• stumble
  • youtube
  • linkedin

Archives for : October2017

Aadhaar Number in India and the Social Security Number in USA- not the same

Image result for aadhaar ssn

In response to news items that reported the Government of India running pilot projects to enroll children at the time of birth for Aadhaar numbers – an idea that government officials in the news items claimed was along the lines of the social security number – this note seeks to point out the ways in which the Aadhaar number and the social security number are different.[1]


SSN is governed by Federal legislation: The issuance, collection, and use of the SSN is governed by a number of Federal and State legislation with the most pertinent being the Social Security Act 1935[2] – which provides legal backing for the number, and the Privacy Act 1974 which regulates the collection, access, and sharing of the SSN by Federal Executive agencies.[3]

Aadhaar was constituted under the Planning Commission: The UIDAI was constituted as an attached office under the Planning Commission in 2009.[4] A Unique Identification Authority Bill has been drafted, but has not been enacted.[5] Though portions of the Information Technology Act 2008 apply to the UID scheme, section 43A and associated Rules (India’s data protection standards) do not clearly apply to the UIDAI as the provision has jurisdiction only over body corporate.


SSN was created as a number record keeping scheme for government services: The Social Security Act provides for the creation of a record keeping scheme – the SSN. Originally, the SSN was used as a means to track an individuals earnings in the Social Security system.[6] In 1943 via an executive order, the number was adopted across Federal agencies. Eventually the number has evolved from being a record keeping scheme into a means of identity. In 1977 it was clarified by the Carter administration that the number could act as a means to validate the status of an individual (for example if he or she could legally work in the country) but that it was not to serve as a national identity document.[7] Today the SSN serves as a number for tracking individuals in the social security system and as one (among other) form of identification for different services and businesses. Alone, the SSN card does not serve proof of identity, citizenship, and it cannot be used to transact with and does not have the ability to store information. [8]

Aadhaar was created as a biometric based authenticator and a single unique proof of identity: The Aadhaar number was established as a single proof of identity and address for any resident in India that can be used to authenticate the identity of an individual in transactions with organizations that have adopted the number. The scheme as been promoted as a tool for reducing fraud in the public distribution system and enabling the government to better deliver public benefits.[9]


SSN is for citizens and non-citizens authorized to work: The social security number is primarily for citizens of the United States of America. In certain cases, non citizens who have been authorized by the Department of Homeland Security to work in the US may obtain a Social Security number.[10]

Aadhaar is for residents: The aadhaar number is available to any resident of India.[11]

Storage, Access, and Disclosure

SSN and applications are stored in the Numident: The numident is a centralized database containing the individuals original SNN and application and any re-application for the same. All information stored in the Numident is protected under the Privacy Act. Individuals may request records of their own personal information stored in the Numident. With the exception of the Department of Homeland Security and U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services, third parties may only request access to Numident records with the consent of the concerned individual.[12] Federal agencies and private entities that collect the SSN for a specific service store the number at the organizational level. The Privacy Act and various state level legislation regulates the disclosure, access, and sharing of the SSN number collected by agencies and organizations.

Aadhaar and data generated at multiple sources is stored in the CIDR and processed in the data warehouse: According to the report “Analytics, Empowering Operations”, “At UIDAI, data generated at multiple sources would typically come to the CIDR (Central ID Repository), UIDAIs Data centre, through an online mechanism. There could be certain exceptional sources, like Contact centre or Resident consumer surveys, that will not feed into the Data center directly. Data is then processed in the Data Warehouse using Business Intelligence tools and converted into forms that can be accessed and shared easily.” Examples of data that is stored in the CIDR include enrollments, letter delivery, authentication, processing, resident survey, training, and data from contact centres.[13] It is unclear if organizations that authenticate individuals via the Adhaar number store the number at the organizational level. Biometrics are listed as a form of sensitive personal information in the Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) 2011, thus if any body corporate collects biometrics with the Aadhaar number – the storage, access, and disclosure of this information would be protected as per the Rules, but the Aadhaar number is not explicitly protected. [14]

Use by public and private entities

Public and private entities can request SSN: Public and private entities can request the SSN to track individuals in a system or as a form of identifying an individual. Any private business is allowed to request and use the SSN as long as the use does not violate federal or state law. Legally, an individual is only required to provide their SSN to a business if they are engaging in a transaction that requires notification to the Internal Revenue Service or the individual is initiating a transaction that is subject to federal Customer Identification Program rules.[15] Thus, an individual can refuse to provide their SSN, but a private business can also refuse to provide a service.[16]

Any public authority requesting the SSN must provide a disclosure notice to the individual explaining if the provision of SSN is required or optional. According to the Privacy Act of 1974, no individual can be denied a government service or benefit for not providing the SSN unless Federal law specifically requires the number for a particular service.[17] Thus, there are a number of Federal legislation in the U.S that specifically require the SSN. For example, the Social Security Independence and Program Improvements Act 1994 allows for the use of the SSN for jury selection and allows for cross matching of SSNs and Employer Identification Numbers for investigation into violation of Federal Laws. [18]

Public and private entities can request Aadhaar: The Aadhaar number can be adopted by any public or private entity as a single means of identifying an individual. The UIDAI has stated that the Aadhaar number is not mandatory,[19] and the Supreme Court of India has clarified that services cannot be denied on the grounds that an individual does not have an Aadhaar number.[20]


The SSN can be verified only in certain circumstances: The SSA will only respond to requests for SSN verification in certain circumstances:

  • Before issuing a replacement SSN, posting a wage item to the Master Earnings File, or establishing a claims record – the SSA will verify that the name and the number match as per their records.
  • When legally permitted, the SSA verification system will verify SSNs for government agencies.
  • When legally permitted the SSA verification system will verify a workers SSN for pre-registered and approved private employers.
  • If an individual has provided his/her consent, the SSA will verify a SSN request from a third party.

For verification the SSN number must be submitted with an accompanying name to be matched to and additional information such as date of birth, fathers name, mothers name etc. When verifying submitted SSN’s, the system will respond with either confirmation that the information matches or that it does not match. It is important to note that because SSN is verified only in certain circumstances, it is not guaranteed that the person providing an SSN number is the person whom the number was assigned.[21]

The Aadhaar number can be verified in any transaction: If an organization, department, or platform has adopted the Aadhaar number as a form of authentication, they can send requests for verification to the UIDAI. The UIDAI will respond with a yes or no answer. When using their Aadhaar number as a form of authentication individuals can submit their number and demographic information or their number and biometrics for verification.[22]

Lost or stolen

SSN can be replaced: If an individual loses his/her SSN card lost or their number is fraudulently used, they can apply for a replacement SSN card or a new SNN number. [23]

Aadhaar number can be replaced: If an individual has lost their Aadhaar number, there is a process that they can follow to have their number re-sent to them. If the number cannot be located by the UIDAI , the individual has the option of re-enrolling for a new Aadhaar number.[24] The UIDAI has built the scheme with the understanding the biometrics are a unique identifier that cannot be lost or stolen, and thus have not created a system to address the possibility of stolen or fraudulent use of biometrics.


Legislation and formal roll out: The SSN program was brought into existence via the Social Security Act and officially rolled out while eventually being adopted across Federal Departments.

Bill and pilot studies: The UID scheme has been envisioned as being brought into existence via the Unique Identification Authority Bill 2010 which has not been passed. Thus far, the project has been implemented in pilot phases across States and platforms.


