'Thought it was a prank': Pahalgam terror attack victim's wife shares ordeal
Ashanya Dwivedi, the wife of Pahalgam terror attack victim Shubham Dwivedi, has demanded the status of a martyr for the deceased. She said Dwivedi sacrificed his life and saved others by identifying himself as a Hindu.
"He proudly sacrificed his life by identifying himself as a Hindu and saved the lives of many people. The first bullet hit my husband, and the terrorists took time asking whether we were Hindu or Muslim... In such a situation, many people had time to run and save their lives," Ashanya told PTI on Saturday.
Twenty-six people were killed as terrorists rained bullets on tourists at a meadow near Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam.
Shubham got married to Ashanya on February 12. He was cremated in his native village on Thursday.
Also read: Houses razed, 60 raids, Pak nationals deported: Crackdown over Pahalgam attack| 10 points
She said she would have a reason to live if the government accepts her demand.
"I do not want anything else from the government except that Shubham should be given the status of a martyr. If the government accepts my wish, I will have a reason to live," Ashanya said.
She said anyone who shoots others based on religion should be killed.
Also read: On Mann Ki Baat, PM Modi notes 'citizens' anger' over Pahalgam attack: 'Deep agony...'
She said when the terrorists approached them and asked Shubham about his religion, she thought they were playing a prank.
"As soon as they came, one of them asked if we were Hindus or Muslims? I thought those people (terrorists) were playing a prank. I turned back, laughed and asked them what was going on. Then they repeated their question, and as soon as I replied that we were Hindus, a shot was fired and everything was over for me. Shubham's face was covered in blood. I could not understand what had happened," she said.
She said she begged the terrorists to shoot her too, but they refused, saying they were letting her live so that she could go and tell the government what they did.
The Central government has taken punitive actions against Pakistan for the terror attack, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, speaking on Mann Ki Baat, assured justice to the bereaved families.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Dear Editor, I disagree: Not all speech is free
The constitutional right to free speech — a fundamental democratic principle — is often misinterpreted. The editorial ('Whose free speech?', IE, June 3) circumvents the context, intent and impact of free speech by defending Sharmistha Panoli's inflammatory social media post, targeting Islam and the Prophet, as a legitimate exercise of free expression. An important disclaimer: My disagreement with the editorial is not a defence or endorsement of the carceral state. Rather, beyond the over-simplistic binaries, the focus here is on recognising hate speech as a form of violence. While the editorial rightly criticises the overzealous police action in arresting the 22-year-old law student — she was later released on bail — it ignores the context that enabled Panoli's remarks and fails to acknowledge the target of her outburst. Panoli's words are far from being an act of reckless indiscretion; they feed into the volatile environment, increasingly marginalising, vilifying, and disproportionately targeting Muslims. The editorial, too, acknowledges that Panoli's post echoed 'some of the most hurtful anti-minority tropes in circulation'. However, more than the troubling content of Panoli's post, one should be wary of the political sentiments that consider Muslims to be demographic threats. Condemning arrests for online posts is crucial, but one must differentiate between freedom of expression and provocative speech that perpetuates targeted hatred against marginalised communities. The editorial failed to realise the essence of Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015). The judgment upholds freedom of speech but doesn't legitimise hate speech. On the contrary, the SC has clearly defined the boundaries between protected free expression and punishable hate speech. In Shreya Singhal, the court established a crucial framework by distinguishing three categories of speech: Discussion, advocacy, and incitement. It held that 'mere discussion or even advocacy of a particular cause, howsoever unpopular, is at the heart of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution', and is therefore protected. However, as the court noted, once such speech crosses the line into incitement — particularly incitement to violence, hatred, or public disorder — Article 19(2) applies, and restrictions become constitutionally valid. By drawing this line, Shreya Singhal underscores a crucial principle: The right to free speech does not encompass a right to incite harm or hatred against others. Many judicial precedents affirm this critical distinction. Notably, in three rulings in 2018 — Tehseen Poonawalla vs Union of India, Kodungallur Film Society vs Union of India, and Shakti Vahini vs Union of India, the SC went a step further, laying down guidelines to prevent and address hate speech and vigilante violence. However, these directives have largely remained on paper, with little to no meaningful implementation. The antidote to overzealous state action cannot be universal impunity. The editorial rightly points out that young Muslims have often been arrested for social media posts and labelled 'anti-national' or 'pro-Pakistan', often with little evidence of real harm. But to use that injustice to suggest that no one should be held accountable for incendiary speech is a fallacy. The discourse on free speech must be shaped by consistent legal principles, not by selective outrage and the use of legal machinery by those in power. The solution to the wicked problem of protecting free speech lies in equal and principled application of the law, not in abandoning accountability altogether. In a system that disproportionately targets minority voices while mostly excusing and sometimes even celebrating those who vilify them, the overwhelming defence from all political cadres for free expression is amusing. The double standard is made evident through the ruling party's sudden invocation of the principle of freedom of speech and expression, championing Panoli's right to free speech while silencing dissenting voices from marginalised communities — the latest, the arrest of Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, is a case in point. Defending insidious speech on the grounds of constitutional liberty risks defending the right to hate, a right not promised by the Constitution. The writer teaches law at Jamia Hamdard
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
In Bhopal, a bridge with 90-degree turn draws criticism, minister says will look into it
