 |
|
Back to Tytler Cheating the House |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Missile shield
A Tribune Debate
To school
Lashkar terror threat goes global Heed the dead of 1984 Defence notes
|
Back to Tytler IT speaks volumes about the criminal justice system that 23 years after the 1984 riots, a court in Delhi had to ask the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate further the role of former Union Minister Jagdish Tytler in the riots. In doing so, the additional chief metropolitan magistrate has turned down the CBI’s plea to close the case against the Congress leader. Neither the court nor the country is convinced by the CBI’s stand that there is no evidence against him. What has put a spanner in the works of the premier investigating agency is the sudden surfacing of one Jasbir Singh, who claims to have heard the former minister allegedly rebuking his supporters for not killing enough Sikhs. What stands out in this episode is that while the CBI could not contact the “eye witness” who now lives in the US, television channels have little problem in interviewing him. One inference possible is that the CBI had not taken the necessary initiative to contact him and get his version, perhaps, in its enthusiasm to close the case than take it to its logical conclusion. The court has made it compulsory for the CBI to use all the resources at its command and, if necessary, seek the help of agencies like Interpol to bring him to India so that he can give his evidence in the court hearing the case. On his part, Jasbir Singh owes it to all those who suffered at the hands of the marauding mobs in Delhi to give a truthful account of the grisly events so that the guilty are duly punished. The NRI should remember that any reluctance on his part to depose before the court would dent his credibility as an eyewitness, which will only benefit the accused. It is also a reflection on the CBI’s functioning that its case rests on the evidence of a witness who is allegedly out of its reach. Although 3,000 people were reportedly killed in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, only a handful of people have been convicted and punished so far. What this means is that there are hundreds of people who have blood on their hands and, yet, have gone scot-free. This makes a mockery of justice. Generally speaking, state governments do not show any interest in investigating riot cases and punishing the guilty. Most of those who perpetrated the riots in Mumbai in 2002-03 and in Narendra Modi’s Gujarat have escaped punishment. This does not speak well of the criminal justice system and the will of the rulers to punish the guilty.
|
|
Cheating the House Corruption
is not only marching onward but has also reached higher levels. Ten years ago, nobody would have thought that even the record of the proceedings of the Punjab Legislative Assembly would be tampered with to mislead the House and save the skin of the then Minister for Local Bodies, Chaudhary Jagjit Singh, who was facing serious corruption charges, possibly much to hide. That was not only a fraud on the Legislative Assembly but also amounted to whitewashing of huge losses to the exchequer in the alleged Amritsar Improvement Trust scam. In a way, a dubious record of sorts has been set by this shocking incident, which took place last year. The Privilege Committees of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha has now recommended that former House Secretary Nachchatter Singh Mavi and Under Secretary Tara Singh be booked under provisions of the Cr PC and their pension and other post-retirement benefits be stopped. The action is mild for the crime which is serious for the men who held responsible positions. Also, the Assembly must proceed against the other culprits in the crime, or those on whose behalf they tampered with the records that might have compromised their patrons’ position. The Privilege Committee has also sharply criticised the role of former Speaker Dr Kewal Krishan in this episode. According to its report, a House Committee was not set up to inquire into the corruption allegations of the minister despite Dr Kewal Krishan having said that the “House Committee will be formed”. According to the Vidhan Sabha records, the House proceedings were allegedly tampered with at a later stage and the words “if House agrees” were added at the end of the Speaker’s ruling which practically nullified the ruling because the House was now required to move a fresh resolution in this regard. Mischief was obviously afoot for which the former Speaker also owes an explanation. The Punjab Assembly must pursue the matter further, otherwise its credibility is at stake. The people must not be made to come to the conclusion that the corrupt in high places cannot be punished. Responding to the comments sought by the Privilege Committee, the former Speaker said: “I found some mistakes on my part and made a correction and added the words ‘if the House agreed’… Being the Speaker I was fully authorised to do so.”