Social Security Administration: The Social Security Agency is the soul body in the US that receives and processes applications for SSN and issues SSN numbers. [25]

UIDAI, registrars, and enrolling agencies: The UIDAI is the soul body that issues Aadhaar numbers. Registrars (contracted bodies under the UIDAI_ – and enrolling agencies (contracted bodies under Registrars) are responsible for receiving and processing enrollments into the UID scheme.

Required supporting documents

SSN requires proof of age, identity, and citizenship: To obtain a SSN you must be able to provide proof of your age, your identity, and US citizenship. The application form requires the following information:

  • Name to be shown on the card
  • Full name at birth, if different
  • Other names used
  • Mailing address
  • Citizenship or alien status
  • Sex
  • Race/ethnic description (SSA does not receive this information under EAB)
  • Date of birth
  • Place of birth
  • Mother’s name at birth
  • Mother’s SSN (SSA collects this information for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on an original application for a child under age 18. SSA does not retain these data.)
  • Fathers’ name
  • Father’s SSN (SSA collects this information for IRS on an original application for a child under age 18. SSA does not retain these data).
  • Whether applicant ever filed for an SSN before
  • Prior SSNs assigned
  • Name on most recent Social Security card
  • Different date of birth if used on an earlier SSN application.
  • Date application completed
  • Phone number
  • Signature
  • Applicant’s relationship to the number holder.[26]

Aadhaar requires proof of age, address, birth, and residence and biometric information: The application form requires the following information:

  • Name
  • Date of birth
  • Gender
  • Address
  • Parent/guardian details
  • Email
  • Mobile number
  • Indication of consenting or not consenting to the sharing of information provided to the UIDAI with Public services including welfare services
  • Indication of if the individual wants the UIDAI to facilitate the opening of a bank account linked to the Aadhaar number and permits the sharing of information for this purpose
  • If the individual has no objection to linking their present bank account to the Aadhaar number and the relevant bank details
  • Signature[27]


[1] Sahil Makkar, “PM’s idea to track kids from birth hits practical hurdles”, Business Standard. April 11th2015. Available at:

[2] The Social Security Act of 1935. Available at:

[3] The United States Department of Justice, “Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974”. Available at:

[4] Government of India Planning Commission “Notification”. Available at:

[5] The National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010. Available at:,%202010.pdf

[6] History of SSA 1993 – 2000. Chapter 6: Program Integrity. Available at:

[7] Social Security Number Chronology. Available at:

[8] History of SSA 1993 – 2000, Chapter 6: Program Integrity. Available at:

[9] UID FAQ: Aadhaar Features, Eligibility. Available at:

[10] Social Security Numbers for Noncitizens. Available at:

[11] Aapka Aadhaar. Available at:

[12] Program Operations Manual System. Available at:

[13] UIDAI Analytics -Empowering Operations – the UIDAI Experience. Available at:

[14] Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information rules 2011) available at:

[15] IdentityHawk, “Who can lawfully request my social security number?” Available at:

[16] SSA FAQ ” Can I refuse to give my social security number to a private business?” Available at:

[17] The United States Department of Justice, “Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974”. Available at:

[18] Social Security Number Chronology. Available at:

[19] Aapka Aadhaar. Available at:

[20] Business Standard, “Aadhaar not mandatory to claim any state benefit, says Supreme Court” March 17th, 2015. Available at:

[21] Social Security History 1993 – 2000, Chapter 6: Program Integrity. Available at:

[22] Aapka Aadhaar. Available at:

[23] SSA. New or Replacement Social Security Number Card. Available at:

[24] UIDAI, Lost EID/UID Process. Available at:

[25] Social Security. Availabl at:

[26] Social Security Administration, Application for a Social Security. Available at:

[27] Aadhaar enrollment/correction form. Available at:

Related posts

Australian Journalists Questioned by Gujarat Cops, Film “Digging Into Adani” Creates Waves

NEW DELHI: Four Corners, Australia’s leading investigative journalism program has been exposing “scandals, triggering inquiries, firing debate and confronting taboos” since 1961. This time around it chose to investigate Indian industrialist Gautam Adani as he has been in Australian news for several months now with his mega mining project, facing strong protests from local groups. Despite this he bagged the contract, with Four Corners journalists travelling to India for an expose that has been aired on October 2. The video link is at the end of this report for those who are interested in viewing it, filmed by Four Corners as it says “to serve the public interest.”

Four Corners reporter Stephen Long said that he had been in Mundra, in Adani’s home state in Gujarat for less than 24 hours when the police turned up at the crew’s hotel. He said that their main concern was to safeguard the interviews and footage they had filmed on the story they were investigating. Long said, “We were questioned on and off for about five hours, the senior policeman kept on going outside and talking to someone on his mobile, and whenever he’d return the questioning, the hostility, would ramp up.”

“It was obvious they knew why we were there but everybody was avoiding the ‘A’ word: Adani.”, he added.

“They’d told us that if we stayed there’d be officers from three Indian intelligence agencies coming to see us the next day, plus we’d have an entourage of crime squad detectives and local police wherever we went,” Long said on camera while introducing the film. The journalists left India and in their subsequent story telecast in Australia on October 2, share concerns whether Australia should be supporting Adani’s controversial mine in Queensland.

This is the text that Four Corners put out:

“Why would the crime branch want to see us?” Stephen Long, reporter

When Four Corners travelled to India to investigate the activities of the giant Adani group, they soon discovered the power of the company.

While attempting to film and gather information about Adani’s operations, the Four Corners team had their cameras shut down, their footage deleted and were questioned for hours by police.

The team were left in no doubt that their investigations into the Indian company triggered the police action.

For months, Four Corners has been digging into the business practices of the Adani Group. This is the corporate colossus that plans to build Australia’s biggest mine site.

“I do know about Adani and that means thousands of jobs for regional Queenslanders …” Annastacia Palaszczuk, Qld Premier

The polarising debate around the proposed mine site in Queensland’s Galilee Basin is often pitted as a simplistic jobs versus greenies argument.

But there are influential figures in India who warn that Australians need to know much more about the Adani Group.

“You know, the Australian politicians are obviously not properly briefed by their offices.” Former senior energy official

On Monday Four Corners examines the troubled corporate history of the Adani group in India revealing the findings of government investigations into financial and environment crimes.

“The report found not accidental violations, the report found deliberate violations, wilful violations.” Former Government Minister

The program analyses the Adani Group’s opaque financial operations and investigates the ramifications for their Australian operations.

“What this tells you is that here is a business group that will not stop at anything to maximise its profits.”Economist

This investigation examines whether, in the rush to secure jobs and shore up the mining industry, Australian politicians have failed to properly scrutinise the company that’s now hoping to receive a taxpayer funded loan of up to $1 billion for its project.

“I think the Australian Government ought to do environmental due diligence, which it seems not to have done. It certainly has to do financial due diligence. Both due diligences are required, both for the financial side and from the environmental side.” Indian politician

The film is fast being picked up by organisations and the media across the globe.This is what Greenpeace reported, for The Citizen readers to get a sense of how this investigation is playing out across the globe:

“An expose aired last night by the ABC’s Four Corners program revealed a shadowy network of companies and trusts behind Adani’s Australian assets, which offer the Indian firm “multiple ways” to reduce their tax in Australia, experts say.

Adani Australia has previously boasted its Carmichael mine could boost Australia’s tax coffers by up to $22 billion over the life of the project.

However, Adani’s Australian assets are seemingly owned by companies domiciled in notorious tax havens such as the Cayman and British Virgin Islands, which provide a means to minimise tax paid in Australia.

