Hindu-Muslim Marriages-2: Islamic tolerance for mixed marriages in Jammu and Kashmir

Posted on June 27, 2010. Filed under: Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics |

In the October of 2009, the custodial death of a Sarwal youth in Sringar triggered tension outside Mortuary department of GMC after family members alleged police hand in the death of the youth instead of the police claims of suicide by the detainee. Moreover the police had put in the name of the elder brother of the deceased in the place of the actual deceased.  Apparently the youth Rajneesh Sharma of Sarwal, son of Lt. Nanak Chand Sharma of Sarwal, whose dead body was shifted from Srinagar to Jammu in the name of his elder brother Pawan Sharma, was picked by Bakshi Nagar police on September 30 and handed over to a police team from Ram Munshi Bagh police. A case of kidnapping had been lodged against Rajneesh by family members of Amina, daughter of a house boat owner in Dal Lake in Srinagar.

The illuminated and enlightened Jammu and Kashmir coalition government that includes the intensely secular Congress, could order a CBI inquiry in the Shopian case, but only a magisterial inquiry in the case of Rajneesh after extensive agitation by the local population.  As noted by many, in a police cell where a blanket, tooth brush or even a paper pin is not tavailable normally, the rope  with which Rajneesh was found hanged, appeared magically.

Here is a link from the “Hindu” side of the story – which has not found press and media coverage in the intensely and supremely secular Indian apparatus for “manufacture of consent”  : http://www.aryasamaj.org/newsite/node/769.

Here is a selection from the above link:

“When Ameena disclosed her desire to convert to the Hindu Dharm and marry her beau ideal, hell broke loose in the Muslim society and opposition to the wedding became an Islamic issue. Ameena eloped to Jammu. Rajneesh and Ameena went to the Arya Samaj, Jammu and declared their intention to tie the knot. The Arya Samaj received them with open arms and supported their idea of a wedding. On conversion to the Vedic Dharm, Ameena became Aanchal and along with Rajneesh performed the Havan, walked seven steps together in Saptpadi and took the vow to be together in life and death as husband and wife. Rajneesh’s father and the entire Sharma family along with friends, relatives and neighbourhood celebrated the Vedic wedding with feast, fun and frolic that it merited.

Back in Srinagar, Ameena’s father lodged an FIR with the Kashmir police that his minor daughter had been kidnapped by Rajneesh and forced to marry him. The complaint was against facts of the case. However, the communal overtones swayed the course of action and the Srinagar police went to Jammu and arrested Rajneesh. They brought him to Srinagar, tortured him endlessly for days and beat him black and blue for no fault of his. The bride, Ameena, in Jammu supported her husband through thick and thin but it did not cut ice with the pre-conceived notions of authorities in Srinagar. Ameena’s brother turned out to be the villain of the piece in perpetrating physical and mental cruelty on Rajneesh till he died of wounds inflicted on him. Here was a case of custodial death.”

Let us do an equal-equal with the case of Rijwanur in Calcutta. Muslims and Hindus came out on to the streets of Calcutta and the media unanimously ran a trial where the bride’s Hindu family was found “guilty”.  The innocent love of Rijwanur that was apparently quashed by fanatical “Hindutva” found the top space in government concerns, CBI concerns, political party concerns, and most importantly in the apparently peaceful, and tolerant Islamists of India.

The suicide was deemed a murder. Just as every custodial or other death in Jammu and Kashmir is deemed a murder by the security forces and indirectly by the Hindus. But there is a big conditionality – suicides can be deemed a murder by the Indian media, only if they happen to Muslims. Rijwanur cannot be made equal to Rajneesh. Because Rajneesh is a Hindu and therefore it is a crime for him to “make a Muslim girl” fall in love with him, where it is a natural born right for a Muslim to make a “Hindu girl fall in love” – a right to be protected by all the instruments of the state.

Nothing so far has moved in Rajneesh’s case. No CBI inquiry. And in an uncanny parallel to Rijwanur’s case, Rajneeshs’ wife vanished recently to resurface at her parents to claim that she had been “duped” and “married against her will”. I guess, even this will be turned around to prove “victimhood” for Muslims and further justification to carry out violent jihad against Hindus who dared to “steal” Muslim women and maybe compensate for this imagined outrage – by a dozen rapes and abductions when Ghazwa’s would be appropriate – as the Islamists did in 1947 and 48 in India and Kashmir, in 1971 East Pakistan.

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: