Judiciary: Tolerance of Contempt

Judiciary: Tolerance of Contempt

On 20th April, the Congress Party moved an Impeachment motion against the Chief Justice of India. It was expected considering the unfavorable verdict for the Congress and other opposition parties in the Judge Loya death case as they were trying to entangle BJP President Amit Shah into it by appealing for a ‘free and fair’ investigation into the death. Judge Loya was hearing a case where BJP President Amit Shah was an accused and died under ‘mysterious circumstances’ according to the petitioners. The court opined that the petitions lacked merit and went on to say that the conduct of the petitioners was “lacking in bona fides and reveals a misuse of the judicial process”. Therefore we can infer that the petition lacked substance and was politically motivated. The Court opined regarding the misutilisation of PILs “by people with personal agenda”. It also said the present one was also a case of misutilisation.

It did not stop there. On one side if it was a politically motivated petition, on the other there was continuous attempt to defame the Judiciary by making unfounded allegations against the judges. One of the petitioners Mr.Prashant Bhushan argued that two of the judges in the Bench ‘may have known’ the judicial officers and therefore they should recuse themselves from hearing the petition. To this the court replied when a Judge faced with such wanton attacks to withdraw from a case, it would amount to abdication of duty”. It was a perfect case for Contempt of Court under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. The Court observed

“…on a dispassionate view of the matter, we have chosen not to initiate proceedings by way of criminal contempt if only not to give an impression that the litigants and the lawyers appearing for them have been subjected to an unequal battle with the authority of law. We rest in the hope that the Bar of the nation is resilient to withstand such attempts on the judiciary. The judiciary must continue to perform its duty even if it is not to be palatable to some. The strength of the judicial process lies not in the fear of a coercive law of contempt. The credibility of the judicial process is based on its moral authority. It is with that firm belief that we have not invoked the jurisdiction in contempt.”

It is not a secret that since past few months, Court proceedings at times have turned ugly. Be it Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal threatening to stage a ‘walk out’ of the Court or Mr.Prashant Bhushan doubting the statements of the judicial officers, the aura has definitely not been the same as it was when Legal Luminaries such as Ram Jethmalani, Nani Palkhivala and others argued. This reminds us of the Vinay Chandra Mishra case where Advocate Vinay Chandra had hurled abuses at the judge and was subsequently found guilty of Contempt of Court. The behavior of some of the advocates now, has been nothing less than that of Mr.Vinay Chandra. Therefore, is there a need for the Court to pull up some of these advocates and initiate Criminal Contempt against them? May be the time has come for the Court to take extreme steps.

Coming to the politics being played around the Judiciary, it is not new for the Congress to sabotage the functioning of the Judiciary. Back in 1973, after the verdict of Keshavananda Bharati Vs State of Kerala case, three senior most Supreme Court judges were superseded for the post of Chief Justice. The Congress of Smt.Indira Gandhi clearly sent a message to the Judiciary that it had to align its views with the Congress government failing which the institution itself can be abused. A couple of years after this, National Emergency was declared following the verdict of Raj Narain Case where Smt.Indira Gandhi was found guilty of misusing state machinery for election purposes. Therefore it is in the DNA of Congress to intimidate the Judiciary whenever the judgements have not favoured it.

The Impeachment motion moved by the Congress relies on the unprecedented press conference of four senior judges of Supreme Court who expressed displeasure regarding the “selective allocation of cases” to few judges which included the Case of death of Judge Loya. Justice Chelameswar, one of the judges who expressed displeasure in the press conference, later in an interview told that ‘impeachment is not the solution to all the problems’. Despite this the Congress has gone ahead and mentioned unfounded charges in the notice. It was rightly rejected by the Chairman of Rajya Sabha after considering the merits of the allegations and consulting other legal experts. The motion itself has words like “may have”, “likely” which means those who submitted the motion are themselves not sure of the charges and therefore lacks credibility. According to Article 124 (4), a Supreme Court judge can be impeached only the grounds of “proved misbehaviour or incapacity” which is not the case here as the charges levelled are not “proven beyond reasonable doubt”. It is surprising to see that Mr.Kapil Sibal who had spoken against the procedure for impeachment of judges in an interview to NDTV in 2010 is leading the coterie of those asking for it. In fact, it was Mr.Kapil Sibal who had stood against impeachment of Justice Ramaswami in 1991. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in a tweet called this motion as ‘Intimidation of India’s judiciary’.

