Menu

Citizens for Justice and Peace

08, Jan 1995

Thus wrote Thackeray. . . .

>December 2, 1992:   “Municipal commissioner Khairnar risked his life to use the bulldozer in Bhendi Bazar which has become a haven of Pakistani infiltrators and anti-national Muslims. Moulvis and mullahs have corrupted Bhendi Bazar. The poison of treachery (anti-nationalism) is flowing through every vein of Bhendi Bazar. Is Bhendi Bazar a part of India at all?”

Thus ruled HC

It is pertinent to note that in the said article criticism is only against Pakistani infiltrators and anti-national Muslims and not Muslims as a whole…we are therefore of the opinion that the article has no tendency to create ill-will, ill feeling against Muslim community as a whole… it is clear that the author of the article respects all religions and claims that the Holy Koran is for the whole humanity.”

Thus wrote Thackeray

>December 5, 1992:   “The temple should not be constructed because the sentiments of the minorities would be affected. And who are those minorities? The Muslim traitors who partitioned this country and have not even allowed us to breathe ever since then”

Thus ruled HC

“If we consider the entire action including the offending sections relied upon by the petitioners, the criticism is levelled against those Muslims who had espoused the case of the two nation theory and thereby were responsible for partition of the country. They have been described as traitors. Aftermath of partition is too well known.” (page 26-27).

Thus wrote Thackeray

   >December 8, 1992: “Muslims should draw a lesson from the demolition of Babri Masjid otherwise they will meet the same fate as Babri Masjid. Muslims who criticise the demolition are without religion, without a nation.”

Thus ruled HC                           

          *According to this articles, by the fissiparous mentality created in the minds of Muslims by the aforesaid anti-social elements, Muslim started drifting from the mainstream of life….these articles do not criticise Muslims as a whole but Muslims who are traitors to India..

“….It is true that in some of these articles due to the emotional outburst, high-flown and caustic language is used but this per se will not fall within mischief of sections 153A and 153B of the code.” (pages 51-52).

Thus wrote Thackeray

  >December 9, 1992: “Streams of treason and poison have been flowing through the cities and mohallas of this country. Those mohallas are inhabited by fanatical Muslims. They are loyal to Pakistan. Riots occur only in those cities and mohallas with a growing Muslim population. It is clear from the fact that the root cause of riots lies in the Muslim community and its attitude. There are three 3 per cent Muslims on record all over Delhi. But they are concentrated in old Delhi and the areas surrounding Jama Masjid. Therefore riots occur in this area. They also take place in Bhendi Bazar, Musafirkhana, Bhiwandi, Malegaon and Muslim majority areas of Bhopal. Riots break out wherever Muslims enjoy domination. They stop as soon as the Muslims are at the receiving end.

“A similar thing is happening today. Muslims revolt in their own areas. They beat Hindus, demolish temples and attack the police. The government is appeasing these traitors. It is learnt that Pakistan has manufactured seven bombs. But the bomb that has been made in India with the blessings of Pakistan is more dangerous. Now Pakistan need not cross the borders for launching an attack on India. Twenty-five crore Muslims loyal to Pakistan will stage an insurrection. One of these seven bombs made by Pakistan lies hidden in Hindustan.”

Thus ruled HC

In this article, it is true that reference is made to 25 crores of Muslims in India and relying on this, Mr. Setalvad argued that Muslims as a whole are criticised. It is an admitted position that in India at that time there were eleven crores of Muslims and therefore the figure given in the editorial pages appears to be a typographical mistake and hence from the reference to 25 crore Muslims one cannot draw the inference that the whole dig in the editorial is against Muslims as a whole….the dominant impression which the reader is likely to carry is definitely not ill-will, spite or hatred towards Muslims in general but it may carry ill-will, spite or hatred against unlawful behaviour of anti-national Muslims including leaders like Imam Bukhari and Shahabuddin.” (pages 37-38).

Thus wrote Thackeray

>January 8, 1993: “Stop the armed bands of traitors before it is too late. Hand over the ‘Mini-Pakistans’ of Bombay to the Indian army. Unless the rioting traitors are shot on the spot, normalcy which the police refer to would not be restored.”

Thus ruled HC

“The aforesaid portion of the article refers to the lukewarm attitude taken by the police and S.R.P. at the behest of the government taking the role of bystanders and it is from this point of view, the part of the editorial refers to the government to take stringent measures against the rioters by firing on the spot. In the article reference is made to the violence which erupted at Bhendi Bazar, Null Bazar, Dongri and traitors are held responsible for it and suggestion is made that in such type of situation shooting at sight will be an appropriate action. In our opinion, this article also cannot come within the ambit of section 153A and 153B of the code.”

Thus wrote Thackeray

>January 9, 1993: “The ugly and violent form of Muslim traitors was witnessed by the city yesterday. During the 26-year tenure of M.K. Gandhi, Muslims from Malabar to Noakhali grew progressively violent and Hindus became non-violent… Our prophecy has come true. A Muslim whichever country he belongs to, whichever position he occupies is first a Muslim. To him his religion is the first concern. Nation is of secondary importance to him. In the last two days patriotic people have been subject to attacks. These attacks constitute attacks on the nation.”

Thus ruled HC

“The aforesaid article when read as a whole, refers to the activities of Muslim traitors who were destroying culture, tradition, piety, family, law, truth, affection, public administration and other such cherished values and showing their cruelty before the police and army…according to this article, the army, the police in the city instead of stopping the traitorous activities of anti-national Muslims, are taking the role of bystanders, mutely looking at the scene. This attitude of the army and the police is abhorred. This article does not create feeling of ill-will, spite and hatred in the minds of Hindus against Muslims.” (pages 46-50).

Thus wrote Thackeray

>January 9, 1993 (Special column captioned “Question to the Chief Minister):” Hindus will not be crushed to death by the politics of pressure tactics and Muslim terrorism. The killing of Hindus in Bombay is the result of inaction on your part. If you cannot stop the way Muslims and in your language minorities are slaughtering us, then we have to follow their ways for self-defence. This is not instigation but indignation in my mind.”

Thus ruled HC

*… “It is clear that the article has criticised the government, army and police. According to the article, the army and the police in the city instead of stopping the treacherous activities of anti-national Muslims are taking the role of bystanders merely looking at the scene. This attitude of the army and police standing like Khada Parsi is abhorred. This article does not create feeling of ill-will, spite or hatred against Muslims.”   

(The various segments of this story appeared as part of the cover story of Communalism Combat, January 1995)

Tags:

 

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Go to Top