chinmoymukherjee wrote:

Here comes the brilliant judgement of Justice Pratiba Rani of Delhi HC! She has granted bail to Kanhaiya Kumar what could be construed as 'antibiotic treatment' in her own words ,talking about the danger of infection needing surgery even amputation of it when that infection turns gangrenous! She has exposed all our pseudos whose only passion is polemics. She has taken a dig at a section of teachers whose credentials are suspect,they are out there to lead students into a world of anarchy and nihilism.I request you to go through her judgement. A very thought- provoking one!!

Indeed it is a brilliant and well thought out judgment and it certainly does not let him off the hook as many interested parties make it seem..

While granting him bail, the judgement expresses concern over the anti-national slogans and reads, “As President of Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union, the petitioner was expected to be responsible and accountable for any anti-national event organised in the campus. Freedom of speech guaranteed to the citizens of this country under the Constitution of India has enough room for every citizen to follow his own ideology or political affiliation within the framework of our constitution. While dealing with the bail application of the petitioner, it has to be kept in mind by all concerned that they are enjoying this freedom only because our borders are guarded by our armed and paramilitary forces. Our forces are protecting our frontiers in the most difficult terrain in the world i.e. Siachen Glacier or Rann of Kutch.”

The judgement sees the use of anti-national slogans in JNU as a bodily infectio

suni51 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

First of all Naukarshahi is part owned by Congress, so they will go all out to defame BJP and RSS and anyone connected with that. Secondly just a picture does not anything and in this picture the ABVP activist is holding the late soldier Hanumantappa's (who laid down his life recetly at Siachen) picture and to think they would be raising pro Pakistani slogans is ridiculous in the least, so this argument will be believed only by the coterie ..

If anyone can read the poster in the front in Hindi the message says "jo Afjal ke vare me baat kare vo desh ke Gaddar hain" (The people who support Afjal are anti national). I can clearly see who is national and who is talking anti national.

Wonder whose brainwork that was ? they seem desperate in their attempt to point fingers at everyone else except the culprits ! 

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

Here comes the brilliant judgement of Justice Pratiba Rani of Delhi HC! She has granted bail to Kanhaiya Kumar what could be construed as 'antibiotic treatment' in her own words ,talking about the danger of infection needing surgery even amputation of it when that infection turns gangrenous! She has exposed all our pseudos whose only passion is polemics. She has taken a dig at a section of teachers whose credentials are suspect,they are out there to lead students into a world of anarchy and nihilism.I request you to go through her judgement. A very thought- provoking one!!

In fact, her judgement is very thought provoking. Each and everyone, from the political leaders to the teachers and the authorities of any educational institution, is responsible in making or breaking the students. They need to be streamlined in the positive direction but what happens is, the students' energy is always used for disguised motives and the young blood gets trapped and tempted. The students get divided on the basis of ideology which is quite natural but if any of them speaks against the country then it is unacceptable. To stop this trend the students must be guided properly which seems to be missing but now, in this case the truth must come out because blaming and arresting a student should be done by the police only and only on facts.

It seems what many want is restricted freedom of speech and not freedom of speech. Then let the restrictions be clearly laid out.  Because views expressed under the right of freedom of speech are subjected to individual evaluations which vary from person  to person. In view of JNU episode the restrictions should be made clear so citizens are also clear. A forum member has been advocating that Prashant Bhushan is a traitor and needs to be whipped. He always advocates harshest punishments and uses choicest  offensive words against whom he does not like. Is this proper use of the right of  freedom of speech which he wants to enjoy but denies similar right to others because he does not like their opinions.

suni51 wrote:

All such people behaving in such a hateful manner have no right to stay in open and if someone wants me to brand a BJP party follower that I am certainly not but I speak for my country. When a BJP member talks bad I react in the same way. It's high time we forget all about party affiliations and work for our nation or wait for the dooms day. After all what kind of freedom of expression is that which speaks ill against our own Mother-Nation? I hail the judgement of the Delhi High Court.

You are much annoyed on Delhi High court judgement. But it is interim judgement not final one. Still courts of India is raise of hope. for one moment if we accept that president of JNU did not rays anti India slogan than who did it. He is president of JNU and also host of that meeting. for any wrong thing he is prime facia responsible. Now it is his duty to trace persons who raise slogan. One more question he called meeting to gloryfy Afzal, why he did not call meeting to pay homage to martyr, brave security personal of India who sacrifice their life to save to honor and grace of temple of India's democracy, " The Parliament.

anil wrote:

suni51 wrote:

All such people behaving in such a hateful manner have no right to stay in open and if someone wants me to brand a BJP party follower that I am certainly not but I speak for my country. When a BJP member talks bad I react in the same way. It's high time we forget all about party affiliations and work for our nation or wait for the dooms day. After all what kind of freedom of expression is that which speaks ill against our own Mother-Nation? I hail the judgement of the Delhi High Court.

