BEHIND THE BOND

 

The data about the #ElectoralBonds released by the EC has prima facie shown that it was another grand scam like the #Demonitisation (Demo for short).

The similarities are quite striking.

In the case of Demo, the #RBI was used as a shield.  In the case of the Political Electoral Bond (PEB for short), it was the #SBI.

In Demo, the Government said that the intention was to wipe out black money and fake currency (issued primarily by Pakistan).

But, what was hidden under the carpet from the eyes of the gullible common man is that black money is not related to the currency held in one’s hand.  It is related to whether it is accounted for (not merely accounted) and has been subjected to tax that it ought to have been.  It changes from its nature of being black or white depending upon with whom it is at the time of the transaction, when it was required to be accounted for and subjected to tax.  With the next transaction, it changes the colour depending upon whether the recipient was required to account for it and had to pay any tax and whether it was done so or not.   For example, if a person who has earned money that should have been subjected to Income Tax, but he either did not account for the said transaction in his IT returns and spent the money for purchase of groceries on a large scale and gave it away to some organization which fed the poor, the money has changed hands, is not taxable at the hands of the grocery merchant, if he is below the IT limits and is not going to be taxed at the recipient end, which is the organization feeding the poor (exempted as a charitable organisation).  Yet, the liability of the person who did not account for the income remains.  To get hold of that tax, no end of chasing of the currency would matter. Because, from the grocer, it could have changed hands to a whole-sale merchant, who might have accounted for it or not and from there to some other supplier or to a manufacturer or down the lane to some other persons.  And if the money has reached the hands of an agriculturist it becomes non-taxable and thus is white at that point.

The second example is that of a person who earns money which is taxable, but shows it in his book of accounts under a category of non-taxable receipt.  This money also changes many hands.  Classic case is incomes shown as generated out of agricultural activities, even if no such activity had been undertaken.  There is no use in chasing that currency because it does not stay with the person who has stained it.

Thus, black money could be essentially and properly checked only by means of checking the accounts and investigating those who have filed false returns or evaded tax.  Not by going after the currency in the hands of all and sundry.  Thus this stated objective itself was false.

Regarding the next stated objective regarding checking fake currency, it is indeed directly related to the currency.

But during the Demo exercise, when exchange of notes was made mandatory, there was no mechanism to check whether the currencies obtained across the counter were fake or not.  Since there was no mechanism of noting down the number of the currency and from whom it has been obtained, even if it is stated that the Banks subsequently undertook a verification of the genuineness of the currency, there was no way they could have tracked down the person who exchanged it.  They had also by that time issued genuine currency in that place. 

Then of course, as revealed in the Sekhar Reddy episode where crores worth of currency in Rs. 2000 denomination had been seized during a raid, within days of demo, even as people were standing in queues to get two such notes, all transactions did not necessarily take place across the counters and some persons were lucky enough to get them exchanged in lump sum.  It is another thing that subsequently the case was said to have been closed on finding that all that was ‘accounted’.  This again proves the disconnect between the colour of the currency and the colour of the accounts.

All the more important is that there is no statistics revealed by the RBI regarding what number of such fake currency had been thus got exchanged for new genuine ones.

The other issues that they stated regarding fake currency were (a) that it was enabled due to imported paper used for printing the currency in India and (b) due to high denomination currency in circulation.

These stated objectives were also proved to be a mere eye wash when subsequently paper for printing currency was imported again and a still higher denomination (Rs 2000) currency was issued in the place of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 thus making it more luring and profitable to issue fake currency (in a higher denomination).

The final tally of the currency which had come into the RBI also disproved the Government claim that it expected that there will be a deficit of 15% of the money in circulation when it comes back and thus it will be the net saving.  The total number of currency which came in was almost 100% (99.3% as per RBI) to that which was issued.  The counting in the last phases became very slow beating even Ravi Shastri’s innings at the finals of the Benson and Hedges in 1985. 

In the case of Political Electoral Bonds it was stated that the intention was to stop illegal political funding.  The second limb was the assurance that the identity of the donors will be maintained to ensure that there will not be victimization. 

Here again, the legality or illegality of political funding does not depend merely upon whether the fund has come through banking channels. First criterion is regarding whether it is accounted on both the sides, whether it has suffered the eligible tax deductions and then whether there is any quid-pro-quo for the said donations.