Tweet of Finance Minister Arun Jaitley.

However, the Congress party did not stop its propaganda of abuses against the CJI even after the Rajya Sabha Chairman rejected their motion. Congress Social Media head Divya Spandana tweeted a scandalous photo containing unfounded, unsubstantiated allegations of CJI fixing benches. The tweet can be seen below-

Scandalous tweet of Divya Spandana against the CJI.

This clearly qualifies to be contempt of court under Contempt of Courts Act 1971. If abuses of such kind which bring disrepute to the Judiciary are left unattended, citizen’s trust in the judiciary will erode. Rather, it would not be wrong to say that it has been already eroded to some extent. Thanks to the Congress party which is trying to do everything to stay relevant in the national arena. It is clear that the Congress, does not want the Ayodhya Verdict to be given before 2019 elections, and is ready to do anything for that. Nani Palkhivala came out with a booklet in 1973 ‘A Judiciary made to measure’ after three senior Supreme Court judges were superseded, perfectly describes the present situation where there are abuses hurled at the judiciary by people who have questionable pasts and credibility. At any cost this has to be abated and the judiciary has to punish abusers for criminal contempt suo moto.


AYUSHman Artharekha


Do you know how the Artha provided to AYUSH used? This article analyzes the funding of Ministry of AYUSH (Ayurveda,Yoga and Naturopathy,Unani,Siddha and Homoeopathy) which are widely referred to as alternate systems of medicine. The article will also specially focus on Homoeopathy in particular. The time-period for the analysis is from the financial year 2015-16 to the Budget Estimates of 2018-19. It is to be noted that the figures generally quoted for the years 2015-16 and 2016-17 are the Actuals (Final amount spent under different heads) and for the year 2017-18 it is the Revised Estimates (Mid-year review of budget estimates depending on the actual trend in spending) and finally for the year 2018-19 it is the Budget Estimates (forecasting approximate expenditure for the coming financial year).



The Ministry of AYUSH was established in 2014 for promoting these alternate systems of medicine. Since then various measures have been taken by the government for the same. Will this suffice? In this Budget (2018-19), the allocation to the AYUSH ministry was increased by over 13%. It is to be noted that Ayurveda and Yoga being an indigenous medicinal system, has developed here over a period of time. Some of the concepts of the Ayurveda is said to have been originated during the period of Indus Valley Civilization which is around 2000 BCE. There are 3.99 lakh registered Ayurvedic practitioners’ in India, with most of them coming from Bihar.

Homoeopathy on the other hand, though not having its roots in India, has over 100 million people using it in India (50% of world) and has over 2 lakh registered doctors, with 12000 being added every year according to the Homeopathy Research Institute (HRI). Homoeopathy is also included in the National Health Systems of other countries like Brazil, Chile, United Kingdom and Switzerland.



The Union Government has undertaken various initiatives to expand the reach of these systems. The Union Government had spent Rs.1.16 crore in 2016-17 for expansion of Ayush under the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS). However, it is to be noted that since then there has been no allocation in the budget 2017-18 and 2018-19 for that specific programme. It would have been encouraging had the funding continued under this specific programme, considering this has not been consolidated with any other initiative.

Another initiative by the Union Government for the expansion of these medicinal systems is the National Ayush Mission (NAM) under the National Health Mission (NHM). The funding for this mission has seen a steady increase over the past four years (See Fig.1). As a matter of fact, the Revised Estimates for the year 2017-18 is Rs.490 crore whereas the Budget Estimates was about Rs.440 crore. This shows that the funds are being utilized completely. But the question to be asked is how efficiently and how effectively.

It is encouraging to see the funding for Ayush go up as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at current prices. It has increased from 0.0082% in 2016-17 to 0.0093% in 2017-18 which is a 13.41% rise. However, I believe it should go up to at least 0.025% of the GDP (Current Prices) by 2025 to make substantial impact in the medium term. Isn’t it surprising that Budget for Ministry of AYUSH with an allocation of about Rs.1600 crore finds a place in the budget speech, but the budget of Ministry of External Affairs which is eight times more does not?

Screenshot-2018-2-13 art pdf

In Karnataka

Health is a state subject. Therefore this article proposes to look into the State of Karnataka. The state has about 177 AYUSH hospitals and 33618 registered Ayush practitioners. Under the head ‘Urban-Health’, the allocation for AYUSH for the year 2017-18 was Rs.13.48 crore which is almost twice as much as the previous year’s Revised Estimates.

