Nothing Against Ram!
Palash Biswas
Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
Seeking to soften the criticism against his anti-Ram remarks, DMK chief M Karunanidhi on Tuesday said he had nothing against Ram as a "human prince" and said even late Rajaji, who authored a book on the Ramayana, did not attach any divinity to him. The monsoon session of the Tamil Nadu Assembly, which begins today, is likely to be stormy with the Opposition AIADMK determined to rake up the issues, including Chief Minister M Karunanidhi's anti-Ram remarks on the Ram Sethu. Karunanidhi, a self claimed atheist, had recently said the existence of Lord Ram was a fallacy as tall as the Himalayas. His comments have irked Hindu groups, already up in arms against the Central Government, over the controversial Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP). The Karunanidhi Government may also pass a resolution underlining the need for the immediate implementation of the project. While the opposition AIADMK, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and several Hindu groups have opposed the project, the DMK has been pressing for its early implementation. The project will dredge a channel in a narrow strip of sea between India and Sri Lanka, reducing distances and cutting costs for freight traffic for ships moving from Arabian Sea to Bay of Bengal. However, Hindu groups have been opposing the 560 million dollars project, saying it would destroy the 'holy' Ram Sethu, a 48-kilometre chain of limestone shoals that once linked Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu to Mannar in Sri Lanka.
"I have nothing against Ram and will welcome the good work done by him," he said.
Karunanidhi was responding to Tamil superstar Rajnikant's remark that he should initiate efforts to talk to north Indian politicians to find an amicable solution to the Ram Sethu issue while distributing state film awards for 2005 and 2006.
"In the foreword of his book 'Chakravarty Thirumagan' (son of an emperor), Rajaji has said that Ramayana was an epic and not history. He described Ram as a human prince who did good work for society," he said and asked people to differentiate between epic and history.
Rajnikant has always been a believer and one of his Tamil films 'Baba' shows the protagonist scaling the Himalayas to meet a "Mahavtar Baba", revered by the actor in real life.
On the other hand, AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa on Wednesday described as "shameful" Chief Minister M Karunanidhi's request to Tamil superstar Rajnikanth to convince his "saint friends" in North India not to oppose the implementation of the Sethusamudram project.
"Being a Chief Minister for so many times and given his experience,it is shameful to seek such a recommendation," she told reporters at the party headquarters here.
Speaking at an award function here on Tuesday night, Karunanidhi requested Rajnikanth to explain to his friends in the north that he (Karunanidhi) was not against Lord Ram and that the Sethusamudram project would put the state on the path of development.
Jayalalithaa said the project was as good as dropped as both the Centre and the Axis Bank, the funding agency, were not willing to finance the project as its cost had now risen to over Rs 4,000 crores. Stating that the project would be economically unviable and prove to be a disaster, she said it would be beneficial only to Karunanidhi and his family and Union Shipping Minister T R Baalu but not to the nation.
Karunanidhi said the former NDA government headed by A B Vajpayee implemented the Setu Samudram project and then BJP ministers including S Thirunavukkarasar had cleared it.
"Be it the DMK, AIADMK or the Left parties, all have mentioned in their various poll manifestos that the project would lead to the development of the state," he said.
Karunanidhi asked Rajnikant to talk to his "saint friends" in north India and convince them that the project would put the state on the path of development and therefore they should not protest against it.
"He travels extensively in north India and can tell his friends that Karunanidhi is not against Ram as even his mentor's name had Ram," he said referring to the late E V Ramasamy Periyar.
He said the project was envisaged by the British, later dropped, and former chief ministers like C N Annadurai and K Kamaraj also tried to give life to it.
The chief minister said it would augur well for the state as well as the national economy and there "should be no obstacles in the name of religion or others".
"It is just a project like Bhakra Nangal or any other," he said adding that 75 per cent of work was complete.
Urging the Centre to immediately notify the Forest Act, CPI leader D Raja on Wednesday alleged it was being held up by some "vested" interests for the last ten months since its rules were drafted.
"The continued failure of the government to notify the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 is a betrayal of the people," Raja, national Secretary of CPI said in a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Alleging that "vested" interest have been trying to undermine the Act to the extent that amendments were later made to weaken it, the Left leader said the 'delay in notifying it was causing unrest among people facing repression and brutal violence in various parts of the country'. As there was no proper policy, people are being evicted and displaced from their habitat in the name of land acquisition and wildlife conservation, Raja alleged, adding such cases of uprooting of villagers have taken place in Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Gujarat.
"These evictions are clearly aimed at removing people before the Act comes into force-- a blatant fraud on the legislation and on Parliament," the letter said.
Slamming the wildlife conservationists for opposing the Act, he said it is the law of the land passed in Parliament and unanimously recommended by a Joint Parliamentary Committee.
"It is now the law of the land. It is not open to the government to undermine it and allow it to be rendered null and void by evictions. The government must ensure that the Act is not sabotaged any further," he added.
Many nomadic, semi nomadic tribes like pardis, sansis have long faced prejudice and stigmatised as ''criminal tribes'' or born criminals who are often subjected to relentless persecution.
Now, a Government appointed commission has submitted its interim report on the status of some 500 such criminal castes who make up to 12 crore population scattered across India.
When 10 people were lynched by a mob in Bihar, no questions were asked to them. But had someone asked them, they would have said they were ''Nats'', the traditional acrobats and performers of India.
A government fact finding team has found that all they were trying to do was gate crash a birthday party only for a free meal.
The ''Nats'', along with 500 other castes are known as criminal tribes in India.
12 crore people still bear this stigma, even though the Criminal Tribes Act 1871 was repealed 55 years ago.
And yet, its only now that a Government appointed committee has submitted its report on these tribes and suggested ways to get them back into the mainstream.
They have recommended that only a senior police officer of a district should investigate charges against them. The commission also says that in such cases the criminals should be represented in the State and Central Human Rights Commission.
Special Planning Commission also plans for their development apart from what they get as SC/ST.
An efficient system of birth/caste certificates for these nomadic people is the need of hour.
''Human development indices are just about the worst in the country'', said Balkrishna Renake, Chairman Denotified Nomadic and Semi-nomadic Tribes Commission.
With literacy rate less then one per cent, no medical facilities and zero delivery of any Government programme, nomadic tribes have been pushed to the margins.
Government laws especially the Wildlife Protection Act has snatched livelihoods of kalandars, madaris, pardhis, sansis, saperas, waghmaris, without providing an alternative to them.
''They have learned to live with snakes and monkeys but we haven't learnt to live with human beings like them. No plan has ever been designed keeping in mind their livelihood and their future, said Balkrishna Renake.
The key issue ultimately is not financial allocation for the 12 crore people who have been socially invisible for a long tome but the inherited baggage of social and cultural prejudices against them.
Story Finder 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002
Mayawati among world`s top 8 women leaders: Report
New York: Uttar Pradesh's firebrand Chief Minister Mayawati has been profiled by the US magazine Newsweek among eight women leaders worldwide who have reached the top despite all odds, with the Dalit leader narrating her struggle to rally the oppressed community.
Writing in the magazine, the 51-year-old Bahujan Samaj Party chief, who swept the Assembly elections early this year with a rainbow coalition of Dalits, upper castes and Muslims, says her aim is to replicate the victory in the other states and prepare for the bigger struggle to capture power in New Delhi.
Mayawati says her party initially needed an aggressive approach to rally the poor Dalits. "Political parties dominated by upper castes got alarmed by the rising masses.
"Their opposition cut short each of my first four stints as Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and it became clear we needed to broaden the base to include the poor irrespective of caste or religion," she said.
So, Mayawati says, she organized village-level amity meetings for the poor irrespective of caste or religion. "Our efforts were met with calumny, attacks and lawsuits, but we struggled on, and prevailed in elections this May. For the first time in 17 years, a majority government led by a Dalit is in place in Uttar Pradesh," she adds.
Apart from Mayawati, others who write their success story include CEO of the French Energy Conglomerate Areva Anne Lauvergeon and Director General of World Health Organization Margaret Chan.
Centre yielding to communal forces on Setu project: Left
Chennai: Condemning the Centre for yielding to the pressure of communal forces and dilly-dallying with the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, the Left parties urged the Union Government to implement it without any change. Addressing a joint press meet here, CPI(m) State General Secretary N Varadarajan and CPI State Secretary D Pandian demanded to know why the centre had sought three months time in the supreme court and agreed to consider an alternate alignment. "Why is the Union Government not firm in carrying out the project on the present alignment?"
The centre should expedite the proceedings before the Apex Court on the SSCP issue and carry out the scheme as formulated by scientists, experts and various government agencies.
