DONALD J TRUMP AND HIS PRIVATE ADMISSION OF GUILT

At a recent interview, Bill O Reilly asked Donald Trump a follow-up question on his latest scandal, "Have you assessed how you're going to win back women who were offended by the recent exposition from 'Access Hollywood'? Do you have a plan to get those women back?"

His answer was - "Well, first of all, locker room talk, and most people have heard it before, and I've had a lot of women come up to me and said, boy, I've heard that and I've heard a lot worse than that over my life."

He also added a surprisingly unapologetic tone in his answer, "And, you know, if that's why I'm going to lose an election to get rid of ISIS and to create strong borders and rebuild our military and do all the things we're going to do, including Supreme Court judges and saving the Second Amendment, because it's under siege with Hillary Clinton or as I call her crooked Hillary, which is what she is. If that's what it's going to take to lose an election, I would be pretty sad then I have to go back to my other life."

This was after an apology he had made earlier - "I said it, I was wrong, and I apologise."  But Donald Trump actually told radio host Billy Bush that he committed an act of unwanted sexual advance on a married woman.

According to the US Department of Justice, "sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape."

Based on the US government's own definition and Trump's admission on tape, the Republican Presidential nominee may very well be guilty of sexual assault. The penalty for a person convicted of sexual assault allegation carries jail-time.

Donald Trump also told Billy Bush that he was "automatically attracted to beautiful (women)" and that he "just start[s] kissing them." And in his words, he doesn't "even wait." Apparently, "when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything." These are Donald Trump's words about what he did and what he does.

CNN's Anderson Cooper pressed him at the 2nd Presidential debate to confirm whether he actually did the things he said he did, "Just for the record, though, are you saying that what you said on that bus 11 years ago that you did not actually kiss women without consent or grope women without consent? Have you ever done those things?", Trump rumbled on but finally said,"No, I have not."

If Trump had said "Yes", he would have admitted his guilt of sexual assault. His "No" answer isn't good either. It means he lied to Billy Bush about his conduct with women and bragged about that lie.

To be fair, Hillary Clinton has a mountain of scandals that is just not going away. And Wikileaks is dropping one bomb after another. Her lying under oath at a Congressional hearing; her lying about emails and lying about those lies, the conduct of her aides in destroying evidence subpoenaed by Congress, the foreign contributions that seem to flow into the Clinton Foundation under her watch. The list goes on and on. If the law was correctly applied, she would clearly be in prison for the many laws she and her aides recklessly broke.

However, all of these still donot nullify nor justify the claim that Donald Trump made in 1995 on that bus with Billy Bush. Sexual immorality is considered one of the scarlet sins by the many Christian leaders that support his candidacy. While the Christian faith advocates forgiveness for someone who is repentant of his sins, the law is clear about the penalty for sexual assault.

If the sexual assault allegations against Donald Trump are true and can be proven, he will have to face the music even if he becomes the US President.

Bill Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct and assault, even rape. But he has never been known to admit it, even privately. Donald Trump has actually said he has sexually assaulted women. Even if all his Christian supporters forgive him, the law may still not be on his side.

CROOKED HILLARY AND AMORAL DONALD ON SUPREME COURT NOMINATION

At the 2nd US Presidential debate, both candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were asked this question by a member of the audience: "Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice?"

Hillary answered, "I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works." She also went on to express her opinion on the issue of abortion and same-sex marriage saying, "I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality."

Trump, despite his lifelong record on being mostly progressive and liberal leaning on these issues, said something that strikes the heart of millions of conservative Christians in America, "Justice Scalia, great judge, died recently. And we have a vacancy. I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of Justice Scalia. I’m looking for judges — and I’ve actually picked 20 of them so that people would see, highly respected, highly thought of, and actually very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody. But people that will respect the Constitution of the United States. And I think that this is so important."

Justice Antonin Scalia was a Reagan-appointed Supreme Court Justice who was one of the strongest believers in the process of democracy and a Justice with unwaivering faithfulness to the constitution. When 5 unelected Supreme Court Justices decided for 320 million Americans what marriage should be, he strongly expressed his disapproval and belief in the democratic process of social transformation before such a change. “Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court,” said Justice Scalia the day the US Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in America. 

Perhaps his main objection to the Court's decision is best summarized in his words - “[T]o allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

On the issue of abortion, his friend and ideological twin Judge Andrew Napolitano's explanation of Roe v. Wade couldn't be clearer. 


According to Judge Napolitano, "The linchpin of Roe v. Wade is the judicial determination that the baby in the womb is not a person."