A railway overbridge near Aishbagh Stadium in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, has run into controversy just as it nears completion – not for delays or cost overruns, but for what some critics say is a fundamental design flaw that could make it unsafe for motorists. Concerns have been raised around the bridge's sharp, almost 90-degree turn, which vehicles must negotiate soon after ascending. With the Congress taking to social media to take a jab at the design, the state PWD Minister Rakesh Singh promised to look into the issue. 'Whenever a bridge is made, a lot of technical considerations are taken into account. So if there are such allegations, we will look into it,' he said, while dismissing the Congress party's concerns as baseless and politically motivated. Constructed at Rs 18 crore, the 648-metre-long, 8.5-metre-wide overbridge is intended to link the congested areas of Mahamai Ka Bagh, Pushpa Nagar, and the railway station zone with New Bhopal. Conceived as a relief project, it promised to eliminate long wait times at railway crossings and spare residents a circuitous detour that many have endured for over a decade. Government estimates suggested that the bridge would benefit around three lakh commuters daily. The bridge, whose construction began in March 2023, has also faced delays. Initially set for completion in 18 months, it is only now approaching readiness after more than 36 months, delayed by factors such as the shifting of electrical lines and coordination issues between the Public Works Department and the Railways. Public Works Department (Bridge Department) Chief Engineer V D Verma told PTI, 'Due to the Metro station, there is limited availability of land at the point. Due to the lack of land, there was no other option. The purpose of the RoB is to connect the two colonies.' Only light vehicles will run on this overbridge, he said, adding that heavy vehicles will not be allowed. — With PTI inputs
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Banke Bihari Corridor: Mathura admin draws up rehab scheme
: Amid the Goswamis' vocal opposition to the Banke Bihari Corridor plan, the Mathura district administration has come up with a scheme to rehabilitate the sevayats or servitors (the Goswami community members engaged in prayers and priestly duties) at the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan. The plan envisages accommodating the sevayats at Rukmani Vihar in Vrindavan. The Uttar Pradesh government's decision to form a trust to manage the Banke Bihari Temple and oversee the construction of the corridor has met with strong opposition from the Goswami community, the hereditary priests who have managed the temple for centuries. They view this as a government 'takeover' attempt, eroding their traditional authority and control over the temple's affairs. In the context of Hindu temples, sevayats are individuals or families who are responsible for performing various ritual services and duties related to the deity and the temple. Their position is hereditary. The Supreme Court has given the go-ahead for the Banke Bihari Corridor, an ambitious plan to ease crowd congestion and enhance the pilgrimage experience around the shrine. The state government has brought an ordinance to create a Trust to run the temple and oversee work of the proposed corridor. After the recent visit of Awanish Kumar Awasthi, the special advisor to chief minister, to Vrindavan on June 6, the work for the proposed Banke Bihari Corridor has gathered pace. The Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority has selected land in Rukmani Vihar and Sunrakh Bangar for a residential scheme to rehabilitate 275 families to be affected by the Banke Bihari corridor, Mathura district magistrate Chandra Prakash Singh said on Wednesday. 'The work for the proposed Banke Bihari Corridor to enhance facilities for lakhs of devotees coming to the Banke Bihari Temple is attaining pace. Physical verification is being conducted for land measuring 5.5 acres required for the proposed corridor. Alongside this, we have drafted schemes to rehabilitate those to be affected by the corridor,' the Mathura DM said. 'The district administration will offer to settle the land owners affected by the corridor at Rukmani Vihar and Sunrakh Bangar in Vrindavan. The land has been selected and flats will be brought up in a residential scheme. The work is to be undertaken by Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority,' Singh said. 'The 275 land owners to be affected by acquisition of land for Banke Behari corridor include 200 shopkeepers. These shop owners will be allocated shops within the Banke Bihari corridor and compensation will be provided on the basis of land and shops being affected. Those affected by the corridor will be provided the option to settle in a common region for which a residential scheme has been worked out,' Chandra Prakash Singh said. Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority vice chairman Shyam Bahadur Singh said, 'We plan to construct 325 to 350 flats, both 1 BHK and 2 BHK, on four big plots at Rukmani Vihar Residential Scheme. If required, the number of flats will be increased by marking out adjoining land. Further, land measuring 3.5 acres has been selected at Sunrakh Bangar in Vrindavan.' 'Plots measuring 3924.91 square metres, 2844 square metres, 1800 square metres and 1504 square metres have been selected in Rukmani Vihar where 325 to 350 flats are to be developed under Group Housing Scheme having 1 BHK and 2 BHK flats,' he said. 'A design has been planned for flats to be constructed for affected families because of the corridor. Houses in Rukmani Vihar are on top priority,' said Arvind Kumar Dwivedi, secretary of MVDA. When asked about the proposal, Rajat Goswami, the former vice-president of the erstwhile managing committee at the Banke Bihari Temple (defunct after a court order), stated that the district administration has not communicated any such rehabilitation plan to them and they are not in position to react as of now. 'The district administration is in conversation with us on various aspects, but has not communicated any such plan in writing to us. The stakeholders should be taken into confidence before making such plans public,' Rajat Goswami said. Earlier, seeking a consensus on the proposed Banke Bihari Corridor project, Awasthi held meetings with local residents, traders and Goswamis (priests) in Vrindavan on June 6. On May 15, the Supreme Court paved the way for a state government scheme to develop the Banke Bihari Corridor for the benefit of devotees. The apex court also allowed the state government to use temple funds to purchase five-acre land for the corridor. The state government on May 27 constituted a Trust to manage the Banke Bihari temple and oversee the work of the proposed corridor.
