"Great Relief": Uma Bharati Applauds Malegaon Blast Verdict
Former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister and senior BJP leader Uma Bharati said the verdict in the Malegaon case was a "great relief" to her. All seven accused in the 17-year-old case were acquitted today by a special court. The judge said the prosecution failed to prove the allegations in the case and that all seven accused deserve the benefit of doubt.
"My reverence to the people because they were the ones to face any torture or physical pain but they were not ready to give the names," Uma Bharati told NDTV in an exclusive interview.
"They were forced to name the people of some right wing organisation, some BJP leaders. It is because of the torture they faced and ultimately they tolerated it... The whole country, the whole Hindu community, the whole organisation now honours them. We worship them," she added.
During the years-long trial, the prosecution had examined 323 witnesses, of whom nearly 40 turned hostile.
Pointing to the discrepancies in the evidence, the court said terrorism has no religion, but it cannot convict on mere perception.
Uma Bharati slammed those who suspected the right wing of involvement in the blasts.
More Muslims stayed back in India than the number that went to Pakistan, because they trusted the Hindus. Now they were blaming the Hindus for the Malegaon blast. "They should be ashamed and they should apologise," she said.
The blast occurred on the night of September 29 2008, near Bhikku Chowk in the communally tense town, located about 200 km from Mumbai, during the holy month of Ramzan. A powerful bomb tore through an area near a mosque, killing six people and injuring more than a hundred.
Today, all seven accused in the case, including former BJP MP Pragya Thakur and former army officer Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit, were acquitted.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
4 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Sena protests against Prithviraj Chavan for advocating term ‘Sanatani terrorism'
MUMBAI: Senior Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan found himself in the crosshairs of the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena after he used the term 'Sanatani terrorism' while discussing the NIA court's acquittal of all the accused in the Malegaon blasts case. The former Maharashtra chief minister's contention was that the word 'saffron terror', which is often used to describe right-wing violence, was wrong since 'saffron' was a sacred word. He suggested that people use 'Hindu terror' or 'Sanatani terrorism' instead. Mumbai, India - Aug. 2, 2025: Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde Faction) party worker protested against Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan for his controversial statements referring to "Hindu terrorism" and "Sanatan terrorism" at Dadar W, in Mumbai, India, on Saturday, August 2, 2025. (Photo by HT Photo/ Hindustan Times) (Hindustan Times) Chavan's pronouncement sparked protests by the Shiv Sena in Mumbai and Thane. In Mumbai, one such stir was held in Parel, where Shiv Sena activists tried to barge into the Congress headquarters at Tilak Bhavan. The police stopped them a few metres away, and this led to heated arguments between the two. Most of the protesters were women leaders and activists, who said they wanted an apology from Chavan and Leader of the Opposition in Parliament Rahul Gandhi for 'insulting the Hindu religion'. A statement released by the Shiv Sena said that the Congress' 'narrative' of 'Hindu terrorism' had received a 'major blow' after the NIA court acquitted all seven Hindu accused in the Malegaon bomb blasts case. 'Despite this, leaders like Prithviraj Chavan continue to use terms like 'Sanatan terrorism' and 'Hindu terrorism', which is an insult to Hindus,' read the statement. 'The Shiv Sena condemns these remarks. It also criticises the Congress ideology of appeasement. By using the terms 'Hindu terrorism' and 'saffron terror', leaders like Sushilkumar Shinde, Prithviraj Chavan, Digvijay Singh, P Chidambaram and Rahul Gandhi are defaming Hindus.' Chavan had explained his stance in an interview to a news channel. 'For us 'bhagwa' (saffron) is a holy word,' he said while referring to the Malegaon verdict. 'It is a symbol of the struggle for independence. It was also the colour of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj's flag. Instead of using 'saffron terrorism', terms such as Hindu terrorism, Hindu fundamentalism or Sanatani terrorism should be used.' The former CM also declared that the 'country's first terrorist' was Nathuram Godse. 'The first terror act of terror in independent India was conducted by Nathuram Godse. He assassinated Mahatma Gandhi. Which religion did he belong to—or did he change his religion after killing Gandhi?' remarked 79-year Chavan sardonically. In response, Shiv Sena president Eknath Shinde, who was in Thane, declared that all Hindus were good people. 'Chavan's remarks are condemnable, as Hindus or Sanatanis never do injustice with anyone,' he told reporters. 'Hindus are tolerant. Chavan has insulted the Hindu and Sanatan religion and he will have to pay the price for it.'