He also said, "[Roe v. Wade] permits abortions in all 50 states during the first three months of pregnancy for any reason or for no reason. It permits abortions during the second three months of pregnancy for the health of the mother. 'Health of the mother' can mean mental health; thus, most states have taken the liberal position that if a continued pregnancy would make the mom sad or challenge her psychologically, or if she has second thoughts about the pregnancy, the baby may be aborted.

Roe vs. Wade also permits the states to prohibit or to allow abortions during the last three months of pregnancy. Most states prohibit all abortions during the final three months, as this is the period of viability; when the baby can live — assisted, of course — outside the mother's womb. New Jersey, my home state, is the exception, as it permits abortions up to the moment of birth."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/20/andrew-napolitano-the-abiding-abortion-controversy/

https://www.creators.com/read/judge-napolitano/01/12/a-few-words-about-abortion

It is not a surprise that Hillary Clinton wants to have a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade. She made her position clear when she told Meet The Press that “the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufYzo5hKLww

Donald Trump, for all his indefensible words and deeds, has the backing of pro-lifers especially on this issue because the appointment of the next Supreme Court Justices will outlast even a two-term presidency. 

Ted Cruz once rightly said Donald Trump is "utterly amoral," "a narcissist at a level I don't think this country's ever seen" and "a serial philanderer." Hillary Clinton plans to appoint Justices that "understand the way the world really works" according to her belief and not according to the fundamental beliefs on which America was built. It looks like it is going to take an utterly amoral and immoral person to stand for the bedrock of society - traditional marriage - and defend the life of the unborn.

HINDU NATIONALISM VS MIZO NATIONALISM

The general understanding of what is happening under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's leadership in India is that the country is under new management and hindutva is the banner to which all of India must conform. Atleast this is what most people on the other side of the fence believe.

In 2013, then Chief Minister Narendra Modi gave an interesting interview to Reuters news agency. One of the questions was, "People want to know who is the real Modi — Hindu nationalist leader or pro-business chief minister?" to which Modi replied, "I'm nationalist. I'm patriotic. Nothing is wrong. I'm a born Hindu. Nothing is wrong. So, I'm a Hindu nationalist so yes, you can say I'm a Hindu nationalist because I'm a born Hindu. I'm patriotic so nothing is wrong in it. As far as progressive, development-oriented, workaholic, whatever they say, this is what they are saying. So there's no contradiction between the two. It's one and the same image."

There is no doubt this Indian Prime Minister has shaken the belief that India must only be ruled by a Gandhi family or some other related dynasty. In that sense, he has done a great service to Indian democracy. During the last parliamentary election, Congress party senior leader Mani Shankar Ayer derided him at an AICC meeting in New Delhi when he said, "I promise you in 21st Century Narendra Modi will never become the Prime Minister of the country. ...But if he wants to distribute tea here, we will find a place for him." Ayer's promise, we now know, was not delivered. In fact, the people of India gave Modi a place well above distributing tea at any AICC meeting.

It is true that Modi used to sell tea at train stations as a young boy with his father. He was poor and did not have the luxury of not having to work for low-paid jobs. And he is quite open about it. "I have sold tea at the railway station and in running trains," he once told a crowd in Patna.

From very humble beginnings Narendra Modi rose to become the most powerful man in the biggest democracy in the world. Quite an achievement. The one significant thing that seems to stay with him is his humility. His down-to-earth appeal to people, some would say, is even Reaganesque. Like the great US President of modern era, Modi would often strike the right tone when it comes to giving public speeches on themes related to limiting the size of government and the burden it has on everyday people. At the 70th Indian Independence Day celebration on Monday, he said this of taxation - "We want to change the situation where people are scared of Income Tax authorities, particularly the middle class." Sounds like the Gipper? You bet!

Also known is the fact that the Prime Minister has had his genuine baptism in the waters of Hindu nationalism. At the age of 8, Modi learned about the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and started to attend its local shakhas (training sessions). It was there that he met Lakshmanrao Inamdar, also known as Vakil Saheb, who inducted him as an RSS balswayamsevak (junior cadet). Vakil Saheb became his political mentor. During his training, he also met some of the founding members of his state's BJP unit. And the rest is history.

