"Aim Was To Preserve Dynastic Rule": Amit Shah On Emergency
The Emergency, imposed 50 years ago, by a despotic ruler, whose sole aim was to preserve her dynastic rule, was one of the darkest chapters in India's history, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said on Wednesday.
Mr. Shah said the Emergency was not a national necessity but a reflection of the anti-democratic mentality of the Congress and just "one person", a reference to then prime minister Indira Gandhi.
The Indira Gandhi government imposed the Emergency on June 25, 1975. The Modi government observes this day as 'Samvidhan Hatya Diwas'.
"Emergency, imposed 50 years ago, by a despotic ruler, whose sole aim was to preserve her dynastic rule, was one of the darkest chapters in India's history," the home minister posted on X.
Emergency, imposed 50 years ago, by a despotic ruler, whose sole aim was to preserve her dynastic rule, was one of the darkest chapters in India's history.
I was a Bal Swayamsevak of RSS then and heard firsthand the excesses and injustices during the dark days of Emergency. The…
— Amit Shah (@AmitShah) June 25, 2025
Mr. Shah, who was just 11 years old in 1975, said he was a 'Bal Swayamsevak' of the RSS then and heard firsthand the excesses and injustices during the dark days of the Emergency.
He said the memories of that time, though blurry, as he was very young then, the suppression, the torture, the blatant assault on democratic values were still vivid in his memories.
"I take immense pride in having been associated with a movement that stood up against this tyranny, and with a leader who fearlessly raised his voice to protect Bharat's democracy and its Constitution," he said.
Paying tributes to those who suffered after the imposition of Emergency by the Indira Gandhi government, Mr. Shah said the day reminds everyone that when those in power become dictatorial, the people have the power to overthrow them.
The home minister said the Emergency was the "Age of Injustice of Congress's hunger for power".
"This day tells us that when power becomes dictatorial, the people have the power to overthrow it," he said in another post on 'X' in Hindi.
"The Emergency was not a national necessity, but a reflection of the "anti-democratic mentality" of the Congress and one person," the minister said.
He said freedom of the press was crushed, the hands of the judiciary were tied and social workers were put in jail.
"The countrymen raised the slogan of 'sinhasan khali karo' (vacate the throne) and uprooted the dictatorial Congress. A heartfelt tribute to all the heroes who sacrificed their lives in this struggle," he said.
Last year, Mr. Shah had announced that the Modi government would observe June 25 as the 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas' to commemorate the "massive contributions" of those who endured "inhuman pain" during the period.
He had also said the observance of 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas' will help keep the eternal flame of individual freedom and the defence of democracy alive in every Indian, thus preventing "dictatorial forces" like the Congress from "repeating those horrors".
A gazette notification to this effect noted that the Emergency was declared on June 25, 1975, following which there was "gross abuse of power by the government of the day and people of India were subjected to excesses and atrocities".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
14 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Juveniles, age of consent and justice: Explaining the wide conviction gap
An analysis of government data in the Supreme Court reveals a stark disparity between the number of juveniles and young adults charged under rape and child sexual abuse laws and the relatively small proportion who are eventually convicted, throwing sharp focus on the ongoing debate over the age of consent and its unintended consequences. According to the Union government's latest submission to the Supreme Court, between 2018 and 2022, only 468 juveniles aged 16-18 were convicted under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, despite more than 4,900 being booked across the country in the same period , a conviction rate of just 9.55%. For charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, just 855 convictions were recorded out of 6,892 cases during the same period , a rate of only 12.4%. The corresponding numbers for young adults aged 18-22 tell a similar story. While 52,471 were arrested under these stringent laws during this period, only 6,093 were convicted under Pocso, a conviction rate of just 11.61%. Of 24,306 arrested between 2018 and 2022 for rape, only 2,585 young adults were convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, amounting to just 10.63% . The statistics form part of the Centre's written submissions opposing any move to lower the age of consent under the Pocso Act or introduce exceptions for adolescent relationships, telling the top court that such dilution, 'even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy,' would dismantle the statutory shield meant to safeguard minors and risk opening the door to child abuse. However, the wide gap between the registration of cases and convictions suggests that while these laws aim to safeguard children from sexual exploitation, they may also be pulling large numbers of adolescents and young people (mostly men) into the criminal justice system, often in cases involving consensual relationships that turn adversarial due to family or societal pressure. Convictions and sentencing For juveniles (16-18 years), Pocso convictions rose modestly from 144 in 2018 to 213 in 2022 even as the number of detentions rose from 844 to 1,757, which implies a conviction rate of just 12.12% in 2022. The majority received prison terms of up to 10 years. Life imprisonment was awarded in only 31 cases across five years, and there was no death penalty. For the same group, rape convictions remained flat, ranging from 83 to 110 per year, with over 85% receiving sentences of up to 10 years. Only eight juveniles, tried as adults under the pertinent legal provisions, received life terms during this period. Among young adults in the 18-22 years age group, convictions under Pocso grew from 1,213 in 2018 to 1,312 in 2022. However, even this increase is modest considering the scale of bookings under the Act. While 8,740 persons were apprehended in 2018, 13,068 were arrested in 2022. That translates to conviction rates of 13.88% in 2018 and 10.04% in 2022 under Pocso. Additionally, rape convictions dropped from 620 in 2018 to 476 in 2022, reflecting a 23.23% decline despite higher arrest figures. Life imprisonment was more common in this age group. 