What the details of the PEB revealed by the SBI have shown is that there is every indication that the funding has been for some quid-pro-quo.  Either it is in the way of contracts, obtained or to be obtained; or to wriggle out of some case already booked or to be booked by any of the agencies like CBI, IB, ED, etc.  These could obviously be operated only by the parties in power, whether at the Center or at the States and thus, the entire funding itself is obviously illegal, irrespective of whether it came through the bank or not. That the donors have donated beyond their capabilities as per their own books of account again evidence that merely because it came through banks, it is not white money.

As in the case of Demo, here again it is proved that black and white do not depend merely on being accounted or coming in through banking channels.  People who still do not understand this difference shall continue to be duped again and again by the advertised concept of transparency through banking transactions.

Secondly, when the scheme said that the donations will be anonymous – at least to those not involved in it- it was quite contrary to the requirement for any banking system to reconcile receipts and payments; to verify whether the bonds that were being realized were the ones actually issued by the institution itself; that no cash purchase was possible and only through bank accounts; that Banks had to take the KYC of the donors; that realization could be done only by way of deposit in another bank account and when such data is available with the institution, no anonymity is possible, particularly from the eyes of the Government and when the scheme itself stated that the data should be provided if demanded by a competent Court, the said declaration of providing cover or protection to the donor itself was misleading. If at all there was any intention of keeping it anonymous, it was only from the knowledge of the public, who are the citizens, called upon to vote, in the name of promises, from time to time.

In the above scenario, when the Bonds were having an alphanumeric identity, the SBI taking a stand after 16 or 17 days of the Supreme Court order requiring them to reveal the details of the bonds, that they found it difficult to match the donors and recipients (something the Court had never required them to do in the first instance) is obviously a lie.  Once the data was out, people have been able to match it within a few hours. Because all of us know that the SBI and Mr. Harish Salve were saying the lie with impunity only because they, like anyone else knew that they had the backing of the Government, no action could be expected against them for making such a statement.  Nor will they be hauled up for not understanding simple English which required them to reveal all details, and instead they chose to misunderstand it in a very complicated way, ‘in the light of some paras of some earlier judgment’.  If any ordinary mortal had attempted such tricks before even the lowest court in the land, he would have landed up in jail.  But mighty Government is mighty due to their having gained absolute majority. 

When the alphanumeric details of the bonds were released, it only confirmed the quid-pro-quo nature of all these donations.  The time line, the amount involved and the parties involved have made it obvious regarding the purpose for which these donations took place.  They were definitely ‘not in the national interest’. If they had anything to do with elections, then it was only for further illegal dealings using the said money.

This episode not only revealed yet another hollowness of the claims of the BJP Government, but also shows how brazenly people are being taken for a ride in the name of tall promises of cleaning up the economy or the system.

As a last ditch attempt, the SBI and FICCI, ASSOCHAM, etc were made to attempt to thwart revealing the alphanumeric details of the PEB.  Mr. Harish Salve appearing for the SBI openly sought a declaration from the SC that no PILs should be entertained on the basis of the information.  Mr. Mukul Rohatgi representing the Associations of the Industries and Commerce/Corporates (donors) said that they feared that there will be a witch-hunt once the data is revealed.

The episode once again shows how the BJP let down those who believed in them – that they will deliver on the stated objective.

It could also be a pointer that the trade or captains of Industry fear that BJP may not come back next time and hence they may be in trouble since the contributions to BJP is the highest.  Otherwise, why should they talk about witch-hunt?

From this revelation, what is clear is that the very persons who came to power in 2014 in the name of cleaning up politics and the economy have only further muddied them and in the process the investigating agencies have blatantly and brazenly been misused to suit the needs of the party in power.

The other thing is that there is no difference between any of the political parties.  Either they get money through deals for contracts, or through some policy that might help only someone who give them money, or by threats of raids, arrests, etc.  The one who came up promising to be a messiah against all these ills has proved to be only a master of these techniques.

When it becomes blatant that investigations could be launched against any one and pre-trial arrest itself will be seen and propagated as evidence of guilt and the persons could be bound down, even Judges cannot remain fearless in such an atmosphere.  Then, to expect that in the face of such misuse, Judiciary can come to the rescue is also difficult to believe, always. 

One Dhanjaya cannot don all roles and all times.  He is not after all Krishna Paramatma.

In such a scenario, democracy becomes a farce, because there is no level playing field.  Russia also conducts elections.  But we do not consider them democratic any more. 

So more than the monetary element, what is at the back of the Bond is the revelation that we are in deep trouble as a democracy and as a state.

THE LINES ARE CLEAR

 

When the Supreme Court ordered that the SBI should reveal ‘all details of the electoral bonds, including the names of the purchasers, the amounts and the names of those who en-cashed them’,  like a clerk in a panchayath office, the SBI interpreted it to mean only the names of the purchasers, the amounts and the names of those who en-cashed them.  They deliberately did not understand the words, ‘all details of the electoral bonds, including’.  And they did not have the guts to send a representative to the SC for the next hearing.  The ASG Mr. Tushar Mehta repeatedly said ‘I am not representing the SBI’.  So much fear for the ire that the SBI would draw from the first bench of the highest Court for mocking them on their face. The Court had to order specifically that the numbers of the bonds have also got to be revealed. 

In fact, I had felt that even in the previous hearing Mr. Harish Salve had feebly said that the numbers and KYC details were deliberately kept separately so that they cannot be matched.  But nobody seemed to listen or give any significance for that.  He also did not press on that later.  But it appeared to be a very lame excuse; keeping the KYC had absolutely no meaning if they cannot be connected to the bonds, because then there would have been no requirement to obtain them at all.  Thus, even at that time, the SBI was trying to find an excuse not to divulge the bond numbers so that they cannot be directly co-related to the deposits by the parties. 

But even without the numbers coming out, the indications of quid pro quo are quite evident. However, once this co-relation is done, then, all contracts awarded to the parties who had made the deposits, the charges against them investigated but closed or put on back burner, etc should have to be investigated afresh.  But who will do that?  The very beneficiaries of these un-constitutional bonds?

Now, coming to the effect of the revelations of the electoral bonds on the general public:

I find that only those who were already convinced about the illegality of the bonds got it confirmed.  But those who proclaimed that it was a transparent system have gone silent even on why the transparent system failed even the orders of the highest court.  They perhaps meant that it was transparent to the ruling party alone and that is enough, like the other opaque fund created in the name of PM himself, the PM CARES. How can there be a private trust in the name of the PM is a fundamental question these people will not face.  They are not shocked by the revelations of the SBI.  Rather they are only shocked that the Supreme Court suddenly got this courage to dictate to the SBI and the EC, which means the ruling party in government.  They say that the Court should not interfere in administrative matters.  They do not even acknowledge that the highest court is a Court for Constitutional matters.

Therefore, even if they were claiming that the BJP is a party with a difference and that they are in-corruptible, even as legislators were being bought right, left and center, they merely called it an extension of only the political games the Congress played earlier, not that they really believed about the cleanliness of the party.  They still said that their leader was in-corruptible.  Then they said that even Patel took money from the industrialists for the party and even Gandhi stayed (though only for 7 months) in the Birla mandir (forget how he stayed there, why, etc) and that instead of taking money without accounts, taking it through a banking system was always welcome. They are not even bothered about this having been brought as a money bill, that the amendments made for this electoral bond enabled even loss making firms contribute, which means even shell companies could do so and that the Representation of Peoples Act was also amended to the effect that the parties need not reveal the receipt details through these bonds. Great measures to ensure transparency indeed.

These are the very people who did not understand the stupidity (even theoretically) of demonitisation and the lock down announced at a single stroke instead of leaving it to the concerned states to control the epidemic whenever it spreads in the different regions.  They have refused to acknowledge the failures of both these announcements, which were done purely for one person to assert – to exhibit the power to bring lives to a stand-still.

And it is this cult mentality that keeps them bound till date, irrespective of any number of proofs of the weakness of their government (not mentioning of China or the deliberate looking away from Manipur) or the steep corruption involved in by their party.

That their party has amassed wealth on one hand, has got many of their opponents either imprisoned or embroiled in different cases and have withdrawn them if they joined the BJP, on the other hand, has put them on a totally high pedestal (not morally but on monetary terms) – that is, on a totally uneven playing field.  To make the best of this advantage, they would like to go for a ‘One Nation One Election’ so that none of their opponents will have the wherewithal to face them in such an unequal match – at one go.  They have got hold of the full powers to appoint the referee for the match also.  Even the CAG has been caged.

The only impediment has been the highest Court.  To take care of that, they have been propounding a way out of the collegiums system.  Once, that is achieved, the appointments to the Courts also could be done like to any other administrative post and the appointees will be answerable only to the PM. 

It is not that the supporters of the BJP are not aware of any of these.  In fact they are happy about all this.  They are absolutely sure that this PM or anybody who follows him as per the decision of the BJP or the RSS are enough to safe guard their interests.

Now, what are ‘their interests’?

They feel that as Hindus, they did not have enough freedom to propound whatever they wanted in the name of the religion.

Why?

They have propagated and believed that the Congress under the leadership of Nehru and thereafter his family indulged in ‘pseudo secularism’, thereby giving the Muslims and Christians an advantage at the cost of the majority of the Hindus. They have put the blame for the partition on Gandhi and Nehru. 

Before going into the truth about that, one question arises – whether these RSS elements were against partition?  They were not.  In fact, without a Muslim Pakistan coming into being, they could not demand for a Hindustan.

It is quite a fact that after the experience of running the interim Government (before the Independence) along with the Muslim League, both Nehru and Patel were fed up with it and hence felt that a combined Government accommodating the League could not be possible.  Hence, the blame cannot be on Nehru alone. 

Now coming to the role of Gandhi:

All along Gandhi has said that the British should quit and then Independent India can decide on whether a partition was necessary or not.  He said that Britain had no business to indulge in such an exercise which was playing with the fate of the lives of millions, as if it was child’s play. 

The following is the transcript of his letter to Mountbatten written on 8^th May 1947 when he was on a train to Patna:

 (Source : https://www.mkgandhi.org/selectedletters/95viceroy.html )

On the train to Patna,
8th May 1947

DEAR FRIEND,

It strikes me that I should summarize what I said and wanted to say and left unfinished for want of time, at our last Sunday's meeting.

1. Whatever may be said to the contrary, it would be a blunder of first magnitude for the British to be party in any way whatsoever to the division of India. If it has to come, let it come after the British withdrawal, as a result of understanding between the parties or [of] an armed conflict which according to Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah is taboo. Protection of minorities can be guaranteed by establishing a court of arbitration in the event of difference of opinion among contending parties.
2. Meanwhile the Interim Government should be composed either of Congressmen or those whose names the Congress chooses or of Muslim League men or those whom the League chooses. The dual control of today, lacking team work and team spirit, is harmful for the country. The parties exhaust themselves in the effort to retain their seat and to placate you. Want of team spirit demoralizes the Government and imperils the integrity of the services so essential for good and efficient government.
3. Referendum at the stage in the Frontier (or any province for that matter) is a dangerous thing in itself. You have to deal with the material that faces you. In any case nothing should or can be done over Dr Khan Sahib's head as Premier. Note that this paragraph is relevant only if division is at all to be countenanced.
4. I feel sure that partition of the Punjab and Bengal is wrong in every case and a needless irritant for the League. This as well as all innovations can come after the British withdrawal not before, except always for mutual agreement. Whilst the British Power is functioning in India, it must be held principally responsible for the preservation of peace in the country. That machine seems to be cracking under the existing strain which is caused by the raising of various hopes that cannot or must not be fulfilled. These have no place during the remaining thirteen months. This period can be most profitably shortened if the minds of all were focused on the sole task of withdrawal. You and you alone can do it to the exclusion of all other activity so far as the British occupation is concerned.
5. Your task as undisputed master of naval warfare, great as it was, was nothing compared to what you are called to do now. The singlemindedness and clarity that gave you success are much more required in this work.
6. If you are not to leave a legacy of chaos behind, you have to make your choice and leave the government of the whole of India including the States to one party. The Constituent Assembly has to provide for the governance even of that part of India which is not represented by the Muslim League or some States.
7. Non-partition of the Punjab and Bengal does not mean that the minorities in these Provinces are to be neglected. In both the Provinces they are large and powerful enough to arrest and demand attention. If the popular Governments cannot placate them the Governors should during the interregnum actively interfere.
8. The in transmissibility of paramountcy is a vicious doctrine, if it means that they the States can become sovereign and a menace for Independent India. All the power wherever exercised by the British in India must automatically descend to its successor. Thus the people of the States become as much part of Independent India as the people of British India. The present Princes are puppets created or tolerated for the upkeep and prestige of the British power. The unchecked powers exercised by them over their people is probably the worst blot on the British Crown. The Princes under the new regime can exercise only such powers as trustees can and as can be given to them by the Constituent Assembly. It follows that they cannot maintain private armies or arms factories. Such ability and statecraft as they possess must be at the disposal of the Republic and must be used for the good of their people and the people as a whole. I have merely stated what should be done with the States. It is not for me to show in this letter how this can be done.
9. Similarly difficult but not so baffling is the question of the Civil Service. Its members should be taught from now to accommodate themselves to the new regime. They may not be partisans taking sides. The slightest trace of communalism among them should be severely dealt with. The English element in it should know that they owe loyalty to the new regime rather than to the old and therefore to Great Britain. The habit of regarding themselves as rulers and therefore superiors must give place to the spirit of true service of the people.
10. I had a very pleasant two hours and three quarters with Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah on Tuesday last. We talked about the joint statement on non-violence. He was agreeably emphatic over his belief in non-violence. He has reiterated it in the Press statement which was drafted by him.
11. We did talk about Pakistan-cum-partition. I told him that my opposition to Pakistan persisted as before and suggested that in view of his declaration of faith in non-violence he should try to convert his opponents by reasoning with them and not by show of force. He was, however, quite firm that the question of Pakistan was not open to discussion. Logically, for a believer in non-violence, nothing, not even the existence of God could be outside its scope.

