In the Countryside

In the summer vacations during my first year of college, I made a memorable trip to the countryside and recorded some of my thoughts in a journal I was maintaining then. I recently stumbled upon that journal once again, so I am sharing a young boy's experience of gracious hospitality that he experienced.

I always write my own posts. I do not copy content. That's why it requires a lot of ideas. A lot of thinking. But today, it was hard to come up with ideas. So, I decided to take a stroll outside. Just to get some fresh air and to open up my mind.

So, I started from my house and had barely walked some distance when I happen to meet my gardener. His name is Kailash - the name of the sacred mountain. He is good natured. He invites me to his home which is a few kilometers away down the countryside. With nothing else to do, I accept his offer.
We start our march to the countryside. Leaving the smooth township roads we come upon the uneven and dusty path of the village. 

Its a wonderful contrast. To leave the big buildings, honky vehicles and bustling crowd of the town and to come upon the peace and quiet of the rural side was appeasing to say the least. Soon the stench of soil mixed with that of cow dung fills my nose and my brain goes "welcome to the real India!" I skip a step many a times. Several times my ankle twists and turns unaware of the rocky path which my legs are treading upon. My knees buckle but somehow my spirit and Kailash's company has me walking. His words keep me busy. We cross the fields, an abandoned farmhouse, railway tracks, a canal and some ditches.

After walking a little over two miles we reach his home. His home is a semi-pukka building with the walls of bricks and the roof of tin enforced by tarpaulin. It has electricity bulbs and connection. But electricity graces his house only after 8 in the evening. His wife welcomes us. He has two little children. I ask them their names. "Arvind" says the bigger one. "Vishal" pops the second one. Both have two or three milk teeth missing.
He has a cow, a buffalo and calf. The cow and the buffalo are content, chewing their meal. The calf agitates. He doesn't like to be chained. His neck-ring chimes constantly.

Kailash springs up a charpayee for me to sit on. I rest myself without complaining. My legs are aching and my ankle is sore. Soon some neighbors gather to welcome me. Simple people are these rural folks. They welcome even a stranger with open arms. I feel privileged. Somewhat like asarpanch or the village head addressing a small crowd. I greet them all. Ask a few of them about life. "Sab Badhiya hai aapki krupa se" (Everything is fine with your grace).
"Bas ab bacche kuch padh likhkar ho jayen to mehnat safal ho jayegi..." ( Now if only the children study and become something in their life, then my hardwork will be rewarded.) Kailash says.

In no time I am served with a delicious meal. I wonder how fast his wife can cook. Or has the time passed so fast.....

The food is hot and spicy. It burns my throat. I soon have a running nose. But I don't complain. Thank god there is no electricity or he would have been embarrassed. I wipe away my tears and nose with the help of the corner of my sleeve. I feel like Rahul Gandhi eating a meal in the house of a villager. Except the fact that there is no media around here to take my photo or report it in the newspapers - and I am no Gandhi.

We are done eating. I drink some water and wipe my face. The water was sweet, as were my hosts. I stand up to leave. I fold my hands and take their blessings. I came humbled, I part humbled.

I am indebted to Kailash and I must repay this debt soon. Again after a little over two mile walk, he leaves me at the town's gates and returns home. I watch his silhouette disappear in darkness. I come home.

My mother wanted to wash away the dirt off my shoes. I refuse her to do so.

"Its the dust of my country. It will fade away."

Memories of Witnessing a Heated Exchange in the Hon'ble [One Particular] High Court

Shri Protik Prokash Banerjee, Additional Judge, Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, passed away on 03/07/2020, less than a week after this post was first published. He is the 'Counsel' mentioned herein. 

Upon reading this blog post he commented  on Facebook "Anshul! Shades of a man I know, making a submission he was hauled over coals for having made! Besides, the Judge in question is not merely a Chief Justice designate, but he is brilliantly adorning that chair." 

This post is now a fond reminiscience of his memory.

As an Advocate, the best thing that you hope for is an understanding and encouraging judge, who listens to your point patiently and gives a reasonable explanation even if he rejects your argument. The worst thing you can get is a hostile bench bent upon cutting short your sentences and dismissing your plea. However, in between these two extremes, are exchanges which begin reasonably and then, due to one off the cuff remark or another, descend into a hostile exchange. It is at this point that the Advocate has to display his tact, his nerves of steel and his ability to think on his feet so as to salvage the situation and prevent an adverse order being passed against his client. Most importantly, the Advocate must not get intimidated by the bench.