You are much annoyed on Delhi High court judgement. But it is interim judgement not final one. Still courts of India is raise of hope. for one moment if we accept that president of JNU did not rays anti India slogan than who did it. He is president of JNU and also host of that meeting. for any wrong thing he is prime facia responsible. Now it is his duty to trace persons who raise slogan. One more question he called meeting to gloryfy Afzal, why he did not call meeting to pay homage to martyr, brave security personal of India who sacrifice their life to save to honor and grace of temple of India's democracy, " The Parliament.

JNU is one such university where regularly various kind of discussions and meetings take place. Are we aware of each and every such meeting? Can you name any Indian student from JNU who turned out to be a criminal or a terrorist? Rather we have greats from this university. It is true, the judge gave bail with many conditions and it's natural because it is yet to be proved who was behind all the activities. Let us wait for the other findings. If he was wrong then he should be punished otherwise not and I think we on this forum should remain open.  

anil wrote:

suni51 wrote:

All such people behaving in such a hateful manner have no right to stay in open and if someone wants me to brand a BJP party follower that I am certainly not but I speak for my country. When a BJP member talks bad I react in the same way. It's high time we forget all about party affiliations and work for our nation or wait for the dooms day. After all what kind of freedom of expression is that which speaks ill against our own Mother-Nation? I hail the judgement of the Delhi High Court.

You are much annoyed on Delhi High court judgement. But it is interim judgement not final one. Still courts of India is raise of hope. for one moment if we accept that president of JNU did not rays anti India slogan than who did it. He is president of JNU and also host of that meeting. for any wrong thing he is prime facia responsible. Now it is his duty to trace persons who raise slogan. One more question he called meeting to gloryfy Afzal, why he did not call meeting to pay homage to martyr, brave security personal of India who sacrifice their life to save to honor and grace of temple of India's democracy, " The Parliament.

 

Wow, where did you read me that I am feeling bad about that judgement? In fact I am all in praise about that judgement. She knew what she was up to. She has trust on our defense system and she knows all about the cowardice, anti national acts of people like Kanaihas and his supporters. She also knows where the support is coming from and who is being targeted.

vijay wrote:

It seems what many want is restricted freedom of speech and not freedom of speech. Then let the restrictions be clearly laid out.  Because views expressed under the right of freedom of speech are subjected to individual evaluations which vary from person  to person. In view of JNU episode the restrictions should be made clear so citizens are also clear. A forum member has been advocating that Prashant Bhushan is a traitor and needs to be whipped. He always advocates harshest punishments and uses choicest  offensive words against whom he does not like. Is this proper use of the right of  freedom of speech which he wants to enjoy but denies similar right to others because he does not like their opinions.

people like Prashant Bhushan knows their rights only when they are speaking, this kind people thinks that this rights are only meant for them, they forget that these rights are also for the people of India. this kind of people follows only one rights and that is right of own liking which means they do, they hear on the basis of their own liking and if they don't like they will not hear nor they will do anything which they should do.

Babu saroj wrote:

vijay wrote:

It seems what many want is restricted freedom of speech and not freedom of speech. Then let the restrictions be clearly laid out.  Because views expressed under the right of freedom of speech are subjected to individual evaluations which vary from person  to person. In view of JNU episode the restrictions should be made clear so citizens are also clear. A forum member has been advocating that Prashant Bhushan is a traitor and needs to be whipped. He always advocates harshest punishments and uses choicest  offensive words against whom he does not like. Is this proper use of the right of  freedom of speech which he wants to enjoy but denies similar right to others because he does not like their opinions.

people like Prashant Bhushan knows their rights only when they are speaking, this kind people thinks that this rights are only meant for them, they forget that these rights are also for the people of India. this kind of people follows only one rights and that is right of own liking which means they do, they hear on the basis of their own liking and if they don't like they will not hear nor they will do anything which they should do.

Good points are raised. Prashant Bhushan and similar people  deserve no sympathy. In fact if I had the power I would recommend whipping and the stockade.

 

By grace of god you do not have these powers otherwise you would be the Chief Whip of the country. You can use your freedom of expression to the hilt but if Prashant does it he should be whipped/ Great but flawed logic.