Rajkumari Amrit Kaur saw the first eight paragraphs, the purport of which she was to give to Pandit Nehru with whom I was to send you this letter. But, I could not finish it in New Delhi, I finished it on the train. I hope you and Her Excellency are enjoying your hard-earned rest.

Yours sincerely,
M.K. GANDHI

To

H.E. THE VICEROY, SIMLA

In spite of the above documented letter and many more records, there is a wild allegation that Gandhi got the Nation divided to make Nehru the Prime Minister.  Surely, a generation which has not read history can easily be misled by whatsapp universities.

I am following the above by giving some excerpts from ‘Let’s Kill Gandhi’, by Tushar Gandhi, to throw more light in the matter:

    "Gandhi did not have the least doubt that the British would eventually leave, but of late he was worried that what his countrymen would be left holding would be an empty shell that once was a glorious nation.  On the morning of 24 May, as Gandhi boarded the train for Delhi at Patna, he told Dr. Mahmud, “The Congress has practically decided to accept Partition.  But I have been a fighter all my life.  I am going to Delhi to fight a losing battle”. (p 309)  (See the pain in his statement)

    “On 29 May, during his morning walk, a co-worker said to Gandhi: ‘You have declared that you won’t mind if the whole of India is turned into Pakistan by appeal to reason, but not an inch would be yielded to force.  You have stood firm by your declaration.  But is the Working Committee acting on that principle?  They are yielding to force.  You gave us the battel cry of “Quit India”; you fought our battles; but in the hour of decision, I find, you are not in the picture.  You and your ideas have been given the go by’.

    Gandhi replied, ‘Who listens to me today?’ to which the co-worker replied, “The leaders may not, but the people are behind you’.  Gandhi replied, ‘Even they are not.  I am being told to retire to the Himalayas. Everybody is eager to garland my photos and statues.  Nobody really wants to follow me’.

    The co-worker said, ‘They may not today, but they will have to before long’, to which Gandhi replied, ‘What is the good? Who knows, whether I shall then be alive?  The question is: what can we do today?  On the eve of independence, we are as divided as we were united when we were engaged in freedom’s battle.  The prospect of power has demoralized us”. (p 310-311)

    “During his walk on the morning of 3 June, Gandhi asked Rajendra Babu if he might now return to Bihar.  But the latter did not feel he should, as his presence was essential in the capital, ‘if only for Badahah Khan’, cryptically suggesting that the whole process might still degenerate into chaos on the question of the fate of the North-West Frontier Province.