I had the good fortune of witnessing such an exchange first hand. I immediately wrote down the transcript of the exchange upon exiting the court realizing it to be of immense value for my growth as an Advocate. I am sharing it with you, dear reader, in the hope that you too will learn something from it.

ITEM No. 1 - 18th November - Court Room No. 15

In the Court of Hon'ble Justice [Distinguished Personality] 

Dramatis Personae

Counsel 

Mr. XYZ 

Mr. ABC

All three of them Advocates.

Bench = One very prominent Justice of the concerned HC who is now the Chief Justice designate of another very prestigious HC.

Counsel begins to speak.

"Your Lordship will please refer to Section 24(4) and 24(6)"

"24(4).... "

".. and 24(6) your lordship"

"Yes"

*Reads Section 24(4) and 24(6)*

"Yes"

"Your Lordship will see that the word used is 'consultation', which is of quite controversial nature with regards to its interpretation... "

"Show me the document where it says the District Judge was consulted... "

"Your Lordship will refer to Section... "

"No, you show me the document... "

*hands over the document to the Bench*

"Your Lordship will see the date and please refer to Para 6"

*Bench reads Paragraph No. 6*

"Where does it say consultation?"

"May I refer your lordship to the Proviso of the said section?"

"Yes"

*Reads Proviso*

"Does service mean the same thing as consultation?"

"Your lordship will allow me... "

"The meaning is not the same... "

"But this is the Section my learned friends are relying upon in their memo!"

"Which memo?"

"The original one"

*Motions for copy of the memo*

*Copy of the original memo handed to the Bench*

"Your Lordship will see the appointments to the post of Public Prosecutor in 2011 have been made without consultation with the District Judge... "

"Counsel, the state has not followed the proper procedure for the appointment of the public prosecutors. I am not going to invalidate those appointments in this proceeding."

"Does your lordship accept that the appointments were illegal?"

"Yes, they were illegal."

*Bench to the opposite party*

"Mr. XYZ, any intervention at this point?"

"Your Lordship, we would like to submit that the appointments made since 2011 were made according to the procedure."

"I am not going into that. What has been done is done. I cannot invalidate appointments made in 2011."

*Counsel intervenes*

"Your Lordship, if I may refer you to the latest memo"

"Yes"

"Your Lordship will see that the original memo has 9 names"

"... Yes"

"And the latest memo has a lot more names"

"... Yes"

"The opposite party is seeking a writ of mandamus, without specifying whether these appointments were made in consultation with the District Judge."

"Read the memo."

"Your Lordship I have only one copy of the memo."

"Then take it from me and read it."

*Reads the Memo*

"It says Judicial Magistrate."

"Judicial Magistrate is not the same as District Judge."

"I know your Lordship. But my learned friends..."

"I cannot go into those appointments. They will continue on an ad-hoc basis until the law relating to their appointments is followed. Mr. XYZ, how much time do you require?"

"Your Lordship, I cannot say. Please grant us the time which your Lordship feels is appropriate."

"Mr. ABC, any submissions?"

"Your Lordship would look at the names mentioned in the writ..."

"Have you made them parties to this proceeding?"

"No, Your Lordship. But a number of them do not have requisite experience required for appointment to the panel."

"Have you made them parties?"

"No, your Lordship. But Your Lordship, one of them even has an FIR under Section 302 pending against him."

"I am not going to pass any remark against any person unless you have made them parties to the proceeding."

(Mr. XYZ) "Your Lordship we have an email from the District Judge which we would like to show you regarding the appointment of Mr. [One Particular Public Prosecutor]."

*Hands over email printout to the Bench*

(Counsel) "It looks like the District Judge is interested in the continuance of the Writ Proceeding."

"Mr. Counsel! That is a very serious accusation that you are levelling against one of our judicial officers! Do you have any evidence?"

"What is the evidence that the opposite party is relying on?"

"This email!"

*Bench passes printed copy of email to the Counsel*

"Is your Lordship seriously relying on an email from gmail.com as primary evidence of consultation for appointment? The little knowledge I have, and it is very little, regarding Cyber Law, says that you cannot rely on an email as evidence without verifying the server and the receiver!"

"Are you disputing the evidence?"

"Yes!"