Stalling a developmental project in the name of epic heroes, that too after 60% of the work was completed, was not good for the country, they said.
The leaders said other alignments were not acceptable since they would affect marine ecology and the livelihood of fishermen.
Asked if the DMK was putting pressure on the centre to carry out the project, Pandian shot back "it is not a party project, but a national project."
To a query on AIADMK Supremo Jayalalithaa's charge that only small ships could enter the proposed canal under the present plan, Pandian said, "dredging a canal at least for the entry of small ships will be better than doing nothing. If Jayalalithaa becomes prime minister, she can deepen the canal and the communists will not object."
Eleven people died in a stampede at Mahakali temple at Paavagadh today (October 14) when over one lakh people congregated near the temple on the occassion of Navratri.
It has also been reported by the police that several people have been injured in a stampede.
Paavagadh is situated in the Panchamal district of Gujarat when around one lakh devotees were visiting the Mahakali temple to offer prayers.
The stampede took place at an area called Patia Pul, which is a narrow uphill place that leads to the temple. Authorities said that the stampede occurred between devotees who were coming down the hill and those who were climbing their way up. Police say that the injured have been taken to various hospitals in Halol and nearby towns.
Gujarat CM has announced a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh to relatives of the dead. Three out of the twenty injured have been rushed to the Baroda hospital.
The government has ordered a magesterial inquiry to probe the incident.
'No Minority bashing'
10/13/2007 3:53:33 PM
Modi sets the agenda for Gujarat polls, speaks in favour of inclusive politics
In a surprising turn-around the Chief Minister, Narendra Modi says he has never indulged in minority bashing. Speaking to TIMES NOW Editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami on 'Frankly Speaking', Modi said he has never represented any one religion.
In his first agenda-setting interview after the announcement of the Gujarat election dates, Chief Minister Narendra Modi has surprisingly pushed for inclusive politics - a far cry from the hardline Hindutva stance he has always represented.
Modi has promised not to do any minority bashing in the current election campaign.
http://www.timesnow.tv/NewsDtls.aspx?NewsID=3475
New York (PTI): The Indian Muslim Council-USA has condemned the Ajmer Dargah bomb blast, but cautioned authorities against drawing "hasty conclusions" in blaming any particular group for the attack.
"Paradoxically, the law enforcement authorities that were clueless till these blasts happened didn't take much time after the blasts to pinpoint the blame on specific Muslim outfits in an attempt to hide their intelligence failure," the group's President Rasheed Ahmed said.
Intelligence sources had said that Harkat-ul-Jehadi Islami outfit of Bangladesh was suspected to be behind the blast at the sufi shrine of Khwaja Mohiuddin Chisti.
Pilgrims of Bangladeshi origin were also questioned by security agencies.
"We hope that the police will do a full and honest investigation and nail down the actual culprits behind this heinous crime, rather than scapegoat poor and innocent civilians and extract fake confessions," said Ahmed.
IMC-USA also urged the National Human Rights Commission to intervene immediately in the investigations to ensure that due process of the law is followed and the true culprits are brought to book.
The NRIs for Secular and Harmonious India also condemned the bomb blast at the "holiest interfaith shrine".
All Indian communities putting up a united fight is the only answer to terrorism, its spokesperson Najma Sultana said.
"We are hopeful the government will hunt down the goons and punish them," she said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apex court: no verdict can violate statute
Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and no judgment, even of the Supreme Court, can violate the Constitution, a Bench comprising Justices A.K. Mathur and Markandey Katju said directing regularisation of the services of employees who have put in 22 years as daily wage earners.
A five-judge Constitution Bench in Uma Devi’s case said courts should not give a direction for regularisation of the services of daily/temporary workers as they had not been recruited following the due procedure and recruitment rules.
In the present case, the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Board, citing this judgment, appealed against an Allahabad High Court verdict directing regularisation of the services of 34 daily wage employees, who had been working in the erstwhile Cooperative Electric Supply Society.
Dismissing the appeal, the two-judge Bench said, “The decision in Uma Devi’s case is clearly distinguishable. The said decision cannot be applied to a case where regularisation has been sought in pursuance of Article 14 [equality before law].”
Cut dead wood
Quoting an earlier judgment, the Bench said, “A precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice, but you must cut the dead wood and trim the side branches, else you will find yourself lost in thickets and branches.”