     ‘In all probability’, he said later, the final seal will be set on the partition plan during the day.  But though I may be alone in holding this view, I repeat that the division of India can only do harm to the country’s future.  The slavery of 150 years is going to end, but from the look of things, it does not seem as if independence will last as long.  It hurts me to think that I can see nothing but evil in the Partition plan.  May be that just as God blinded my vision, so that I mistook the non-violence of the weak for true non-violence, He has again stricken me with blindness.  If it should prove to be so, nobody would be happier than I.”  (p – 315) 

          It is very saddening to see that a person who called off the Civil Disobedience movement after the Chauri chaura had only at the fag-end of his life found that the people who acted to be non-violent were actually cowards within – in other words that he had been fooled not by his opponents, but the very ones who called him Bapu and Mahatma.  [“They were the ones, the word went round, with whom business could be done.  The impossible old man was put on a pedestal, admired for his genius and unerring hunch, consulted, listened to with respectful attention and bypassed”. – Pyarelal Nayyar in Mahatma Gandhi: The Last Phase, Vol. 10 Part II]

All along the Congress paid lip service to Gandhi. Now it is the turn of the BJP.  First, it was in the name of ‘Gandhian Socialism’. The present day rulers have decided to renovate the Sabarmathi Ashram. Every now and then, even as Nehru is rubbished, Gandhi’s name is invoked, clearly to pit Gandhi’s name against Nehru. And then to undermine the stature of Gandhi, they try to portray Patel, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Bhagat Singh and Nethaji as the real patriots.  Then simultaneously, they have started to openly celebrate Nathuram Godse – as if he was a patriot and started to slowly introduce their own icon Veer Sarvarkar on par with Patel, Shasthri, Netaji and Bhagat Singh and propagate that things would have been far better if Gandhi and Nehru had not been in the scene.  That Patel and Shastri would have been non-entities but for Gandhi and that Bhagat Singh and Netaji had a difference with Gandhi only like sons have with their father [“It was Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose who had called Ba a martyr first; in his obituary, he accused the colonial administration of murdering Ba to break Gandhi’s spirit” – Let’s Kill Gandhi p- 173] and that definitely they were all not in league with Sarvarkar, is something they do not want others to consider – even if it is so clearly recorded in the history.

Modi ji paying lip service to Gandhi does not suppress the resentment of the RSS or BJP to Gandhian philosophy.  Because, for these people, ‘Ends justify the means’ – just the opposite of what Gandhi stood for.

These people believe that there is no crime in killing (they may call it a sacrifice) an individual to save the family, a family to save a village and a village to save the nation.

And precisely for this, those who are opposed to them as well as their supporters hold the same view – that the BJP and its outfits could have indulged in any atrocities in Gujarat - and they are not repentant about it;  that they may not want to accept before the Court, but they brought down the Babri masjid in a planned way and that the strong armed tactics will be followed as a measure to maintain law and order – in the same manner in every situation – a la a bulldozer raj.

The crown of dadagiri will be worn with a different colour.  What smaller parties have been accused of doing at the level of states or districts, will gain a national status.  But, when states indulge in it, there was the Centre to be looked towards for help and intervention.  ‘When an elephant goes mad, the chain would restrain; what if the chain itself goes mad?’, is a saying in Malayalam.

The lines are therefore drawn – it is not any more regarding corruption or clean public life, since it has been established that BJP is no different from other parties in spite of their tall claims all these years– it is regarding whether we will have the rule of law to abide by, where institutions can discharge their respective functions without fear or favour, or whether we will fall back to being ruled by mobocracy – in the name of religion or individual’s cult.  Because, we know that there never existed a Hindu Rashtra – there were only kingdoms of different sizes by different rulers at different points in time in different places of the country.  Those kingdoms had got buried due to the efflux of time and by the misuse of the positions that their rulers indulged in.  They had fought between themselves and ended up letting in the Muslim invaders and then selling themselves up to the East India Company. 

Hinduism obtained a concrete form only after it was organized by Adi Sankara.  That itself was only an answer to the rude shock the then vedic religion faced after the advent of The Budha.  But even after Sankara, the division of Advaidha, Dvaidha, Vishistadvaidha, remain, not to forget about the non-believers and sects which still are not fully absorbed into the above organized branches. 

Hence, the essence of true Hinduism, whether in its pre-organised form or after its different branches in the organized form, has been assimilation.  This was the greatest proclamation made by Swami Vivekananda to the world.