"Mr. XYZ, 17th, 18th, 19th of the next month, whichever is a Friday, come back prepared. In the meantime, the appointments will continue on an ad-hoc basis. Until February 28 or until further orders."

*Order passed accordingly*

As is evident, an off the cuff remark against the District Judge led to a hostile exchange with the Bench, which was salvaged by the counsel by disputing the evidece using, by his own admission, his 'very little' knowledge of Cyber Law. 

Learn, dear reader, to buy time for your client, when the waters become choppy, rather than making any submission which would sink his ship.

A Visit to Tihar

It has been a while since I wrote on this blog. Things would have remained that way I guess, but a worldwide pandemic has finally forced me to break through the dreary dilemmas of law and publish here again.

I want to recount an experience when I was attending chambers of an Advocate and learning the ropes of the legal profession from him. 

"Attending chambers" sounds like a gathering of aristocratic dynasts, wearing three piece suits, pipe in hand, discussing the high falutin' matters of the day while laughing at ribald jokes. It is a curious way of expressing the rigor of a demanding profession - a profession in which words are powerful and have psychological and material impact. Concepts, on the other hand, exist in the abstract till they are more determinedly fleshed out. 

"Advocacy", as one of such concepts, exists somewhere at the back of one's mind and does not register in its full sense on one's conciousness because dealing with the machinery of law enforcement becomes a rigorous routine rather than being a novel one off experience. Perhaps those with an outsider's view of the law have a better understanding of the gravity of matters at stake rather than a young entrant at the bar. For him, it is just survival through sheer scrunching - moulding one's character, sharpening one's rhetorical and legal skill and becoming one with the legal fraternity, matter after another matter.

 

Still, there are some moments even for a young lawyer, where he steps back, and realizes the importance of the job that he is discharging. He realizes that there are matters of life and liberty at stake, and what seems to be a never ending academic exercise, actually reverberates powerfully outside the creaky courtrooms and into the individual lives of the litigants. 

And so it was for me, when among the usual humdrum of legal rigor, I was suddenly dispatched to Tihar Jail to get a Vakalatnama signed from two inmates (A Vakalatnama establishes a lawyer-client relationship after it is duly executed and filed in the court).

I will not bore you, dear reader, with the details of how to reach the jail, how much time it takes from the court, which route one should take etc etc. Suffice it to say that in due course of time I found myself standing before the entrance of the jail and entered it. 

Advocates have more leeway than others while visiting prisoners, but they too have to adhere to fixed timings for prison visit. I entered with half an hour remaining on the clock and heaved a sigh of relief. Entered my credentials in the visitor's register under the watchful gaze of the policeman seated there and finally came to the road that lead to the prisons.

Yes. You read that right. There is actually a road that leads to the prisons. What if prisoners unite and try to break and flee the jail? Who doesn't love freedom and a breath of fresh air? Ask the people who came out of self isolation after 2 weeks of quarantine how it felt. "Relaxed" they would probably reply. What if prisoners decided to "relax"? En masse? 

So you have roads. Long, winding ones. Not because the authorities want to make sure that the fleeing inmates at least get enough cardio before they face the rat race of the big bad world outside, but because there are watch towers at frequent intervals on the sides of these roads so that they can keep a watch on the people coming inside and going outside. The inmate that I had business with, was lodged inside Jail No. 8. And that was a long walk. 

When the walk ended, I came to the place with iron clad gates with a small passage to enter. There were high walls above the entrance. Barbed wire above the walls. There were watch towers inside this entrance with multiple sentries moving about on their posts. And because we Indians have an obsession with "killing two birds with one stone" mentality, the prominent sign on the gate wasn't the Jail numbers (they were less prominent) but a cheerful signboard announcing "Tihar Textiles" complete with its ISO Certification Number. 

Now, the thing with iron clad gates is, you have to knock them hard for the people inside to hear you. And if you have ever tried knocking them with your bare knuckles, you would know that knuckles hurt a lot without making the kind of sound you would expect. Perhaps that is why the English phrase "cracked his knuckles" rings so true. Knuckles really do crack under pressure and the only sound they make is of their own cracking. 

Anyway, the powers that be had shown mercy and had provided circular "knockers" (if I may call them that) for outsiders to come and use for the purpose of knocking the iron clad gates and making the kind of sound which, in ordinary course, is enough to knock even the most lethargic sentry off his feet. And so I took advantage of this state sanctioned opportunity to knock away. 