|
|
Missile shield Riding
high on its recent successes in testing interceptor missiles, the Defence Research and Development Organisation has expressed confidence in developing a missile defence system in three to four years. DRDO chief controller V.K. Saraswat has talked about the option of providing a missile defence shield to major metros and other high value targets, which the government can induct if it so decides. The DRDO over the past year has conducted three interceptor tests, which included a Prithvi missile simulating an enemy missile, which was destroyed at an altitude of about 15 kilometres. By April next year, they plan to conduct more tests with two missiles intercepting a target missile at varying altitudes. While we are still far away from a Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system, these successes are encouraging. This is in spite of the fact that worldwide, BMD technology is still in the realm of uncertainty. Even systems like the US Patriot cannot claim a 100 per cent kill ratio. And when faced with the prospect of defending against nuclear-tipped missiles, other challenges enter the picture, including the requirement of destroying the enemy missile at or soon after launch. But the uncertainty can work to our advantage as well, as a potential attacker will have to factor in the possibility that some or all of his missiles may be destroyed. Thus, the very existence of a BMD will change the costs-to-benefit calculation of an aggressor. The DRDO has indicated that the system it has in mind can defend an area of about 200 square kilometres, and can even be effective against cruise missiles, which typically fly in at low altitudes. Two to three such systems can defend a city or a cluster of strategic installations, like those at Mumbai or Bangalore. The government should eventually look beyond the metros and consider providing such cover for all major cities. Costs will certainly enter into the picture, but it may well be offset against the strategic elbow room and confidence that will be gained.
|
|
The ruling passion, be it what it will,/The ruling passion conquers reason still. — Alexander Pope
|
A Tribune Debate
Self-inflicted
wounds are the worst and take the longest to heal — and some never heal. This may be said appropriately of the two-judge judgment of the Supreme Court speaking through Katju J., delivered recently, setting aside the High Court judgment which had directed the state to regularise the plaintiff gardener as a truck driver to which post he had been working for 10 years. But then the court went on to pronounce on the supposed limitations of PIL, a question not arising in the case, an exercise frowned upon by the Supreme Court almost 40 years back thus, “Obiter observations and discussion of problems not directly involved in any proceeding should be avoided by courts in dealing with all matters brought before them, but this requirement becomes almost compulsive when the court is dealing with constitutional matters”. (though I may agree with some observations regarding High Court matters) But it is embarrassing when it says about three-judge Bench judgments in “Jagadambika Pal’s case of 1998, and the Jharkhand Assembly case of 2005, that they are two glaring examples of deviations from the clearly provided constitutional scheme of separation of powers”. The Bench observation that constitutional trade-off for independence is that judges must show judicial restraint is hurtful if it suggests that judges must look over their shoulders lest the executive feels annoyed at their decisions. Independence of the judiciary and judicial review are the mandate and very life-blood of the Constitution — it is not dependent on the creatures of the Constitution like the legislature or the executive. The judiciary has always followed the hallowed maxim, “Let heavens fall — but justice must be done”. The judiciary is not weak, nor the people at large so spineless that the arrogant empty threats of the temporarily elected executive and legislature can deflect the judiciary from its path of constitutional rectitude and duty. Chief Justice Earl Warren of the United States Supreme Court quoted the observations of Daniel Webster wherein he said, “the maintenance of the judicial power is essential and indispensable to the very being of this government. The Constitution without it would be no constitution, the government no government.” Let us recollect the wise words of Alexander Hamilton, one of the framers of the American Constitution, who stated “that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature in order among other things to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. Judges, though they may not be omniscient or for that matter philosopher — kings, are better equipped for the task so long as they are aware of their limitations.” The criticism of judicial activism as such is untenable. Courts have since long been judicially active in giving relief in social action litigation to labour, to victims of custodial violence, to the excesses committed by the executive. But, as previously, judicial targets were comparatively junior officials and certainly never involving politicians; the issue of judicial activism was not raised by the executive. This charge of alleged interference by the courts has only now been put in issue because the fire of judicial activism is coming nearer home to the high officials and politicians who had falsely hypnotised themselves into believing that they were above the law even though as far back as over 300 years Chief Justice Coke of England had said, “Be you ever so high, the law is above you.” It will thus be amply clear that the judiciary (barring some rare escapades), as mentioned in the two-judge judgment, is aware of its precise role in the constitutional set-up. So, when seemingly