Women condemn Meenakshi Lekhi’s sexist slandering of Ishrat Jahan

Meenakshi Lekhi
Meenakshi Lekhi

Over 115 women have signed a letter seeking an apology from Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi for her sexist slandering of deceased Ishrat Jahan in a television channel. The letter has also been sent to the Chairperson of the National Commission for Women for appropriate action.

As the noose is tightening around the conspirators who cynically and coldly planned and executed the killing of teenaged Ishrat Jahan and three other people in 2004, there is a concerted campaign – the final, last ditch bid to save their skins – by tarnishing the image of this college student. There have been planted stories in the media linking her to a terrorist group –all of them false and concocted, even as the Gujarat High Court has clearly said that the CBI’s mandate is to simply investigate whether Ishrat and others were killed in cold blood.

But Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi’s rantings on prime time TV touches a new low. Responding to mounting evidence of staged encounter, she asserted on Times Now TV channel that ‘here was a girl travelling with men unrelated to her’. Then she outdid herself by reiterating yesterday that since Ishrat came from a deprived background, she was a “fit case” for being a terrorist. This kind of personal slander reflects BJP’s deeply sexist and patriarchal character, besides of course communal and class prejudice. That their woman spokesperson chose to do so makes it worse. Ms. Lekhi would like us to believe that all those young women who travel and work independently are ‘suspicious’ and could have terrorist links, and are therefore fair game for encounter killings.

We condemn Ms. Lekhi’s insensitive sexist slandering of a girl who cannot defend herself, and demand an immediate apology.

1. Manisha Sethi, academic, Delhi

2. Mansi Sharma, activist, Delhi

3. Shabnam Hashmi, activist, Delhi

4. Saba Dewan, filmmaker, Delhi

5. Sanghamitra Misra, academic, Delhi

6. Mona Das, academic, Delhi

7. Sucharita Sengupta, academic, Delhi

8. Shohini Ghosh, academic and filmmaker, Delhi

9. Sabeena Gadihoke, academic, Delhi,

10. Seema Misra, Lawyer, Delhi

11. Pushpa, Writer, Bangalore

12. Uma V Chandru, Activist and academic, Bangalore

13. Neelanjana Mukhia, Activist

14. Rakhi Sehgal, activist, Delhi

15. Ramlath Kavil – Mumbai

16. Supriya Madangarli, writer, Mumbai

17. Amrita Shodhan UK

18. Geetanjali Gangoli- UK

19. Penkoottu, Kozhikode, Kerala

20. Prasanna P. R, Kochi, Kerala

21. Bitopi Dutta, researcher, Guwahati

22. Namrata Kilpadi Misra, Freelance editor and Gandhinagar

23. Ammu Abraham, feminist, Mumbai

24. Arfa Khanum Sherwani, Senior Anchor, Rajyasabha TV

25. Khadeej Arif, Journalist, London

26. Peggy Mohan, Writer, Delhi

27. Brinda Bose, academic, Delhi

28. Anurdha Chenoy, academic, Delhi

29. Ruchi Shroff, Vadodara, Gujarat

30. Sania Mariam,student ,kolkata.

31. Rohini Hensman, writer, Mumbai

32. Malini Sood, freelance editor, New Delhi

33. Bindu Menon, Academic, Delhi

34. Dr. Ayesha Sultan, Hannover Medical School, Germany

35. Teena Gill (Film maker, New Delhi)

36. Nandini Rao, Activist, Delhi

37. Rajashri Dasgupta, Journalist. Kolkata.

38. Kriti Budhiraja, JNU Delhi

39. Anuradha Bhasin, Journalist, Jammu

40. Minnie Vaid, Writer, Mumbai

41. Mamta Jaitly, activist, Jaipur

42. Renuka Pamecha, activist, Rajasthan

43. Mary Abraham, Student, Delhi

44. Kavita Srivastava, activist, Jaipur

45. Anuradha Talwar, activist, West Bengal

46. Dipa Sinha, Economist, Delhi

47. Komal Srivastava, activist, Rajasthan

48. Dr. Meeta Singh, health activist, Rajasthan

49. Nishat Hussein, activist, Rajasthan

50. Pragnya Joshi, activist, Udaipur

51. Smita Chakraburtty, Phd Scholar, Calcutta University, Kolkata

52. Sumati Pannikar, Research Fellow, JNU

53. Samreen Naaz, student, Kolkata

54. Shipra Nigam, Consultant Economist, New Delhi

55. Rizwana Akhtaree, Human Rights Defender, Bhubaneswar.

56. Tanuja Dh,

57. Meena Saraswathi Seshu, Activist

58. G. Arunima, academic, New Delhi

59. Aparna Sanyal, Film maker, New Delhi

60. Saba Hasan, Artist, New Delhi

61. Shweta Kishore, Researcher, Melbourne Australia

62. Ruchika Sharma, Academic, New Delhi

63. Irene Dhar Malik, Film Editor & writer, Mumbai

64. Shashwati Talukdar, Film maker, Dehradun

65. Monica Mody, poet and academic, San Francisco

66. Shikha Sen, Documentary Editor, New Delhi

67. Seema Duhan, Student, CA

68. Shaweta Anand, Student, Delhi

69. Laxmi Murthy, Journalist, Bangalore

70. Ammu Joseph, Journalist, Bangalore

71. Arpita Das, Delhi

72. Suma Josson, Activist, Mumbai

73. Sanam Roohi, PhD Candidate, NIAS/AISSR, Bangalore

74. Aprajita Krishna

75. Kavita Krishnan, activist, Delhi

76. Kirtana Kumar, Director, CARP/Little Jasmine/Theatre Lab

77. Sheeba Aslam Fehmi, writer and academic, Delhi

78. Shazia Nigar, journalist, Bhubhaneshwar

79. Taranga Sriraman, activist, Mumbai

80. Dr. Shelley Dahiya, New Delhi

81. Rupa Gulab, Writer, Gurgaon

82. Poornima Joshi, writer, Delhi

83. Amabrien Alqadr, Academic and filmmaker, Delhi

84. Himadri Sekhar Mistri, Research Scholar, Delhi School of Economics

85. S M M Ausaja, Film Historian, Mumbai

86. Nandini Lal, writer, Washington DC

87. Nandini Chandra, Academic, Delhi

88. Tahira Hasan, activist, Lucknow

89. Jyotsna, Journalist, Delhi.

90. Afreen Haque, Journalist, Kolkata

91. Smita Chakraburtty, Phd Scholar, Calcutta University, Kolkata. West Bengal.

92. Divya Rajagopal, journalist, Mumbai

93. Laxmi Murthy, Journalist, Bangalore

94. Rajeshwari Saroja, Academic, Mumbai

95. Jyotsna Khatri, filmmaker, Delhi

96. Snigdha Sheel, photographer, New Delhi

97. Purwa Bharadwaj, activist, Delhi

98. Nikita Agarwal, activist, Delhi

99. Ameen, Activist, New Delhi

100. Shehla Rashid, Policy Analyst, Delhi

101. Nabanipa Bhatacharya, academic, Delhi

102. Suraiya Patel, Entrepreneur, Mumbai

103. Virginia Saldanha, Activist, Mumbai

104. Dr. V. Mohini Giri, Delhi

105. Rukmini Rao, Secunderabad

106. Aashima Sharma, Student New Delhi

107. Abha Bhaiya, Delhi

108. Chinmayee Subhash

109. Vasanth Kannabiran

110. Suneeta Achutya

111. Anita Dixit, academic, Kolkata

112. Sona Mitra, Economist, Delhi

113. Shefali Sewak, Lawyer, Delhi

114. Neha Kohli, Researcher, Delhi

115. Namrata Ganneri, academic, Delhi

116. Bharati Jagannathan, academic, Delhi

117. Meera Ahmad, Academic, Delhi

52 thoughts on “Women condemn Meenakshi Lekhi’s sexist slandering of Ishrat Jahan”

    1. I approved this comment only as a sample of the many comments that Modi supporters leave,and which are not approved. This comment shows how much respect this Modi supporter has for women and for domestic labour. These people promise Ram Raj!


      1. next time plz think twice before giving such people a platform to express their prejudices, they have more space than they need anyway!


      2. In Dasharatha’s time, Ram respected the will of his father – which was actually the result of Kaikeyi’s ayyah (Mandari)’s devious machinations. Ram did not accuse his father of step-mother ‘appeasement’. He quietly performed what he felt was his Dharma. These pseudo-ram-bhakts have no qualms about referring to other women as Ayyahs, Waitresses or 50 Crore Girl Friends. No wonder Indians have been rejecting their promises of a fake ram-rajya.


      3. This is only one cmment from the Modi brigade on Kafila. You need to see the venom against minorities – both religious and otherwise – on blogs posted as comments on news stories of main newspapers !


        1. And believe me, it breaks my heart. As an honest, proud Indian Muslim youth, it breaks my heart to see that such venom, often directed against us. And these people are actually followed by Modi and Swami on twitter! How many more times do I have to profess my patriotism? How many?


          1. Nobody cares whether you profess your patriotism or not, because that does not win elections for anybody. Md. Advani ruined the country forever, in order to fulfill his ambition of becoming the Prime Minister of this country. He rode to power over the dead bodies of a few thousand innocent men, women and children, many of them sexually humiliated in the worst possible forms. Mr. Modi replicated his master simply because of the fact that we are an uncivilized ‘nation state’ where people love to seek glory and richness, not by any iota of hard work, but by trampling over the dead bodies of others. If ‘human beings’ lived in this country, we would have never seen the rise of BJP after 1992, nor would we have witnessed the public garlanding of a shameless mass murderer. Alas this is where we are stuck with our lives. Relax and carry on with your life. The curse of the dead won’t go unheard. Amen!


    2. I am no Modi fan or ardent BJP supporter, but the contents of the article are more in the nature of maligning a particular political party than criticize, if at all they were, sexist remarks of a ‘female’ advocate.
      When Shushma Swaraj, Uma Bharti, Meenakshi Lekhi, Smriti Irani and many other women are top leaders in the party, what sort of sexist or patriarchal character is evident in BJP! Plus, people from lower classes and castes have made it to the top positions of BJP. Modi I believe is an example only the uber ignorant can ignore. But, you folks of course won’t be successful in creating ripples in the lake if remarks of an advocate made in whatever capacity are not manipulated and attributed to the entire political outfit she is affiliated too.
      Also, the analogies in the article, to put it mildly, are an evidence of lack of common sense and logical capabilities of the author. Also, the fact that Ishrat’s involvement was corroborated by Headley’s statement to NIA has been very conveniently ignored.

      P.S. Though, I condemn Mz. Lekhi’s comments, this article has gone too far in singling out BJP and maligning it.

      P.S.S. @Shivam Vij, I am sure the person told you of his Modi ‘Bhakti’.


      1. Just a few women in any party does not mean the party is not patriarchal.A year ago many politicians belonging to various parties made sexiest remarks over their clothes.


    3. While it is true that the ‘pappu’ comment is reflective of the mindset of Modi supporters as pointed out by the moderator, I am kind of missing the inclusiveness of this letter too. How many domestic workers have been included in this letter? Or are we to believe that it can only be writers, activists, mediapersons. Artists, entrepreneurs and the like who can petition to the NCW?

      We as a society are actually quite exclusionary , even in our protests. Our maids do our chores and go away back to their slums or ‘servants quarters’. We don’t want them around after that. They dare not sit on our dining tables and have food with us or even use our loos for that matter. This is precisely the kind of mindset that brahmanical parties like BJP thrive on. Till we are not even going to accept this as a problem, leave alone doing something about it, we should not expect much to change.


  1. Several people, including Maulana Masood Azhar and David Headley have corroborated that Ishrat Jehan was an LeT operative – the former then retracted the statement. The curious case of the CBI inquiry is that while it is apparently doing its best to find out who killed her (along with her bona fide LeT operative companions), neither the CBI not the IB is interested in finding out whether or not she was indeed a terrorist.

    Mind you, I’m not quibbling on the right or wrongness of terrorists or any other person being killed without trial. What amuses me is this writer’s vociferous assertions that Jehan was NOT a terrorist and to gain moral traction – suggesting some sort of immoral conspiracy in even entertaining the thought that she – given the terrorist friends accompanying her – might indeed have been one of them.

    And then to think of cooking it all up in feminist floss – funny, I’d say.


    1. Whether Ishrat had terror links or not is yet to be proved, but the topic is about the sexist remark of a BJP spokes person.I find those remarks are in line with the patriarchal social system. Where are this women leaders when girls are being raped and murdered?


    2. How can anyone in his right senses believe assertion of those who run terroist den. Ishrat Jehan was a poor innocent girl like so many of her age in India. Every sensible person’s heart should weep for her untimely death.


    3. While I too felt that the article had wrongly arrogated for itself the right to decide whether or not Jehan was a terrorist, I think your phrase ‘cooking it up in feminist floss’ is deeply misleading, if not downright arrogant and offensive. The issue here is not whether she was guilty or not, and is not even whether the encounter was fake or not. The issue here is that this Meenakshi Lekhi made some outrageous comments on television by casting suspicion on a girl simply because she was travelling around with men who were not related to her. This is a very dangerous assertion to make, and to demand that it be apologized for is crucial, especially given the abysmal state of affairs in our country as far as women’s rights are concerned. To dismiss this as ‘feminist floss’ suggests nothing but a deliberate and malicious effort to de-legetimize the entire argument with insulting phrases, rather than addressing the crux of the matter.


