top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Rohit Pawar sniffs a devious plot

Asks was there a sinister motive behind his uncle’s travel delay because of an NCP leader from East Vidarbha Mumbai : A fortnight after the January 28 air-disaster that snuffed out Nationalist Congress Party President and Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Anantrao Pawar, his nephew and Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MLA Rohit Rajendra Pawar raised haunting questions challenging the premise that the Baramati tragedy was a mere accident, and alleging sinister attempts to suppress facts, delayed...

Rohit Pawar sniffs a devious plot

Asks was there a sinister motive behind his uncle’s travel delay because of an NCP leader from East Vidarbha Mumbai : A fortnight after the January 28 air-disaster that snuffed out Nationalist Congress Party President and Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Anantrao Pawar, his nephew and Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MLA Rohit Rajendra Pawar raised haunting questions challenging the premise that the Baramati tragedy was a mere accident, and alleging sinister attempts to suppress facts, delayed investigations and shielding powerful interests.   In a detailed, ‘research presentation’ in Mumbai on Tuesday, Rohit R. Pawar made stunning revelations of the chain of events to allege that Ajit Pawar - who was originally planning to travel by road - may have been pushed by a set of circumstance into taking that ill-fated Learjet flight – resulting into what he suspected “a possible well-planned conspiracy”.   The startling presentation showed official documents, ATC records, papers of the VSRVPL, WhatsApp chats of government groups and the VSRVPL top brass, the alleged shady background of some pilots and directors, brief pilot exchanges, records of certain international agencies to buttress his claims, and the snail-paced probe that could give time to manipulate the case.   Altered Plan The Karjat-Jamkhed MLA revealed that Ajit Pawar planned to travel by road that morning, but it was altered at the last minute due to some late-night events on Jan. 27.   “There was speculation on how much time Ajit Pawar would spend in Mumbai. So, was it already ‘decided’ that he would be compelled to take a hurried flight the next morning (Jan. 28)?” Rohit R. Pawar asked.   He also questioned how and why the pilot and co-pilot of the Learjet – owned by VSR Ventures Pvt Ltd.(VSRVPL) – were abruptly changed at the last moment and asked for a probe into this aspect.   He questioned why critical documents like the maintenance certificate of the VSRVPL aircraft, those responsible for carrying out the regular checks on the 16-year-old Learjet, and other records have not been made public yet.   “As per the official versions, after Ajit Pawar reached Mumbai airport at 7.50 am, the flight took at 8:10 am. Ajit Pawar was killed when the Learjet crashed between 8:43 and 8:45 am, just after it overflew Lonavala. But there was no MayDay Call, the transponder had allegedly been switched off, there was a deafening silence in the cockpit as the Push To Talk button was also off. Did the pilot deliberately crash it? All this will emerge only when the Black Box details are released,” asserted Rohit R. Pawar.   Urgent File In another shocker, he said that Ajit Pawar’s road departure plans were foiled as he had to sign an urgent file from an East Vidarbha leader of the NCP who arrived late – whom he did not identify – prompting him to wonder: “Was there a sinister motive behind these ‘delays’ considering that Ajit Pawar was a stickler for punctuality?”   Rohit R. Pawar said that in his final days, Ajit Pawar had stopped using plastic bottles and drank water from a glass bottle that was entrusted with his close security guard – “Did Ajit Pawar sense something amiss?”   Showing the alarming video of the aircraft tilting dangerously seconds before it crashed with an explosion and a blaze, Rohit R. Pawar said this contradicted VSRVPL officials’ claims that low-visibility and fog may have caused the disaster.   “The same aircraft had flown to Surat (Gujarat) two days earlier, it was reportedly airworthy, yet its Stall Warning System that gives advance alert to the pilots of any impending disaster, was allegedly off, and questions remain over whether Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System  EGPWS) alert came at the low altitude or not,” said Rohit R. Pawar.   Five Questions He posed five technical questions pertaining to the Learjet - the absence of tech-logs, airworthiness reports, hangar inside and outside CCTV footage, and heavy (base) maintenance records.   “Though 13-14 days have passed, there is no meaningful progress in the probe… This gives room for manipulating the evidence and the records,” contended the grand-nephew of NCP (SP) supremo Sharad Pawar.   In this context, Rohit R Pawar demanded a professional international investigation by reputed French or US agencies, alongside Indian authorities. For effect, he cited an ex-Mossad Director Meir Dagan’s famed comment in a book - “Sometimes it’s most effective to kill the driver, and that’s that” – suggesting the easy way to execute top personalities, and demanded a probe into whether similar tactics were employed to eliminate Ajit Pawar.   Upon enquiries with the probe agencies, Rohit R. Pawar said he was told that the CCTV footage has been collected, but even that has not been examined transparently, and wondered what was the status of the other critical aspects of the investigation involving one of the most high-profile political VIPs in the country – “If Ajit Pawar was not safe, what about the ordinary people?”

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page