The investigation also revealed that the man behind a British Virgin Islands company variously described as ARFT Holding Ltd, AFRT Holding Ltd, and Atulya Resources Family Trust, which appears to be the ultimate owner of Adani’s Australian assets, has been accused of money laundering.

Vinod Adani, the older brother of Adani Group chairman Gautam Adani, has been investigated by Indian authorities with ex-Adani Group employees and Adani companies for allegedly executing a “planned conspiracy of siphoning off foreign exchange abroad … and Trade Based Money Laundering”.

Adani has requested a $1 billion loan, currently under consideration, from the publicly funded Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility.

“The Four Corners revelations prove that Adani is a company which cannot be trusted with a taxpayer loan, or to build the world’s biggest export coal mine on the Great Barrier Reef coastline,” Greenpeace Australia Pacific Climate and Energy Campaigner Nikola Casule said.

“Now more than ever, it’s time for the government to rule out any public money for Adani and say no to the proposed $1 billion NAIF loan for Adani’s rail line connecting the proposed Carmichael mine and Abbot Point coal port.”

“Its secrecy, apparent use of tax havens and alleged money laundering provide the Australian government with all the evidence it needs to rule out even one cent of public money going to Adani’s rail line.”

This is what Adani group stated in its response:

Dear Mr Long,

The team from ABC Television while visiting Mundra did not adhere to the journalistic codes of conduct and fairness. While you had earlier expressed your desire to visit Mundra, without further discussion or intimation you and your team landed in Mundra and started filming the sensitive areas without proper permissions and any kind of intimation to the company officials. To our mind it is both unfair and unethical apart from a serious security breach at the industrial site locations in border area.

The Adani Group is one of India’s leading business houses with a core vision of nation building. The group has created a portfolio of businesses aligned with the national priorities of infrastructure development, food security, energy security and clean energy. Each of our businesses is integrated to the core of the country, touching millions of lives and generating direct and indirect employment for thousands of families.

We at Adani Group follow every principle of law that governs operations of company like us in India. To therefor suggest through a documentary, which in its essence have been made surreptitiously and without any legal sanction, is indicative of the fact that the purpose of the documentary is malafide and riddled with the singular agenda of national shaming. For reputable organisation like ABC Television to indulge in this form of ethical violation is truly sad.

On the issues mentioned in your last email, please find our response below. We request you to use the same verbatim, without tweaking its context.

Issue 1 – The reference that has been made to the Lokayukta of Karnataka, Retired Justice Santosh Hegde

Pursuant to the report by Justice Hegde and reports of CEC the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an order directing CBI to investigate the allegations over illegal export of Iron Ore from Belekeri Port. After the detailed investigation CBI came to the conclusion that Adani Enterprises Limited and its officials had never violated any State and/or Central laws of India. Accordingly, CBI filed closer report and the same was accepted by the designated CBI court at Bangalore.

With regard to another allegation of “Illegal gratification to public officials”, Karnataka Lokayukta formed Special Investigation Team. Adani Enterprises Limited submitted all the data to SIT as required. However after the detailed investigation, SIT found that no case is made out against AEL & others. Accordingly, closer report was filed and the same was accepted by the court.

To summarise, our activities at Belerkeri Port have been conducted within the framework of Law. The Adani Group is absolute and religiously Law abiding organization and respect Law of the land.

Issue 2 – The ruling of HC of Gujarat about developments in the Mundra SEZ without valid environment clearances

The Gujarat High Court in its order passed in January 2014, ordered that 12 units operating in Mundra SEZ cannot operate till Mundra SEZ is granted the Environmental Clearance (EC). The said order was challenged before the Supreme Court of India and the Supreme Court stayed the order of Gujarat High Court and permitted 12 units to continue with their operational activities. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court.

There is no restriction for units to set up their facilities and operate in SEZ with their appropriate clearance, till SEZ is granted the EC. Even the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Ministry of Commerce and Industries (MoCI) and Pollution Control Boards have granted clearances to units even irrespective whether the SEZ was having the EC or not. Therefore, it was not a case of development of Mundra SEZ without valid EC, as such practice has been followed in all SEZs across India. In any case, Mundra SEZ is also granted Environmental and CRZ clearance by MoEF on 15.7.2014.

Issue 3 – Sunita Narain on environment violation in Mundra

The Sunita Naraian Committee submitted its report in 2013 and it was India’s largest business daily The Economic Times which in July 2014 revealed the manner in which the committee was appointed. In any case, the committee’s findings were just that – recommendations. Neither they were absolute; nor were they binding or implementable because of the malafide agenda driven nature of those findings.

Based on the Report, MoEF issued a show cause notice in September, 2013 which has been disposed of on 18.9.2015. The final order is not challenged since. Therefore, Report cannot be cited to defame the Adani Group. Further, the Gujarat High Court dismissed the public interest litigation in April, 2015 concerning this issue and the Supreme Court of India also did not entertain appeal against the order of Gujarat High Court.

Issue 4 – National Green Tribunals decision on Hazira Port

The order that NGT has passed has been challenged before the Supreme Court of India. NGT failed to appreciate the facts and no reasons are given which supports the order. NGT observed that the company damaged mangrove whereas, in February 2007, MoEF itself substituted the condition based on NEERI report and permitted development in that area. The company came into picture only in November, 2010. Likewise, all the findings of NGT in its decision are wrong and contrary to the facts placed before it. In any case, the matter is pending before the Supreme Court and is sub-judice and it is unfair and unethical for responsible media to jump to any conclusion and report a story till the matter is finally decided.

Issue 5 – As for the really trite charge of money laundering

On August 22, the adjudicating authority of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) has passed orders striking all proceedings launched by the DRI against Adani Group for alleged money laundering. This can be only be challenged at the higher appellate authorities and that too by governmental authorities. Since no challenge as of now has been made, there is not only complete acquittal but in fact a validation of what we at Adani Group has always been saying.

Adani Group adhere to the laws of the land in which we operate – be it India or any other of the 50 geographies we work in. To suggest that we are non-compliant, deviant or unethical will once again attract defamation and severe legal action. As an organisation with more than 11,000 employees spread across the world, stakeholders and vertical businesses ranging from agriculture to port to logistics, we cannot be held to either ransom or blackmail by media organisations that indulge into sensationalism without any basis and contrary to facts.

For any media organisation to jump the gun and believe that we have indulged in any malafide is in itself is illogical because we shall have to wait for the Supreme Court of India to pass its judgement. Some of the issues have even attained finality which cannot be blatantly ignored and no damage can be inflicted on Adani Group on the basis of vexatious allegations.

Please note that any manipulation of this message by way of twisting the facts will compel us to undertake legal recourse. We request you to use our response in totality to avoid any misinterpretations.

Thanks & Regards,

Mitul Thakkar

Associate General Manager Corporate Communications Adani Enterprises Limited

(Interestingly, the Adani’s have not slapped a legal notice on Four Corners limiting the response so far to the above rejoinder)

Related posts

Amit Shah You are wrong – Gujarat does not have ‘Minimum Dalit Atrocities’, as you claim


Crime rate for atrocities against scheduled castes (SCs) in Gujarat was 32.5% in 2016, above the national average of 20.4%, according to government data.


“Gujarat is among states that witness minimum Dalit atrocities,” Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president Amit Shah said on September 10, 2017, while addressing a youth town hall meeting in Ahmedabad.