interested people, mostly politicians, accuse it of overstepping its constitutional limits, the anger is borne more out of frustration at their partisan actions being challenged before the judiciary rather than the usurpation of power and jurisdiction by the courts. The US Supreme Court struck down several pieces of legislation made by Presidents and the Senate. There were severe uproars, but the orders of the court were enforced. This was illustrated in the case of Brown v. Board of Education, which attracted the ire of the white majority and even federal troops were called to enforce the court decision - incidentally, the Bench has praise for the Brown decision. The bald assumption that judges are not aware of their limitations has been succinctly answered by the wise observations by Patangli Shastri C.J. in a 1953 Judgment thus, “If, then, the courts in this country face up to such important and none too easy task, it is not out of any desire to tilt at legislative authority in crusader’s spirit, but in discharge of a duty plainly laid upon them by the Constitution — and that while the court naturally attaches great weight to the legislative judgment, it cannot desert its own duty to determine finally the constitutionality of an impugned statute”. Frankly, I do not think a reference to a larger Bench would in any way help. Public interest litigation is not a civil or criminal jurisdiction; PIL is an innovative mechanism evolved by the judiciary, sanctified as it is by the very compulsions and jurisprudence of a written constitution. There is no gainsaying that Judges’ decisions are influenced by what writers like Pound and Frankfurter called “sociological jurisprudence” and Justice Holmes called the “major inarticulate premise”. Therefore, reference to a larger bench would only get an answer that it will depend on the facts of each case. In 1983 a two-Judge Bench referred to the Constitution Bench various questions arising out of public interest litigation so as to give proper guidelines. In 1995-96 when this matter came up before the Constitution Bench, it was disposed of with the remarks that much case law has already laid down various guidelines and it was not necessary to have a regular hearing. I feel the same history will be repeated if a matter is referred to a larger Bench now. So, it will be an exercise in futility. But one does believe that there is an easier and responsive alternative. It should, therefore, be hoped that the Bench, now having been made aware of the misapprehensions troubling undoubted friends of the judiciary, though at the same time appreciating also the genuine concern of the Bench about the judiciary not over-relating its jurisdiction, would in order to give quietus to this controversy themselves recall their observations though retaining the decision. This would show their appreciation of the sentiments expressed by members of the public and legal fraternity. Once it is done, the judiciary would be freed from the flurry of market-place gossiping and an easy target of ridicule by the executive and the legislature. Let no one talk disparagingly of the
judiciary. An article by Virendra Kumar, former Professor and Chairman, Department of Laws, Panjab University, Chandigarh, will appear tomorrow
as part of The Tribune Debate.
|
To school FOR once I strongly admired the Father of the Nation for his decision of not imparting formal education to his kids. Had the Mahatma belonged to this era, I am sure he would have felt proud of the idea that attracted brickbats a couple of decades ago. Trusting a set of complete strangers to mould your little one is not as easy as it may seem to be. Quite confident of my own upbringing my first conscious decision was to eliminate the most sought after schools from my list. That significantly lessened my burden and I felt relieved each time a parent, aspiring an entry into one of these schools, narrated his woes. An entire month prior to the process, these parents and their tiny tots spent preparing for interactions (read interviews banned by the Supreme Court). They would religiously attend mock test sessions, were busy filling forms, collecting a bundle of documents etc. On the contrary, I was absolutely worry free. Unruffled by whatever was going on around me, I woke up from a slumber when the school I had been planning to admit my child told me that the last date for admission was barely five days away. I panicked. All doubts on my selection of school, which I had done after giving due thought for well nearly a year, surfaced. Would it be okay for the child to travel almost an hour to the school? Should I not consider schools that are home to the wards of rich ones, an urbane lot? Should fee structure be a consideration? With these and a host of other queries in mind, I too marked my entry into the lot of anxious parents keenly keeping a tab on admission and interview dates. I decided to visit each of these schools rather than merely relying on information posted on their websites, their philosophy mentioned in prospectus et al. Each visit to a school added to my confusion. To ease it, I tried visualising my daughter in each of these schools, studying, playing, spending her years in the school concerned. I called every person I thought was mature enough to help me in my decision making. With different advice coming from all corners, I only wished I could put on hold this one decision that would mark a major change in my child’s life. Three days of excessive hard work in the direction and I almost gave up. Till the four-year-old came to my rescue: “Mamma, I want to go to Siddhartha’s (her friend) school,” she said with a glint in her eyes. This was the first one I had decided. I could feel the sense of security the child felt being with her existing friends. And I let the child make the final
decision.
