First Quote Added
April 10, 2026
Latest Quote Added
"[from December 7 onwards] “large mobs of Muslims came on the streets and there was recourse taken to violence without doubt.” [in Nirmal Nagar jurisdiction] “a Ganesh idol in the Ganesh Mandir on Anant Kanekar Marg was found decapitated and moved out from its place of installation and eleven temples in different jurisdictions were damaged, demolished or set on fire.”"
"In the 1995 report on the Mumbai riots, HRW sought to place the blame for the violent events exclusively on the Hindu community and completely ignored the role of Muslim communalism in the riots. This should be compared with a more objective report on the occurrences by the Srikrishna Commission. There was not a single eyewitness account of attacks on Hindus in the HRW report even though Hindus had also suffered many casualties! ....In April 1996, HRW released another report on the Mumbai riots titled, “Communal Violence and the Denial of Justice.” This report repeats the things discussed in the first report, albeit in much more detail. As in the first report, exclusive blame for the violence is placed on the Hindu community and the Shiv Sena, Muslims are exonerated of all blame, and a biased analysis of encounters between Muslims and the police is presented. What is ironic about this report is that it was written as a response to Chief Minister Manohar Joshi’s decision to terminate the Srikrishna inquiry. The purpose of this report is to encourage the continuation of the inquiry and the implementation of its recommendations. Yet, despite the fact that the Srikrishna Report notes that roughly one-third of those killed in the riots were Hindus, there is not a single mention in the HRW report of any attack against Hindus! In addition, every single one of HRW’s eighteen eyewitness accounts describes attacks on Muslims,and none describe attacks on Hindus. From reading HRW’s report, one would be surprised to find that any Hindus suffered from the violence. HRW even uses testimony from a Muslim man “who participated in a demonstration,” (not exactly the most objective of sources) claiming that Shiv Sena members attacked the demonstrators. Just imagine HRW using testimony from Hindu “demonstrators” or “activists.”"
"The Times of India has succeeded in its Goebbelsian design: the world has never heard about the Muslim initiative in the Bombay riots, and even well-meaning people.. think of them as a "pogrom", inflicted without provocation by mean and hateful Hindus on the unsuspecting Muslim minority… The outside world has never heard this account of the January riots because the decisive news channels… have chosen to black out all reference to the Muslim initiative… Following Press Council rules, the paper did not mention which community was on the attack and which one on the defensive, until three days later, when the Shiv Sena started its retaliation. From that point onwards, the first three days, when Muslims were on the attack… were kept out of view, but the details of subsequent Shiv Sena-led Hindu violence against Muslims were reported in full."
"In the later controversy over the Srikrishna Commission's report on the Bombay riots, an admittedly biased report written under instructions of the then ruling Congress Party and shamelessly whitewashing Muslim violence all while putting the Hindu side in the dock, the Shiv Sena tried to wimp out by ordering the discontinuation of the Srikrishna inquest and by denying its allegations. The one-person Srikrishna Commission was mandated by the Congressite government... The report produced by Justice Srikirhsna only proved the suspicions of bias which had led the state government to dismiss it."
"On 7 January, mobs of Muslims in the Muslims areas named above fanned the streets and caught passers-by on the busy roads. Those suspected to be Hindus were made to remove their pants, and if they were found to be uncircumcised, they were stabbed to death. The police were under strict instructions from the state government not to shoot at Muslim mobs. The main area of this activity was in the Muslim heartland in south Mumbai."
Young though he was, his radiant energy produced such an impression of absolute reliability that Hedgewar made him the first sarkaryavah, or general secretary, of the RSS.
- Gopal Mukund Huddar
Largely because of the influence of communists in London, Huddar's conversion into an enthusiastic supporter of the fight against fascism was quick and smooth. The ease with which he crossed from one worldview to another betrays the fact that he had not properly understood the world he had grown in.
Huddar would have been 101 now had he been alive. But then centenaries are not celebrated only to register how old so and so would have been and when. They are usually celebrated to explore how much poorer our lives are without them. Maharashtrian public life is poorer without him. It is poorer for not having made the effort to recall an extraordinary life.
I regret I was not there to listen to Balaji Huddar's speech [...] No matter how many times you listen to him, his speeches are so delightful that you feel like listening to them again and again.
By the time he came out of Franco's prison, Huddar had relinquished many of his old ideas. He displayed a worldview completely different from that of the RSS, even though he continued to remain deferential to Hedgewar and maintained a personal relationship with him.