Cow vigilantism: Why Naqvi's explanation is not convincing -Governance Now

Cow vigilantism: Why Naqvi's explanation is not convincing

The Indian media has taken notice of this. But the minister says it is all wrong. So ill-informed a government! So insensitive a government!, says Ghulam Nabi Azad

GN Bureau | April 8, 2017

#Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi #Gujarat #Rajasthan #Gau Rakshak #Cow vigilantism #Ghulam Nabi Azad

Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has dismissed cow vigilantism that led to one person being killed, when he said in parliament that no such incident has taken place.

Here is the relevant section of the debate, translated into English from Hindi, that took place in the Rajya Sabha:

Madhusudan Mistry from the Congress: I demand that the Rajasthan government should be dismissed. The law and order situation is quite bad. Any person or a gang, without fear of the state, is free to stop a truck. They can hit or assault, but the local police won’t act. Won’t do anything in Madhya Pradesh… Won’t do anything in Rajasthan…Neither in Gujarat nor in Uttar Pradesh. I demand the resignation of the state government over the incident. The government is not able to fulfil its constitutional obligations. I demand that the victim be paid Rs 1 crore as compensation.

Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi: This is a very sensitive issue. The message should not go that we support cow slaughter…This is an emotive issue linked to people. No such incident has taken place in the state being referred to. The state government has already denied the media report on the incident. We don’t want to justify lawlessness or goondaism of any kind. But, the message should not go from this house that we are supporting cow slaughter.

Leader of the opposition Ghulam Nabi Azad: “Sir, I am extremely sorry that the minister is so ill-informed. Even the New York Times has written about it today saying, “Hindu Cow Vigilantes in Rajasthan, India, Beat Muslim to Death.” So, even the New York Times knows about it, but the minister does not know about it.

“Then, see what the U.P. high court is saying. It says, “The High Court reminds U.P. Government of secular umbrella”. So, the High Court of U.P. has taken notice of this. The New York Times has taken notice of this. The Indian media has taken notice of this. But the minister says it is all wrong. So ill-informed a government! So insensitive a government!”

Read: The complete debate in the Rajya Sabha

Comments

Other News

Capital acquisition proposals worth Rs 1.10 lakh crore for defence forces cleared

The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), under the chairmanship of Raksha Mantri Rajnath Singh, on Monday accorded Acceptance of Necessity (AoN), that is, in-principle administrative approval to various acquisition proposals of the defence forces at an estimated cost of about Rs 1,10,000 crore.

How Rafi, Raj Kapoor helped pave the way for a great uranium deal

There`s a certain moment in diplomacy that`s too personal to be captured in a communiqué, too small to make the front page, but more revealing than the front page. This week, prime minister Narendra Modi reached Tashkent and, amid the pomp of state visits, managed to evoke the old Bollywood tunes

Distinguishing Fish 1 and Fish 2: The pragmatism behind India’s WTO ratification

India became the 123rd WTO member to ratify the multilateral Agreement on Fisheries subsidies (AoFS) when it deposited the Instrument of Acceptance for Phase 1 on July 20, 2026. The ratification is restricted to disciplining Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU), protection for overfished

The 7% growth problem: Why the next 7% will be harder

India has become accustomed to hearing the 7% growth number. It is now less a milestone than an expectation. Yet the paradox is becoming clearer: maintaining 7% growth may be considerably harder than achieving it once. India’s real GDP grew 7.7% in FY2025–26, following growth of 6.5% in FY202

The Constitution cannot be altered: Justice Abhay Oka

Justice Abhay Oka, who retired from the Supreme Court in May 2025, has said that the Constitution of India cannot be altered. Explaining the landmark Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) on the basic structure of the Constitution, he said, “This is one judgment that has saved democracy in India.&rdq