|
Lashkar terror threat goes global
LAHORE – While the war against Islamic militancy has focused on shadowy underground organizations such as al-Qaida, counter-terrorism officials say there is a growing worldwide threat from an extremist group operating in plain sight in Pakistan. The group, formerly known as Lashkar-e-Taiba, or Army of the Righteous, was formed in the late 1980s and, with the support of the Pakistan government, has launched attacks against India in the dispute over the Kashmir region. In recent years, the camps that Lashkar once used primarily to train Pakistanis to fight for Kashmir have increasingly become a training ground for other militant groups and extremists who come from around the world to learn guerrilla warfare, according to current and former US and allied counter-terrorism officials. And as its ranks have swelled by growing anti-US sentiment, they say, there is evidence that the group is working more closely with al-Qaida and other extremist groups and may be getting more directly involved in jihadist activities against the West. They cite evidence in recent years of fundraising or recruiting efforts in Canada, Britain, Australia and the United States, including current probes in Massachusetts and Lodi, California. Lashkar-e-Taiba was designated as a terrorist organisation by the United States in December 2001 and was soon outlawed by Pakistan. But it disbanded and its founders created another group named Jamaat ud-Dawa, which functions openly in Pakistan as an officially recognized humanitarian organization. US authorities consider it one and the same as Lashkar-e-Taiba and say it has continued to operate camps that train militants. The Treasury Department designated Jamaat ud-Dawa as a terrorist organization in April 2006, saying, “LET renamed itself JUD in order to evade sanctions. The same leaders that form the core of LET remain in charge of JUD.” US counter-terrorism officials say the group’s status as a legal organisation in Pakistan makes it difficult to oppose. It has thousands of loyal supporters and close ties to a government that has done little to rein it in, they say, which has been a source of tension between the United States and Pakistan. “The US government . . . has voiced its concerns” about Jamaat ud-Dawa to the Islamabad government, said Daniel Markey, who oversaw South Asia policy for the State Department until February. Pakistani officials said Jamaat ud-Dawa is “under watch,” but that the group is legal and separate from Lashkar-e-Taiba, which they insist they have shut down. Jamaat ud-Dawa spokesman Abdullah Muntazir said the organisation does not participate in any jihadist activities or run military training camps. “No political party in Pakistan has as many offices as Jamaat-ud-Dawa,” Muntazir said. “So how can the government of Pakistan ban a group that has such deep roots throughout Pakistan society?” US officials say Pakistan has closed down some of the training camps, but that the camps pop up again elsewhere in secret locations along the borders with India and Afghanistan. Leaders of the group have been detained at times by the government, they say, but only temporarily. A major concern for US officials now is that the Pakistani government of President Pervez Musharraf, contending with its own crises, does not have the ability to control the group. “It has gradually grown and morphed over recent years from something that was directed and manipulated by the Pakistan military establishment into something more grass roots, more independent and more dangerous – and more closely tied to terrorist groups with global reach,” said Markey. Lashkar-e-Taiba was founded in about 1989 by a college professor named Hafiz Muhammad Saeed to help fight the occupying Soviet army in Afghanistan. The Soviets soon pulled out, and Lashkar turned to fighting for Muslims in Kashmir against Pakistan’s predominantly Hindu neighbor, India. Over the years, Lashkar has claimed responsibility or been blamed for dozens of deadly attacks on Indian forces and civilians, including a 2001 strike on its Parliament that brought the two countries to the brink of war. US and European authorities believe that throughout the 1990s the group branched out and established close ties with more than a dozen Islamic militant groups in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and areas of the former Soviet Union. Although its leadership has not been directly connected to any terrorist acts against the West, members of Lashkar-e-Taiba and others who have attended their training camps have been linked to some of the most serious plots uncovered since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, including a scheme in Britain to blow up at least 10 US jetliners over the Atlantic Ocean in 2005, plots to attack a nuclear plant and other targets in Australia, and one to blow up Canada’s Parliament building. Since the formation of Jamaat ud-Dawa, which translates roughly as “The Islamic Missionary Organization,” Saeed has remained at the helm. From its headquarters near this city close to the border with India, Jamaat still operates a network of at least 10 camps and mobile training centers, according