Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Do you agree with Mr. Narendra Modis justification of Sohrabuddin Sheikh's killing by fake encounter during his election speeches by saying he deserved such a fate?
(My view: Person cant be considered guilty unless his / her guilt is proved in court of law.)

Tags: guilt, person, mr.
Asked by PANIWALA A, 06 Dec '07 12:14 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (33)

1.

Sohrabuddin Sheikh was another Dawood in making. He was on the run. He had been evading law for a long time. Law of the land will decide whether the encounter was fake or otherwise. Now that he is dead we should rejoice. He was afterall a criminal. He was not innocent. His killing should a serve a lesson to others going down the same path. Those who killed him in encounter, if found guilty, should nevertheless, be punished. If it is proved that it was a fake encounter then such happenings should be discouraged.
Answered by Jack Johnson, 08 Dec '07 01:43 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

Modi is an idiot to discuss such things in public. I do agree and concur with encounter killings for doing away with criminals. Experience has shown that enoucnter killings did bring down the crime rate drastically in Mumbai. Criminals and gangsters who dont observe or care for the rule of the law deserve nothing better.
Answered by Saj Sierra, 09 Dec '07 01:28 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

Any encounter by Govt will take toll of one or two. But any attack by the Govenrment will done by an intelligence report or some kind suspcious activities of the deceased. Even if one would attack Modi on his outburst, he in my view is trying to fight terrorism sternly. What he said is blown out to the viewers point of view rather than what he meant.

Why are people keeping mum or supporting Sanjay Dutt. Dealing with neferious people for arms has never rediculed by the so called secular society. Afzal case is been kept pending for months. All cases related to Mumbai blasts has been asked to go slow. Sabamatti express carnage never come to discussion.

If one decides to question some kind of act of only one incident or a person, then one may find different answer.

I find many people question to suit their convenience like the oppostion parites questions only the ruling party and forget what they did when they were rulling. Every one says take stern action against terrorists. ...more
Answered by MS Prasad, 08 Dec '07 11:08 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (3)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

It is not yet for sure that a false encounter did take place. Modi never said but it was people's united chorus in the public meeting that anti-national forces should be killed. So it was not Modi's admission that Sohrabuddin deserved such fate but that of public voice. This has to be understood by everyone and shd not exhibit pseudo-secularism for vote bank.
Answered by Dr G V Rao, 08 Dec '07 03:00 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

Trying to justify fake encounters publicly or doing fake encounters is wrong, not only in India but any where in the world. But encounters cannot be avoided any where in the world, when dealing with hard core criminals and terrorists.
When Sonia Gandhi referred Modi as Mauth ka saudagar in public during election campaign, Modi also prefered to give a fitting answer to her on the same platform, and attempted to justify anti Indian hard core terrorist, Sohrabuddin's encounter (Modi did not say in fake encounters).
Political leaders like MODI are emerging purely because of biased attitude of all the psuedo secular parties and their leaders from Congress, Comrades, BSP, NCP, DMK etc.
We cannot blame MODI alone for his Hindu vote bank politics, when we could not prevent or stop the minority vote banks, caste based vote banks, region based vote banks created by many other parties or leaders across the country. The examples for this are many, but a few are below.
Example-1: In West Beng ...more
Answered by kesireddy sreedhar, 08 Dec '07 12:47 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

Paniwalaji, I would rather be straight in my opinion than being diplomatic, because I respect you a lot. My analysis of the situation is as follows.
1. There have been a no. of fake encounters in India. In fact fake encounters started during Congress regime. Remember UP under Veer Bahadur Singh (Cong-I) and erstwhile Congress-I led Governments in Maharashtra.
2. Since then fake encounters have become a norm rather than exception.
3. Famous blinding case of criminals in Bihar also occured during Congress-I rule in Bihar.
4. There has not been any discrimination on communal grounds for encounters. Members of almost all communities have been killed in fake encounters.
5. It was Congress-I, which sensationalized the issue of Sohrabuddin encounter to give an impression of Narendra Modi being Anti-minority. If they are against fake encounters, why does not Congress-I raise the issue of "Ab ttak Chhapan encounters" in Maharashtra. In Maharashtra also a no. of minority must have got kiled ...more
Answered by manish varma, 07 Dec '07 08:34 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

He was a potential trouble creator having weapons hidden in his house. The CM of that cannot be blamed for fake encounter by the police!
Answered by T A RAMESH, 06 Dec '07 12:27 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

Although I agree dangerous criminals should be dealt with at gunpoint, Narendra Modi shouldn't be discussing such issues in public. Encounters are state affairs. And a Chief Minister has no business bringing it up in a public fora.

He's just using it to whip up right wing majoritarian vote banks, it's all too obvious.
Answered by A Moin, 06 Dec '07 03:52 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
9.

I totally agree with you.Everyone liked the killing of people like Sohrabuddin who was terrorist and anti-Indian except Congressmen.Anybody who is against India and still living in India deserves a bullet in his chest.
Answered by shailuna, 06 Dec '07 12:25 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
10.

Sorry to give u this answer but i hate politics and nor i want to involve in it ....
Answered by Crystal, 08 Dec '07 10:36 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
Previous

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining