditionally was hungry of power and she was highly inefficient in taking decisions on issues related with public interest. She was interested in increasing number of followers and not leaders. She disliked leaders. She as per Nehruvian tradition removed residual leaders of Cong I, one by one. E.g. Bahuguna, VP Singh, Vir Bahadur Singh etc… She had adopted all Communist tactics to strengthen her autocracy.


As for Indira Gandhi the communistic tactics was becoming difficult for her with a nation where still some freedom fighters of independence movement were alive and the basic ideology of democracy was deep rooted.

There were all level failures. All the issues on water distribution, infrastructure developments were hanging. Working of Nationalized Banks had gone to dogs. Corruption got wide spread, as she herself was not beyond doubt. She had appointed CMs of her personal choice in all the states even then everywhere there was corruption and anarchy.


First time in the political history of India, the students of Gujarat launched a stir with a demand “Remove Corruption”.

Off course there were stir for having some Industries, Railways projects in other states, but the launching a stir against “Corruption” was unique. Jai Prakash Narayan a veteran Gandhian was highly impressed by the agitation of Gujarat. He gave full support. Other Mahatma Gandhian also joined the stir.

The first demand was to remove the Congi CM, Chimanbhai Patel. The stir was comparable with the independence movement. It was a wide spread movement. Indira had no option but to remove the CM. But this was not the end. The youth asked MLAs to resign. A lot MLA resigned for political survival. Indira Gandhi suspended the State Assembly instead of dissolving the state assembly. Morarji Desai very well aware of behavioral aspect of Indira. To avoid delay of dissolution of the State Assembly, Morarji Desai went on indefinite fast. Ultimately Indira Gandhi had to dissolve the state assembly.

Now she started dividing people by caste and creed. She also took no action to declare assembly elections. Indira Gandhi was becoming highly unpopular. Morarji Desai again went on indefinite fast on a demand of popular government. To avoid further defame Indira Gandhi declared Gujarat State Assembly elections. She had carried an impression that the division by castes and creed would work efficiently. It off course worked to some extent but not completely. Janata Front came to power with a marginal majority with the MLAs of KIMLOP party formed by Chimanbhai Patel the former CM who was removed by Cong-I.

This was a big victory for opposition parties in India. Jai Prakash Narayan launched a wide spread agitation in Bihar with a slogan that “the Victory in Gujarat belongs to us, and now it is the turn of Bihar.” Meanwhile the High Court of Allahabad disqualified Indira Gandhi on her election as MP from Rai Bareli under a writ filed by Raj Narayan.


Some how the likely judgment of Allahabad High Court against her was known or expected by Indira Gandhi. She had made all the pre-arrangements to fight out for her political survival as PM.

She had kept printed posters ready and well distributed in all the corners of India; “Indira Gandhi is still holding the post of PM”.

The very next day at mid-night she imposed the “emergency” and put all the opposition party leaders, Mahatma Gandhian veteran leaders of Sarvodaya including Jai Prakash Narayan behind the bar. She also imposed censorship on print media. All India Radio already was treated as her family property. She had imposed MISA well before, which was termed, as Maintenance of Internal Security Act was better known as Maintenance of Indira Security Act.


It was one sided poster war against enemy. One would find posters on each wall.

“When united enemies attacked, she stood like a rock to save the nation from anarchy”

“Our motive is to be gentle to all”

“Emergency is a period of ceremony of self discipline”

There were several dozens types of posters all round the country. Unwritten instructions were given to all institutions that as and when any meeting is held they are supposed to pass a resolution that they have supported the emergency and having full confidence in Indira Gandhi the PM.

It was a golden time for ruling party to loot and spread rumors.

Rumors were widely spread that it had been given to understand that any complaint against any official if received, the official would be liable for suspension.

There was also a rumor that trains are running in time due to emergency,

There were rumors that black marketers are arrested and were put behind the bars,

There were rumors that Gunda-s and smugglers were arrested and were put behind the bars,

There were announcements in a big way that Sanjay had launched a 4-point program and Indira had launched a 20-point program for the benefit of poor mass, i.e. 4 + 20 points.

There were daily radio announcements where a backward class community member was talking with others that now he is very happy as under the 4+20 program he has been provided with pakka house and free hold land.

Cong – Indira took full advantage of dividing people by caste especially in Gujarat.

The backward class people were told that this emergency is for elite people.

See this emergency has been imposed recently even than these upper class is making hue and cry, where as you people were put by them under emergency for thousands of years.

These upper class people have never cared for you.

These upper class people do not like you to have any reservation. They want you to remain backward so that you can serve them all the time.

Now it is Indira Gandhi who has come to rescue you.

Bajpai of Jana Sangh and Morarji of Congress-O all are upper Class people.

Morarji is the owner of Morarji Mills.

He is Brahmin and would favor only upper class.

INDIRA CONGRESS ALSO FOUNDED KHAM (Kshatriya-Harijan-Adivasi-Muslim) politics with firm footing during emergency.

However here in Gujarat the state government was run by Janata Front, and the Congress-I was in opposition.

Congress-I was taking every chance to agitate against the Janata Front Government.

Soon after imposition of emergency Congi-I concentrated to get the MLAs and other leaders defected to Cong-I.

Unfortunate to Gujarat Hitendra Desai was one of them who was close associate of Morarji Desai, despite of this he defected to Cong-I.

Many other MLAs resigned from Cong-O and supported Cong-I to avoid arrest.

The print media was surrendered to Indira Gandhi.

The censorship was very strict. Any type of agitation would be termed as anti-national was the declaration of Indira.


The columnists of print media were put to difficult situation.

Though they were against such censorship they had no courage to leave the newspapers and magazines.

They thought if they would leave the publication some body else will be employed by the publisher.

Thereby they started writing on odd-subjects.

Which vegetable can be cooked easily potato or ladies finger? Cotton cloth is better or synthetic?

Cap is better or Hat?

You cannot discuss on whether Sita was pure or not?

Or Rama’s decision was OK or not?

As some how or other the Government was likely to smell something wrong you have tried to link Indira’s Government to criticize it indirectly.

And you could be behind the bar. There was no difference between rights of citizen, fundamental rights and natural rights.

JUDICIARY NOT SPARED but judges did not surrender

Even a judgment given by a High Court was censored because it was in favor of an employee and against a government department.

Indira Government carried an impression that it had got full liberty to arrest not only without assigning any reason but also without existence of any reason.

That is government was not supposed to inform you that why you are being arrested. It was its free will to arrest you without existence of any reason.

Judiciary too had surrendered to Indira. However at many places the judiciary functioned better.

In a case a judge objected an arrest. A person who was arrested said, “OK you may not inform me as to what offence I have made. But I say there is no existence of any offence. If you believe existence of any offence, at least you inform the court if not to me.”

There was no information with the police about the offence.

Court dismissed.

Police arrested a monk with an allegation that the monk was kidnapping children.

Judge asked the police;” have you got any information about missing of any child? Or have you seized any child from this monk?

Police said; “No. but this monk is using black magic.”

Judge said; “what is that black magic?”

Police said, “A crow has been killed by this monk as reported by public”

Judge said; “Have you got any witness?”

Police said: “No. but we have Crow”

Judge said; “Where is the Crow?”

Police said; “At moment we are left only with a feather of Crow. Because a Dog has snatched away the Crow as reported by the people.”

And the police submitted a feather of a crow before the judge.

Judge simply dismissed the case.

At one place few persons took a procession with slogans as: “Bharat Mataki Jai”, “Vande Mataram”, “Remove emergency”

The police arrested them. They were placed before the judge.

The judge asked the police as to what was the offence.

Police said; “they were shouting slogans”

“What were they shouting?” asked the judge.

“They were shouting Bharat Mataki Jai,” said the police.

“What is wrong in it?” asked the judge.

“They were also shouting ‘Vande Mataram’” said the police.

