Sarabjit embraced Islam, has a Muslim name Sarfaraz: Surjeet

June 29, 2012

Sarabjit_fine

Amritsar, June 29: Freed after a high decibel drama following Pakistan’s alleged flip-flop of first announcing the release of Indian prisoner Sarabjit Singh and later clarifying that it was Surjeet Singh who was to be repatriated, Surjeet Singh — who on Thursday crossed over to India from Pakistan after spending more than 30 years in prison — claimed that Sarabjit had “converted to Islam” and was now known as “Sarfaraz” in Lahore’s Kot Lakhpat Jail.

Surjeet also claimed that another Indian prisoner on death row in Pakistan, Kirpal Singh, had also “converted to Islam” and had a new name “Mohammed Din”.

Speaking to mediapersons at the information centre of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee after paying obeisance at Golden Temple, Surjeet said: “Sarabjit Singh and Kirpal Singh have converted to Islam. They probably did so in hope of getting mercy. But no mercy was granted to them. Pakistan authorities do not grant mercy to even their own nationals.”

When contacted, Sarabjit’s sister Dalbir Kaur denied that Sarabjit had converted to Islam. “This is not true at all. Sarabjit was a Gursikh, is a Gursikh and will remain a Gursikh. He has kept photos of Sikh gurus in jail and a Sikh religious book. He regularly recites from that book,” she said.

Dalbir added that during her visit to Pakistani jail to meet Sarabjit, she did heard people calling Kirpal Singh by a Muslim name. “But this is not the case with Sarabjit. Had he converted, he would have some Muslim name,” she said. “When I went to meet him in Pakistan, he was either addressed as Sarabjit or Manjit.”

When informed that Surjeet had claimed that Sarabjit had changed his name to “Sarfaraz” after “converting to Islam”, Dalbir insisted: “No way, Sarabjit remains Sarabjit and a Sikh and has not changed his name or converted to Islam.”

Dalbir also took exception to Surjeet’s statement that Sarabjit was hale and hearty in jail. “How can a person lodged in solitary confinement be happy? If this was the case, why will prisoners seek release?” she asked.

Meanwhile, Surjeet claimed that if things fell in place, he would ensure that Sarabjit was back home in three months. “Seven to eight MLAs of Pakistan are my very good friends. Even Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari is my good friend. I have had breakfast with Zardari. And I will ensure Sarabjit’s release,” Surjeet said, alleging that the Pakistani media and the ISI were against Sarabjit’s release.

“It has to be done at the presidential level. If ISI comes to know about any effort for Sarabjit’s release, the agency will never allow it to happen,” he added. Saying that his and Sarabjit’s cases were entirely different, Surjeet added: “The case of Sarabjit, who faces charges of terrorism, is entirely different from mine. Neither India nor Pakistan would like to release terrorists.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.