NIMHANS in Bengaluru has a dedicated Ayurvedic Research Unit which provides treatment for Apasmara(Epilepsy), Manasmandata (Mental Retardation), Manodvega  (Anxiety Neurosis) and Mamsavata (Muscular Dystrophy). Generally, treatments for such complex disorders are not found elsewhere in Karnataka.



Nobel laureate Dr. Rabindranath Tagore once said-

“It (homoeopathy) is not merely a collection of few medicines but a new Science with a rational philosophy as its base. We require more scientific interest and inquiry into the matter with special stress upon the Indian environments”

The above statement sums up why this article analyzes the funding of Homoeopathy in particular.

As mentioned earlier, this article will try to analyze the funding of Homoeopathic system of medicine in particular. There are about 245 hospitals and 6958 homoeopathic dispensaries as per ‘Infrastructure Facilities Under AYUSH’. (as on 1.4.2010)

As per the Budget Estimates of 2018-19, Rs.5.6 crore has been allotted for establishment of Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia Laboratory, Ghaziabad. The Budget Estimates for this in the year 2016-17 was not met and as per the Revised Estimates for the year 2017-18, it seems so that it will not be met again. Therefore one can expect about Rs.5 crore to be actually spent on this in 2018-19.

There are two major autonomous bodies which receive funding from the Union Government. One is the National Institute of Homoeopathy, Kolkata (NIH) and the other is the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH). Budget Estimates for 2017-18 was Rs.95.5 crore for CCRH and Rs.37.5 crore for NIH. The Revised Estimated for 2017-18 shows that there is a need of extra funding. This Budget should have ideally increased the allocation for these two institutes over the Revised Estimates. However, the allocation has been lesser than the Revised Estimates of 2017-18. See Fig. 2.

Screenshot-2018-2-13 art pdf(1)

There are about 245 hospitals and 6958 homoeopathic dispensaries as per ‘Infrastructure Facilities Under AYUSH’. (as on 1.4.2010). When it comes to state-wise statistics for Homoeopathy, Maharashtra is the most popular with 45 hospitals followed by Kerala and Karnataka respectively. Surprisingly, Uttar Pradesh being a huge state has just 8 Homoeopathic hospitals. One can say that the popularity of Homeopathy tends to increase as one moves towards the south.

In Karnataka

The article proposes to look into the Karnataka Budget 2017-18 to see what it has for Homoeopathy. The funding for Homoeopathy has been progressive since 2015-16. In the year 2015-16, it was funded Rs.771 lakhs which is Rs.7.71 crore. As per the Revised Estimates of 2016-17 the funding has increased to Rs.10.1 crore. In the year 2017-18 the amount allocated is Rs.12.31 crore.

The state has around 21 Homeopathy hospitals, which is the third highest and 6546 registered practitioners. It has around 43 dispensaries and 10 Licensed Pharmacies. This shows that Homoeopathy is quite popular in Karnataka, when compared to other states especially Uttar Pradesh.



The major challenge is of maintaining state-of-art infrastructure. The National Institute of Homeopathy, being a national level institute has had several instances where sub standard medical care has been provided. The problems start from sanitary seepages to non availability of essential drugs. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) Report states-

In contravention of guidelines of World Health Organisation and Indian Public Health Standards of DGHS, the amenities provided by NIH to patients in Out Patient Departments (OPDs) were deficient in terms of seepage of toilet water in three OPDs, inadequate ventilation, inadequate sitting capacity and water filters. NIH failed to maintain sufficient stock of drugs and conducted only one general surgery during 2015-16, as against 158 surgeries done during 2013-15….”


It also states that the paediatric ward did not function between 2013 and 2016 due to a damaged ceiling. Therefore there is clearly no assurance regarding the quality of medical care provided at National Institute of Homeopathy. If this is the case in a premier autonomous institute what about the quality of healthcare in other centres. Therefore recognition of the problem and effective utilization of funds is needed to enhance the quality of healthcare.

The CAG Report states other failures to meet the intended objectives like failure to provide funds for the Pharmacopoeial  Laboratory of Indian Medicine, Ghaziabad and blockage of funds to National Research Institute of Ayurvedic Drug Development, Kolkata.


Allocation, Integration, and Enhanced Delivery is the Need of the Hour

Though it is encouraging to see the importance given to other systems of medicine increasing, there are major challenges facing the Government when it comes to effectiveness of the utilization of funds. Apart from the challenges stated above, one issue is regarding the Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) for AYUSH. Out of Rs.1626.37 crore in the Budget 2018-19, only Rs.23.7 crore comes under capex. The rest is Revenue Expenditure which means it goes for salaries of doctors and other running costs. There needs to be a substantial increase in the next budget.

What one can notice is the lack of AYUSH integrated institutes. There are several research institutes which are funded by the government. However, what is desirable is an integrated AYUSH institute (on the lines of AYUSH University,Haryana). By integrated, I mean a college cum hospital cum research institute comprising AYUSH medicinal systems. At least four institutes of such kind with state of art infrastructure facilities are needed. The four institutes can come up in New Delhi (North), Mumbai (West), Kolkata (East) and Bengaluru (South) considering the locational advantage each of these cities have and the connectivity to the rest of the world. It would also enable inter-disciplinary research projects. There can be an introduction of inter-disciplinary course apart from the present ones in these institutes which could possibly result in increasing the effectiveness of each of these systems and also provide solutions to many problems which the modern medicine has failed to.

Apart from this, the need of the hour is to develop AYUSH IT Tools and Networks for enhanced efficiency of delivery of these medicinal systems. Investment is needed to develop this and connect the doctors and pharmaceutical companies as the availability of AYUSH medicines, particularly rare Homoeopathic drugs is a problem.

Apart from the Budget Speech rhetorics, substantial funding, incentivizing the pharmacies of these medicinal systems is desirable. The Artharekha for AYUSH should be a steeper positive slope for at least a decade for its use to expand substantially.




1.       Expenditure Budget; Ministry of AYUSH: 2018-19

2.       “Homeopathy Research Institute”, Resources> Homeopathy use. http://www.hri-research.org.

3.       Economic Survey 2018

4.       Ministry of Ayush; ayush.gov.in

5.       ‘Open Budgets India’; http://www.openbudgetsindia.org

6.       Detailed Budget Estimates of Expenditure 2017-18: Government of Karnataka.

7.       Expenditure Budget; Ministry of Ayush: 2017-18.

8.       ‘The Economic Times’, ‘AYUSH ministry allocation in the budget increased by 13 percent’.

9.       CAG Report Number 12, 2017; Chapter III, Ministry of Ayush.

Aum NaMo DeMo!

Aum NaMo DeMo!

I had not blogged regarding #Demonetisation as I felt it is too early to analyze the move(even now it is). Albeit, I felt I should come up with a blog after noticing sub-standard, preposterous and biased reporting by some national and regional media houses regarding the 50 day deadline getting over and situation restoring to normalcy. This reporting includes criticizing the government with no substantive arguments and criticizing it only on the inconvenience caused to the public at large.

In short, I believe Demonetisation was intended for institutional cleansing. A large number of transactions takes place in the informal economy. Therefore, much of the cash in circulation had no trails. This move would largely result in an address being attached to the money as it comes into the banking system. Over the past 10-15 years, our cash-GDP ratio has increased from about 8% to around 12.5%. As a country develops, the trend should be the other way.The cash-GDP ratio should decrease. I believe this move would reduce the cash-GDP ratio.

The Government believes this move would also widen the tax base and therefore increase the revenue for the government which is very likely to happen. It has to be understood that higher revenues for the government would mean higher spending on developmental activities and programmes which would benefit the common man. The common man can be benefited either by decrease in taxes which is a short term gain or by enjoying better infrastructural facilities which is a long term gain.

Regarding the inconvenience caused to the common man, I personally believe this can be mitigated if the common man adopts digital ways of transacting. As per a study by a private agency about 97% of the households in India have Debit/Credit Cards. If each of them are taught about the usage of these cards other than being used in ATMs, the inconvenience can be subsided. To my limited understanding, there are strong possibilities of rural population adapting to cashless transactions much faster as access to banks and ATMs in rural areas is not good. As they would not have accessibility to withdraw cash as much as they need, they would learn to transact digitally much faster. Ibramhimpur in Telangana and Lanura in Jammu and Kashmir have been a model to other villages by being the first villages to go cashless. However, I reckon the access to electricity is a hurdle to achieve this.

