New Education Policy First Attempt To Decolonise India's Education System: Kerala Governor
Kerala Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar on Sunday said that the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is the first serious attempt to decolonise the country's education system. Arlekar said that the country was moving forward with a "colonial thought" till now.
"Our whole thinking was changed by the earlier education system. We did not even realise when it entered our family lives. We are now attempting to come out of that colonisation," he said, and urged everyone to be part of the change in the education sector.
The Governor, speaking at the national education conference, 'Gyan Sabha', organised by the RSS-linked Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas in Kochi, said that the education policy brought by the Narendra Modi government was "different from what has been taught to us for all these years".
He said that India was 'Vishwa Guru' when it attained independence and even now.
"But we were not able to assert it back then. When we became independent, it was only political freedom," he said, adding that Bharat could again become the 'Vishwa Guru' if the new education policy is accepted.
"The question is whether you want to be a part of the change," he said.
Addressing the gathering, which included Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat, Arlekar also said that Viksit Bharat was not just an economic concept but "a wholesome development of the entire society and not just a particular section of it".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
‘Strong suspicion, no legal proof': Why all 7 accused in the 2008 Malegoan bomb blast case walked free
A Special National Investigation Agency (NIA) Court on Thursday (July 31, 2025) acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case, including Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and former Member of Parliament (MP) Pragya Singh Thakur and serving Army Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit. In a detailed 1,036-page judgment that was delivered on July 31 and made available on August 1 evening, Special Judge A.K. Lahoti observed that although the occurrence of the bomb blast was indisputable, the prosecution had failed to produce credible and admissible evidence establishing the accused's involvement in the crime. 'I am fully aware of the degree of agony, frustration, and trauma caused to society at large and, more particularly, to the families of the victims by the fact that a heinous crime of this nature has gone unpunished. However, the law does not permit courts to convict an accused solely on the basis of moral conviction or suspicion. No doubt, terrorism has no religion because no religion in the world preaches violence. The court of law is not supposed to proceed on popular or predominant public perceptions about the matter,' the Judge underscored. However, he directed the State Government to pay compensation of ₹2 lakh to the families of the deceased and ₹50,000 to those injured in the blast. Editorial | By evidence alone: on the 2008 Malegaon blast trial What was the Malegaon blast case? On September 29, 2008, during the holy month of Ramzan, a powerful bomb blast ripped through Malegaon, a communally sensitive town in Maharashtra. Around 9:35 p.m., an explosive device concealed in an LML Freedom motorcycle with a fake number plate (MH-15-P-4572) detonated near Shakeel Goods Transport Company, between Anjuman Chowk and Bhiku Chowk. The explosion killed six people, injured 95 others, and caused significant damage to surrounding property. An FIR was promptly registered, and the investigation was initially undertaken by the Nashik Rural Police and Mumbai's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), then headed by Hemant Karkare, who was later killed in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. In 2011, the case was transferred to the NIA as part of a wider probe into alleged Hindutva-linked terror cases. Of the 14 individuals arrested in connection with the blast, charges against seven were eventually dropped. The remaining seven, Pragya Singh Thakur, Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit, Ramesh Upadhyay, Sameer Kulkarni, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, and Sudhakar Chaturvedi, were put on trial. They were prosecuted for murder and criminal conspiracy under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, and the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. According to the ATS, conspiracy meetings had taken place across various locations allegedly under Ms. Thakur's leadership. The agency also claimed that the two absconding accused, Ramji Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange, had assembled the explosive device and placed it in the boot of a motorcycle registered to Ms. Thakur. However, several witnesses, including serving Army officers, later retracted their statements in court, alleging that their earlier testimonies had been coerced. Many of the accused also claimed that their confessions were extracted under torture. The NIA appeared to accept parts of these allegations in its final chargesheet, which the defence used to bolster