773 individuals received life terms for Pocso offences, while 238 did so for rape. A total of 22 young adults were awarded the death penalty over the five years, compared to just one juvenile. These statistics emerge at a time when the Supreme Court is hearing a public interest litigation examining whether the blanket criminalisation of all sexual activity below the age of 18 under the Pocso Act requires re-examination. The law, enacted in 2012, sets the age of consent at 18 and makes even consensual acts between teenagers prosecutable. Senior advocates Indira Jaising and Sidharth Luthra, appearing as amici curiae in the 2012 public interest litigation (PIL) filed by lawyer Nipun Saxena, have argued that the mandatory reporting requirement and lack of a close-in-age exception is leading to over-criminalisation, infringing on the autonomy, privacy, and health rights of adolescents, particularly girls. But the Union government has pushed back, telling the court that 'any dilution of the age of consent, even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy, would irrevocably dilute the statutory presumption of vulnerability that lies at the heart of child protection law.' In a recently filed affidavit, It has urged the court to uphold the 'bright-line' age of 18 to deter abuse and exploitation. Numbers suggest a need for nuance Data suggests that many of those convicted are themselves just a few years older than the complainants. The tables submitted by the government highlight that young men aged 18–22 are the most prosecuted group under Pocso, raising concerns that the protective intent of the law is being applied to penalise consensual relationships. For example, in 2022, 213 juveniles (16-18) were convicted under Pocso whereas 1,312 young adults (18-22) were convicted under the same Act -- over six times higher. Rape convictions for 18-22-year-olds (476) were also significantly higher than for juveniles (92). The sentencing trends further bolster the case for a more differentiated approach. A vast majority of both juveniles and young adults received sentences below 10 years, suggesting courts may be exercising discretion when faced with such cases, but only after the accused have undergone lengthy trials and detention. A legal and social dilemma The Centre's firm position against creating a 'close-in-age' exception, such as exempting consensual acts between teens aged 16-18, comes amid growing calls for a calibrated rethink. Several high courts, and even Supreme Court benches in bail and quashing proceedings, have flagged the problem of criminalising teenage love. Yet, the government has maintained that 'loosening age-based protections could open avenues for abuse under the guise of consensual activity,' and that the law must 'act as a strong deterrent… in a society where children, especially girls, are vulnerable to manipulation, coercion and abuse.' At the heart of the debate lies the challenge of balancing protection with autonomy, ensuring minors are not exploited, while also preventing a legal system from punishing consensual and developmental relationships among peers. In her written submissions countering the Centre's stance, Jaising said the age of consent was static at 16 years for 80 years and that increasing it to 18 years through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. 'No rational reason has been indicated for the increase, nor is there any data to suggest that the age of consent required any increase,' stated her submissions, adding the increase in the age of consent violated the right to autonomy of children between the ages of 16 and 18 who have the ability to give mature consent to sexual activity, having regard to the fact that they have attained puberty giving rise to sexual awareness. 'Scientific research indicates that adolescents are attaining puberty sooner than they did several years ago and puberty as we know, is the age of awakening of sexual awareness. It is the age during which there is a natural attraction between the sexes and the development of sexual relationships of choice. Hence, to criminalise such an activity rather than addressing the issue of sex education, is arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the best interests of children as defined in law,' the submissions contended. Increasing the age of consent has led to branding hundreds of children in the 16-18 age group as criminals. 'Data also indicates that most complaints to police are filed by parents of the girl, often against her own wishes and for extraneous reasons such as inter-religious or inter-caste relationships,' she said. 'The only solution lies in declaring that sex between consenting adolescents between the age of 16, an almost universal age of sexual maturity, and 18 is not a form of 'abuse',' Jaising's submissions added. The senior counsel urged the Supreme Court to read into the impugned legal provisions a 'close-in-age exception', applicable when both parties to the sexual act are adolescents between the ages of 16 and 18 and the sexual act is consensual. 'Such an exception would preserve the protective intent of the statute while preventing its misuse against adolescent relationships that are not exploitative in nature,' she said. As the Supreme Court resumes hearing the matter next month, the numbers paint a sobering picture : thousands of adolescents and young adults are caught in the legal net each year, but only a fraction are ultimately held guilty, often after years of litigation. Whether this calls for legislative reform or judicial steps may now be for the court to decide but the data offers compelling reason to confront the unintended consequences of the current regime.