I would like to respond to those who have been pessimistic regarding the objectives of the move-

Firstly, the opposition has been regarding the amount of ‘black money’ being in cash and tackling the black money held in foreign banks first. There have been several estimates ranging from 6% to 8% of black being held in cash. It is to be noted that these figures are not credible and are not arrived after robust analysis. It is not a rocket science to understand that all cash isn’t black and all black isn’t in cash which the opposition has been stressing on. Regardless of the percentage of black money being held in cash, it has to be tackled. Only because terrorism constitutes a small percentage of the total crimes committed, it cannot be said that terrorism shouldn’t be tackled. Similarly, regardless of the estimates it is necessary to tackle the black being held in cash. On the issue of tackling the black money held in foreign banks, the Government has set up a SIT to investigate into this. To ask the government to tackle that first, it is just like a thief asking the authorities to catch Dawood Ibrahim before catching him.

Secondly, the opposition is that counterfeit notes are just 0.025% of the total amount. As per a working paper from The Institute for Business in the Global Context at Tuffs University, “Over the seven years from end of March 2006 until March 2016, the compounded annual growth rate of fake currency notes in India was 21%”. This should be a cause of concern for the government. Tackling counterfeit notes is just one of the objectives of this move and has to not be seen in isolation.

Thirdly, as each objective cannot be seen in isolation, Demonetisation too should not be seen in isolation. To reach the top floor from the ground floor one needs to pass through the floors between them. Similarly this move is just one floor among the others which the Government has opted to pass through to tackle corruption. The vice-president of the Grand Old Party has been posing many questions to the Government, which I feel can be answered by a class 10 student.

Lastly, some sections of the media have been trying to influence the people to resent on the sole matter of ‘inconvenience’ caused. Some ’eminent’ journalists have also questioned the morality of the move. I do not understand if it is immoral to tackle corruption and black money. The exaggeration by some media houses regarding the inconvenience caused to the public reflects the level of maturity. A senior journalist of  a Kannada channel which claims itself to be for the ‘public’ stresses on the inconvenience caused but fails to understand the economic implications. The journalist vehemently opposes to any view put forth by the BJP spokesperson which she is entitled to but does it without logic and substance. Still the channel influences the public to a large extent. As mentioned, many channels stress on the inconvenience caused and give ‘Ground Reports’ but I do not understand why can’t these media houses help and support the government reduce the inconvenience caused to the public. Are they not responsible and do they not have a role in it? I am not asking them not to criticize the government, but help in reducing inconvenience. When reporters go to rural areas to report on the inconvenience caused, the same reporters can educate the rural people on digital payments like USSD,UPI and POS. I therefore appeal to all the media establishments to educate people on transacting digitally.

To conclude, this is a large scale experiment and not a switch on-switch off exercise for the normalcy to be restored after the 50 day period. I reckon the restrictions on bank withdrawals will be removed from 1st January 2017 and expect the restrictions on withdrawals from ATMs to continue. No doubt, the GDP figures for Q3 and Q4 would reduce but one can’t estimate by how much. As mentioned, it is early to analyze the gains from this experiment. To end I wish all the readers a Happy New Year!

(Could not elaborate on some things due to time constraints)

Eminent hypocrites

New names are making to the first page of national dailies. People are returning their awards after citing communal intolerance in India after BJP came to power. What can one understand from this? More and more people are feeling free to express themselves after Mr.Modi came to power. These great personalities had never seen communal intolerance during the Congress rule because they weren’t feeling free to express themselves may be because the then government was intolerant towards any criticism. By this, what we understand is the present BJP is tolerant for criticism which is a good sign.

However, may be because of lack of knowledge or some other reason they are not rightly informed or they have political bias. One needs to understand the fact that law and order is a state subject. The union government can’t do much with respect to state subjects. The unfortunate Dadri lynching took place in Uttar Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh is ruled by the ‘secular’ Samajwadi Party whose leader is Mr.Mulayam Singh Yadav who claims to be secular. The Chief Minister is his son Akhilesh Yadav. With respect to murder of the rationalist scholar MM Kalburgi which was another unfortunate incident, Karnataka is ruled by the ‘secular’ Congress. Why is everyone blaming the Union government for the incidents which come under the jurisdiction of the State Government. Why are the writers and scholars not protesting against Mr.Akhilesh Yadav and Mr.Siddarammiah? Recently even historians have expressed their displeasure over these incidents against the Union Government. I believe historians will have the knowledge that these subjects are under the control of State Governments. Why are these eminent personalities not protesting against the state governments? Interestingly no writer has returned any state award.We also find a personality who accepted the award when the 1984 riots took place and is returning the award now.  Where was the concern then which is there now? A famous film star has spoken against intolerance after ED registered a case against him. What can we understand from this?