Shah is wrong, as the crime rate for atrocities against scheduled castes (SCs) in Gujarat was 32.5% in 2016, above the national average of 20.4%, according to government data. The state’s crime rate–crimes registered per 100,000 population–against SCs was fifth of 26 states and union territories that registered such atrocities (Madhya Pradesh topped the list at 45.1%).


Gujarat’s conviction rate for atrocities against SCs was 4.7% in 2016, substantially below the national average of 27.3% and 60% in Uttar Pradesh, the state that reported most atrocities against SCs.


Four Dalits attacked in less than 10 days


A 17-year old Dalit boy was stabbed by unidentified men in Gujarat’s Gandhinagar on October 3, 2017, for sporting a moustache, Indian Express reported on October 3, 2017.


This is the third such incident in less than 10 days. Two Dalit men were allegedly beaten for “sporting a moustache” in two separate incidents in Gujarat’s Gandhinagar district on September 25 and 29, 2017, the Indian Express reported on October 1, 2017.


Jayesh Solanki, a 21-year old Dalit youth, was beaten to death in Gujarat’s Anand district on September 30, 2017, allegedly by men from upper castes, “for attending a garba event”, the Indian Express reportedon October 2, 2017.


Atrocities against SCs up 31% in 2016


Gujarat accounted for 3% of atrocities reported against SCs in 2016, official data show, ranking, as we said, fifth among 26 states and union territories that registered such cases. By population, the state ranks 14th among these provinces.


Gujarat is home to four million scheduled castes or 7% of the state’s population.


As many as 1,321 atrocities against SCs were reported in Gujarat in 2016, or almost four every day, according to this reply (unstarred question 1170) to the Rajya Sabha (upper house of Parliament) on July 26, 2017, based on data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).


Atrocities reported against SCs in Gujarat increased 31%–from 1,009 cases in 2015 to 1,321 in 2016, the data show.



Source: Rajya Sabha
Note: Figures for 2016 are provisional; *Crime Rate is incidence of crime per 100,000 SC population; crime rate calculation is on method used by NCRB based on Census 2011.


Atrocities reported against SCs across the country increased 6%–from 38,564 in 2015 to 41,014 in 2016.


Uttar Pradesh topped the list with 10,457 cases, followed by Bihar (5,701), Rajasthan (5,134), Madhya Pradesh (5,123) and Andhra Pradesh (2,343). The top five states accounted for 70% of all atrocities reported against SCs.


The NCRB classifies crimes against SCs and Scheduled Tribes (STs) under three heads: Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955; SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Indian Penal Code crimes against SCs (in which SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act not applied).


NCRB also records crime under “The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1923” and “Other Special & Local Laws (SLL) crimes”.


In other words, ‘atrocities against SCs’ is a sub-head under ‘crimes against SCs’ which covers all crimes reported against SCs under various sub-heads.


Crimes against SCs in India down 4% in 2015; down 7% in Gujarat


Crimes against SCs declined 4% to 45,003 in 2015 from 47,064 in 2014 in India, NCRB data show.


As many as 1,046 crimes against SCs were reported in Gujarat in 2015, of which 1,009 were reported under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 36 under other SLL crimes and one under Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955.



Source: National Crime Records Bureau


The crime rate for atrocities against SCs in Gujarat was 24.8% in 2015, above the national average of 19.2%.


Goa reported the highest crime rate at 51.1%, followed by Rajasthan (48.4%) and Bihar (38%).


There was a correction in figures submitted by Gujarat to National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) on crime against Dalits last year, The Hindu reported on July 25, 2016.


Crimes against Dalits increased from 1,130 in 2014 to 6,655 in 2015, which made the NCSC official suspicious, the report said. The state later shared corrected figures, The Hindu reported.


“Gujarat’s officials, sources said, were worried that “inflated” data would further damage the state’s record on Dalit atrocities when at a time it is in the eye of storm over the Una incident of public beating of Dalits and the subsequent suicide attempts by Dalits in the state,” the report said.


Atrocities on SCs (in India) are on the rise every year, despite laws present for their prevention, PL Punia, then chairman of NSCS, said in a meeting on monitoring the implementation of constitutional safeguards for scheduled castes held in July 2015.


“‘Campus related atrocities, denial of temple entry, hate speeches, discrimination in mid day meals etc.,’ were some of the atrocity trends,” Punia had said.




This story was first published on

Related posts

Andhra Bank, Syndicate Bank customers lose lakhs to #Aadhaar fraud

Five customer accounts belonging to Andhra Bank and Syndicate Bank were subjected to fraudulent withdrawals using the customer’s Aadhaar data, government data indicated.Four of the five Aadhaar fraud cases took place in Andhra Bank, while the remaining one took place in Syndicate bank.

The four account holders of Andhra Bank lost a total of 4.2 lakh rupees, while the Syndicate bank customer lost Rs 1.22 lakh.

The amounts were withdrawn from their account by faking the customers’ Aadhaar data. The account holders were subsequently compensated by the banks for their losses.

Aadhaar is India’s single number identification system for all residents, and is similar to the social security number of the US.


The government has, in recent months, introduced Aadhaar Enabled Payment System or AEPS. Using AEPS, anyone can transfer or pay money by pressing their fingerprint against an AEPS terminal or ATM after entering their Aadhaar number.

It was not immediately clear how the system was ‘hacked’, but likely methods include making a fake ‘finger cover’ with the victim’s finger prints.

A criminal can wear the fake skin over his or her finger and use it to authenticate a money transfer transaction after entering the victim’s Aadhaar number.

The technology behind such attacks is not very new, and there are even videos on the topic on the Internet.

A second, less-likely method is to hack the fingerprint terminal and send non-genuine data onward for verification.

The Aadhaar system, administered by the Unique Identification Authority of India, works by using fingerpints and iris scans to authenticate users.

In most cases, such as payments using the AEPS, only a single fingerprint is used.

However, iris scans can also be faked by using contact lens that mimic the characteristics of the victim’s eye.

Privacy advocates have expressed concerns about the potential for hacking or misuse of the Aadhaar database.

While some have warned about mimicking of fingerprints and iris-scans, others have expressed worries that hackers may gain access to the central database and substitute their data in place of genuine records.

This would then help hackers to successfully authenticate as other people using their own fingerprints and eye scans.

One of the easiest ways to prevent others from misusing Aadhaar data is to keep one’s unique number private, and not share it unnecessarily.


Related posts

How #Aadhaar promotes a digital caste system

The linking of biometric UID/Aadhaar number to all public services makes “We, the People of India” worse than slaves, says Dr Gopal Krishna.

The second in a 7-part series.

Illustration: Dominic Xavier/

While adding some 24-page-long words of concurrence with the opinions of Justices Chelameswar, SA Bobde, Rohinton Fali Nariman and Dr DY Chandrachud in the verdict of  August 24, 2017, on the right to privacy, Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre refers to ‘We, the People of India’ in the Preamble of the Constitution, to the “attack on the legality and correctness of Aadhar scheme” and to the “dignity of the individual”.

The original case pertains to the Central Identities Data Repository of Unique Identity/Aadhaar numbers of Indian residents.

The verdict came as a consequence of a reference made to the Constitution bench to decide the existence of right to privacy as a Fundamental Right.

Justice Sapre observed, “The most important place of pride was given to the People of India by using the expression, We, The People of India, in the beginning of the Preamble. The Constitution was accordingly adopted, enacted and then given to ourselves.”