to US officials. The camps provide training in explosives, weapons, assassinations and surveillance to Jamaat recruits as well as to individuals affiliated with other extremist groups, such as the Taliban of Afghanistan, which pay for the service, said a Western diplomat in Pakistan who monitors the group. Jamaat also has a sophisticated fundraising apparatus that has raised tens of millions of dollars from donors in the oil-rich Middle East, the United States and elsewhere, according to US officials, court testimony and government reports. Leaders of the group say the funds are for its charities, hospital network and more than 130 schools and 35 madrassas, or religious academies. US officials believe some funds are diverted to support jihad. Although it has toned down Lashkar’s rhetoric since organizing in 2002, Jamaat has publicly advocated violence, including calling for a holy war against the United States and its allies and the destruction of Jews worldwide. The US Treasury Department said that “while JUD claims to be a `humanitarian’ organization, it continues to voice its support for violence against civilians. A recent article in a JUD magazine, for example, praised suicide attacks around the world, including by the Taliban, Iraqi insurgents, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad among others.” Husain Haqqani, a former senior adviser to three Pakistani prime ministers, described Jamaat as a highly disciplined organisation that furthers its agenda through its associations with both the Pakistani government and militant groups including al-Qaida. But the group has taken pains not to have its fingerprints on any violent attacks against the West, according to Haqqani. US and allied officials now fear that the group may be getting more directly involved in the terrorism business. “They are still a rent-a-service,” said the Western diplomat in Pakistan, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak publicly. “But they are increasingly involved in discussions with other terrorist groups about tactics and targets.” By arrangement with
|
|
Heed the dead of 1984
WITH a Delhi court directing the CBI to reinvestigate a 1984 anti-Sikh riot that took place in Delhi and consequent to an eyewitness named Jasbir Singh having now come forward to join investigations, the spotlight is once again on the role allegedly played at the time by former Union Minister Jagdish Tytler. There are reports that the assistance of the US authorities and Interpol may be taken, so that the witness, who is now resident in California, may be facilitated in the deposition and cross-examination to be held in this country. The law may take its time but in the long run, truth will be out. It cannot be bottled up. One vividly remembers those troubled times when Indira Gandhi was gunned down and the uncalled for retribution set upon a whole community for a number of days in the streets of Delhi. In those three days over 3000 Sikhs perished in mob lynching and organised crimes with the police standing by as disinterested onlookers, and the Indian Army units that were readily available being moved in late when the damage had already been done. Twenty-three years on when reason had taken flight and vengeance had been wreaked because a “great tree” had fallen, and after countless enquiries and commissions ordered into the so called “riots” (read genocide, for it was all one-sided killing) had gone about their business in one cover-up after another, the uprooted and homeless have today begun singing requiems over their dead and begun calling to account all the governments that have ruled at Delhi ever since, for having failed to deliver them justice. By now some facts that just cannot be contradicted by anyone of a fair bent of mind stand out in stark glare. One, the killings were not spontaneous and were organised by the party cadres in Delhi, and it needs no guess as to which was the party that had been angered most to order these reprisals. Two, local leaders, some of whom are no longer with us today to answer for their sins of commission or omission, were certainly in league with the police, who not only looked away (read ‘arrived late’), but in many cases connived with the mayhem that was taking place for well over 72 hours thereafter. Three, the Delhi Administration headed by the Lt Governor failed to swing the law-enforcing machinery into action at the first sign of trouble. In fact, the Indian Army columns were much delayed into moving in to quell the rot after they had expeditiously reported for duty to the Delhi government. Four, that many of the lumpen elements on the periphery of Delhi who had then taken a very active part under the guidance of their ‘netas’, still roam about freely without being either identified or punished. Five, because of the tardy progress of the legal cases, many of the crucial witnesses who could have testified in favour of the Sikh families are now either no longer available or worse have been pressurised into doing the disappearance act. And finally, with some very few lower-rung officials being punished so far (and some in the police even having gone on to promotions), the woes of the