its case. The case also attracted widespread attention following the resignation of NIA special public prosecutor Rohini Salian, who alleged that she had been instructed to 'go soft' on the accused and that the agency was deliberately weakening the case against the so-called 'Hindu terror' network. After her departure, special public prosecutor Avinash Rasal took over and conducted the trial to its conclusion. Why were the accused acquitted by the court? Here are some of the key findings: Thakur was not in 'conscious possession' of motorcycle The court held that Ms. Thakur was not in 'conscious possession' of the LML Freedom motorcycle in which the explosive device was allegedly planted. Citing her renunciation of the material world at least two years before the blast, Judge Lahoti observed, 'Prosecution had not led any evidence on record to show that she was in conscious possession of the said motorcycle even after renouncement of the material world. Nobody has seen her with the said motorcycle, or it was with her at Jabalpur Aashram even after taking the Sanyas.' The Judge further observed that there was neither eyewitness testimony nor circumstantial evidence to suggest that Ms. Thakur had handed over the motorcycle to the co-accused or was involved in assembling the explosive device. Instead, he noted that the explosive could have been hung, placed, or kept near the motorcycle, rather than fitted inside it. 'Mere, blast on the site and damaged condition of the motorcycle are not conclusive proof of fitting explosives inside the dikki, i.e., beneath the seat of said motorcycle,' the Judge observed, adding that expert testimony did not rule out the possibility of the device being attached externally or placed nearby. As for allegations of torture by the ATS, the court noted that Ms. Thakur had not raised any such complaint when she was produced before a magistrate on October 24, 2008, following her arrest. Citing an earlier Supreme Court order, the Judge pointed out that she neither made any allegations of ill-treatment at the time nor challenged the magistrate's remand order. No official sanction for Purohit's association with Abhinav Bharat The ATS alleged that the explosive used in the blast was RDX, claiming it had been procured by Colonel Purohit during his posting in Jammu & Kashmir. However, the court found no evidence establishing the source of the explosive or how it was procured or transported. It also noted the absence of any proof regarding who had parked the motorcycle at the blast site or when, particularly since the area had been cordoned off for Ramzan. However, Judge Lahoti rejected Mr. Purohit's claim that his association with fringe organisations like Abhinav Bharat was part of his official duties as an intelligence officer. He noted that documentary evidence clearly established Mr. Purohit's role as a trustee of the Abhinav Bharat Trust. However, there was no material on record to suggest that his superiors had authorised him to join the trust or to collect and utilise its funds. 'As per the ethos of the Military Intelligence, the commanding officer or the Discipline & Vigilance Branch used to protect the interests of officers and sources. But after the arrest of A-9 (Mr. Purohit), no steps were taken to protect their officer. If he had really discharged the duty under the colour of his office, there would have been protection for him,' the Judge reasoned. Absence of forensic evidence Judge Lahoti observed that the forensic expert who examined the motorcycle, on which the explosive device was allegedly planted, had admitted that it was merely his 'guesswork' that led him to conclude the bomb was placed in the vehicle's boot. No scientific test had been conducted to verify the placement of the explosive. Accordingly, the Judge held that in the absence of any primary forensic analysis, the expert's testimony failed to inspire confidence. 'The present matter is [a] serious case of bomb-blast. In such a case, mere guess work is not enough. Neither it is expected from expert when he is specifically called on the spot to collect the articles, to assist and to guide the Investigating Agency by carrying out some scientific tests. In such situation, there must be some scientific test to be carried out by an expert on the spot to arrive at certain conclusion,' the Judge emphasised. Procedural lapses in the invocation of MCOCA and UAPA The ATS, which initially investigated the blast, based its case primarily on the accused having participated in conspiracy meetings related to the planning and execution of the attack. Its key evidence comprised confessional statements recorded under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), 1999. However, these confessions were rendered inadmissible after MCOCA was dropped from the case in 2016, when the NIA took over the investigation and flagged procedural lapses in the Act's invocation. The court concurred, noting that the sanction to invoke MCOCA had been granted without 'application of judicial mind.' A similar procedural lapse was found in the invocation of the UAPA. Judge Lahoti noted that the then Additional Chief Secretary of the Home Department, Mumbai, Chitkala Zutshi, had failed to consult the investigating officer before granting sanction under the UAPA. As a result, the statutory presumptions under the Act, such as the reverse burden of proof, could not be invoked against the accused, the court held. No merit in claim that ATS directed arrest of RSS chief The court rejected the claim made by former ATS officer Mehboob Mujawar that he had been instructed to arrest RSS chief Mr. Mohan Bhagwat in connection with the case. Judge Lahoti found no merit in the argument advanced by the lawyer for the accused, Mr. Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi, who had relied on Mr. Mujawar's statements before a Solapur court. Mr. Mujawar had alleged that senior ATS officers directed him to arrest Mr. Bhagwat to frame the case as one of 'saffron terror,' but said he refused, having found no evidence linking Mr. Bhagwat to the alleged crime. However, the Judge relied on the testimony of Mr. Mohan Kulkarni, the then chief investigating officer, who stated that Mr. Mujawar was only tasked with tracing the absconding accused, Mr. Ramji Kalsangra and Mr. Sandeep Dange, and was never instructed to arrest any RSS leader. The court also noted that Mr. Mujawar was neither listed nor examined as a witness by either side. Accordingly, it concluded that the statements submitted were part of Mr. Mujawar's defence in another case and held no evidentiary value in the present trial. What happens next? Advocate Shahid Nadeem, representing Nisar Ahmed Haji Sayyed Bilal, who lost his son in the blast, told the media that the case reflected 'significant failures' on the part of the NIA. He added that the victims' families intend to explore legal remedies by filing an independent appeal in the Bombay High Court after reviewing the full judgment. Meanwhile, political pressure is mounting on the Maharashtra Government to file its own appeal, as it did following the acquittals in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case. Twelve Muslim men were acquitted after spending 19 years in prison, with the High Court issuing scathing observations on the use of torture during the investigation. The State had moved the Supreme Court the very next day, prompting the apex court to clarify that the High Court's observations could not serve as precedent in other similar cases. In the present case, however, Special Public Prosecutor Avinash Rasal, appearing for the NIA, said a decision on whether to file an appeal would be made only after a detailed study of the judgment.
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Decode Politics: Why Fadnavis govt is granting Sindhi refugees land titles
In a significant step towards aiding displaced Sindhi families, the BJP-led Mahayuti government in Maharashtra has announced it will issue property titles to five lakh such families residing in 35 cities across the state under the 'Special Abhay Yojana 2025'. The decision, part of the BJP's poll pledges, comes at a time when the state government has launched an intense drive against 'illegal Bangladeshi and Rohingya migrants' across the state. Behind this outreach is a BJP-RSS push to bring Sindhis, who were forced to migrate from Sindh in Pakistan after Partition in 1947, under the larger Hindu umbrella. While announcing the scheme Tuesday, state Revenue Minister and Maharashtra BJP chief Chandrashekhar Bawankule said, 'The Special Abhay Scheme will be implemented, under which residential and commercial land in 30 colonies of the Sindhi community, displaced after the 1947 Partition, will be converted to free-hold (Occupancy Class-I) according to the law.' Under the scheme, all properties in possession of Sindhis or registered with a local self-government body as of December 31, 2024 will receive ownership titles at concessional rates. The land will be converted to free-hold upon payment of a premium. 'This scheme will serve as a milestone for the welfare of the Sindhi community and reflects the government's citizen-centric policies,' Bawankule said. This move to introduce a special policy for displaced Sindhi families fulfils a promise made by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis ahead of the 2024 Assembly elections, Bawankule added. The scheme will provide legal ownership rights to homes and establishments in 30 colonies across cities such as Nagpur, Jalgaon, and Mumbai. In Ulhasnagar, which has been excluded from this scheme and has the state's largest Sindhi population, a separate policy will be introduced. The Revenue Department will implement the scheme, delivering justice to the Sindhi community, Bawankule said. Sindhis, who have been living in their colonies for several decades, had long been demanding that the government legally acknowledge their settlements. The issue has been discussed in the state Legislative Assembly and Council on several occasions in the past. In the aftermath of the Partition, a large number of Sindhi Hindus fled the Sindh region. At the time, it was estimated that 10 lakh Sindhi families migrated to India as refugees. To address their concerns, refugee colonies were set up by the government across Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Karnataka and other states. These settlements became homes for the refugees who left behind in Pakistan their