Shah’s Naxalbari drive begins with lunch in village hut

BJP president Amit Shah kicked off the party’s ‘booth chalo’ programme, an exercise to strengthen the party organisation at the grassroots level in Bengal in the cradle of Left-wing extremism in India, Naxalbari, with lunch at the hut of a scheduled tribe couple.

The meal, served on plantain leaves, was a frugal one consisting of dal, vegetables, rice, and roti. With BJP’s Bengal president Dilip Ghosh to his right, Shah sat cross-legged on the floor of the hut in South Kotiajot village in Naxalbari block and ate his meal.

Shah was seen chatting with Gita Mahali, who cooked the meal. Her husband is a labourer.

The BJP is showing interest in Naxalbari, where Left-wing extremism was born 50 years ago with the killing of a police officer and 11 villagers falling to retaliatory police firing the next day.

Hatighisha, the village of Maoist leader Kanu Sanyal was adopted by BJP MP SS Ahluwalia as a model village after he was elected to the Lok Sabha in 2014. While campaigning for the Lok Sabha polls, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said in north Bengal that the BJP would change the face of Naxalbari. He had also alleged that the Mamata Banerjee government had done little for the area.

“BJP will get the maximum number of seats in 2019 (Lok Sabha) polls. The history of violence started from this Naxalbari. This is where the Prime Minister’s slogan ‘Sab ka saath, sab ka vikas’ will be given shape,” said Shah after a meeting with the party workers. He also said party workers will visit every home in every village of Bengal.

“BJP workers are being attacked in Bengal. The more they are attacked, the more BJP will rise in the state,” said Shah.

After he landed in Siliguri on Tuesday morning, the BJP president changed his plans and decided to go to Mahali’s house for a meal instead of holding a meeting with party workers.

After lunch, Shah met boothlevel workers of the party. He was accompanied by national secretary Rahul Sinha and Bengal observer Kailash Vijayvargiya.

The ‘booth chalo’ drive is an exercise designed to focus on strengthening the party organisation at the grassroots level.

When Shah was touring Naxalbari, Mamata Banerjee was attending a public meeting organised by the Kamtapur Progressive Party (KPP) at Rashmela grounds in Cooch Behar district about 200 kms away.

In 2014 Lok Sabha polls, KPP supported BJP, but in the 2016 assembly elections, it threw its weight behind TMC after its leaders assured the KPP to recognise Rajbonshi language.

On Wednesday, Shah will visit a few households in Bhawanipore, the constituency of Banerjee. On Thursday, he will meet party leaders and intellectuals and prominent citizens in Kolkata’s Mahajati Sadan.

VIP culture seems to have raised heckles at the Delhi airport as Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar faced an angry passenger when he was trying to avail buggy service meant for VIPs and elderly at Terminal 3.

As Kumar sat in the cart after arriving from Mumbai, another passenger came and sat in the front seat and started shouting ‘No VIP culture’.

The security agency requested him to get down but when he didn’t budge, the staff allowed him to sit.

Kumar, however, got down at the international lounge, while the other passenger went till the immigration counter.

Although there are walkalators and escalators at the airport, VIPs are often taken in golf carts till immigration counters. There are 30 such battery operated carts available at Delhi airport.

“The incident happened at 10pm on Saturday, when Kumar arrived from Air India flight AI 310 from Mumbai. He deboarded from gate number 8 where a buggy was waiting for him. This passenger had arrived from the same flight and sat on the front seat of the cart,” said a security official.

The chief minister of a state is treated as VIP at airports and usually, security personnel escort them out.

The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), which is responsible for security at airports, said since the passenger was not violent, they did not use any force and even Kumar did not raise any objection.

The incident comes after the government decision last week to ban red beacons atop cars of all ministers, politicians and bureaucrats, signalling an end to a culture of privilege.

The move was welcomed in the country and sparked calls to end VIP culture.

While the order will come into effect from May 1, chief ministers such as Yogi Adityanath and Devendra Fadnavis removed the red beacons from their cars and directed their ministers to do the same.

At a meeting of the parliamentary committee on January 18 this year, MPs had grilled RBI governor Urjit Patel about the rationale and impact of demonetisation. Former prime minister Manmohan Singh had bailed out Patel by saying that he didn’t have to answer all questions, but the RBI governor was asked to provide answers in writing later. The Central bank furnished the replies in a note recently. The panel has summoned Patel on May 25 for deposition.

On whether demonetisation would curtail black money, RBI stated, “Government may be best placed to reply to this.” It said that the discussion with the government on the possibility of demonetisation had started in early 2016. The approval for introduction of ₹2000 note and new design ₹500 was received from the gov- ernment on June 7, 2016.

To another query whether the views of the chief economic advisor and the finance minister were taken before the announcement of the decision, the RBI said, “Government may be best placed to answer this question.” The Central bank said that there was a continuous process of engagement with the government before the final announcement but no formal minutes were recorded.

It did not provide the exact amount of money that returned to the banking system post-demonetisation, explaining that it was taking all steps expeditiously to release the figures.

As the proposal was being discussed with the government, the RBI was “cognizant” of the likely short-term impact of demonetisation on the economy and “possible inconvenience” to people for some time, but “...the impact was assessed to be transitory.”

The HC was hearing appeals filed by Thakur and Purohit against an earlier order of a special court that rejected their bail pleas. In her appeal, Thakur argued that the lower court failed to take note that the NIA said it found no evidence against her and charges should be dropped.

Families of some of the victims had been arguing that there was enough evidence in the ATS’ charge sheet to establish that Thakur was a conspirator.

The NIA opposed Purohit’s bail plea and argued that there was prima facie evidence in the form of audio and video recordings, call data records and witness statements that proved his involvement in the case. Purohit had argued that the NIA was “selective” in exonerating some accused and that the agency had made him a “scapegoat”.