affected families continue to mount with little hope of getting a roof over their head or even getting the full compensation ranging from Rs 2 to 7 lakhs per family as promised. In all this it is pretty evident that no government to date has really brought the affected Sikh families any true justice, so that festering wounds could fully heal. Neither has any commission – and that includes the one headed by Nanavati – succeeded in bringing the guilty of 1984 into the dock of public gaze and self-introspection. Mine is a common citizen’s conscientious appeal to the courts of the land to kindly take official cognisance of the often willful and deliberate lack in performance of duty during the days of the mass Sikh killings, and the dismal performance of all the governments at the Centre who to date have done little to bring to book the officials, who then sat and twiddled their thumbs while Delhi burned in disbelief and horror. Action also needs to be initiated in respect of the many commissions of enquiry who have ever since spent valuable public money in the so called performance of their duties. It is only the apex and high courts that can spur some of our worthies into action, as it has done in the case of the Bihar fodder scam, the pollution of the Yamuna river and other public interest issues like the sealing of commercial establishments being run from residential premises. Surely to punish those who took innocent lives is more important, than cattle fodder having been squandered by human beings. If the killings of the Muslims in Gujarat many years after the 1984 happenings has evoked so much revulsion and a general call for judicial retribution, then it is time that the guilty of 1984, including those who have since retired from service, are not allowed (because of time and apathy in action) to get away with their misdeeds. Housing for the affected, enhanced compensation keeping the inflation factor in mind, and importantly, punishing the guilty for their crimes, is the minimum that the Sikh community expects from its rulers.
|
|
Defence notes THE high point of Defence Minister A.K. Antony’s visit to Vietnam was his meeting with the legendary Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap in Hanoi. Antony went to meet the General, who was instrumental in defeating the armies of France, the US and China, at his modest residence. Giap was Vietnam’s longest serving defence minister from 1945 to 1979. He was behind the strategy which led to the French colonial forces leaving the country in the 1950s. He then beat back the invading US forces in the now famous Vietnam War in the 1970s. He was also at the helm of affairs when the Vietnamese army defeated the Chinese army’s attempt to invade the country in the 1980s. During the meeting Giap recalled the contributions of Jawaharlal Nehru and Ho Chi Minh in laying the strong foundations of Indo-Vietnam friendship. He requested Antony to convey his best wishes to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Stopping cartels The Government is taking steps to ensure that there was no cartelisation of ordinance factories’ suppliers, who grabbed orders worth Rs 4.72 billion last year. According to Ministry of Defence officials, measures to break cartel formation are reviewed and fine-tuned on a regular basis. The measures were formulated by a committee in consultation with the corruption watchdog Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), in July last. As part of the measures tender guidelines were modified by incorporating appropriate clauses to prevent cartelisation. Heading 10 Corps Colonel Commandant of the Sikh Regiment Maj Gen Raj Singh Sujlana, on promotion to the rank of Lt.General, has taken over the reins of the army’s renowned, battle-hardened, 10 Corps. The Corps is responsible for conduct of defensive and offensive operations along the country’s Western borders in the plains, semi-deserts and the desert sectors, and internal security and aid to civil authorities in Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. Prior to the corps command, Lt Gen Sujlana headed the Public Information Directorate at the Army HQ. A very significant achievement during his tenure was the creation and oversight of the Army HQ’s RTI Cell. The cell responded satisfactorily to over 15,000 RTI applications in less than a year. The responsive functioning of this cell has led to reinforcing the army’s commitment to transparency, and has also been commended by the Chief Information Commissioner. Ashok Chakra paltan Tenth Battalion, the Bihar Regiment, the Ashok Chakra paltan, celebrated its prestigious 36th Theatre Honour Day ‘Akhaura’ earlier this month, somewhere in the South Western Command. This also sparked a fortnight long festivities commemorating the 1971 victory. One of the highest decorated Infantry units of the Indian Army, it remembered this glorious occasion with traditional military solemnity under the command of the present CO, Col Manoj Kumar Singh. Notably, the unit was honoured by the rare presence of the war time Commanding Officer Lt Col (retd) P. C. Sawhney and his company commanders in the war.
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