“What is wrong in it? What is the objection? There is no offence” said the judge.

“But sir, these people were also shouting Remove emergency” said the police.

“It is up to government. Government may decide whether to remove emergency or not. There is no offence in asking the Government to remove emergency,” said the judge.

The judge disposed off the case.


The government official became more corrupted.

A postman went to a shopkeeper and demanded money. He threatened him and said I would report to police that you are receiving anti-government communications. Police would arrest you. It is better you pay me some thing.

On 4+20 point program Tamilnadu government commented.

This was just comparable with an unmarried lady counseling a mother of two children as to what care should be taken by a pregnant lady.

Cong-I leaders got angry and said the Government by the way insulting Indira Gandhi.


Gandhian publication “Bhoomi Putra” was taken to task. Ultimately it had been made to stop publication as one by one all the printers were sealed and editors were arrested.

Gorwala’s publication “Opinion” was also stopped.

His printers were sealed.

Gorwala cyclostyled and continued his magazine. That machine was also seized.

Then Gorwala prepared Carbon Copies.

These carbon copies he circulated to his subscribers.

On his arrest, subsequently he paid the refund of the subscription to his subscribers.

Gorwala was a very gallant man.

The chess player Vinoba Bhave tried to assess the courage of Indira Gandhi.

Indira Gandhi was not courageous.

She could not arrest Ravishankar Maharaj though some blasting material was seized from the house where he was residing. Ravishankar Maharaj was a true Mahatma Gandhian. He cannot have any link with people having faith in violence. Though he was disable person was number one popular in the heart of Gujarati people irrespective of castes, creed and religion.


Vinoba Bhave submitted an application to take some action to ban cow slaughter, and asked Indira Gandhi to decide within some specified target date as to what action she would take to ban cow slaughter.

And further he informed that failure to which he would go on fast to death. Since there was censorship this could not be a news line.

But any thing that announced by a Congressman cannot be censored. Hence when some leaders abused Vinoba Bhave for issuance of such notice to Indira Gandhi and they bitterly criticized Vinoba Bhave, this became a news line.

Hence people came to know that Vinoba Bhave is not silent.


According to Hindu social tradition Acharya means he who educate and guide the mass and the king with his moral power.

Generally it is the head of the education institution. Admission to the conference was open to all.

At the beginning Vinoba Bhave clarified without mentioning the posters circulated by Indira Gandhi on his remark that “Emergency is the ceremonial period of self discipline” carries a meaning that the self-discipline can be imposed by Acharya-s only.

No ruler can impose it. What the ruler has imposed cannot be termed as period of ceremony of self-discipline.

Further he asked the Acharya-s to discuss on the matter of emergency without any fear.

If Acharya-s would afraid of ruler it would be insult of the nation.

The Acharya-s conference passed a resolution

Emergency has to be an end.

If the emergency has been imposed due to a National Cause (not a Party’s Cause), then all the National Leaders should be invited for discussion of the issues.

If the emergency has been imposed due to cause to party, the whole nation cannot be taken on ban.

The people arrested should be released at the earliest.

Vinoba Bhave hitherto known as Governmental Saint (Sarakari Saint) showed his braveness and maturity and defeated Indira Gandhi without moving a pawn on the Chess Board of the politics.

Indira only moved her pawns and got defeated.


The Mahatma Gandhian leaders off course were not young but took the challenge. However many of them were not keeping good health.

The authorities were taking no proper medical care. Deshpande a veteran Mahatma Gandhian when asked replied that Indira had made no arrangement to check and convey to her the condition of some really needy political prisoners.

Jai Prakash Narayan was among them.

He was suffering from kidney problem.

He was not supposed to provide with salty food. But no care was taken. He lost her both the kidneys during this period.

A Cong-I man wrote to Vinoba Bhave to request Indira Gandhi to release Jai Prakash Narayan, as his health condition was serious.

Vinoba Bhave forwarded the said letter itself to Indira Gandhi with an under line drawn to the word “Release”.