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Justice Nagamohan Das submits report, proposes 6.6% internal quota for SC (Left)
Bengaluru: The Justice HN Nagmohan Das Committee on internal reservation among Scheduled Castes (SCs) submitted its final report to the govt Monday, marking a key step in the state's move to rationalise SC quotas based on empirical report, which contains six major recommendations, was formally received by chief minister Siddaramaiah and will be placed before the cabinet on Thursday for further consideration. Sources say the report recommends an allocation of 6.5% for SC (Left), 5.5% for SC (Right), 4% for 'untouchables', and 1% for other nomadic Das told TOI that since there was no reliable data on SC sub-castes, the commission undertook a fresh state-wide survey. This data forms the basis of the panel's recommendations."The govt agreed to our interim recommendation of having a fresh SC survey which was held between May 5 to July 6," Justice Das said. "The survey was conducted across 27.2 lakh families and just over 1 crore people. We have done our job and the govt is vested with our report to take further action."He also pointed out that his earlier report had suggested raising the overall SC quota in Karnataka from 15% to 17%, and this premise has also influenced the internal reservation framework recommended now."The 30-year-long struggle of communities seeking internal reservation came to a head when the Supreme Court on Aug 1, 2024 said providing internal reservation is permissible under the Constitution," Justice Das response to the Supreme Court's ruling, the Siddaramaiah govt, in Jan, formed a single-member commission headed by Justice Das. An interim report was submitted on March 27. The idea of internal reservation had also found traction during the previous BJP govt, which in Oct 2022, had proposed a similar matrix — 6% for SC (Left), 5.5% for SC (Right), 4.5% for 'touchables', and 1% for smaller final report submitted on Monday spans 1,766 pages and includes the panel's findings, the survey data, and supporting appendices.
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Opposition loves anti-national forces, sees reflection in them': Delhi CM amid praise for Op Sindoor, PM Modi
Even as Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta on Monday lashed out at the Opposition parties and hailed Operation Sindoor and Prime Minister Narendra Modi for protecting the dignity 'of our sisters', Leader of Opposition Atishi questioned the imposition of ceasefire during the military operation. The political war of words happened on Monday in the Assembly as the Monsoon session began. 'Operation Sindoor was a response to the silent suffering of India's daughters and sisters. By acting as a courageous father, a compassionate brother, and a resolute national leader, the Prime Minister has upheld the dignity and empowered the spirit of Indian women,' the CM remarked. The operation by the tri-services was launched in response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed 26 lives. Her remarks came as she addressed the House during a debate on Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev, in which the perpetrators of the terror attack were killed recently. Calling the Operation Sindoor a 'befitting reply' to Pakistan, the CM stepped up the attack on the Opposition. 'These people (Opposition) do not love Bharat, but they love anti-national forces because they see their own reflection in them. They are not inspired by India's progress — they would rather see the nation held back,' she claimed. Hitting out at the Congress-led INDIA bloc, she said, 'The Opposition parties came together to form an alliance. Only its name has INDIA in it but if you listen to them, they sound as if they are the spokesperson of Pakistan…they even raised numerous questions on Operation Sindoor in Parliament recently…They don't trust their own military and refuse to believe their own Prime Minister, and instead place their faith in foreign powers.' She stressed that the Indian armed forces continue to defend the nation with the same courage and commitment they displayed during the wars of 1965 and 1971. 'Why did our governments return captured territories under pressure after the 1965 war? Why did we accept mediation from the United Nations and the United States? And in 1971, after capturing 93,000 Pakistani soldiers, why were they released unconditionally?' she asked, attacking the previous Congress-led governments. On the other hand, former CM and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Atishi questioned the imposition of the ceasefire. 'Our army could have decisively wiped out Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, but that didn't happen because of BJP's cowardice. PM Narendra Modi got scared of US President Trump's threats. Trump has publicly said over 25 times that he threatened to shut down trade — that is why India backed out,' she alleged. AAP MLA Sanjeev Jha also questioned the declaration of ceasefire and used words that the Speaker directed to be expunged from the records after he allegedly made a derogatory statement against the PM. Meanwhile, Delhi Education Minister Ashish Sood tabled the Bill to regulate fee hike by private schools in the Capital. He also claimed that they got 'threats' from education mafias against the BIll.