In short, Narendra Modi is a die-hard, Hindutva-favouring Prime Minister who loves his country a little differently than the first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru was a secularist and a socialist with good intentions and for the most part he governed the new nation well. Even Modi would agree that Nehru and the other founding fathers of modern India served their country with conviction as dedicated Indian patriots. It was perhaps the prolonged romance the people of India had with the INC leaders that led to the subsequent decadence in the politics of the nation. By the time UPA II finished its term, the people of India were throughly fed up with the Congress and their colleagues and there was a genuine hunger for a total change. And Modi was the perfect candidate to lead a nation that was tortured by the inefficiency of its government. But it did not come without a price. The secular nature of the nation Mahatma Gandhi had envisioned quickly became a subject of revision, not so much by the government but by the forces that held the government together. It was done without remorse.

One of the allegations directed at the BJP-led government is the saffronisation of the country. For a Hindu-nationalist, this is perfectly in line with what a Hindustan should be. But for the millions of Indians (including many Hindus) who subscribe to the idea of a secular India, this is an affront to the heart and soul of a modern, democratic, secular India.

Last week, the BJP leadership decided to honour 10 "forgotten freedom fighters" from the Northeast states. According to The Asian Age, this move by the Central government is a "bid to walk the talk on its 'Act East' policy" that "will honour 10 freedom fighters from the Northeast, who remain forgotten from the narrative of the Indian freedom struggle." There is actually a degree of truth in this assertion.

Among the 10 patriots the BJP Government wanted to honour as "freedom fighters" for the nation of India is Khuangchera, one of the most celebrated martyrs from the village of Reiek under the chieftainship of Sailo Chief Sailianpuia. Reiek is a town near Aizawl. Pasaltha Khuangchera fought the British/Indian army valiantly and died a hero. He was the first among the Mizo people who died defending his people. The year was 1890 and the lands occupied by the various clans of the Mizo people were ruled by sovereign Chiefs.

When BJP Mizoram President Prof JV Hluna was asked by the national BJP leaders to provide names of Indian freedom fighters from Mizoram, he told them that there was none even though Lunglei resident Darthawma, the lone Mizo Indian Freedom Fighter who fought under the Indian National Army is still alive in his mid 90's. The history professor and his party colleagues went ahead and decided to nominate Khuangchera. When the media broke the news about the Central government's plan to honour Mizo patriot Khuangchera as one of the forgotten Indian Freedom Fighters, all hell started to break loose. Pro-Mizo sentiment was quickly aroused among Mizo nationalists who believed it was a great dishonour to honour Khuangchera for the cause he never died for. They also believed it was effectively a rewriting of history along the Hindu or Hindustan-centric narrative. Long story short, the two largest student bodies Mizo Students' Union (MSU) and Mizo Zirlai Pawl (MZP) immediately mobilised their supporters, held a meeting and issued a strong statement opposing the BJP's plan. They faxed a letter to the Prime Minister's Office and they also met the felicitation program chief guest Union Railways Minister Rajen Gohain at Lengpui airport and told him their strong objection.

According to a PTI report, "Gohain was quoted as saying that he understood the sentiments of the Mizo people and did not want to hurt their sentiments by attending the programme at Khuangchera's native village Ailawng." The Minister cancelled his program but told the student leaders that he wanted to pay his respects to Khuangchera and visit his grave. Crisis was averted, atleast for now. The BJP minister was spared an embarassment, the Mizo student leaders got what they wanted but the state BJP chief and his academic colleague Prof Laltluangliana Khiangte are now seen by many as sell-outs because of their involvement in an apparent attempt to portray Mizo patriot Khuangchera as someone who fought and died for the freedom of India.

While Mizoram is a part of India, the Mizo people were a sovereign independent people in the not-so-distant past. While the Mizo people and other peoples in the state greatly benefit from being part of India, the fact is there are still remnants of Mizo nationalism that will not die as long as the Mizo people live, especially when living relatives of martyrs such as Khuangchera still hold onto the legacies of their beloved ones.

Maybe Modi's government will have to recognise and respect the sincerely held belief of the Mizo people. Maybe Hindutva does not work well in Mizoram. Maybe Mizos prefer to maintain and preserve their identity while embracing their Indian nationality. Maybe that is the way it should be, as Nehru clearly recognised it during the formative years of what has now become a state in the Indian union.

Borrowing Modi's words, Mizos are "nationalists" and "patriotic" and "nothing is wrong" with that. Most Mizos today embrace Christianity and "nothing is wrong." And so you can say, a Mizo is a Christian nationalist. He is a proud member of the Mizo or Zo community and will continue to live in harmony with his Indian brothers and sisters as one nation as long as he feels he is treated with respect and fairness.