possessions and assets. Reeling in poverty, resettled Sindhis in India were forced to rebuild their lives from scratch. As per the 2011 Census, there are 28 lakh Sindhi language speakers in India. This figure excludes ethnic Sindhis who don't speak the language and some Kutchis who do not identify as ethnic Sindhis. At 7.2 lakh, Maharashtra has the second-largest Sindhi-speaking population after Gujarat at 11.8 lakh. The timing of the scheme is crucial as the state government wants to convey a strong message to the Sindhi community in Maharashtra. By granting property rights to Sindhu refugees, the BJP also wants to reinforce its commitment to Hindus. Secondly, the Mahayuti government also wants to make a distinction between Hindu Sindhi refugees and other migrants. While the drive against illegal Bangladeshis in the state has been debated since the 1990s, the Fadnavis government has decided to push it for the first time. 'Illegal Bangladeshis manage to get fake birth certificates and Aadhaar cards. They are being provided these documents by some local authorities and enjoy patronage of non-BJP politicians who want to use them for vote bank politics,' said state BJP leader Kirit Somaiya. The state government has directed district collectors to carry out anti-illegal immigration drives. It has also urged them to cancel fake birth certificates and other such documents, and submit them to the state revenue and health departments. Bawankule said, 'The Maharashtra government has decided to crack down against illegal Bangladeshis/Rohingyas. Through its special drive, the government will cancel 42 lakh fake certificates issued to illegal Bangladeshis till August 15.' He claimed that this figure may rise. The Opposition, while welcoming the government's decision to resettle Sindhi refugees, cautioned against the 'harassment' of the Muslim community in the name of an anti-illegal immigration drive. State Congress president Harshvardhan Sapkal said, 'The BJP's politics is to divide and rule in the name of religion, caste and community. We are not against government action against illegal Bangladeshi migrants. But if it is used as a tool to harass Indian Muslim citizens, which is not acceptable.'
Hans India
6 hours ago
- Hans India
Revanth fires salvo at Modi on continuing as PM
Hyderabad: Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy on Saturday fired a salvo at Prime Minister Narendra Modi (who will turn 75 this September) for seemingly holding on to the prime minister post despite the BJP's ideological parent RSS' insinuation that leaders (of the sangh pariwar) should demit office on attaining 75 years. The Chief Minister predicted that BJP will win not more than 150 Lok Sabha seats in the next General Election. He was delivering a speech on 'Constitutional Challenges - Perspectives and Pathways' at a conference organized at Vigyan Bhavan in New Delhi on Saturday. The Chief Minister pointed out that Modi had been holding on to chief minister and prime minister chairs since 2001. To months back, RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat expressed the organisation's considered opinion that leaders should demit office upon attaining 75 years. The Chief Minister went ballistic at Modi for overlooking the RSS's viewpoint and choosing to remain in the PM chair. Revanth demanded to know why Modi was not relinquishing the PM post, though the age limit rule had been applied to senior BJP leaders LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi. Revanth Reddy contested BJP MP Nishikant Dubey's statement 'without Modi, BJP will not get even 150 seats'. Under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, the Congress will register a resounding victory in the next general election and 'BJP's tally in the Lok Sabha will not cross 150', Revanth observed. Asserting that Rahul Gandhi will dethrone Modi from the PM chair in the next elections -- something that could not be done by RSS and former Prime Minister Vajpayee -- he said that Rahul, as ordinary worker of the Congress, had been fighting for the last 25 years for the uplift of the poor, Dalits, Adivasi as well as OBCs and securing for them social justice. The CM called upon all leaders within the Congress to fight strongly under Rahul Gandhi's leadership and protect the Constitution by defeating Modi. Referring to Telangana's success story in coming up with its unique Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC), Revanth Reddy said that achieving social justice for OBCs was a big challenge and only the Congress can fulfill the aspirations of the backward communities. During Bharat Jodo Yatra in Telangana, Rahul Gandhi had made the promise of coming up with the caste census. Telangana people opened the doors of "Mohabbat ki Dookan' and gave their mandate to the Congress in Telangana. Soon after coming to power, the 'People's government' in Telangana conducted the caste census to provide 42 per cent BC quota in education, employment and political opportunities in local bodies. Caste Census meant rendering social justice to the backward communities, the Chief Minister underlined. The Chief Minister took potshots at BJP leaders for repeatedly questioning the contribution of the Congress to the country.
