Partial Emergency Still Exists ?

With other conditions remaining the same Indira Gandhi managed the complexity of the situation, President Nixon's dominance, opposition with the FBI and threat to India's sovereignty with some compulsions better than Modi and paid the price losing the subsequent elections. Emergency was Modi has learnt the lesson to do an undeclared emergency. Now Modi politicising Emergency to divert attention from present day issues! more  

Absolutely true. All were not really bad in those days. Yes, a segment politicians and influential guys were raising voice that it may ruin democracy but it was never been so watchful on people's activities on various platform like today. Common people were happy as everything is in order. No troubles any one ever faced to get done the works on time. Transport system is in order. Nothing is late. No corruption at all. But now there is no such official declaration but everything is closely watched and Govt. is the super power and no one questions on any issues. Sharing my experience only. more  

Modi has enjoyed partial Emergency on India. Modi never appreciated the positive aspects of Emergency, which he could never deliver: ". Despite the draconian measures, the initial days of the Emergency paradoxically brought a sense of order that many people welcomed. Trains began running on time. Buses adhered to strict schedules. Crime rates plummeted. Government employees were punctual, and the insidious practice of bribes to expedite files seemed to vanish. Classes in schools were conducted regularly, and street hooliganism largely disappeared. Vinoba Bhave, a close associate of Mahatma Gandhi, even lauded the Emergency as anushasan parv (era of discipline). Middle-aged and elderly people often remarked that it felt as if the time of the British Bahadur had returned, an era where "sher aur bakri ek hi ghat se paani peete the" (the lion and the goat drank water from the same place), implying a return to strict but fair governance. It might seem astonishing to read this in 2025, but many at the time indeed considered such actions necessary." Nor did Modi ever face compulsions of Indira. Yet Modi imposed undeclared Emergency and favoured private capitalists leading to corruption and inequality. How Indian democracy survived the Emergency 50 YEARS OF EMERGENCY It was the summer of 1976. In Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh, as dusk gave way to night, a gathering of people enjoyed a friendly chat at the bungalow of a prominent person in the town. Amidst the gathering, a frail man, his face partially obscured by a towel, arrived and prostrated at the host's feet. His body trembled like a dried, yellow leaf, his distress palpable. He was a washerman with a harrowing tale, from a village nearby. Tears streaming down his face, he recounted how a minor altercation a few days ago had taken an unexpected turn. He believed the matter had been settled, but he had gravely under- estimated the situation. The person with whom he had quarreled had a relative who was a police sub-inspector. A few days later, a police team raided the washerman's home. The charge: "Conspiring to uproot railway tracks with the aim of bringing about armed revolution." He struggled even to pronounce these words, terms that were entirely alien to him just 48 hours ago. Fortunately, on the day of the purported incident, he visited a distant relative. Had he been home, he would have been apprehended and incarcerated for months under the infamous Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA). Surprisingly, those present at the bungalow that evening were initially sceptical. They assumed he was talking through his hat, taking everyone for a ride to avoid a minor inconvenience. However, his story proved chillingly true. After intervention from the district authorities, the matter was resolved. Yet, his case was a more common occurrence than people believed. During those dark days of Emergency, approximately 35,000 individuals were detained under MISA, and over 75,000 under the equally notorious Defence of Indla Rules (DIR). Millions more were arrested under various other