I remember watching with a degree of excitement when the Prime Minister came to visit Sydney two years ago and gave a 90-minute speech in front of a 20000-strong audience at Allphones Arena. I wanted to go but I'm glad I watched it streamed live on youtube with English subtitles. I wouldn't have understood a thing because it was all in Hindi except for the first lines - "I like to begin by acknowledging the tradition of this land, and pay my respect to original owners of the land of Sydney, the aborigines and their descendants . My respect to all senior members of the society and community, and my countrymen..."

Statesman Modi did what is commonly accepted as a decent thing to do. It did not cost him anything. He gave his speech, met the Australian leaders and later left Australia with much stronger ties than before.

HOW MUCH DID THE GOVERNMENT SPEND TO CONFIRM WHAT WAS OBVIOUS?

On Dec 11th, 2013, K.Chhawnthuama anonymously sent two crazy text messages to Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla who was not happy about it. Lal Thanhawla reported it to the police on Dec 13th and hoped for "an appropriate legal action." The Chief Minister later told his party men and women at the Congress Bhavan the reason why he filed a complaint - the text messages contained really dirty and extremely disgusting information about him and that he would appear to be a coward if he did not have the courage to take it to court.

The Officer in Charge of Aizawl Police Station registered the FIR the next day (Aizawl PS Case No.373/2013) under Sections 171G IPC and Sections 66A (a)&(b) of IT Act.

Section 171G of the Indian Penal Code is about false statement in connection with an election. This is what it says "Whoever with intent to affect the result of an election makes or publishes any statement purporting to be a statement of fact which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, in relation to the personal character or conduct of any candidate shall be punished with fine."

When the police OC read the text messages, he pretty much came to the conclusion that the sender was wrong and that the receiver was right. Hence, the registration of complaint under Sec 171G. (The charge under IT Act has another interesting story which shall be discussed separately.)

The sender of the text messages was quickly identified by the police and it turned out to be K.Chhawnthuama, Principal of KV Multipurpose School in Durtlang, Aizawl. He was arrested on Dec 17th, 2013 and was charged under Sections 201/204/506/507 IPC along with Sections 66A (a)&(b) of IT Act.

The first charge IPC Sec 201 is about "causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender." Sec 204 is about the "destruction of document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence."

IPC Sec 506 attracts the "Punishment for criminal intimidation.—Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprison­ment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc."

IPC Sec 507 is about the "criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication."

As you will see in the disposition of the case by the Aizawl Bench of the Gauhati High Court that confirmed the first judgement by the 1st Class Magistrate, whoever exercised their legal judgement on what law K Chhawnthuama allegedly broke is clearly in need of a refresher course on the basic understanding of the law. The contents of the text messages pales in comparison to some of the messages circulated every day on social media today in terms of its shock value and criminal nature. The church elder was irresponsible and should never have sent those messages but to say he was criminally intimidating the Chief Minister is an argument too far a stretch.

A 1st Class Judicial Magistrate examined the charge but "came to an opinion that the chargesheet does not disclose any prima facie materials to frame the alleged charges of guilt of offences under Sections 201/506/507 of the IPC" and dismissed them on May 26th, 2014.

When this happened, the Government of Mizoram (guess who was the Government of Mizoram?) was not happy and "preferred a Criminal Revision Petition under Section 399 Cr.P.C" before a Sessions Judge. A "Criminal Revision No.27/2014" was registered. 

This petition by the State government attempted to override the Magistrate's judgement because under this clause of the Cr.P.C, the Sessions Judge has the power to make a decision which "shall be final and no further proceeding by Way of revision at the instance of such person shall be entertained by the High Court or any other Court." It was clear the government wanted to trump the lower court's decision.

However, in what could only be described as disappointing, an Additional Sessions Judge upheld the Magistrate's decision on Feb 23rd, 2015. 

According to the judgement of the High Court that decided on this case this year, Public Prosecutor AK Rokhum "contended that both the Trial Magistrate was well as the Revisional Court without applying their judicial mind, in a very casual manner dropped Sections 506 & 507 IPC" against K Chhawnthuama "without going through the materials & documents submitted by the prosecution." 

The Public Prosecutor, paid for by the government using public money, basically argued that the Magistrate did not go through the text message properly and did not read the law (IPC Sec 506/507) well.

After loads of legal arguments back and forth, the Aizawl Bench of the Gauhati High Court finally decided that the petition of the State of Mizoram against K.Chhawnthuama a.k.a. Phantom could not stand and ruled in favour of the accused criminal.

