Waris Pathan Urges Against Political Color in Disha Salian Case, Critiques UCC

by

Bhupendra Singh Chundawat

Waris Pathan Urges Against Political Color in Disha Salian Case, Critiques UCC

Mumbai, September 15 (Daily Kiran) : Waris Pathan, the national spokesperson for AIMIM, has called for the Disha Salian case to remain free of political agendas. He emphasized that the truth will emerge only after the CBI investigation concludes. Pathan addressed this issue alongside discussions on the Maratha reservation movement, AIMIM’s recent electoral success in Rajasthan, and the proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC).

Pathan remarked that the Disha Salian case should not be politicized. He highlighted the ongoing struggle of Satish Salian, Disha’s father, who has been seeking justice for his daughter for six years, insisting that her death was not a suicide. Following a High Court order, the CBI has initiated an investigation, recording statements and examining the roles of individuals named in the complaint. Pathan stated that if anyone is found guilty, legal action will follow.

He urged the CBI to investigate the basis of a previous closure report and what evidence was considered at that time. Only after thorough examination of witness statements and other facts will the CBI present its findings to the court, he noted. Pathan called for avoiding media trials and speculation, stressing the need for the truth to emerge and for the victim’s family to receive justice.

On the Maratha reservation issue, following Manoj Jarange Patil’s announcement of a march in Mumbai, Pathan reiterated AIMIM’s support for the demand. He advocated for reservations for both the Maratha and Dhangar communities, as well as for economically and socially backward Muslims. Citing the Sachar Committee and other reports, he argued that reservations should benefit families striving for educational advancement.

Addressing the controversy surrounding a West Bengal IAS officer using religious expressions in uniform, Pathan condemned what he termed “hate politics.” He argued that phrases like “Assalamualaikum” and “Inshallah” are cultural expressions and should not be contentious. He emphasized that uniforms do not reflect a person’s religion and that officials work under the Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom.

Concerning Umar Khalid, Pathan responded to Karnataka Congress President B.K. Hariprasad’s remarks. While unfamiliar with the statement, he expressed that it is unjust to keep someone imprisoned without trial. He asserted that the legal principle holds that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. Khalid and others have been incarcerated for years without progress in their cases, he noted, urging the government to present evidence in court.

Pathan also criticized Pakistan for allegedly promoting terrorism, referencing incidents like the Pulwama attack and the 26/11 attacks. He dismissed Pakistan’s reward for Masood Azhar as mere theatrics and called for stringent actions against terrorism.

On the proposed UPI payment system for transactions over ₹2,000, Pathan questioned the government’s timing in introducing fees after encouraging digital payments. He warned that such policies could erode public trust in the government.

Reflecting on AIMIM’s recent electoral success in Rajasthan, he described it as a significant achievement for the party, which has formed alliances with local leaders. Pathan expressed optimism for AIMIM’s future performance in Uttar Pradesh and indicated that decisions regarding future alliances would be made at the appropriate time.

Finally, Pathan voiced strong opposition to the UCC, arguing that India’s identity is rooted in its diversity and pluralism. He questioned how a society with varied religions and customs could be governed by a single legal framework. He warned that the UCC could infringe upon constitutional rights and impose specific religious laws on the Muslim community. Pathan criticized the notion of uniformity in laws across states, asserting that AIMIM will continue to oppose the UCC, advocating for consideration of India’s pluralistic structure in lawmaking.

Leave a Comment