      1. Only if you have a Hindu name. If your name reads ‘Ishrat Jehan’, you are game for an round of firing practice :-)


    4. If she was not a terrorist, an entire nation stands with her and her family. If she was a terrorist, she already got what she deserved. Leaving this question unanswered is only bringing more slender to her and creating an environment of fear and mistrust. A young educated Muslim girl is scared for she runs a risk of being shot in a fake encounter only because of her religious identity. A corporate slave in Pune who luckily escaped a bomb blast wonders who’s side our government is on. Yes both of these people are real and so are their fears. But then who’ll complain; politicians are garnering votes and extremists (right and left) having a field day.


      1. Would like to define who a ‘terrorist’ really is? I have come to believe that the only pre requisite is that you should bear a Muslim Identity. A person, on the hand, can organize the worst pogrom in the history of ‘India’ and he is not called a terrorist. Could you please help me with the definition of a terrorist? Thanks


    5. And what amuses me is your conviction that Ishrat was definitely a terrorist. And look whose evidence you are sighting, David Headley (a CIA double agent gone rouge) and Masood Azhar (a man the NDA government escorted out of India on a red carpet). The funny thing actually is that the only agency hell bent on proving that Ishrat was an LeT cadre is the IB, which itself is in the dock for eliminating her. No surprises here as to why they want to prove that she was a terrorist.


  2. The Gujarat High Court decided that the CBI’s current mandate was to investigate whether Ishrat Jehan and her companions were killed in a fake encounter, but the order does not preclude that she, and the others may have been terrorists. Their LeT links, if any, have been neither proved nor disproved, with Headley and other corroborations yet to be verified. Lekhi was certainly sexist in implying that Jehan travelling with unrelated men was somehow illegal, but surely the petitionists are being equally sexist in presuming she could not have been a terrorist simply because she was a teenaged girl. Rajiv Gandhi’s assassin was a girl too — and a very young one at that — and LTTE had many young women in their ranks. The encounter may well have been staged and therefore illegal and reprehensible — but the foursome’s overall innocence cannot be presumed either. Let’s not link and confuse issues.


  3. All right-thinking people would agree whole-heartedly with this statement. But the one big pity is that this has been signed only by 115 women. This is the basic problem with most gender-related issues that are discussed on public platforms – i.e. that they are pitched as some warped battle of the sexes. EVERYone should have been asked to sign this, and I can guarantee that an equal or larger number of sensible men would have signed this. In a similar vein, the statement made by the BJP spokesperson (Lekhi) would have been despicable no matter who it was made by- man, woman or ape. In future I would urge outlets such as Kafila to lead the way in this regard and approach such issues in a more inclusive manner.

    On another note, we also need a thorough investigation into how media houses (most notably Headlines Today) have gotten away with running stories planted by the IB, whose only purpose is to tar Ishrat Jahan’s name on the basis of fabricated CD’s and transcripts.


  4. Shivam, how about posting a similar protest against Maulana Madani, General Secretary, Jamiat Ulema-Hind who used highly derogatory and outrageous words against Ms. Smriti Irani on a news debate on Headlines Today at prime time thereby displaying his crass and crude mindset towards women?
    You might not register your protest as Ms. Smriti Irani is from BJP (a party towards which you and your comrades have pathological hatred) and Maulana is a ‘secular’ figure, but then Ms. Irani is a woman and deserves equal respect and dignity as others. Let me see how keen you are to address this issue.
    I am also posting the link of the video here for your reference and for others to watch it.


  5. Disgusting comments. Just shows the mentality of BJP ‘leaders’. It’s also disconcerting to know that the alternative to Montek, Chiddu and Manmohan are these sort of people. India is pretty much doomed.


  6. How can this remark “here was a girl travelling with men unrelated to her” be treated as SEXIEST ? Change the word “girl” to “boy”. Is this sexist then ? When a girl is travelling with some “unknown” men.. what should one say not to become sexist ?

    Till now NO INVESTIGATING AGENCY has declared the killed girl as “INNOCENT”. Everyone is trying to HIDE something. CBI’s chargesheet has kept mum on this issue. WHY ? Was it very difficult to declare her innocence ?