Twice.

Thrice.

Four times.

Then I stopped. 2 minutes later, the door slowly opened and a policeman looked at me with the curious contempt reserved for young lawyers. I gave him the Vakalatnama, along with a letter addressed to the Deputy Superintendent, Tihar Jail about the details of the inmate I had business with along with my Bar Council ID and barely had time to mumble "Vakalatnama attest karwana hai" before he shut the gate back on my face. 

Now the wait started. I was standing there in sweltering heat wearing black coat and black trousers without a place to even sit. I shuffled my feet and wiped the sweat off my brow. Within 5 minutes, a couple of other lawyers joined me as they too had come for attestation of vakalatnamas on behalf of their clients. We made small talk after they handed over the documents and joined me to wait for their turn.

Soon, we heard a police van approaching the gate. It came close to the entrance of the jail and then the driver, through a series of deft manoeuvres made the rear of the van face the jail entrance.

Watching us advocates from inside the van were prison inmates. Maybe they were undertrials. Maybe they were convicted. Maybe they had a court date. Maybe. But their gaze had a sort of longing for the freedom that they saw us enjoying. What was this freedom? It was the freedom to choose to be at Tihar Jail rather than to be sent to it forcibly. It was the freedom of choice.

The iron clad gates opened, and not just through the small passage through which I saw the policeman, but they opened wide. Inside, I saw, was a sort of a high ceilinged hall for the prisoners to be inspected, counted and then dispatched to their holding cells. A number of policemen sat in this hall, watching every move of every inmate, making sure nothing funny happened. I soaked in the visual details.

Once all the inmates were offloaded and counted and accounted for, the gates shut back again and the van made its way away from us. We went back to waiting for our names to be called out. Some 10 minutes later, my name was called out and I was handed back my documents. The Vakalatnama had the thumbprint of my client and the signature and seal of the Deputy Superintendent, Tihar Jail.

To be frank, I was hoping to meet my client. My senior hadn't told me that getting the Vakalatnama attested wouldn't involve me meeting the client and so I was under the impression that once my name would be called out, I would be allowed to enter the prison and meet my client. These turned out to be wishful fantasies of a young and inexperienced lawyer. 

I understood that once you are inside that prison, the routine act of meeting face to face also becomes a luxury allowed within the confines of constitutionally regulated framework. Maybe, the freedom that ordinary citizens take for granted, is the freedom lawyers fight for. Maybe, that freedom was much more than mere freedom of choice - it was the freedom to be. Maybe, I had my first lesson in the impact of advocacy in the real world.

I had plenty to think about on my walk back to the exit.      

A Meeting with Madam PM, Australia – October 17,2012

[Text of the Report previously available on Youth Ki Awaaz, and now being put here for records purposes]

On Tuesday, the 9th of October, Australia’s Prime Minister Ms. Julia Gillard, the first female Prime Minister and the first Female Leader of Australia’s ruling Labour Party, stood up in the house of representatives and blasted the Leader of Opposition into pieces by delivering an epic speech on Sexism and Misogyny in Australia and the Leader of Opposition’s double standards on the issue. The speech went viral on the social networking sites and Ms. Gillard was hailed as the first head of state anywhere in the world to have put the issue of gender sensitivity in a very clear perspective. Back here in India, I sat back and saw the way in which she launched the attack, awed by the content of her words and even more by her composure while delivering the speech.

It was in this context that I was overjoyed to receive an invitation from Youth Forum on Foreign Policy in my capacity at Youth Ki Awaaz to be a part of one of the very few people who would have a chance to interact with Ms. Gillard, when she visited India a week later. On 16th, I walked in the Australian High Commission in New Delhi to meet the woman who had overnight become an inspirational figure for countless women across the globe.

Here is the report on the interaction between the Australian Prime Minister and a group of young people representing various organizations and forums.

The Australian High Commission in New Delhi organized an interaction with the Australian Prime Minister Ms. Julia Gillard on Tuesday, October 16th, 2012. The interaction was attended by various people representing a wide spectrum of youth leadership in the country. The interaction was moderated by well known Television Personality and the anchor of popular chat show ‘The Devil’s Advocate’, Mr. Karan Thapar.