Here's what the Court says about the whole drama:

"From the perusal of the written complaint/FIR dated 13.12.2013 lodged by the complainant/informant, it can be seen that it does not contain any specific allegation against the sender of the anonymous SMS received from the mobile number '8575891878' that the sender threatened the complainant with injury to his person, reputation or property or it caused any alarm and since the said FIR dated 13.12.2013 of the informant, involved in this case, does not contain any ingredients of Sections 506 & 507 IPC, the learned Trial Magistrate rightly did not frame charge under Sections 506 & 507 of the IPC against the accused respondent...

this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed..."

The Court also said the Trial Magistrate did consider “all the materials available before him carefully” when it dismissed the charges in the first place. Public Prosecutor AK Rokhum’s argument - that the Trial Magistrate and the Revisional Court did not apply its judicial mind – is thus clearly rejected by the High Court. The subordinate officers of the law did apply their judicial mind and not political minds.

The State Government of Mizoram took all that trouble and spent all that money for something that is easily discernable as negligible or a non-issue. But, guess how much the government spent to confirm what was obvious?

On June 21st, Vanglaini published the amount of money the State government spent in five years for the service rendered by the Advocate General Biswajit Deb and four other lawyers. Between 2011 an 2016, the government gladly spent Rs.1,48,52,110 for various legal arguments including the absurd argument Public Prosecutor A.K.Rokhum kept pushing at the expense of the state.

Mizoram sorkar chuan Gauhati High Court-a advocate general Biswajit Deb leh sorkar ukil palite rawih nan kum nga, 2011-2016 chhungin Rs. 1,48,52,110 a sêng. - See more at: http://www.vanglaini.org/tualchhung/56342#sthash.8xN9wwQu.dpuf

HOW MUCH DID THE GOVERNMENT SPEND TO CONFIRM WHAT WAS OBVIOUS?

On Dec 11th, 2013, K.Chhawnthuama anonymously sent two crazy text messages to Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla who was not happy about it. Lal Thanhawla reported it to the police on Dec 13th and hoped for "an appropriate legal action." The Chief Minister later told his party men and women at the Congress Bhavan the reason why he filed a complaint - the text messages contained really dirty and extremely disgusting information about him and that he would appear to be a coward if he did not have the courage to take it to court.

The Officer in Charge of Aizawl Police Station registered the FIR the next day (Aizawl PS Case No.373/2013) under Sections 171G IPC and Sections 66A (a)&(b) of IT Act.

Section 171G of the Indian Penal Code is about false statement in connection with an election. This is what it says "Whoever with intent to affect the result of an election makes or publishes any statement purporting to be a statement of fact which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, in relation to the personal character or conduct of any candidate shall be punished with fine."

When the police OC read the text messages, he pretty much came to the conclusion that the sender was wrong and that the receiver was right. Hence, the registration of complaint under Sec 171G. (The charge under IT Act has another interesting story which shall be discussed separately.)

The sender of the text messages was quickly identified by the police and it turned out to be K.Chhawnthuama, Principal of KV Multipurpose School in Durtlang, Aizawl. He was arrested on Dec 17th, 2013 and was charged under Sections 201/204/506/507 IPC along with Sections 66A (a)&(b) of IT Act.

The first charge IPC Sec 201 is about "causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender." Sec 204 is about the "destruction of document or electronic record to prevent its production as evidence."

IPC Sec 506 attracts the "Punishment for criminal intimidation.—Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprison­ment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc."

IPC Sec 507 is about the "criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication."

As you will see in the disposition of the case by the Aizawl Bench of the Gauhati High Court that confirmed the first judgement by the 1st Class Magistrate, whoever exercised their legal judgement on what law K Chhawnthuama allegedly broke is clearly in need of a refresher course on the basic understanding of the law. The contents of the text messages pales in comparison to some of the messages circulated every day on social media today in terms of its shock value and criminal nature. The church elder was irresponsible and should never have sent those messages but to say he was criminally intimidating the Chief Minister is an argument too far a stretch.

A 1st Class Judicial Magistrate examined the charge but "came to an opinion that the chargesheet does not disclose any prima facie materials to frame the alleged charges of guilt of offences under Sections 201/506/507 of the IPC" and dismissed them on May 26th, 2014.

When this happened, the Government of Mizoram (guess who was the Government of Mizoram?) was not happy and "preferred a Criminal Revision Petition under Section 399 Cr.P.C" before a Sessions Judge. A "Criminal Revision No.27/2014" was registered. 