His pointed reference to the presence of ‘We, the People of India’ assumed great significance if it is read with the definition of ‘resident’ in the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.

As per Section 2 (v)  “resident” means an individual who has resided in India for a period or periods amounting in all to 182 days or more in the 12 months immediately preceding the date of application for enrolment.

First in the series: Right to Privacy and the Bhagavad Gita

Notably, the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010, which was withdrawn from Rajya Sabha till March 3, 2016 for the introduction of Aadhaar Bill 2016 referred to “We, the People of India” as the ‘resident’ under Section 2(q) as an individual usually residing in a village, rural area, town, ward, demarcated area (demarcated by the Registrar General of Citizen Registration) within a ward in a town or urban area in India.

Interestingly, “We the People” is also the opening phrase of the preamble to the constitution of United States.

In fact this phrase finds place in the constitutions of some 50 countries.

It is “We, the People” who have constituted the Constitution of India.

It emanates from “We, the People” who are parochially being defined by Aadhaar Act as “residents”.

The conclusive assumption about “We” being the first brick of the basic structure cannot be tested or questioned in any court, but Aadhaar Act does the unthinkable by narrowcasting its meaning since September 12, 2016, when the act came into force after more than 100 crore Indians were coerced and enticed to enroll for Aadhaar numbers.

Based on an inquiry into the human condition, renowned psychiatrist Thomas Szasz wrote in The Second Sin that in the animal kingdom, the rule is, eat or be eaten; in the human kingdom, it is define or be defined.

It is clear that “We the People” are being defined in the bill as “residents” in a manner that makes our republic deficit in democracy for some visible and invisible purposes. The legitimacy of this exercise is the subject matter before the court.

The reference made by Justice Sapre to the “attack on legality and correctness of Aadhaar scheme” is reminiscent of the orders of the Punjab and Haryana high court.

In its order dated February 19, 2013, the bench of Chief Justice AK Sikri (currently judge of the Supreme Court), and Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain had noted that the petition against UID/Aadhaar “raises a pure question of law.”

Responding to the direction issued to the Union of India and Union territory of Chandigarh by the Punjab and Haryana high court in the matter of Civil Writ Petition 569 of 2013 filed in the high court against Union of India and others, the executive order for making Unique Identification/Aadhaar was withdrawn.

The HC order dated March 2, 2013, observes, “In this writ petition filed as a public interest litigation, the petitioner has challenged the vires of notification issued by the Union of India for making it compulsory to have UID cards.”

It further observed that “second issue raised in this petition is that vide order dated December 5, 2012, respondent No 3, ie, Deputy Commissioner, UT, Chandigarh has given directions to the Branch In charge Registration-cum-Accountant, office of Registering & Licensing Authority, Chandigarh not to accept any application for registration of vehicle and grant of learner/ regular driving license without UID card” referring to the UID/Aadhaar numbers.

The petition in the Punjab and Haryana high court included the following prayers:

i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash executive order dated December 5, 2012, passed by respondent No.3 passed in violation of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 vide which UID has been mandatory for the registration of vehicles and grant of learner/ regular driving licence.

ii) A writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Union of India to accept other proofs of identity and address, ie, voter I-card issued by the Election Commission of India, the constitutional body and passport issued by the ministry of foreign affairs, the Government of India and other proofs of address, age prescribed under Rule 4 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 for issuance of learning/ regular driving license and for registration of vehicle;

iii) Further it sought direction for the Union territory of Chandigarh and the Union of India not to make mandatory the UID for essential public utility services and accept other documents as proof of identity and address as per the Rules;

The writ petition had emphasised that during the pendency of the petition, executive order dated December 5, 2012, and other similar executive orders vide which UID/Aadhaar have been made compulsory for essential public utility services may kindly be stayed.

In its concluding paragraph the March 2, 2013, order of the high court reads, “Today, short affidavit of M Shayin, IAS, deputy commissioner, UT, Chandigarh is filed stating that the aforesaid instructions have been reviewed and now the insistence of UID card is no longer treated as mandatory.”

It noted in its order that since “this issue is pending before the Supreme Court” it chose not pass any observation on the remaining prayers.

It is evident from this outcome that the moment the court raised the “questions of law” in the matter of UID/Aadhaar scheme, the Union of India realised that its position was not legally defensible and it submitted that “the insistence of UID card is no longer treated as mandatory”.

This case demonstrates that UID/Aadhaar scheme is legally questionable.

Against such a judicial backdrop, Justice Sapre recollected the significance of the Preamble to the Constitution in the UID/Aadhaar case.

“Perusal of the words in the Preamble would go to show that every word used therein was cautiously chosen by the founding fathers and then these words were arranged and accordingly placed in a proper order. Every word incorporated in the Preamble has significance and proper meaning,” observed Sapre.

He noted, “The incorporation of expression Dignity of the individual in the Preamble was aimed essentially to show explicit repudiation of what people of this country had inherited from the past.”

It is clearly a reference to the inhuman caste-related practices which undermined human dignity.

This observation is significant because UID/Aadhaar fixes caste identities through time even after people are dead.

The information held about caste will be fixed to people by the UID/Aadhaar number. Changing an identity will become impossible.

While there are efforts underway for the eradication of the practice of manual scavenging, for rehabilitation of those and then leaving behind the tag of manual scavenger, there can be no justification for making people accept a system that does not allow them to shed their identity and move on.

A number that links up databases of caste identity through convergence with existing databases cannot be good for “repudiation of what people of this country had inherited from the past”.

Jacob Appelbaum, computer security researcher, hacker, activist, and a spokesperson for WikiLeaks, has warned that biometric Aadhaar/UID will create a digital caste system.

He said, “Going by the way it is now being implemented, if you choose not to be part of the system, you will be the modern-day equivalent of an outcast. In theory, you are supposed to have the freedom to choose but in reality, the choice will only be whether to be left out and left behind”.

The promoters of biometric UID/Aadhaar number are promoting digital and biometric caste system and digital and biometric racism.

Notably, Aadhaar Act, 2016 lists breaking into CIDR as an offence but this law criminalises a technological impossibility.

In a bizarre act, it provides that only Unique Identification Authority of India can file a complaint when the data of a resident of India is misused or abused, instead of the victim of abuse.

As per Section 47, “Courts will take cognizance of offences under this act only upon complaint being made by the UIDAI or any officer authorised by it.”

This deprives the victim of a right to file complaint and also undermines the dignity of the individuals although Section 34 of the act states that “Impersonating or attempting to impersonate another person by providing false demographic or biometric information will punishable by imprisonment of up to three years, and/or fine of up to ten thousand rupees.”

Victims cannot file complaint even when someone changes or attempts to change any demographic or biometric information of an Aadhaar number holder by impersonating another person (or attempting to do so), with the intent of i) causing harm or mischief to an Aadhaar number holder, or ii) appropriating the identity of an Aadhaar number holder although it is punishable under Section 35.

Victims of abuse cannot file complaint in cases wherein collection of identity information is done by one not authorised by this act, by way of pretending otherwise despite the fact that the act makes it punishable under Section 36.

Unless authorised by UIDAI or any officer authorised by it, victims cannot file complaint even when there is “Intentional disclosure or dissemination of identity information, to any person not authorised under this act, or in violation of any agreement entered into under this act” under Section 37 although it is punishable.