Hans India
4 minutes ago
- Hans India
Kishan Reddy lashes out at Cong on BC reservations
Hyderabad: Union Minister G. Kishan Reddy announced that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has deposited Rs 2,000 crore into the accounts of 10 crore farmers through the PM Kisan Samman Yojana. While addressing the OBC Morcha protest programme at Dharna Chowk on Saturday, he criticised Chief Minister Revanth Reddy for making irrelevant comments. He said the Chief Minister referred to the Prime Minister as a 'converted BC.' He questioned how the BC community, which joins the BCs, could be considered a converted BC, noting that in 1971, Lambada joined the STs. He emphasised that mere words do not equate to heroism or greatness, adding that people are not inclined to forgive those who mislead them. He stated, 'People are observing all parties and leaders. This is why you received a clear message in the last parliamentary elections; out of every 100 voters who arrived at the polling station, 37 wanted the saffron flag to fly in Telangana. Revanth Reddy needs to understand this.' Kishan Reddy criticised the Congress party for its pre-election promise during the Kamareddy Declaration to provide 42% reservation for BCs within 100 days of coming to power. He stated that even after two years, the issue of BC reservations remains unresolved, and Congress is attempting to shift the blame onto the BJP-led central government due to its incompetence. He further said that the 42% reservation proposed by the Congress party is not beneficial for BCs, but rather serves Muslim interests for political and electoral gains. He highlighted that Telangana had implemented 34% reservation in local body elections under previous BRS governance and criticised CM KCR for attempting to push for 12% religious reservations for Muslims, stating that this is not truly for their benefit. Reddy pointed out that KCR has reduced BC reservations from 34% to 23%. He asked Revanth Reddy if the 34% reservation for BCs has increased or decreased, emphasising the lack of progress. He noted that if 10% is deducted from the proposed 42% reservation for Muslims, only 32% remains for BCs. He warned that the benefits being touted are 2% less than previous reservations for BCs, that the law is detrimental, not advantageous, for them. Kishan Reddy called on the Congress party to act sincerely and implement the full 42% reservation for BCs. He warned that if there are attempts to deceive the community, they will not stay silent. On behalf of the BJP, he stated that it is unfair to allocate 32% reservation while undermining the backwards classes (BCs). 'As you have announced, 42% reservation should be granted,' he insisted. He accused Congress leaders of spreading false propaganda and attempting to gain attention by going to Delhi for protests. Reddy asserted that the BJP demands that the promised 42% reservation for BCs be implemented. He highlighted the BJP's achievements, stating that the party has had a BC as Prime Minister for 11 consecutive years since independence. He emphasised that the BJP legally granted constitutional status to the BC Commission, empowering it significantly, and has appointed 28 BCs as ministers in the central government. He challenged the Congress party, asking if it has ever appointed a BC as Prime Minister or Chief Minister while governing the country and the state since independence. He criticised their inability to elevate BCs to such positions despite numerous opportunities, stating, 'The Congress party has no moral right to criticise the BJP.' He pointed out that the British conducted a caste census before independence.
Mint
4 minutes ago
- Mint
Sita Devi of Baroda: The 'maharani' who never was
On 6 November 1943, Meka Rangaiah Appa Rao—zamindar of Vuyyuru in today's Andhra Pradesh—received a letter from his wife of ten years. It was a short paragraph, probably worded by a lawyer, and carried important news. 'I have become a Moslem," the lady announced, and taken the name Sheherazade. But the crux of the matter was this: 'in order that our relationship of husband and wife might continue," she wished for Appa Rao to follow her into the new faith. When the man said no thank you, Sheherazade moved the city courts to pronounce their union invalid—a wish that was granted by Christmas Eve. With that she terminated a marriage she declared had always been unhappy. But then there was a twist, or in a colonial official's words, a 'first class scandal". For it suddenly dawned upon Sheherazade, who only days ago proclaimed to a judge that she did not 'like the Hindu faith", that she did, in fact, like it. Making use of Arya Samaj rituals, she reconverted to her ancestral religion, retired her Muslim name, and on 31 December at 9pm acquired a fresh (Hindu) husband. Her conviction in Islam had lasted under three months; the moment her divorce was confirmed, Sheherazade became, once again, Sita Devi, princess of Pithapuram. The marriage of Pratap Singh Rao Gaekwad, maharaja of Baroda, and Sita Devi was one of princely India's most entertaining—but also legally complicated—episodes, sparking all species of bureaucratic nightmares