This petition by the State government attempted to override the Magistrate's judgement because under this clause of the Cr.P.C, the Sessions Judge has the power to make a decision which "shall be final and no further proceeding by Way of revision at the instance of such person shall be entertained by the High Court or any other Court." It was clear the government wanted to trump the lower court's decision.

However, in what could only be described as disappointing, an Additional Sessions Judge upheld the Magistrate's decision on Feb 23rd, 2015. 

According to the judgement of the High Court that decided on this case this year, Public Prosecutor AK Rokhum "contended that both the Trial Magistrate was well as the Revisional Court without applying their judicial mind, in a very casual manner dropped Sections 506 & 507 IPC" against K Chhawnthuama "without going through the materials & documents submitted by the prosecution." 

The Public Prosecutor, paid for by the government using public money, basically argued that the Magistrate did not go through the text message properly and did not read the law (IPC Sec 506/507) well.

After loads of legal arguments back and forth, the Aizawl Bench of the Gauhati High Court finally decided that the petition of the State of Mizoram against K.Chhawnthuama a.k.a. Phantom could not stand and ruled in favour of the accused criminal.

Here's what the Court says about the whole drama:

"From the perusal of the written complaint/FIR dated 13.12.2013 lodged by the complainant/informant, it can be seen that it does not contain any specific allegation against the sender of the anonymous SMS received from the mobile number '8575891878' that the sender threatened the complainant with injury to his person, reputation or property or it caused any alarm and since the said FIR dated 13.12.2013 of the informant, involved in this case, does not contain any ingredients of Sections 506 & 507 IPC, the learned Trial Magistrate rightly did not frame charge under Sections 506 & 507 of the IPC against the accused respondent...

this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed..."

The Court also said the Trial Magistrate did consider “all the materials available before him carefully” when it dismissed the charges in the first place. Public Prosecutor AK Rokhum’s argument - that the Trial Magistrate and the Revisional Court did not apply its judicial mind – is thus clearly rejected by the High Court. The subordinate officers of the law did apply their judicial mind and not political minds.

The State Government of Mizoram took all that trouble and spent all that money for something that is easily discernable as negligible or a non-issue. But, guess how much the government spent to confirm what was obvious?

On June 21st, Vanglaini published the amount of money the State government spent in five years for the service rendered by the Advocate General Biswajit Deb and four other lawyers. Between 2011 an 2016, the government gladly spent Rs.1,48,52,110 for various legal arguments including the absurd argument Public Prosecutor A.K.Rokhum kept pushing at the expense of the state.

Mizoram sorkar chuan Gauhati High Court-a advocate general Biswajit Deb leh sorkar ukil palite rawih nan kum nga, 2011-2016 chhungin Rs. 1,48,52,110 a sêng. - See more at: http://www.vanglaini.org/tualchhung/56342#sthash.8xN9wwQu.dpuf

AMERICA RAMAH CHUAN SIKUL TAN TLÂI AN DUH

- K.L.Biakchungnunga

Sawrkar finchhuah a ngaih hun lâi, fin chhuah tura ngaihdàn sawi chhuah hun a nih avângin, sikul tan hun sawn hmà chungchâng hi sawi ve ka duh a ni. Ka ui vawih ngawih ringawt chuan ka inthiam thei dâwn tlat lo. 

Sikul tan hmà chungchângah nu leh pa ngaihdàn làk a ni kha tha ka ti. A nghawng nat ber tûr an ni tlat a; an ngaihdàn hriat kha a pawimawh. Zawhna kha eng zât chiahin nge chhâng? Zâ zêlah eng zâtin nge sikul tan hun sawn hmà duh tih kha hriat a châkawm khawp mai. Kan sawrkar hian sikul tan hun sawn hmà tum ru reng siin, nu leh pa te ngaihdàn hi a serh then nân lek a zâwt mai mai nia ngâi an tam. Hetianga ngaih theih tura thil tih hi a hrisêl lo. 

Kan hotute hian, “Kan enchhin ang a, a that loh chuan a ngaiin kan kal leh mai ang,” an ti a ni âwm e. Zîng dâr 7:30 vela sikul tan hi kan la tih ngai loh a nih avangin enchhinna chu a ni dâwn hrim hrim. Mizoram puma sikul zawng zawng hi enchhinna atana hman luih vek a tûl kher em? Scientist hovin enchhinna (experiment) an neih rêng rêngin, thil pahnih khatah enchhinin an zir chiang hmasa phawt thin. Engkim an zir chian hnuah, mipui chhawr theih tûrin an tlângzarh chauh thin a ni. Sikul tan hmà chungchângah pawh hian, enchhinna sikul (experimental school) awm phawt se. Harsatna awm theite zir chian phawt ni se. A lo \hat viau chuan nakum session-ah sikul tam zâwkah hman ni se, a finthlâk ka ring. Aizâwla tha viau hi, district khawpui dangah leh thingtlâng khaw tam takah a tha kher lo thei bawk. 