Unless authorised by the UIDAI — the intentional acts like accessing or securing access to the CIDR; downloading, copying or extracting any data from the CIDR; introducing or causing any virus or other contaminant into the CIDR; damaging or causing damage to the data in the CIDR; disrupting or causing disruption to access to CIDR; causing denial of access to an authorised to the CIDR; revealing information in breach of (D) in Section 28, or Section 29; destruction, deletion or alteration of any files in the CIDR; stealing, destruction, concealment or alteration of any source code used by the UIDAI, will be punishable under Section 38 — victims cannot file a complaint.

Section 39 of the act reads, “Tampering of data in the CIDR or removable storage medium, with the intention to modify or discover information relating to Aadhaar number holder will be punishable”. Thus, it admits that such acts are possible and imminent but the act does not empower the victims of such tampering or removal instead it empowers the UIDAI.

If these provisions made in Aadhaar Act are accepted as the law, the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India and more particularly the right to liberty under Article 21 would be denuded of vigour and vitality.

It marks the beginning of the end of right to human dignity recognised and promised by the Constitution.

Citizens’ opposition to the CIDR of UID/Aadhaar numbers of Indian residents can be linked to more than a century old world famous Satyagraha of Mahatma Gandhi in order to oppose the identification scheme of the government in South Africa.

On  August 22, 1906, the South African government published a draft Asiatic Law Amendment Ordinance. It  required all Indians in the Transvaal region of South Africa, eight years and above, to report to, a certificate which would then have to be produced upon demand.

The move proposed stiff penalties, including deportation, for Indians who failed to comply with the terms of the ordinance.

Knowing the impact of the ordinance and effective criminalisation of the entire community, Mahatma Gandhi then decided to challenge as it undermined human dignity.

Calling the ordinance a ‘Black Act’ he mobilised around 3,000 Indians in Johannesburg who took an oath not to submit to a degrading and discriminatory piece of legislation.

The UID/Aadhaar case demonstrates how ‘those who forget history are condemned to repeat it’.

The linking of biometric UID/Aadhaar number to all public services is making “We, the People of India” worse than slaves.

This amounts to normalisation of cruelty towards Indian residents, which creates a compelling logic for scrapping this biometric identification exercise.

Now that the Constitution bench has recognised the right to privacy, the original three-judge bench of the Supreme Court which is to pronounce its verdict on UID/Aadhaar should also ponder over following questions:

Will foreign companies like Ernst & Young, Safran, L1 Identities Solution and Accenture that admittedly work with United States security and intelligence agencies who were awarded contracts on  July 30, 2010, for implementation of Aadhaar number protect US national interest or India’s national interest in the aftermath of Patriot Act taking cognisance of disclosures by whistleblower Edward Snowden and Wikileaks?

The manifesto titled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence brought out by Norwegian gunman and neo-Crusader, Anders Behring Breivik who carried out the heinous attacks on his fellow citizens is actually a unique identity manifesto as well.

This manifesto refers to the word “identity” over 100 times, “unique” over 40 times and “identification” over 10 times. There is reference to “state-issued identity cards”, “converts’ identity cards”, “identification card”, “fingerprints”, “DNA” etc.

Is it not true that only a misanthrope can approve of it?

The deluge of advertising and public relations efforts by biometric identification and surveillance technology vendors have attempted to cloud the minds of judicial, political and media fraternity.

The dangers of trusting such technological advances for determining social policies will consequent in a situation where “[A] warrant requirement will not make much difference to a society that, under the sway of a naive and discredited theory of genetic determinism, is willing to lock people away on the basis of their genes” among other adverse effects. We submit that this entire issue is about denial of Fundamental Rights by the emergence of an unlimited government.”

This constitutes an open declaration of war against citizens’ sensitive personal information like biometric data by transnational entities and governments captured by them paves way for the enslavement of present and future generations through biometric Aadhaar database that lies on cloud beyond Indian jurisdiction.

Can there be any legitimate constitutional or statutory authority which can be empowered to indiscriminately prepare a database based on biometric and electronic profiling of  present and future generation of “We, the People of India” for all time to come? Will such Centralized Identities Data Repository safeguard, enhance or undermine the dignity of “We, the People”?

Such initiatives must be stopped and boycotted, else it will spread its tentacles in every sphere of life and mobility in the country before it is too late.

Related posts

Modi Temple Worth Rs 30 Crore To Be Built In UP, 100-Foot Statue Of PM To Be Installed #WTFnews

Modi Temple Worth Rs 30 Crore To Be Built In UP, 100-Foot Statue Of PM To Be Installed

A grand temple worth Rs. 30 crore is going to be built in honour of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Meerut district of Uttar Pradesh.

The temple would be built in the Sardhana area of Meerut where a 100-foot statue of Prime Minister Modi would be installed.

The ‘Bhumi Pujan’ and the stone laying ceremony for the same would take place on October 23.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief Amit Shah is expected to attend the event.

Follower and supporter of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a retired engineer from the Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department, J. P. Singh, announced the decision to erect Prime Minister Modi’s statue.

Singh said that it will take nearly two years to complete the Modi temple.

When questioned about the motive behind building the statue, Singh said, “I like Prime Minister Modi’s policies since decades and because I was still in the job, I was unable to do anything for him.” (ANI)

Related posts

Attempted data breach of UIDAI, RBI, ISRO and Flipkart is worrisome

Though the threat has been ‘addressed’, sensitive leak of information into the dark net is a massive cyber security problem.

Perhaps, we got lucky this time, but the ongoing problem of massive cyber-security breaches wouldn’t stop at one thwarted attempt to steal sensitive information from the biggest and most important databases. An alarming report on a potential data breach impacting almost 6,000 Indian organisations — including the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) that hosts Aadhaar numbers, Reserve Bank of India, Bombay Stock Exchange and Flipkart — has surfaced and supposedly been contained.

A cyber security firm in Pune, Seqrite, had found in its Cyber Intelligence Labs that India’s national internet registry, IRINN (Indian Registry for Internet Names and Numbers), which comes under NIXI (National Internet Exchange of India), was compromised, though the issue has reportedly been “addressed”.

Sequite tracked an advertisement on the “dark net” — the digital underworld — offering access to servers and database dump of more than 6,000 Indian businesses and public assets, including the big ones such as UIDAI, RBI, BSE and Flipkart.

The report states that the “dealer could have had access to usernames, email ids, passwords, organisation name, invoices and billing documents, and few more important fields, and could have potentially shut down an entire organisation”.

The UIDAI has denied the security breach of Aadhaar data in the IRINN attacks, in an expected move. “UIDAI reiterated that its existing security controls and protocols are robust and capable of countering any such attempts or malicious designs of data breach or hacking,” said the report, which is basically a rebuttal from the powerful organisation at the heart of centralising all digital information of all Indians.

Though the aggrieved parties have been notified, and the NCIIPC (National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre) is looking at the issue, what this means is that digital information is a minefield susceptible to all kinds of threats from criminals as well as foreign adversaries, along with being commercially exploited by major conglomerates.

Till August 2017 alone, around 37 incidents of ransomware attacks have been reported, including the notorious WannaCry attacks. But what makes the attacks very, very threatening is the government’s insistence — illegal at that — to link Aadhaar with every service, and create a centralised nodal, superior network of all networks.

This “map of maps” has been rightly called out as a potential national security threat, as it makes a huge reservoir of data vulnerable to cyberthreats from mercenaries, the digital underworld and foreign adversaries.