and the loss of some tremendous jewels. Things looked unpromising from the start, what with the bride's father denouncing her. Sita Devi was the daughter of Surya Rao of Pithapuram, a princely patron of the Telugu language. In a press statement, he expressed 'unqualified condemnation" of his daughter, noting the 'grief and horror" caused by her 'outrageous abuse" of Islam and Hinduism to discard a husband. Many nostrils flared in indignation also at the thought of her nine-year-old son. Of course, her new husband was resoundingly criticised too: as the British representative in Baroda noted, the maharaja had breached his own state's monogamy laws, betrayed its tradition of progressive rule, and public sympathy was unequivocally with his wife, Shanta Devi—the mother of eight children. Though 'greatly shocked", her willingness to 'acquiesce patiently in anything which contributes to her husband's happiness" only made him look worse. It was not as if Indian princes had not taken multiple wives before—one maharaja is said to have been ribbed as 'His Exhausted Highness" because of his numerous romantic conquests. But Pratap Singh's grandfather, Sayaji Rao Gaekwad, had been famous for his modernity, enlightened public policy, monogamy (though he did allegedly have the odd extramarital affair) and for taking Baroda to the top ranks of Indian states. As a result, the people of Baroda, who prided themselves 'on being in advance of (their) neighbours", felt Pratap Singh had let them down. His defence that the Baroda Hindu Monogamy Act—which he himself had passed into law in 1942—applied only to his subjects, not to him, was preposterous. In truth, he simply did not expect the backlash. In February 1944 the British noted how the maharaja was under the impression that 'everyone would (simply) accept his right to marry when and where he liked". On being proved wrong, he maintained an air of defiance, but in private, 'His Highness' conscience is not altogether easy." It probably didn't help that his lively private affairs allowed the Indian National Congress to slam the maharaja politically as well. But neither Sita Devi nor her second husband was easily defeated. A desperate campaign was launched to win support. For one, the maharaja began to collect letters of approval from other princes like the rulers of Indore and Gwalior to demonstrate, that 'from the Maratha point of view" at least, the marriage was 'perfectly in order". Baroda law too was amended to resolve the maharaja's polygamous conundrum retrospectively. Backing for Pratap Singh arrived from one or two unexpected quarters: the Baroda State Muslim League, and V.D. Savarkar of the Hindu Mahasabha. In the latter's case, it was not so much approval of the union that led to support as fear that the scandal might become an excuse to topple a leading Hindu prince and prove 'extremely harmful to…Hindu interests". Pratap Singh also stockpiled a set of favourable legal opinions, including from stalwarts like Chimanlal Setalvad. But the situation remained hopeless: the British considered the marriage a 'fraud upon the law". The advocate general pronounced its legitimacy 'doubtful", while another top viceregal adviser argued that applying the term 'marriage" to the case was a stretch. What made things worse was blows at home. The maharaja's own minister, the celebrated V.T. Krishnamachari, baulked at the thought of kowtowing to Sita Devi. Like her father, he was horrified by the conversion charade and her first husband's ejection. So, after over 16 years of service, Krishnamachari packed his bags and left. Shanta Devi, meanwhile, although she never openly criticised her husband, was said to be in favour of withholding recognition. The idea was that these complications would cool the maharaja's 'infatuation", and that Sita Devi could be 'discreetly pensioned off". Indeed, Sita Devi was never acknowledged as either a 'Highness" or a maharani—the best the British establishment could offer in a 1945 passport was a watered down 'Lady Sita Devi". But Pratap Singh would not give up trying; with the British set to depart, he began to lobby Congress politicians. His new minister, B.L. Mitter, for example, attempted to persuade Sardar Patel in 1947 to let Sita Devi use the title of maharani, albeit without 'Her Highness" prefixed, or 'of Baroda" suffixed. She would be the maharani of nowhere, but at least a maharani of some variety. The request fell flat again. Predictably, given the age in which they lived, the couple faced a social boycott. Honeymooning in Kashmir in 1944, they found that while the state's ruler would receive Pratap Singh as a fellow maharaja, his queen refused to entertain Sita Devi. Sita Devi was forever tarnished as a 'bad" sort of woman, with an 'unsavoury past". Or as a home ministry official would put it in 1957, Sita Devi was 'a modern Cleopatra who has debauched the mind and body and caused the complete ruin of Maharaja Pratapsinh Gaekwar of Baroda." There is, of course, a whiff of sexism here, not least because Pratap Singh was hardly the ideal man or prince before Sita Devi erupted on to the scene. Indeed, at the time of their marriage it