The judges said, “We are constrained to refer to the above decision and principles contained therein because we find that often Uma Devi’s case is being applied by courts mechanically as if it were Euclid’s formula without seeing the facts of a particular case. In our opinion, Uma Devi’s case cannot be applied mechanically without seeing the facts of a particular case, as a little difference in facts can make Uma Devi’s case inapplicable to the facts of that case.”
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW | KANIMOZHI
Font Size
'Don't blame dad, Periyar said same about Ram'
CNN-IBN
Published on Sunday , October 14, 2007 at 10:19 in Nation section
Tags: Devil's Advocate, Kanimozhi , New Delhi
E-mail this report | Print this report
Property In Tamil Nadu
Find Property In Tamil Nadu Buy/Sell/Rent Now. Search Free! The A to Z of Fatherhood
Looking Forward to Fatherhood? Get All the Info On Being A New Dad.
Ads by Google
New Delhi: DMK supremo and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi's daughter and Rajya Sabha MP Kanimozhi has expressed surprise at the controversy around her father’s comments on Lord Ram, saying this has for long been the view of the Dravidian movement.
Speaking exclusively to CNN-IBN’s Karan Thapar on Devil’s Advocate, Kanimozhi said that all that Karunanidhi wants is the Sethusamudram Project to go through.
Kanimozhi: Why is it being given so much importance now, because from the day the Dravidian movement started, people have been speaking like that. Whatever my father has said, Periyar has said 100 times.
Karan Thapar: But is it right for a CM to say this? Periyar was never CM.
Kanimozhi: Anna was CM, Anna has said so much, MGR came from the Dravidian movement and he believed in Periyar.
Karan Thapar: So you are saying that there's a tradition in Tamil Nadu where CMs speak like this about God and people's faith?
Kanimozhi: Yes, whatever tries to come between development and people, definitely you will have to question it. He has not tried to hurt anybody's feelings, his main purpose of the whole question is only to make sure that the project goes through.
Kanimozhi also called the acrimony between her father and Jayalalithaa as a "very unhealthy situation." She also indicated that it's up to Jayalalithaa to end the acrimony.
Karan Thapar: The other big divide in Tamil Nadu is between the DMK and the AIADMK, and the ferocious acrimony between your father and Jayalalithaa - do you think this has gone on for too long?
Kanimozhi: Definitely.
Karan Thapar: Today things have gone to a point where the CM and the leader of the Opposition probably don't even greet each other.
Kanimozhi: Yes.
Karan Thapar: That’s a pretty sad situation.
Kanimozhi: It is very sad and its a very unhealthy situation.
Karan Thapar: Does your father see it the same way?
Kanimozhi: Definitely, he regrets it. The DMK and it's leader have been able to have a relationship that’s beyond politics with most of the other leaders, and it's the first time it's happening to him, so i don't think I can blame him for it
Karan Thapar: The fault lies with Jayalalithaa?
Kanimozhi: I said I can't blame him, but I am not blaming anybody else.
Karan Thapar: But your eyes are saying yes even if as a diplomat you can't bring your mouth to say yes.
Kanimozhi: I am not going to say anything about that, but whatever you want to read, you can read into that.
(Watch the full interview with Kanimozhi on Devil's Advocate on CNN-IBN, Sunday, 2000 hrs (IST). The full text will be available on IBNLive.com)
Gandhi, Religion and Indian Nationalism
Ram Puniyani
The Gandhi anniversary this year has been very special (2007). With UN
declaring 2nd October as the International Day for Non-Violence, with
the renewed interest in Gandhi all over the globe one needs to revisit
the Father of Indian Nation and his yeomen contribution in the
articulation of the concepts of non-violence and nationalism in Indian
context. At another level his own unique definitions and practice of
religion and definition of God as truth and non-violence have their
own matchless place in the history of human thought.
Even before coming to India, the Mahatma had sharpened his philosophy
and political methods. When he returned from South Africa, India was
in the grip of religiosity and broad masses were part of the churning
process due to the on going social changes. Broadly they were not yet
major part of freedom movement. Gandhi on one hand had the exposure to
liberal British political system and on the other had experienced the
repressive South African regime, which was practicing apartheid. In
India the social changes were slow to come by. The elite through
different political formations dominated political process at that
point of time. We had Indian National Congress, mainly espousing
Indian nationalism, where the elite were the main participants. In
Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha, the landlords and princes were the
core participants, later they were joined in by those few who came
from the background of modern education. They were not from the landed
gentry but they did develop political ideologies suiting the interests
of feudal classes. Gandhi's decision, to launch non-cooperation
movement, and to involve broad layers of society, alienated some of
elites from within Congress. Those from communal organizations were
not concerned about freedom movement anyway. Some from the Congress
left in due course of time to join the communal formations. Gandhi was
firm on the involvement of whole nation in the process of national
movement.