A widely circulated report prepared by the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) underlined the major flaws in the 2016 Aadhaar Act, that makes it vulnerable to several digital threats. Photo: ReutersA widely circulated report prepared by the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) underlined the major flaws in the 2016 Aadhaar Act, that makes it vulnerable to several digital threats. Photo: Reuters

That the data dump in the digital black market provides access to entire servers for a meagre sum of Rs 42 lakh, as mentioned in the report, is a sign of how insecure our personal information could be on the servers of the biggest government organisations and commercial/online retail giants. This includes the likes of Flipkart, which store our passwords, emails, phone numbers and other important information linked to our bank details and more.

Whilst UIDAI was declared a “protected system” under Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, and a critical information infrastructure, in practice, there are way too many breaches and leaks of Aadhaar data to merit that tag.

Because the current (officially thwarted) attempt to hack into these nodal databases involved the data of hundreds of millions of Indians, the matter has been dealt with the required seriousness. However, as the report states, “among the companies whose emails they found were Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, Indian Space Research Organisation, Mastercard/Visa, Spectranet, Hathway, IDBI Bank and EY”.

This is a laundry list of the biggest and most significant organisations, with massive digital footprints, which are sitting on enormous databanks. Hacking into ISRO, for example, could pose a formidable risk to India’s space programmes as well as jeopardise information safety of crucial space projects that are jointly conducted with friendly countries such as Russia, China and the US.

A widely circulated report prepared by the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) on the Aadhaar Act and its non-compliance with data protection law in India underlined the major flaws in the 2016 Aadhaar Act, that makes it vulnerable to several digital threats.

Moreover, CIS also reported how government websites, especially “those run by National Social Assistance Programme under Ministry of Rural Development, National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) run by Ministry of Rural Development, Daily Online Payment Reports under NREGA (Governemnt of Andhra Pradesh) and Chandranna Bima Scheme (also run by Government of Andhra Pradesh) combined were responsible for publicly exposing personal and Aadhaar details of over 13 crore citizens”.

The government has been rather lackadaisical about the grave security threats posed by India’s shaky digital infrastructure, saying it’s robust when it’s not: the UIDAI itself has been brushing the allegations of exclusion, data breach and leaking of data from various government and private operators’ servers and there have been several documentations of the security threat as well as the human rights violations that the digital breaches pose for India’s institutions and its citizens.

As noted welfare economist Jean Dreze says, “With Aadhaar immensely reinforcing the government’s power to reward loyalty and marginalise dissenters, the embers of democracy are likely to be further smothered.”

Even as India’s jurisprudence held privacy and autonomy as supreme, Indians remain vulnerable to institutional failures and an abject lack of awareness on the gravity of digital destabilisation.

Related posts

Radhe Maa sits in SHO’s chair at Delhi station as cop stands with folded hands #WTFnews

Self-proclaimed godwoman Radhe Maa was today seen sitting on the seat of SHO at Delhi’s Vivek Vihar Police Station

Delhi Police SHO at Vivek Vihar police station, Sanjay Sharma, has been taken off duty. Five other policemen seen singing with self-styled god-woman Radhe Maa in another event have also been removed

Shiv Sunny
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
Self-styled god-woman Radhey Ma with SHO Sanjay Sharma at Vivek Vihar police station in east Delhi.
Self-styled god-woman Radhey Ma with SHO Sanjay Sharma at Vivek Vihar police station in east Delhi.(Picture circulated on WhatsApp)

The station house officer (SHO) of east Delhi’s Vivek Vihar police station was taken off duty soon after his photograph with self-styled god-woman Radhe Maa seated in his office chair emerged on Thursday.

The photograph taken on September 28 shows SHO Sanjay Sharma standing next to the controversial ‘god-woman’ with folded hands and a red ‘chunri’ (stole) hanging around his neck while in uniform.

When contacted, Sharma told Hindustan Times on the phone that Radhe Maa was on her way to a Ramlila in the area and came to his police station only to use the toilet.

“She occupied my chair for a few minutes… I folded my hands and requested her to leave the office… She is a religious figure,” the SHO told this correspondent.

Sharma said he the incident happened around 11.30pm. “Her followers said she wanted to visit the washroom. So, I allowed her to use the toilet. Since it was located right behind my chair she sat on my chair without asking after coming out of the toilet,” said Sharma. There were at 15 people accompanying her. “All this got over in less than 5 minutes,” the SHO claimed.

On the same night, a group of policemen were reportedly singing along with Radhe Maa at a Ramlila in GTB Enclave. A video of the event was posted on the official Facebook page of Radhe Maa on Tuesday.

It showed a policeman singing into a microphone while Radhe Maa and his colleagues joined in chorus. They too were in uniform. The video, however, was taken down after Sharma’s photograph was shared on social media on Thursday. 
Will the SHO allow any other passerby to use washroom in his office?
Influence of so called God women is visible.

Delhi Police has initiated an inquiry against Sharma and five other policemen identified from the video – two assistant sub-inspectors, a head constable and two constables.

All of them have been sent to district lines, which means they will not be given any position or responsibility till the inquiry is on.

“The matter has been taken very seriously and an inquiry at the DCP level initiated,” said Nupur Prasad, DCP (Shahdara). She said that further action will be taken after reviewing a ‘conduct report’ in this case.

Related posts

Only Manufacturing Thriving Is Manufacturing Of Lies By RSS-BJP


By- Brinda Karat

Amit Shah is leading the fortnight-long padyatra organized by his party and the RSS in Kerala. Simultaneously, the BJP-RSS have declared a daily demonstration at the CPI(M) headquarters in Delhi for the same period and in all state capitals against what they term “red terror” against the RSS by the CPI(M) in Kerala.

Yesterday, the first demonstration at the CPI(M) office was led by Jitender Singh, the minister in the Prime Minister’s Office. So here we have an unprecedented political action by the ruling party running the central government in which the PMO is directly involved, demonstrating at the headquarters of a legally-recognized political party that is currently running two state governments.

The BJP is welcome to do so. In any case, with the police directly under the control of the central government, no one will dare deny permission, more so when the PMO is involved and when union ministers are leading the demonstrations. This is in spite of the problems commuters will face for two weeks as the daily demonstrations will block one of the most busy thoroughfares where the CPI(M) office is located in the heart of the capital. When political parties opposed to the BJP start demonstrating at BJP headquarters, hopefully they too will not be denied permission, or when workers and slum dwellers demand to march through these same roads, they too should not have to face barricades and water cannons.

The deployment of all the BJP-RSS brahmastras from Chief Ministers and union ministers to party leaders shows how desperate the BJP-RSS combine is to put the CPI(M) and the LDF in Kerala on the defensive. It has recognized that the Left and the red flag is a major hurdle to the Hindutva agenda both ideologically and through its pro-people alternate policies. It hopes to use its power at the centre to intimidate, bully and silence the CPI(M). But this is not going to happen.

Many decades ago, the Nazi ideology which inspired the formation of the RSS promoted the theory of the big lie. The Nazi regime’s Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels held that a lie told often enough becomes the truth. This is what the BJP lie-manufacturing machine is doing. In fact it can be said that the only manufacturing flourishing in India under the Modi regime is the manufacturing of lies in the RSS-BJP factories.

It claims that it is the victim in Kerala. This is far from the truth. Kerala police figures tell a different story. Between 2000-2016, 85 CPI(M) workers were killed by the RSS and in the same period, 65 RSS workers were killed.