seemed already clear that he was unable to fill his illustrious grandfather's shoes. The general consolation had been that he was at least a 'model husband and father". But the moment he got handsy with a married woman, he forfeited that distinction too. If anything, official support remained firmly with Shanta Devi, who is described in the files as embodying 'the true spirit of a Hindu Dharmapathni". In the end, things doddered to an expensive anti-climax. When the princely states acceded to the Indian Union in 1947, Pratap Singh was among the first to join. But as Sita Devi's brother noted, he was a 'foolish person, and a dangerously foolish one at that." Thus, when Junagadh opted for Pakistan instead of India, creating a crisis for the government, the maharaja was asked to help maintain law and order in the region. Doing so would have won him favour—perhaps even recognition for his 'lady". But instead, he demanded that six Indian territories abutting Baroda first be handed to him (for historical reasons), and he be recognised as 'King of Gujarat and Kathiawar"; in this position, he would assist India as a 'faithful ally". Sardar Patel never forgave Pratap Singh: 'You bargained about your own position at a time when India was in difficulties." Later it was discovered that the maharaja had been pocketing crores of rupees—including from a fund his grandfather founded to back big infrastructure projects. In 1951, after he launched an ill-fated campaign for the resurrection of royal rule, including by collaborating with certain princes who had flirted with Pakistan, Pratap Singh was deposed. Sita Devi, too, was accumulating fresh layers of infamy. It appears she had been merrily taking jewels from Baroda's vaults, and when some pieces were returned under strict orders from Delhi, parts were missing. In 1955 there was furious chatter in official circles after Pratap Singh's son asked for assistance in recovering treasures she had shipped abroad. Some items were said to be in Europe, others in the custody of the American jeweller Harry Winston. The value of Sita Devi's hoard can be estimated from the fact that a single artefact that vanished from Baroda—a canopy with 950,000 Basra pearls, emeralds, rubies, etc.—was auctioned in 2019 for over $2 million. In 1956 India's deputy home secretary complained that 'Lady Sita Devi" had no right to these articles, especially after her husband was dismissed from his post. Yet, 'in spite of all efforts she did not return the jewellery to the present Ruler of Baroda". A partial list of valuables in her custody shows that she possessed everything from strands of the famous Baroda pearl necklace to milk jugs, coffee pots, and even a strainer made of gold. The sale of these pieces kept Sita Devi afloat for the rest of her days. She certainly needed the cash. For after all the drama of their marriage, in 1956 Pratap Singh and Sita Devi divorced (no high-speed religious conversion was needed this time). She moved abroad, posing among society elites as Baroda's maharani, managing to even get this entered briefly into a British passport. That same year, learning that she had also obtained a diplomatic visa for the US (allowing her to deposit jewels there, uninspected by customs), India informed the Americans that this was a grave mistake. In 1957, Sita Devi was seen at an official event in Colombo, where the Indian high commissioner noticed her in a 'place of honour…with Chou En-Lai to her right and Mrs Bandaranaike to her left". She was presented as a 'Highness", and when the diplomat came face to face with her, she was 'cold and unfriendly". Apparently, Sita Devi—who doesn't appear to have returned to India again—was aware she was out of favour for 'having smuggled out the Baroda State jewels worth several million pounds." In the end, still living off the Baroda treasures, she settled in Paris, dying in the 1980s. In all the files around the saga of 'Lady Sita Devi" and Pratap Singh, her own voice is absent. It is difficult to determine how she might have defended herself—the divorce stunt in 1943, her remarriage, and the question of an 'unrecognised" woman's claim to the dynastic riches of her second ex-husband. To the British, she posed a unique kind of difficulty. Typically, it was when maharajas married white women that they confronted problems around recognition and titles. Sita Devi's case was a rare occasion when a brown woman marrying a brown man caused a scandal. To Indian babus, she looked venal and treacherous, the opposite of the forbearing wife they saw in Shanta Devi. In any case, Sita Devi, for all the wealth she acquired, ultimately had a gloomy end: her son with Pratap Singh, 'Princie", killed himself a few years before her death. There is, though, a strange victory she enjoys in her afterlife. All her goods—from art to jewels and furniture—ended up in alien hands, appearing in auction catalogues across the world. But in what might have pleased our queen-who-never-was—and left her critics incandescent—these brochures uniformly style her as Sita Devi, maharani of Baroda. Manu S. Pillai is a historian and author, most recently, of Gods, Guns and Missionaries.