  7. “Maulana Masood Azhar and David Headley have corroborated that Ishrat Jehan was an LeT operative” – 1) would it be possible to know to whom they confessed these? 2)how credible are such confessions? 3) was it recorded in a court statement or video evidence? 4) So, our public have started believing that Azar and Headley are more credible than CBI!

    Last but not the least, the present case is about ‘encounter’ and not about whether she is a terrorist or not! Even if she is, her parents are still eligible for a fair trail and a civilised society must ensure that they get one!


  8. @Sampurna – “along with her bona-fide LeT operative companions” ? And you got this impression, how ? One of the stories is that Javed Sheikh, alias Pranesh Pillai was her husband and actually an IB informer. The other two have not been shown to had LeT affiliations, that I am aware of. Headley’s mention of Ishrat is controversial, to say the least. After all this, please do not pretend to be objective.


  9. The frame of article is pathetic.”noose is tightening”,the court yet hasn’t framed the charges to speculate over an judgement i pretty dangerous.The other thing which sticks me like a ore thumb is my mom never let me go anywhere ithout taking a number where i could be reached.Here this 19 year old goes missing for four days there isnt a report ,none of the neighbours are in the know and even the mother seems to be clue less.What the departed was doing in Ahmedabad just seems to be anybody’s guess right now aong ith 3 men two of them Pakistanis.


  10. Funny, u would say SAMPOOOOOORNA. A girl is killed, in cold blood, tortured for days. See the pictures, how policemen placed the AK47 rifles on their dead bodies. I could not understand Seetaram, or this lekhi when they say, in their press and media judgments that the girl was a terrorist. I mean how would a terrorist is defined, like if u r terrified by a spider crawling on the wall, then does that automatically be said that the when u are terrified by something, which appears terrifying, for whatever utter reason u forge, then without any name, that terrifying thing can be called terrorist. Only in the case of muslims, the word is the synonym and in case of “others”, it is added with alleged, so-called, and victimised, in some cases. I am very much confident that no constitution, no law, no enforcement no power on this earth or in sky or in the Universe, no press, no media, no matter how much they try to hide it, the color of innocents blood will resurface yet again to doom the berber slaughter men and these slaughter women. i wonder how we were called barbarian, when they themselves do in humane acts….. for which the justice will be done, no matter what, GOD will do justice and we all are waiting for it, here or on the day of judgment, when justice will be done, and when nothing could move except by the will of LORD.


  11. Reblogged this on Indianfeminist101 and commented:
    2 Easiest ways to justify the mindless killing of a teenager girl:

    1. Call her a TERRORIST – but only if she is Muslim.
    2. Call her a loose character.

    Meenazi Lekhi, your comments stink of double edged prejudice.


  12. Shame on you Meenakshi Lekhi. One knows you are incapable of feeling remorse. But atleast extend a token apology. It may calm the soul of the encountered girl.


  13. You didn’t publish my many, previous comments because you erroneously conclude that I am a hard-core Modi fan. I am against extra judicial killings and I expect Kafila, a more or less leftists blog, doesn’t run stories selectively? Do intellectuals at kafila seriously believe that Ishrat Jahan was the first or only victim of extra judicial killings?

    Why other encounter deaths in other states don’t enjoy space on Kafila blog? If you are selective in your righteous indignation, you lose your credibility. It’s not about Congress Vs. Modi. It’s about your journalistic ethos and selective outrage. Give this a thought and then decide on publishing it.



      1. Extra-judicial killings are illegal, and the errant policemen ought to be dealt with severely for their crime. Now here even if the policeman are able to prove that she was a terrorist, they still ought to be punished as their act still qualifies as an extra-judicial killing.

        However, must you ignore evidence available against Ishrat at your sweet willed convenience? That’s pathetic journalism. Just one side of the story. How convenient for you. Saves you time. Or maybe it’s just sticking up for the Bad Muslims for the heck of it because you are unquestionably secular, not to mention incurably stupid.


      2. Dear Shivam,

        All right thinking democratic citizens of India show equal outrage at any extra judicial killings including that of Ishrat Jahan. My point was that you give more prominence to those injustices that are directly or indirectly related to Modi and at the same time, don’t give space for similar events happening elsewhere. You did the right thing as regards Ishrat Jahan case. Did you do the right thing for similar events elsewhere? This is what you have to answer. I am sure you understood it, but are not facing it squarely.