What Vivekananda, his Guru Sri Ramakrishna and many others like Paramahamsa Yogananda, Ramana Maharshi, Swami Rama, Sri Narayana Guru, the Sai Babas, etc, in the last century have shown is that Hinduism still can assimilate from other faiths.  Hinduism shall survive only by that spirit.  Not by becoming a monotheistic religion where we keep on hearing “One’ for each and every thing. Hinduism allows many, as many as one would want.  And it is only that spirit which holds this country together too.

This cannot be achieved with an attitude of vengeance, a scheming mind or even out of an inferiority complex created out of a perpetual portrayal and assumption of victimhood.  Nor by the continuous chants and war cries of annihilating all the others – faiths, parties or people.

Our future depends upon what we decide now.

 

 

 

         

 

 

 

Dandi March day

 

 On 12 March 1930, Gandhi and 78 satyagrahis, among whom were men belonging to almost every region, caste, creed, and religion of India, set out on foot for the coastal village of Dandi in Navsari district of Gujarat, 385 km from their starting point at Sabarmati Ashram. It was to just take a pinch of salt, defying the salt law.

Gandhi had said that he would return to Sabarmathi Ashram only after achieving the freedom of the country.  Unfortunately he could not return to the Ashram in his life time though India gained independence, just months before he was assassinated.

The march, which was initially phoo phooed by the British Administration had shaken them seeing the response of the people on the way and how the crowd swelled. 

There were only 78 sathagrahis who walked along with Gandhi from Sabarmathi Ashram to Dandi.  The others had just joined on the way.  They were selected by Gandhi himself.  They were:

Number	Name	Age	Province (British India)	State (Republic of India)
1	Mahatma Gandhi	61	Porbandar State	Gujarat
2	Pyarelal Nayyar	30		Punjab
3	Chhaganlal Naththubhai Joshi	35	Unknown	Gujarat
4	Pandit Narayan Moreshwar Khare	42	Bombay Presidency	Maharashtra
5	Ganpatrao Godse	25	Bombay Presidency	Maharashtra
6	Prithviraj Laxmidas Asar	19	Western India States Agency	Gujarat
7	Mahavir Giri	20	Darjeeling	Bengal Presidency
8	Bal Dattatreya Kalelkar	18	Bombay Presidency	Maharashtra
9	Jayanti Nathubhai Parekh	19	Unknown	Gujarat
10	Rasik Desai	19	Unknown	Gujarat
11	Vitthal Liladhar Thakkar	16	Unknown	Gujarat
12	Harakhji Ramjibhai	18	Unknown	Gujarat
13	Tansukh Pranshankar Bhatt	20	Unknown	Gujarat
14	Kantilal Harilal Gandhi	20	Unknown	Gujarat
15	Chhotubhai Khushalbhai Patel	22	Unknown	Gujarat
16	Valjibhai Govindji Desai	35	Unknown	Gujarat
17	Pannalal Balabhai Jhaveri	20		Gujarat
18	Abbas Varteji	20		Gujarat
19	Punjabhai Shah	25		Gujarat
20	Madhavjibhai Thakkar	40		Gujarat
21	Naranjibhai	22	Western India States Agency	Gujarat
22	Maganbhai Vohra	25	Western India States Agency	Gujarat
23	Dungarsibhai	27	Western India States Agency	Gujarat
24	Somalal Pragjibhai Patel	25		Gujarat
25	Hasmukhram Jakabar	25		Gujarat
26	Daudbhai	25		Gujarat
27	Ramjibhai Vankar	45		Gujarat
28	Dinkarrai Pandya	30		Gujarat
29	Dwarkanath	30		Bombay Presidency
30	Gajanan Khare	25		Bombay Presidency
31	Jethalal Ruparel	25	Western India States Agency	Gujarat
32	Govind Harkare	25		Bombay Presidency
33	Pandurang	22		Bombay Presidency
34	Vinayakrao Apte	33		Bombay Presidency
35	Ramdhirrai	30	United Provinces
36	Bhanushankar Dave	22		Gujarat
37	Munshilal	25	United Provinces
38	Raghavan	25	Madras Presidency	Kerala
39	Shivabhai Gokhalbhai Patel	27		Gujarat
40	Shankarbhai Bhikabhai Patel	20		Gujarat
41	Jashbhai Ishwarbhai Patel	20		Gujarat
42	Sumangal Prakash	25	United Provinces
43	Thevarthundiyil Titus	25	Madras Presidency	Kerala
44	Krishna Nair	25	Madras Presidency	Kerala
45	Tapan Nair	25	Madras Presidency	Kerala
46	Haridas Varjivandas Gandhi	25		Gujarat
47	Chimanlal Narsilal Shah	25		Gujarat
48	Shankaran	25	Madras Presidency	Kerala
49	Yarneni Subrahmanyam	25		Madras Presidency
50	Ramaniklal Maganlal Modi	38		Gujarat
51	Madanmohan Chaturvedi	27	Rajputana Agency
52	Harilal Mahimtura	27		Bombay Presidency
53	Motibas Das	20		Bihar and Orissa Province
54	Haridas Mazumdar	25		Gujarat
55	Anand Hingorani	24	Bombay Presidency
56	Mahadev Martand	18		Mysore
57	Jayantiprasad	30	United Province
58	Hariprasad	20	United Provinces
59	Girivardhari Chaudhary	20		Bihar and Orissa Province
60	Keshav Chitre	25		Bombay Presidency
61	Ambalal Shankarbhai Patel	30		Gujarat
62	Vishnu Pant	25		Bombay Presidency
63	Premraj	35		Punjab
64	Durgesh Chandra Das	44	Bengal	Bengal
65	Madhavlal Shah	27		Gujarat
66	Jyoti Ram Kandpal	30	United Provinces
67	Surajbhan	34		Punjab
68	Bhairav Dutt Joshi	25	United Provinces
69	Lalji Parmar	25		Gujarat
70	Ratnaji Boria	18		Gujarat
71	Chethan Lucky	30		Gujarat
72	Chintamani Shastri	40		Bombay Presidency
73	Narayan Dutt	24	Rajputana Agency
74	Manilal Mohandas Gandhi	38		Gujarat
75	Surendra	30	United Provinces
76	Hari Krishna Mohani	42		Bombay Presidency
77	Puratan Buch	25		Gujarat
78	Kharag Bahadur Singh Thapa	25	Dehradun	United Provinces
79	Shri Jagat Narayan	50		United Provinces