Beginning the interaction, Ms. Gillard said that she was visiting India to inaugurate the Oz Festival, the biggest Australian Cultural Festival in India which will span for four months and would tour 18 cities. She said that the message of the festival was to show that face of contemporary Australia to the Indians and showcase her country’s diversity. She said that she was extremely proud of being the premier of a multicultural nation and that the immigrants from various parts of the world added to the “tapestry of modern Australia“. She also touched upon the issue of Racism in Australia, which had hogged headlines in the past two years due to the selected attacks on Indians in her country. She said that both Australia and India had a large population of the youth and that the future of engagement between these two countries was going to be defined by the young people of both the nations. She also said that youth in both the countries can contribute to the emerging world order as the economic interests of India and Australia will continue to converge in the future. She added that the ideas and opinions of the youth did make a difference to the leaders across the world. It was therefore necessary that groups of young people, apart from being organized and being visible, should also come up with practical suggestions that the leaders could implement.

On being asked about the strategic challenges facing the region, the Australian Prime Minister replied that both the country’s region was one with the most middle class consumers. She said that the leaders across the globe have begun realizing this fact as the global economic weight has been gradually shifting to Asia and Asia Pacific. She said that ultimately, all the countries in this region would be responsible for shaping the strategic reality of the region.

On the issue of the sale of Uranium to India, Ms. Gillard said that it would take time for both the countries to negotiate a civil nuclear cooperation agreement. She also added that her party’s decision to sell Uranium to India, reversing a 40 year old policy, was not based on any strategic calculations.

Replying to a query on how women in both the countries can be a part of mainstream political dialogue, Ms, Gillard replied that both the countries were at the midpoint of change in politics for women. She said that she was optimistic about this change and that she was sure that soon it would be routine for the people in both the countries to see half the parliament occupied by women members, the election of a female Prime Minister and the increased induction of women ministers in the cabinet. She expressed hope that soon both the countries would get to a stage where their political dialogues were gender blind.

Upon being asked about the United State’s increasing role in the region and the advantages and risks associated with it, the visiting Prime Minister replied Australia had a long term alliance with the United States. She said that the United States has been engaged in the region and that it was a “force of stability“. She added that her government was of the view that it was important for countries in the region to develop and nurture a relationship of peace and accumulate habits of cooperation.

Ms. Gillard was also asked about Australia’s relationship with China and how was her government looking forward to balance that relationship in the context of its relations with India, to which she replied that Australia had a strong and deep engagement with China. She said that her country wanted to see the rise of China optimistically and that relationship between different countries was not a blind sum game. She opined that China’s growth did not translate into the contraction of India’s market and that the region was emerging into the age where there will exist a dominance of multiple nations. She added that it was important for both India and China to build a mutually beneficial relationship for peaceful co-existence in the region.

On the issue of maritime security, Ms. Gillard repeated that it was important for countries across the region to foster a habit of cooperation and that issue regarding maritime security and conduct needed to be governed by the rule of the international law.

Answering a query on the Millennium Development Goals and their effectiveness and impact, Ms. Gillard said that the MDGs have been remarkable catalysers to world’s efforts in eradicating global poverty, lowering maternal mortality etc. She said that it was important for the nations to not lose hope after 2015 and push for achieving these goals even after their time frame has ended.

Concluding the session by elaborating on her relationship with Dr. Manmohan Singh and the Government of India, she said that it was not her mandate to lecture other countries on their domestic politics. She said that it was important that in order to maintain economic growth, a country also ushers in economic reforms. She added that it was a difficult task for politicians around the world to implement economic reforms and change the status quo.

Post Script: After the formal interaction, I had a chance to interact one on one with the premier where I briefed her about the work of Youth Ki Awaaz. She congratulated the entire team on their efforts saying that Youth Organizations like ours were needed in order to spread awareness and increase advocacy of critical issues. I also asked her about the efficacy of mechanisms which reserve a given number of seats for women in the country’s Parliament by referring to the practice in her own country, where, instead of bringing about a law to this effect, her party has been internally reserving 35% of “winnable seats” for the women candidates. She answered by saying that different countries had their own different way of functioning. Drawing my attention to Papua New Guinea where a vote to this effect had recently failed, she said that it was for the countries themselves to find out which way would work the best in increasing female participation in mainstream political discourse of their respective countries.

An Open Letter to Dr. Manmohan Singh: Why Bash the Chinks?