  14. How about providing the sources (meaning the date and time of the Times Now show where she made the comment and where the fit case comment appears)?


  15. As an Indian , I personally feel that Ishrat Jahan and her three friends should be awarded the highest civilian honour posthumously , because their martyrdom has led to the rot in Indian police and intelligence agencies. It speaks volumes about the police of Gujarat when four innocent people were killed in cold blood , just so that they can please Narendra Modi. Just looking at the statistics of people arrested in India , it becomes obvious that the police targets the innocent muslims of India . In West Bengal muslims constitute around 20-25% of the population ,but they constitute 50% of the total prisoners. Now, its not as if muslims are more prone to commiting crime , so its obvious that the police routinely target innocent muslims.


  16. Mukul Sinha raises some valid pojnts about how facts of Headley testimony are twisted to malign Ishrat and save her killers

    “Right wingers are known to lie and falsify history to achieve their nefarious objective of creating wrong public perceptions. The Sunday Guardian’s article not only does this but goes a step further in planting the two paragraphs which are allegedly “dropped” from the NIA Report. It is obvious that the two paragraphs reportedly dropped could not have been a part of NIA report since absolutely contradictory facts could not have been recorded by the ‘expert’ interrogators of NIA.”

    Posted by Mukul Sinha on Friday, July 5, 2013


    1. “Headley therefore could not have been introduced for the first time to Muzammil in late 2005 when he already knew him since 2002 and Muzammil was actually his handler since August 2004.”

      Where is it said he was introduced for the first time in 2005?

      ” how come Muzammil, Headley’s handler, did not tell him about this project in 2004 itself or possibly get him enrolled?”

      The text posted itself says that “Though Muzzammil was my handler but it was Sajid who used to interact with me frequently.” The testimony notes that though Headley expressed his desire to play a role in Kashmir frequently both Zaki and Muzzammil had something different planned for him.

      “It is obvious that the two paragraphs reportedly dropped could not have been a part of NIA report since absolutely contradictory facts could not have been recorded by the ‘expert’ interrogators of NIA.”

      Really? So explain how this set of “contradictory facts” appear in the link quoted by you?

      NIA Report on CNN-IBN – http://ibnlive.in.com/news/read-david-headleys-nia-interrogation-report/154008-53.html

      “At the time of my first meeting, Sajid was not a part of the Indian set up of LeT. ”

      “Then in 2004 Muzzammil again introduced me to Sajid at safe house in Muzzaffarabad . Sajid got married around three years ago. ”

      How is he meeting Sajid twice then? Hmm. Maybe “introduce” here just means introduce in a meeting rather than introduce for the first time. Just like Muzzammil was introduced in different meetings.


  17. I generally tend to think the comments made by Meenakshi Lekhi and the event – IShart Jahan’s extra judicial killing along with three others – reflect India. There is prejudice in some sections of Indian polity against some individuals. The rule of law is weak. The investigative agencies and police are not independent. The wheels of justice turn too slow, if they turn at all. It takes years to bring the real culprits to book. Media houses have their biases or preferences and don’t give equal coverage to injustices regardless of the political umbrella such events take place under. Political party spokespeople stoop to cheap innuendo and character assassination. No spokesperson answers people of India. They answer their political masters.
    The right question that arises is about judicial and police reforms in India. All extra judicial killings must be treated on a par with murder, nothing less. We need to learn a lot from liberal western democracies, especially in the rule of law, judiciary and bringing culprits to book. Making cheap comments and throwing unsubstantiated remarks and using innuendo for political gains should stop. Thumps down to Ms. Lekhi.


  18. The CBI has said in its chargesheet that the guy with whom ishrat was working , was a smuggler and used to run a currency counterfeit racket, this is not just Gujrat’s Govt. statement, but it is CBI’s which is much biased against the Modi govt. The other two belonged to some parties in Kashmir, again according to the CBI, can someone here care enough to tell me what that girl was doing with these three? how was she working with a smuggler in the first place? that same girl was worshipped as martyr on a LET owned magazine, while the writer criticizes and pounces upon a political leader does not question about these things. The writer is as much biased it seems.


  19. But what was Ishrat Jahan doing with those 3 terrorists ? What was her motive to be with them ?


  20. BJP is the Most Shameless Party ever in Indian Politico and to justify their Misdeeds they can Stoop to any Low


  21. Terrorists ll only get bullets,instant and quick natural justice,no emrcy for terrorists and Ishrat Jahan is one because IB says so,period.No more silly verbose debates on it.


Comments are closed.