 We remember that great movement today and all those who participated in the great event.

One of the sathyagrahis in the above list happened to be the Uncle of my father whom we called as Raghavji.  His name figures in Sl. No. 38 above. 

He had completed his Graduation with honours, but decided to join Gandhi in the freedom movement.

After India got freedom, he was offered a Cabinet berth by Nehru, but like many of the Gandhians, he preferred to be in the Gandhian movement and dedicated himself to the cause of sarvodaya and khadhi, till he died at the ripe old age of 85.  He remained a chronic bachelor; did not gather any wealth; was of no use to his family members and rather gave away his ancestorial properties for the work of sarvodaya.

Though he seldom stayed at the homes of any of his relatives, during my college days, he had some how come to like me and stayed at our home a couple of times.

Once, I had playfully asked him what he thought about a politician who had declared that he would burn down the Constitution and when threatened with action, had backed down saying that he did not burn the Constitution, but only some papers, Raghav ji paused for some time and with tears brimming in his eyes asked me, ‘whatever the Constitution is, do you know how many sacrificed their lives to get that Constitution?”.  It stirred me no end.

But though the said politician who had said so that day had done it only to say that there were inequalities even as per the Constitution, really he was not in any position to really distort it or destroy it.

But in later years I find that there have been consistent attempts to dilute the provisions of the Constitution and even the basic structure principle which has been held as its foundation, is now being found fault with.

There is a group of people now thinking that winning an election is enough to make any law including throwing away the Constitution and replacing it with another set of laws which they feel is the correct one.

Those belonging to left wing who found fault with the Constitution earlier, have slowly started realising that any move to dilute it will take away the rights and liberties ensured to the citizens as on date and there will be utter chaos.

Similarly, there were many who found fault with Gandhi due to number of reasons.  But, slowly, they have also come around to see that if that icon is removed, we will fall into an abyss.  

Now, only the hindu right wing believes otherwise.

The recent speech of Prashanth Bhushan regarding the need to reclaim the Republic is very relevant at this time.