 Session laklawh deuha Mizoram pum huapa sikul tan hun sawn hmà rum rum hi a tûl viauna chhan tûr ka hre mai lo. Thih leh dam inkâr thil êm pawh ni lo, hnawhsarum deuha thil tih chûk chûk hi eng nge a tûlna?

Sâpram leh America ramah chuan:

Ka sâp thian, Mizoramah pawh research tia rawn awm reng tawh, Joanna Heath min hrilh dân chuan, an remchân dân leh thâ an tih anga tan hun ruat tûrin United Kingdom-ah chuan sikul hrang hrangin thuneihna an nei. A tam ber sikul kài hun chu dâr 9:00 am – 3:00 pm a ni. Devotion leh Registration nên chuan zîng dâr 8 leh 8:30 inkâr vela tan an awm nual. Tlâi dâr 3 hnu lamah hian, abîkin sports leh music lama tui tân ‘extra-curricular optional class’ a awm a, dâr 4 atanga dâr 5 vêl thleng a awh tlângpui. Sawrkar sikul aiin private sikul an bâng har zâwk

Tun laia America rama an lungkham nia lang chu zirlai naupangin mut kham khawp an hmu lo khu a ni. ‘Boruak leh tuisik thianghlim kan mamawh ang bawkin mut kham khawp kan mamawh’ tih chu 1990 kuma an din, non-profit organization—National Sleep Foundation—a lam tâwia NSF an tih pâwl thupui ber a ni. He pâwlin a tum ber chu America mipuite hnena mut kham khawp hmuh a pawimawhna leh muthilh theih lohna (sleep disorders) chungchânga hriat tûr thil pawimawh puanzâr leh zirtir a ni. Public leh private institution zawng zawngah thawktu leh zirlai zawng zawngin an mamawh mut kham khawp an hmuh theih nân an kalphung her rem leh siam \hat chu NSF thil tum pawimawh tak a ni bawk. 

Tleirâwl (adolescents), kum 13-19 hote hian darkar 8½ a\anga 9¼ mut an mamawh tih chu medical science ngaihdân ding lai a ni. Dr. Mary Carskadon hova research an neihah chuan America rama tleirâwl tam berin an mamawh zât mut an hmu lo tih hmuh chhuah a ni. A chhan pawh America rama sikul tam takin zîng dâr 7:30 vela sikul an tan vâng a ni. 1990 kumah khân, zing dâr 7:25 vela sikul tan thin Minnesota state chuan zing dâr 8:40-ah tan hun an sawn ta a, naupang attendance a that phah bâkah, Health Center-a inentir an tlêm phah tih hmuh chhuah a ni. Kum eng emaw zât research an neih hnuah, Kentucky State-a Fayette County School District-ah chuan, sikul an tan tlài hnuah, zing dâr 7:30 vela la tan reng district aiin, tleirâwl kum 16-18 lirthei khalh zingah accident tâwk an tlêm phah hle tih an hmu chhuak bawk.  

2007 kuma National Youth Risk Behavior Survey an neihah chuan sikul naupangin sikul kài hun laia zân lama mut an hmuh dân an zir chiang a. Zâ zela 68.9 chuan mut khamkhawp an hmu lo tih hmuh chhuah a ni. Mut khamkhawp hmu lote hi thil chîn tha lo (risky behavior) chi hrang hrang 10 zet nên an inkûngkaih tih an hmu chhuak bawk. Chûng risky behavior zingah chuan—insual, sikret zûk, marijuana (ruih hlo) zûk, zu in, sex lama inhman, nguina leh beidawnna, mahni intihhlum tumna te a tel a ni.

Kan taksa hian hun chhiarna sana, ‘biological clock’ a nei. Nausên, naupang leh tleirâwlte hi an mut hun bi (sleeping habit) a inang lo. Kum 5-12 hian darkar 10-11 mut an mamawh laiin, kum 13-19 hian darkar 9 vêl mut an mamawh thung. Tleirawl ho biological clock-ah chuan zân dâr 11 hma lam hi mut hun a ni lo. Zânah an mu har a, zingah an tho tlâi bawk. Zingah thawh hmà ngâi mah se, tleirâwl tam tak hi an mu hmâ thiam chuang lo. Tleirâwl lai hian mut theih lohna (sleep disorders)—narcolepsy, insomnia, restless legs syndrome leh sleep apnea, adt. an vei nasa zual niin an sawi. Zân tumtâwina tûr thil chi hrang hrang a tam tawh bawk si. An lehkha zir dân phungah pawh zîng lam aiin zân lama lehkha zir chî an tam zâwk.