First Published in Youth Ki Awaaz on May 6, 2012

Respected Sir,

Yes I used the ‘C’ word. It’s not for ‘coup’ or ‘corruption’ as you may suppose (or may be led to suppose), but it’s the single most common cultural slur used across the nation: chinki. If we have to get rid of this slur, we should not hide it in the closets of our minds or the backrooms of our vocabulary, but bring it out in the open just as we cannot win the fight against HIV or caste for that matter by abstaining from saying ‘HIV’ or ‘Caste’.

I am writing you this letter in order to highlight the sense and extent of alienation and suffering that has been instilled in the minds of the people coming from the North Eastern part of our country, especially those whose facial features do not match the facial features of a person coming from mainland India. Yes, chinkis they are – chinkis with pride, respect, a profound love for their culture and their land. But why are they made to pay a price for looking like what they do? Let me state at the outset that I have no answers. I am only going to ask you questions about things that your government or your party’s government should have done long ago, but failed to do.

I could have addressed this letter to someone else. Maybe UPA chairperson Mrs. Sonia Gandhi who allegedly calls the shots in your government or Delhi Chief Minister Mrs. Sheila Dikshit who has for the past several years taken no steps at all in order to arrest this sense of discrimination among the North East students even and especially in the country’s capital. However, I have chosen to write to you because you happen to represent Assam in the country’s upper house of the parliament, a state, which happens to be in the North East.

Sir, 65% of our country’s population is under 35 years of age. Yet, if I may ask you, how many among those 65% not belonging to the North East can name the seven sisters and their capitals? How many of them, the so called nationalists and patriots, can even trace a north eastern state correctly on the country’s map? If my experience is anything to go by, except for some of the ardent students of geography, none, not even one, can do so. And right now, even as they read this letter, they are busy fumbling through the country’s map in order to memorize the seven sisters.

I do not intend to point fingers at anyone. Actually, I do not have that many fingers to point if I am asked who is responsible for this situation. However, the recent protest at Jantar Mantar against the killing of Richard Loitam, an architecture student studying in Bangalore and the suicide of Dana Sangma, the niece of the Chief Minister of Meghalaya, in her hostel room due to the discrimination she faced in her college speaks volumes about the extent to which the situation has deteriorated (I can bet those cultural nationalists can’t even name the Chief Minister of Meghalaya).

Nowhere could have a 119 day blockade of a constituent state gone unnoticed except in a country like India. The Indian state skips a heartbeat every time there is a demand for secession from the Indian Union by a state from the North East. And these demands are justified. Who would like to remain in a country where the government treats the residents of a particular state as ‘guests’? Who would like to remain in a country where you are discriminated against day in and day out?

As a recent article by our columnist Purnett Moirnagtham pointed out, the administration of this country takes care in giving the students from the North East a good headache by making them memorize all about the mainland India and making them learn Hindi – a language completely alien to them. Yet the people from the mainland do not know much about their North Eastern counterparts. I have been asked on occasion whether Bihu was the name of a bird and have been completely stumped on other occasions on being asked the capital of Imphal. What does one answer in these situations? What does one answer when she/he is asked whether she/he is from China?

As a student, my experience with my north eastern counterparts has been enriching and educating to say the least. But how does one deal with those culturally insensitive people who do not at all wish to interact with them by saying “they all look alike!” As a nation which goes ballistic when an incident of racism occurs against “Indians” abroad, how do we tackle this gigantic magnitude of racism that we ourselves perpetuate at home? According to a statistic, 78 out of 100 people in Delhi face racism. If the extent of discrimination is so high in the country’s capital, what does one say about the country as a whole?

Respected Sir, we are a country which takes pride in its cultural diversity. Yet, nowhere in the country is culture as diverse as in the North East. I haven’t personally visited that part of our country, yet even the description of Bihu makes me want to dance, even a syllable of Assamese makes me want to learn it and even the mention of Bhoot Jolokia makes me rush for a glass of water. Yet, for most of the “Indians”, north east remains a place where “they” eat dogs. This deliberate cultivation of the cultural other has happened over a period of time, and exponentially during the time when you have been in power.

I appeal to you to urgently take measures in order to stop the discrimination against the seven sisters by their testosterone pumping counterparts in the mainland. Unless serious steps are taken for the correction of the same starting from speedy delivery of justice for the families of Dana and Richard, I, personally, and the people of North East collectively, would continue to blame your government and especially you, for failing to improve this situation.

Yours

Anshul Kumar Pandey