For the knowledge of these personalities I would like to provide the statistics of communal violence which have taken place in 2014 as against to that of 2013. There were 644 incidents in 2014 against 823 in 2013. Deaths too dipped in 2014 to 95 as compared to 133 in 2013. There is no denial that statements of some members of the BJP should be condemned. However, we can’t blame the union government for these incidents which come under the jurisdiction of the state government.Earlier when BJP came to power there were attacks on churches and the BJP was blamed for that. But, the investigations said that most of these attacks were committed by a section of people who wanted to spread the poison of communalism and the BJP or the Sangh had no hand in it. So is the act of returning the national awards just a game play by a section of people who have ideological differences with the BJP?

Indo-Pak Relations

Indo-Pak relationship has been quite tangled over the years. Since independence, the diplomatic relationship between the governments of the two nations has seen a significant progress. However, the Kashmir dispute has been a plaque for the diplomatic relationship. In addition, there are other conflicts which have been an obstacle. One thing that strikes my mind is why the relationship between the two nations has not seen huge progress. Who is to blame?

There have been several instances where we have seen ceasefire violations by our neighbour. Next, as per the Simla agreement signed in 1972, Kashmir dispute is a bilateral issue. Unfortunately, Pakistan has been raising the issue at the United Nations General Assembly(UNGA). Lastly, terror attacks have continued and there is no assurance from the other side of the border to fight terrorism. As Indians, we can’t forget the 2001 parliament attack or the 26/11 attacks. Pakistan has been saying they are the victims of terrorism which we can agree only up to an extent as Pervez Musharaff in an interview said Pakistan has other sources to attack India. What does he mean by other sources? As terrorism is a global  threat all nations need to unite to fight terrorism. For that, cooperation matters, which is not shown by Pakistan.

There have been some significant developments in the relationship. Bus service was introduced from Delhi to Lahore. In 2004, both the countries agreed to stop nuclear testing to prevent misunderstandings. In 2014, Mr.Sharif was invited to the swearing-in ceremony of Mr.Modi. These are some developments that have taken place between the two nations.

Unfortunately, Pakistan has not cooperated to improve the relationship. After the talks between the two Prime Ministers, we see an increase in ceasefire violations by Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan has started attacking the civilians which is sad to hear. In response, the current Government has taken strong steps towards Pakistan by cancelling the foreign secretary level talks and giving freedom to the Army to retaliate massively.

The Indo-Pak relationship can be viewed from several angles. However, the fact remains that Pakistan has been crossing it’s limits. For a good relationship between the two nations, Pakistan has to cooperate be it in tackling terrorism or for the development of the South-Asian region.

Sarve Bhavanthu Sukhinaha
Sarve Santhu Niramaya

May all be prosperous and happy. May all be free from illness.

Nowadays I myself come across many challenges. I also come across many and even more tougher challenges my friends are facing. So, what I feel is the best way to tackle a problem is by thinking “it’s not only us, there are many others who are facing many other bigger and tougher problems.”

If we all pray for others to be happy, I feel even we will find a solution to our problem / face the challenge without fear. Let us all have a sense of unity and let us pray for all. Let us be united,happy and have no hatred.

Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination and RSS

There were some ideological differences between RSS and Mahatma Gandhi. But it doesn’t mean RSS was involved in Mahatma Gandhiji’s assassination. .

First of all, an inquiry committee had been set up when Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel(best home minister) was the home minster.  The committee couldn’t find any evidence. Hence,the ban was lifted. After that, again Indhira Gandhi appointed another committee. Again the committee couldn’t find any substance. Therefore RSS was given a clean chit again. Remember, these inquiries took place under Congress rule.

Nathuram Godse  had once been a swayamsevak of the RSS, but had left RSS 15 years before the assassination of Gandhiji as he did not like RSS ideologies. And he strongly opposed ideologies of the RSS and criticized RSS in his articles to a magazine ‘Aragini’. His main grouse was that the RSS had made Hindus incapable of aggressive action(sublimated the ‘militant spirit’).

And today we have congressmen and the leftists still alleging RSS. I request all the congressmen and the leftists to go back to the drawing board and to do their homework before alleging the RSS or the BJP.