Why a wheelchair-bound person cannot become a security threat??
New Delhi: Deadly terrorist Abdul Nasser Madni’s bail application has been deferred to another bench – As there was difference of opinion among the Judges itself.
While Justice Markandeya Katju supported the bail plea which is on medical grounds, Justice Gyan Sudha Misra opposed it as there is ample proof for the involvement of Madni in Anti National activities including Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Surat blasts.
Justice Katju had wondered how a wheelchair-bound person can pose a security threat. Under Justice Katju’s dictionary nor under Law Journals is there any definition for who all can be classified as ‘Security Threat’ is not known. Whether under Katju’s definition ‘Security threat’ is implied only for young Hindu Sadhwi’s and age old Hindu Sanyasis is also not clear.
Madni can fly to Gulf countries with all his so called medical condition, He can take part in Jihadi meets and exhort Muslim youth to wage Jihad , He can travel to hilly terrain of Kodagu and plot to conduct blasts in Indian cities, He can keep a whole state in Tip Toe, when state police comes to arrest him – Still we got enough ‘Nationalists’ like Shanthi Bhushan to advocate for him and Judges like Katju to sympathise with him!
Welcome to Haindava Keralam! Register for Free or Login as a privileged HK member to enjoy auto-approval of your comments and to receive periodic updates.
Latest Articles from Bharath Focus
- Narendra Modi: The Architect of India’s Momentous Transformation
- Republic Day Tableaux & Regional Pride
- Tarun Vijay meets Governor Arif Khan on Adi Sankara birthplace
- SC-ST പോസ്റ്റ് മെട്രിക് സ്കോളർഷിപ്പിൽ 5 ഇരട്ടി വർദ്ധനവ്
- Treading the Middle-Path on Temple Management
- Taming the dragon-Part-3
- Taming the dragon- Part 2
- India- China trade wars on the cards? Well researched blog on Indian govt.’s proposed plan to tax 371 Chinese goods
- Before removing the idols, I should be removed; Two Kerala faces we should never forget
- The Unseen Unheard Victims of Article 35(A)
Responses