laws, ranging from as young as nine to over 90 years of age. The detainees spanned the entire political spectrum, with the exception of the Congress and the Communist Party of Indla. What drove the Indian system to such extremes? During the Emergency, the bureaucracy, hand in glove with the government, had turned alarmingly autocratic. Despite the draconian measures, the initial days of the Emergency paradoxically brought a sense of order that many people welcomed. Trains began running on time. Buses adhered to strict schedules. Crime rates plummeted. Government employees were punctual, and the insidious practice of bribes to expedite files seemed to vanish. Classes in schools were conducted regularly, and street hooliganism largely disappeared. Vinoba Bhave, a close associate of Mahatma Gandhi, even lauded the Emergency as anushasan parv (era of discipline). Middle-aged and elderly people often remarked that it felt as if the time of the British Bahadur had returned, an era where "sher aur bakri ek hi ghat se paani peete the" (the lion and the goat drank water from the same place), implying a return to strict but fair governance. It might seem astonishing to read this in 2025, but many at the time indeed considered such actions necessary. This week marks 50 years since the beginning of the so-called anushasan parv, and the memories of those days continue to stir me. Apparently, Indira Gandhi imposed the Emergency after the Allahabad High Court annulled her election. However, other darker forces were at play. In the 1971 general elections, she coined the slogan garibi hatao and fielded 442 Lok Sabha candidates, winning 352 seats. But she failed to eradicate garibi (poverty) and unemployment, and a disillusioned student community and labourers took to the streets to vent their frustration. A woman who was likened to Durga during the Bangladesh campaign was now seen as a failed ruler and the Emergency was the last gambit of a cornered Prime Minister. During this period, a campaign of nasbandi (forced sterilisation) was aggressively pursued, allegedly at the behest of her younger son, Sanjay Gandhi. It is widely alleged that this was an attempt to curb the growth of minority populations, with police reportedly raiding settlements of minorities and the vulnerable, forcing them into sterilisation. While isolated incidents may have occurred, I vividly recall family planning being promoted as a national campaign. Senior officials were given undeclared quotas, and they, in turn, pressured their subordinates, suggesting that those with three children should undergo sterilisation for their benefit. Tragedies such as the Turkman Gate demolitions unfolded in New Delhi, The government machinery, armed with bulldozers and a large police contingent, descended upon the Turkman Gate area in the name of “beautification". When residents resisted, they were shot at, resulting in an undisclosed number of deaths and injuries. The government never released the exact figures, and the media, already muzzled, could not effectively report on it. During that time, many newspapers were forced to get pre-publication approval from the district administration for their content. Those were truly the dark days of the Indian Republic. Pupul Jayakar, Indira Gandhi's friend, later wrote in her book how even Indira was disturbed by these aberrations. She sought counsel from the philosopher J Krishnamurti, and it was only after this spiritual reflection that she decided to lift the Emergency and call for elections, according to Jayakar. The Congress lost the general elections in 1977, and the Janata Party won office. How Indira Gandhi later returned to power is another story, but 50 years on, while remembrance of those days brings regret, there is also immense pride that despite stumbling so badly, we Indians took the fall on our chin, brushed off the dirt and not only preserved our democracy but achieved new mile stones of development over the following decades. We can all be proud of this enduring democratic and never-say-die spirit of our country- men. Shashi Shekhur is editor-in-chief. Hindustan. The views expressed are personal more  

Point blank question. A. Emergency imposed in 70s was just to suppress the Constitutional Demands arose since 1956 which cover Fundamentals of Preamble guarantee like [1] Article 39 b, c, read with 38 ; un-addressed Loop-holes in Land Reforms [2] Oppressive Caste base implementation depriving Class Based Reservations ; Protests over Justified verdict/Order of Supreme Court in 1963 that directed deletion of Creamy Layer [3] Increasing Women and Child menace due to effects of Religious Conversions into Islam, Christianity [4] Protests/Revolts that initiated Article 31-C for Directive Principles of State Policy [5] Protests/Revolts that initiated Article 38 (1) , (2) for removing economic inequalities AND, promotion of JUSTICE, Social, Economic and Political to inform all the institutions of National life [6] Protests/Revolts that initiated Article 39-A for Equal Justice and Free legal Aid [7] Article 43-A for Participation of workers in management of Industries was the result of protests under Article 38 ;;;; Finally, Part IV-A was added for due Fundamental Duties of Citizen. THUS, CONGRESS OPTED SUPPRESSION OF CITIZEN WHO ASK FOR THEIR DUE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS but, to be away from the responsibility of implementing UNIFORM CIVIL CODE of article 44 which dilutes Religious Conversions, STAGED THE NEW MOTTO OF 'Secular' . This is the real fact. The true meaning, purpose and objective of 'SECULARISM' is the movement against the Rule of Pope in Christian Dynasty AND, THIS , IS OPTED BY THE Congress Government in the frame-work of the Constitution under the external pressures continued from 14th August 1947. True. Absolutely Correct. This Congress and Allies kept Silent in the Parliament only when NDA CALLED THEIR ANSWER 'Whether to Authorize / allow Religions Conversions' AND, THIS SHOWS, PROVES THE COLLUSION OF Congress and their Allies. B. It is true and prevailing fact going against the principles of JUSTICE if anyone think of the difference patronizing preferred maintaining discrimination and inequality between HINDUISM , ISLAM , CHRISTIANITY as far as the intervention opted by the Governments in controlling and dominating the internal issues of Hinduism , Hindu Belief and Faith on Rites and Rituals too. Even the Governments had been on willful neglect/sleep over the Monitory issues of these 3 Religions. THERE IS ABSOLUTE NEED TO REFORM THESE ISSUES AT NATIONAL INTEREST to uphold the objectives of the Constitution pertaining to ' Right to Freedom of Religion '. C. There is no use of debate on the issue of 'Secularism' WHEN THE INDIAN POLITICAL PARTIES [who are generations of Freedom Fighters] SCORING THEM AS THE "" Followers of Gdndhi ji "" ever set aside some ; set off another some directives, slogans, messages and, aspirations of Sri M.K.Gandhi in following the Rule in the Country. THIS IS GROSS NEGLIGENCE TOWARDS THE WHOLE SET OF 'Freedom Fighters' . D. Coming to the issue of Emergency of Congress Smt.Indira Gandhi , it was so based on the issues of Constitutional Mandates that were demanded continuously through Protests ;;;;; WHILE AS, THE PRESENT SITUATION TENDERING Emergency is not only due to the Communal issues instigated ;; but, LARGELY DUE TO THE SAME DEAF EAR , OPPRESSIVE ATTITUDE WHERE BY THE RULE IN THE COUNTRY as at 2013 itself was alarming tendering the need of Emergency/Marshall Rule JUST, JUST FOR THE SAME 7 ISSUES SPECIFIED ABOVE IN POINT [A] . Luckily, the deeply regretted attentive Speech and message of Ex President of India, Sri Pranabh Mukherji on the eve of Independence Day , 15th August 2013 HAD INSPIRED THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO RAISE IN TIME while the Political Leaders in Question did not care the quotations referred by this President in his same speech. SO, AS NOW ALSO THE CONGRESS AND THEIR ALLIES, REGIONALLY ALIGNED OPPOSITION PARTIES still not realized and recognized their Constitutionally vested Responsibilities and Duties for implementation of Constitutional Mandates,,, THERE IS ABSOLUTE NEED OF A 'President's/Marshal's ' rule for continuous 10 years' OTHERWISE, THESE COLLUSIVE PARTIES NOW ADDRESSING VARIOUS SORTS OF BENEFITS basing various Castes , Several Communities , will definitely TENDER REMOVAL OF THE WORD 'SECULAR' FROM THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF. more  

With due respect Anaokarji it has become a fashion with all Political Leaders to blame the earlier Government despite the fact that they have been in power for a considerable time to undo the wrongs and set things right instead of just claiming shouting on the roof. Every Leader & even group are swearing to be Secular - the interpretation is then taken by media adding spice and dished out in print and visual either to build the image or break the image of the leader. When media houses never follow the Ethics & Ethos of Journalism purely going by TRP, is it not wrong to have too much expectation from Leaders who are any way the Best Liars in the World? Whether India was Secular from its earliest existence....and if we common people have conviction of the same then there is no need to do the drama of amending the constitution to strike that word off. We never know the need of the Hour which prompted the addition of the word in the constitution - if you are much enlightened than Shri.B.R. Ambedkar, then perhaps you can design the Constitution on your own and take the credit from any of our corrupt leaders or political parties. Local Circles has always been a very Open & Broad Minded group of individuals/people irrespective of caste or religion. Please don't bring such divisive topics to spoil the compilation of the group. more