It is horrible that a body count should be required for refuting the RSS’ lies, but in this case, it is necessary to show that the RSS is not the victim as claimed by them. The first killing since the LDF took office was on the day that the election results were declared. RSS workers hurled bombs at a victory procession in the Chief Minister’s own constituency, killing Raveendran, a CPI(M) supporter rejoicing in the victory of his leader Pinarayi Vijayan. Amit Shah’s yatra started from Payyanur in the same constituency. This is the very area where, in June this year, a bomb-making factory reportedly run by the RSS was raided by the police and those involved were arrested. A huge cache of arms was also recovered by the police from a neighbouring place in which RSS workers were involved.

There is no doubt that being in office, the LDF government has the responsibility for ensuring a peaceful environment for democratic and political activity. These incidents are confined to a few pockets, in spite of attempts to spread them to other districts. The LDF government has taken serious initiatives including calling all-party peace meetings, but every time a decision is taken to eschew violence, and all political parties pledge to not support any political workers regardless of their affiliation if they indulge in violent activities, the agreement is broken by the RSS. Even taken from a narrow interest, it is self-evident that it is harmful for the LDF in office if political murders or violent clashes take place. Knowing this, the RSS-BJP is indulging in the most provocative actions to disturb the peace.

One of the examples being quoted by Amit Shah and others is the stone-throwing that took place against the BJP’s state office in Thiruvananthapuram on the night of July 27- 28. It is being made out as though it was a planned conspiracy. What is the truth? Late that night, the home of the elected ward councillor who belongs to the CPI(M) was attacked by RSS men. They came on four motor bikes, broke the gate of his home, and smashed glass windows using stones and bottles. His very sick father was injured by the shattered glass. He had to be hospitalized. His five-year-old daughter who was near her grandfather when he got injured was inconsolable and terrified.

The ward councillor tried to follow the men who went in the direction of the BJP office which is near his home. He along with three or four others reportedly stoned the BJP office in retaliation. He was arrested the next day. The CPI(M) State Secretary strongly condemned his action and he was suspended from the party. A strong message was thereby given that such actions, whatever the provocation, are unacceptable. In contrast, the BJP leadership protected the men who had attacked, without any reason or provocation, the residence of the councilor. Even today, the BJP leadership is protecting them. This is the difference. The BJP and RSS by such examples of shielding the guilty are deliberately sabotaging the initiatives being taken by the Chief Minister to ensure peace.


Just as in the rest of India, criminal activities of gau-rakshaks get fuelled and enjoy impunity because of the backing of the top leadership of the Sangh, so also in Kerala, where the criminal attacks by the RSS are sought to be protected by the top leadership of the RSS and BJP. Mohan Bhagwat, in his Vijayadashami address, advises gau-rakshaks not to be concerned by comments of the Supreme Court against their activities, and Amit Shah rallies the top-most leaders of his party to defend the violent activities of the RSS in Kerala. This is their DNA.

The people of Kerala are familiar with this DNA. The first political murder by the RSS in Kerala was in 1968 when they killed a CPI(M) worker, C P Sulaiman, in Kozhikode district. The RSS chose Thalassery Taluk in the Kannur district of north Kerala as a special target for spreading its politics of hate and violence because of the area’s social demography. A communal riot was orchestrated in Thalassery in December, 1971. The usual RSS methods of spreading lies about Muslim attacks on Hindu women, as well as attacks on temples, were utilized to rouse communal feelings against the substantial minority population of the area. Communist worker UK Kunhiraman was brutally killed by the RSS when he was defending a mosque against the RSS hordes. According to the Joseph Vithayathil Commission set up to inquire into the riots, it was the role of Communists which allowed the violence to be contained while it was the RSS which sought to rouse communal feelings and disrupt communal harmony. The Commission clearly blamed the RSS for the violence.

From 1971 to 2017, on this aspect, not much has changed – the role of both have remained the same. The role of communists is to defend communal harmony and the role of the RSS is to disrupt it.

But there are other things to be done. Kerala has taken great strides in new and innovative initiatives for people’s development. Building on the strong base created by earlier Left-led Governments in Kerala, the present government has a special programme to strengthen the public education and public health systems in Kerala. The government has set up four missions with substantive budgetary allocations to strengthen the social sector, to provide employment opportunities and to invigorate the agricultural sector.

Communist leaders Pinarayi Vijayan in Kerala and Manik Sarkar in Tripura as Chief Ministers have shown by example and policy how an alternative people-centred policy framework can be conceived and implemented even within the limited resources and powers available to a state government. That is why Amit Shah and his fellow Sangh Parivar leaders are running a personalized and vicious campaign against them.

Instead of following such a destructive agenda, it would be good if they studied the Kerala or Tripura models more closely. For example, the UP Chief Minister might well learn from the health system in Kerala how to prevent the horror of infant deaths in Gorakhpur. Raghubar Das, Jharkhand Chief Minister, could learn how the implementation of the Forest Rights Act for tribals in Tripura, backed by added initiatives by the state government, can bring a huge advance in the lives and livelihood of tribal communities.

But for that, Amit Shah and company would have to remind themselves that the motto is satya not asatya mev jayate.


Related posts

‘Mr Dalit’ Protest On WhatsApp After Attacks in Gujarat Over Moustache

The 17-year-old is a cousin of one of two Dalit men who were beaten up in the village last week for wearing a moustache. The attackers were allegedly Rajput men who said Dalits cannot sport moustaches.

'Mr Dalit' Protest On WhatsApp After Attacks in Gujarat Over Moustache

Young Dalit men are posting pictures on social media that show them twirling their moustaches.



  1. Dalit teen near Gandhinagar was attacked by unidentified men on Tuesday
  2. Young men are posting photos online of them twirling moustaches
  3. Two Dalit men were thrashed last month allegedly for sporting moustache

Digant Maheria, 17, was walking back from school in Gujarat’s Limbodara village on Tuesday when two unidentified men drove up on a motorcycle and slashed his back with a blade. Digant is a cousin of Piyush Parmar, one of two Dalit men who were beaten up in the village last week for wearing a moustache. The attackers were allegedly Rajput men who said Dalits cannot sport moustaches.

Hundreds of Dalit men from nearby villages have protested reportedly by changing their WhatsApp display photo to the picture of a big moustache with ‘Mr Dalit’ written below it. In a social media campaign, young Dalit men are posting pictures on Twitter that show them twirling their moustaches.

Digant was with Piyush, 24, when he was beaten last week and his family has alleged that the teen was attacked yesterday because his older cousin had lodged an FIR against the men who attacked him.

gujarat dalit moustache protest ndtv

Young men protesting attacks on Dalits by twirling their mustaches.

“The men who attacked Digant wore masks and told him that they had been given Rs. 1.5 lakh to attack those who had lodged the FIR,” the boy’s uncle Kirit Maheria alleged. He said Digant had deep wounds, but was out of danger.

The police said it is filing an FIR or First Information Report.

Another Dalit man, Krunal Maheria, told the police last week that he was assaulted by some Rajput men for “sporting a moustache” in the same village. On Sunday, a young Dalit man was killed in a village in Anand district, about 250 km away, allegedly by upper caste Patel men who objected to his watching a Garba outside a temple.

Activist Jignesh Mewani, who led protests after four Dalit men were brutally beaten last year in the state’s Una, has demanded the resignation of the state’s home minister.

Gujarat witnessed its most serious protests by Dalits last July, after the four Dalit men were tied to a car and flogged for allegedly killing a cow, when, in fact, they were removing the carcass of a cow that had died of natural causes.

The opposition has accused Gujarat’s BJP government of failing to protect Dalits in the state, where assembly elections will be held later this year.

Related posts