Zzz’s to A’s Resolution:

America rama resolution lâr tak, ‘Zzz’s to A’s Resolution’ an tih mai, House of Congress Resolution 176-ah chuan, America rama sikul zawng zawng chu zîng dâr 8:30 aia hmâah sikul tan lo tura fuih (encourage) an ni. He resolution pu lûttu hi hmeichhe ropui tak, Zoe Lofgren, US Representative for California’s 19^th Congressional District ni lai a ni. He resolution bawhzuia 2002 kuma NSF-in mipui ngaihdân ‘Sleep in America Poll’ a lâkah chuan 80% zetin zîng dâr 8 hmâa sikul tan loh an duh a ni. He resolution fuihna ngai pawimawhin America rama state eng emaw zâtah chuan sikul tan hun zing dâr 7:30 vêl ni thin chu, zing dâr 8:30 – 9:00 vêlah an sawn tlâi tawh a ni. 

Ka thawhna Baptist Higher Secondary School hian tunah hian zîng dâr 9:15-ah sikul kan tan a. School Bus-a kan lam hlat ber, 1^st trip chu Theiriat naupangho an ni. Zing dâr 7:30-ah kan lam thin. Zîng dâr 7:30 hi sikul tan hun a nih chuan, Theiriat naupangho chu zîng dâr 5:45-ah an inpeih ziah a ngâi dâwn tihna a ni. Kan khua, Lunglei atanga a chhehvêl thingtlâng khuaa lânga zirtirtu hna thawk ka hre nual. Zing dâr 7:30 vêlah an chhuak tlângpui. Zing dâr 7:30 vela sikul tan a nih chuan, zing dâr 5:30 – 6:00 vela an thawhna hmun pan tura an chhuah tûk tin a ngâi tawh dawn a ni. Mizoram hmun hrang hrangah hetianga thawk hi an awm nualin ka ring. Mahni khua a\anga khaw danga lânga zirtirtu hna thawk hi an tam lo a ni thei e. Minority an nih avanga palzût leh palzam hi ‘human rights violation’ a nih bâkah, India ram ‘democracy principles’ kalh a ni.

Vâi ramah pawh zing dâr 7:30 vêlah sikul an tan a, engah nge kan theih loh bik ang kan ti a ni âwm e. Vâi rama zirtirtu leh nu leh pa zingah khuan, zing kara NGO leh Kohhran hnuaia pâwl hrang hrang committee meeting-a tel ngai an awm ve lo. Zing kârah kohhran hnatlâng leh YMA hnatlâng an ko ngai bawk lo. Zing kârah emaw chhûnah emaw, thlân lâi turin an thawk chhuak ngai hek lo. Zing tawngtai inkhâwm pawh an nei ngai lo. Vâi society leh Mizo society hi a inang lo lutuk. Kan tih ang tam tak an tih loh avangin, an tih theih ang tam tak khu kan tân tih a rem lo. Kan society nihphung leh kalphung, Mizo naupangte rilru sûkthlêk, tlâi lam hun âwl an hman thin dânte ngaihtuahin, ram pum atan chuan zing dâr 9:00-3:30 vela sikul kan kal hi a la \ha hle rihin ka hria.

STRENGTHEN MY FAITH IN YOU

Lord, I know you bless my life,
The way You do I don't think I deserve;
I know You will guide throughout this strife,
So here I am, I come to serve.
Lord, I know I need a heart
A heart of love that understands
Because You said right from the start
That love for all was Your demand

Strengthen my faith in You
Let me remember the price You paid
The blood of the Lamb has cleared my debt
I'll doubt no more when you strengthen my faith in You

Lord, I know in fellowships
Of different kinds we have today;
You want to open partnerships,
That stretch our vision through Your way.
Give me the strength to do my best,
Empower me to tell Your story
To all who scorn and laugh and test
That they might come to know Your glory

Lord, You know
Sometimes my faith is shaken
If ever I doubt again
Assure me that You've broken
The curse that seems to win
And the bondage of my sin
Renew my strength
And strengthen my faith in You