This ensured that our freedom movement would emerge as the biggest
mass movement not only of India but any time in the World. This had
the participation of people of all the religions, castes and of both
the genders. This movement was also to define the contours of Indian
constitution while laying the path to freedom from British
colonialism. His major opponents were in Muslim League and Hindu
Mahasabha, which later were joined in by the RSS. These formations
were reflecting the interests of landed gentry and upheld the birth
based caste and gender hierarchies. He faced the tough task of taking
all the sections of society along to the path of Independence of the
nation. In this, those on the side of secularism and democracy had
some differences with him, but their common point of acceptance was
the values of democracy and secularism His differences with Ambedkar
and Bhagatsingh are highlighted by sections of society to the limit of
exaggeration. They deliberately overlook that the grounds of agreement
on major fields of political terrain did exist and were and are
crucial in understanding the diverse paths towards modern India. The
Poona Pact with Ambedkar did deprive the dalits them separate
electorate, but it also kept them in the fold of emerging India. The
separate electorate to Muslims did in a way led to the foundation of
Pakistan.
He did not make efforts to save the life of Bhagat Singh who was given
the death penalty by the colonial powers. Here he was sticking to his
principles of non-violence, which for him was the central credo of
value system.
His differences with Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha and RSS were more
on the fundamental issues. These political formations were for
Religion based nationalism, Muslim and Hindu. Subtly they were also
upholders of birth based caste and gender hierarchy. These were the
differences, which were used by the British to partition India. His
central place in the freedom movement and his espousing the cause of
all did get hostile reaction from Muslim communalism and Hindu
Communalism both. These formations projected him to be against their
religion, while his opposition was not to religions but to the
politics in the name of religion. Nothing could be more contradictory
in the approach to religion, than the approach of communalists and
Gandhi. The communalists, both Muslim and Hindu, used the religious
identity of their religion, by-passing the issues related to values
and social reform. They used it to exclude the 'other', while Gandhi
on the other hand saw religion mainly as a moral force, a set of
values, which should guide the individual in her/his life. He hardly
talked of identity and his religion was innovatively inclusive of the
other.
While Muslim League talked of Islamic Nation, Pakistan, and Hindu
Mahasbha/RSS talked of Hindu nation, Gandhi talked of secular India,
articulating the aspirations of majority of the country. He wanted
religion to be a private matter for the individual, "In India, for
whose fashioning I have worked all my life, every man enjoys equality
of status, whatever his religion is. The state is bound to be wholly
secular", and, "religion is not the test of nationality but is a
personal matter between man and God, and," religion is a personal
affair of each individual, it must not be mixed up with politics or
national
affairs". It is clear that while communalists saw religion as the
dividing institution, Gandhi in his unique way, more in continuation
with Bhakti and Sufi traditions saw religion as the ground which
united people, "I consider myself as good a Muslim as I am a Hindu and
for that matter, I regard myself as equally good a Christian or a
Parsi" This quote of his has to be seen along with his two other more
often cited quotes," For me, politics bereft of religion is absolute
dirt, ever to be shunned", and "politics divorced from religion is
like a corpse, fit only to be burnt." (all quotes from Gandhi and
Communal Problems, CSSS, 1994 pg 6). This again is so exceptional in
its innovation in understanding. Here by religion he meant its
morality aspects not just the ones related to external identity.
While he had differences from Ambedkar, he took up the cause of
untouchables in his own way. Ambedkar hammered his point in an
uncompromising way and Gandhi did his all to take the eradication of
untouchably far and wide. As secularization process had not gone far
in the country which was/is in the grip of religiosity, he realized
that policies and values laced in the language of religion will reach
the people in an effective way. His contribution in the eradication of
this evil of untouchability cannot be underestimated. His use of the
word Harijan for the untouchables was again in tune with his language,
which he devised to communicate with the masses. It was not that he
wanted to humiliate them by using a separate derogatory term for them.
It was to lift them up in the popular perception.