Indira Gandhi when received this letter he suspended the Cong-I man.

A rumor was spread if Jai Prakash Narayan dies in the Jail his body would be disposed off with full honor but public will not be allowed to witness.

Indira Gandhi realized that it would be better to release Jai Prakash Narayan.

A rumor was spread that needy prisoners would only be released one by one without any announcement so that they do not get welcome like a hero.


Morarji Desai was the hero among the prisoners.

Morarji Desai was kept in a solitary prison in a 12feet by12feet room with a wooden bed.

Once the room was locked from outside.

He strongly opposed.

Initially no newspapers were supplied to him. He threatened the authority that he would go on fast if newspapers are not supplied to him. Resultantly newspapers supplied.

Morarji Desai was pure vegetarian and that too taking only fruits. Thereby there was no scope for Indira Gandhi to play with his health.

But there were news line with out mentioning the name of Morarji Desai that Jail authority has to supply a 20 kg fruit to an old leader.

Morarji Desai was not allowed to leave his 12’X12’ room.

He was doing all his physical exercise on his bed. He used to make several rounds of his cot as a walk and jog.

On his release he said; it was a lie that I was taking 20 kg of fruits. I cannot eat so much.

If really I take that much I would die. I do not know how it had been measured as 20 kg. Who disposed off that much?


Though the emergency was imposed to secure the rein of Indira Gandhi and this was known to every body, Indira Gandhi had used all her resources to justify it.

She said:

There was a wide spread indiscipline in all field that had badly affected the development.

The opposition leaders and other leaders have instigated the mass to agitate and to break the laws.

These leaders have asked the military and bureaucracy to disobey the orders.

In fact there was not a single case having any prima-facie.

The law of the land was enough to take action. But the situation was a result of inefficient governance of Indira Gandhi where decisions were always avoided. Infiltration of Bangladeshi in Kolkatta and North East states, Water distribution problems, lack of infrastructure, smuggling, corruption, flourishing of anti-social elements etc… and incompetence of taking proper decisions on burning issues was the cause of anarchy.

As for Deshpande the veteran Mahatma Gandhian leader, the emergency was the Exhibition of total failure of Indira Gandhi in all the fields.

Emergency collapsed on its own burden.

Inefficiency was already there. It remained as it was. Indira’s intelligence informed her that situation has not been improved. It is better to declare election before it becomes late. But Indira Gandhi was already late. Emergency excesses were a lot.

Indira Gandhi herself was defeated by 55000 votes.

This was an unparallel event where a one sided campaigner with all media, machinery and system having under her absolute control, lost the election.


Credit goes to the people of India where the democracy is as ancient as its civilization.

Further credits goes to Mahatma Gandhi and his veteran leaders who used their sense of significance and came out to defend democracy against the attack made by a daughter of a leader (Jawaharlal Nehru) who was very close to Mahatma Gandhi during the freedom struggle.

Credit goes not some selected lawyers like MC Chagla, Chandrakant Daru … and judges who kept the judiciary alive.

Credit goes to journalists like Gorwala, all the editors of Bhoomi Putra, Chandravadan Shukla, and Bhogilal Gandhi etc who sacrificed their hard earned money to save democratic values.

It is a matter of surprise as to how the RSS leaders surrendered to Indira Gandhi and reported some of them had applied to get released with a condition that they would not canvass against Indira Gandhi and her Congress. They reported to have been committed to social services only. We do not know their definition of social service.

They had skill of moving “Lathi” but they failed to move it when the nation was in trouble. Similar is the case with Shiv Sena who supported emergency.

However many of RSS workers were brave enough as a matter of strategy went under ground and when election declared rigorously campaigned for Janata Front.

Contrary to this, many of the leaders of Navanirman Stir had joined Congress-I and even today they are beautifying Cong-I. Probably they want to survive.

AND YET THE CONG-I MEN ARE DEVOTEE TO INDIRA GANDHI who insulted Mahatma Gandhians, the principals of Non-violence and fair ways of politics.


Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: