DOST KHAN / ANCHOR
JAMMU: Indian Muslims have had a remarkable contribution towards making of the nation over decades, which is why their presence has been discernible in every field. India is perhaps the only country where members of the minority Muslim community have held very important positions from President, Vice President, Chief Justice of India at the top, down below to chief ministers of Hindu dominated states.
However, lately the scenario is fast changing. The radicalised among peace loving Muslims are traversing on the dangerous path, touching the border line of Ghazwa-e-Hind or the final battle of India, an Islamic term mentioned in some Hadiths in particular predicting a final and last battle in India and as a result, a conquest of the whole Indian subcontinent by the so-called Muslim warriors or Jihadis. The term has become a subject of vast criticism for being used by modern terror groups to justify terrorism in the Indian subcontinent.
Slowly and subtly, the radicalised influence is hovering over the socio-political landscape of the country with so-called and self-styled representatives of Muslims in politics and civil society running counter narratives on all important national but contentious issues.
These zealots have hugely exploited the Muslim population by generating fear psychosis and creating trust deficit. They will never work towards ending illiteracy and ensuring politico-social empowerment of their co-religionists but may not miss a single opportunity to use them as cannon fodder of Jihadi ideology.
The recent reaction over the Supreme Court verdict on Ram Mandir in Ram Janambhoomi exposes the hypocrisy of radicalised Islamists. Ahead of the judgment on this festering issue they kept on vouching about mediation and acceptance of the court decision but when announced most of them stood up in arms to question the wisdom of Indian judiciary.
Look at the double speak of the saner leaders like Asaduddin Owasi, who criticized Supreme Court decision on Ayodhya, describing it as ‘victory of faith over facts’ and alleging that the top court is ‘supreme but not infallible’. The same gentleman had hailed the apex court decision that the National Anthem was not mandatory in the cinema halls, saying that ‘many people were harassed by the previous order, especially people from the minority court’.
When decisions come as per choice of a particular segment among Muslims, the Supreme Court is supreme and when it is adverse they try to find faults.
Yet another case that raised many eyebrows among a section of people pertained to execution of Parliament attack Afzal Guru. The country’s one of the ace legal experts, A. G Noorani tried to trace the emotional angel in the judgement while finding loop holes and lacuna in the investigations. He emphasized on the doctrine of ‘satisfying the collective conscience of the society’ while referring to the verdict.
This observation was a motivating factor for many zealots and separatists of Kashmir to challenge the wisdom of Indian judiciary, acclaimed the world over for its fair and fearless judicial dispensation. The separatists sarcastically reacted to the capital punishment of Guru with Syed Ali Shah Geelani claiming that, ‘The courts did not fulfill the standards of justice in Guru’s case’ and ‘The Indian judiciary has not been able to prove its neutrality as far as cases of Kashmiris are concerned, as they consider Kashmiris as guilty even before hearing their case’. He and his ilk across the country conveniently ignored the fact that the same courts set free Afzal Guru’s two co-accused S.R.S Geelani and Afsan Masood or reducing the sentence of Shaukat Guru to ten years imprisonment from the capital punishment. They were let off or given lesser sentence because the appellant courts were not satisfied with the evidence. They will never appreciate the Indian judicial system which heard the case of a convicted terrorist Yakub Menon during dead of night.
Ironically, so called conscious keepers in the Muslim community keep on indulging in victimhood despite being part of the system. The nation has not forgotten how the former Vice President of India Hamid Ansari, behaved after relinquishing his high office, saying Muslims in India were feeling threatened and insecure. The hypocrisy of the people like him have vindicated all those who questioned the logic behind India not preferring to be a Hindu Rashtra like Islamic Republic of Pakistan. When this could be the mindset of a person holding second highest constitutional position in the country, why others should be blamed for indulging in double speak or agenda of changing the very idea of India.
Jackie Shroff to team up with son Tiger in ‘Baaghi 3’
Want to make film on Chandragupta Maurya: Kangana Ranaut
Depression like any other illness and treatable: Deepika Padukone
Bachchan-Hashmi’s ‘Chehre’ to now release on July 17
Will not apologise for remark on Periyar rally: Rajinikanth
© 2017 State Times Daily Newspaper