At the same time Ambedkar correctly rebelled against the rigid chains
of prevalent Brahminic Hinduism, Gandhi wanted to take along the
majority of social sections towards the process of reform. At this
point the Hindu communalists were talking of values of Manusmiriti, we
are already having the best of social laws in this book, they claimed.
There are also incidents when people like Savarkar also worked for
temple entry for untouchables, but such moves are mere exceptions. His
impact on the process to improve the condition of women reached all
over, at a time when the communalists were putting all obstacles for
women coming out for education and to participate in social life. It
is no surprise that we do not see women's participation in the
communal organization while National movement led by Gandhi has huge
participation by women, and there are illustrious women who led by
example in the fold of national movement.
The divide between Gandhi and communalists, both Hindu and Muslim, was
not merely for the political goals; it ran deeper, to the way of
looking at society. It was about the approach to the social and human
values. A section of Hindu communalists perceived Gandhi as the
"biggest enemy of Hindu". Nathuram Godse symbolized this section. He
killed the father of nation. He began his career as the trained
pracharak of RSS and was later to become the Secretary of Pune Branch
of Hindu Mahasabha. The paper he edited had the title, Agrani and was
subtitled as Hindu Rashtra. Even today while Hindu right pays lip
service to the Mahtama, they do not regard him as the father of the
Nation, and look down upon his principles of non violence as being
emasculating to Hindus and so should be forgotten. Their discomfort
during the present revival of interest in Gandhi's values is palpable
through their reaction as seen in number of list serves and web sites
run by them, and through other expressions of theirs'.
Today sixty years down the line, the world has come far. The increase
in violence all over the world, the politics wearing the clothes of
religion has intensified the 'Hate other' ideology. Can we look up to
Gandhi to confront the misuse of religion for political agenda of the
mighty at global as well as local level? Can we pick up some of the
values from him rather than just bypass him or merely pay lip service
to his ideals?
--
Issues in Secular Politics
October 2007 I
The Indian rulers bore various titles — including Maharaja ("great king"), Badshah ("emperor"), Raja ("king"), Nawab ("governor"), Nizam, Wali, and many others. Whatever the literal meaning and traditional prestige of the ruler's actual title, the British government translated them all as "prince," in order to avoid the implication that the native rulers could be "kings" with status equal to that of the British monarch.
The least prestigious Hindu rulers often used the title Thakur or its variant Thakore.
More prestigious Hindu rulers -mostly existing before the Mughal Empire, or having split from such old states- often used the title "Raja," or a variant such as "Rana," "Rao," "Rawat" or "Rawal." Also in this 'class' were several Thakur sahibs and a few particular titles, such as Sar Desai.
The most prestigious Hindu rulers usually had the prefix "maha" ("great", compare for example Grand duke) in their titles, as in Maharaja, Maharana, Maharao, etc. The state of Travancore-Cochin had queens regnant styled Maharani, generally the female forms applied only to spouses and widows, who could however act as regents.
There were also compound titles, such as (Maha)rajadhiraj, Raj-i-rajgan, often relics from an elaborate system of hierarchical titles under the Mughal emperors. For example, the addition of the adjective Bahadur raised the status of the titleholder one level.
Furthermore most dynasties used a variety of additional titles, such as, mainly? in South India: Varma. This should not be confused with various titles and suffixes not specific to princes but used by entire (sub)casts.
The Sikh princes (a syncretic religion, mixing many elements from Hinduism and Islam; politically concentrated in Punjab) usually adopted Hindu type titles when attaining princely rank; at a lower level Sardar was used.
Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad & Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral) and Mir (from Emir).
After independence, the (Hindu) Maharana of Udaipur displaced the Nizam of Hyderabad as the most senior prince in India, and the style Highness was extended to all rulers entitled to 9-gun salutes. When these dynasties had been integrated into the Indian Union they were promised continued privileges and an income, known as the Privy Purse, for their upkeep. Subsequently, when the Indian government abolished the Privy Purse in 1971, the whole princely order ceased to exist under Indian law, although many families continue to retain their social prestige informally; some descendants are still prominent in regional or national politics, diplomacy, business and high society.
At the time of Indian independence, only five rulers — the Nizam of Hyderabad, the Maharaja of Mysore, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, the Maharaja Gaekwad of Baroda and the Maharaja Scindia of Gwalior — were entitled to a 21-gun salute. Five more rulers — the Nawab of Bho
which, he argues, impose economic policies that condemn millions to poverty.