DRAVIDIANS
ARE NOT SON’S OF SOIL :
JUDGES SPIT VENOM
A criminal
appeal No 11 of 2011 arising out of Special Leave petition No 10367 of 2010 in
Kailas and others versus State of Maharashtra TR.Taluka P.S came up before
Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Markandey Kutju and Justice Gyan Sudha
Mishra on 5 th January 2011. It relates to one Nandha Bhai, aged 25 of Bhil
scheduled tribe of Maharashtra who was beaten, kicked, stripped and paraded
naked in village road over an illicit relationship with an upper-caste man.
Four people were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of six months, one year and
three months in three instances and to pay a fine in each by Additional
Sessions Judge, Ahamadnagar under various provisions of Indian Penal Code and
under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes[ Prevention of Atrocities Act]
1989.But in High Court they were let off from the hook of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribes [ Prevention of Atrocities Act] 1989 but confirmed conviction
under Indian Penal Code to enable them to pay fine of Rs 5000 each to the
victim. This matter came up for appeal in Supreme Court before the bench of
Learned Judges, who instead of limiting their judgment over legal issues had
become historians to declare that India is largely a country of immigrants. The
Hindu in its center page quotes these overnight historians and proclaims “A
Supreme Court Judgment projects the historical thesis that India is largely a
country of old immigrants and that pre-Dravidian aborigines, ancestors of
present Adivasis, rather than Dravidians were the original inhabitants of
India. Dravidian movement that rules Tamilnadu must debate this in the
Legislative Assembly and pass resolution condemning the unnecessary attack
uncalled for to denigrate the Dravidian history. At least scholars should have
ventured to criticize this part of the judgment. If this goes unchallenged the
Aryans would exploit this as gospel.
“Hindu law was
not uniform for all Hindus and as such codification was the only solution and
necessity as it aimed at consolidation of Hindu society” felt Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. He
strongly felt that the present Hindu law was inconsistent with the provisions
of the article 15 of Constitution that birth shall not discriminate any citizen
on ground of birth. Hence his futile attempt to introduce the Hindu Code Bill
which was opposed by Rajendra Prasad. Speaking in clause by clause discussion
in Parliament Ambedkar said “The fact is that in this country although
religions have changed the law has remained one. As early as 1930 the Privy
Council in its judgment had lain down that Sikhs were governed by Hindu Law.
The application of the code to Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains was a historical
development to which they could not give any answer. They could only change the
law to make it equitable whenever it went wrong. Dr.Ambedkar would not agree to
exclude Punjab from the purview of the Bill. “I would have the Code apply to
whole of India or not at all “he thundered. Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru informed Ambedkar that there is opposition both inside and outside to the
bill, and the Cabinet would discuss the matter in beginning of September 1951.
Dr.Ambedkar was keen to pilot the bill before 1952 General Elections. After
passing 4 clauses of the Bill further consideration of the Bill was dropped. So
after 4 years I month and 26 days in Cabinet, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar submitted his
resignation as Law Minister on 27th September of 1951. If Ambedkar’s
vision of a Uniform Code had been realized different Courts interpreting laws
in different manner and sympathizing with offenders of the modesty of a woman
would not have have happened.
Point 1 : “
While North America [ USA and Canada] has new immigrants who came mainly from
Europe over the last four or five centuries, India is a country of old
immigrants in which people have been coming in over last ten thousand years or
so. Probably 92 percent of the people living in India today are descendents of
immigrants who came mainly from the North-West and to a lesser extent from
North-East. Since this is a point of great importance for the understanding of
our country, it is necessary to go into it in some detail, opines Justice
Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra.
The learned
judges have based their opinion on wrong foundations. They say of migrations
over last ten thousand years without extending their vision of human migrations
from times beyond that.
African origins:
Genetic Studies by geneticists most prominent among them being Spencer Wells,
author of Journey of Man claim to have uncovered evidence based on blood
samples taken across the globe that all men who live today are descendents of a
man who lived in Africa 60,000 years ago. How did he arrive at such a
conclusion ? “ We started mapping the
family tree of entire planet taking blood samples from every part of the world.
We worked backwards through elimination and matching and it was the strain of
Sangene that was most common across the planet. During the worst period of Ice
Age 60,000 years ago when the worlds moisture was locked in giant glaciers
causing intense draught in Africa the first batch of Africans moved out. www.bradshawfoundation.com website
displays pictorial explanation of human migration from Africa.
This theory says
whole world migrated from Africa, and the claim by learned judges that India
had aborigines before migrations took place stands demolished.
Gene markers
from Trans-Pacific Nations : A genetic-anthropological study by University of
Madras jointly with Madurai Kamaraj University aims at identifying genetic
polymorphisms among select populations to explain biological and cultural
aspects of ancient human migration and establish the antecedents of communities
in South India, the second continent to be populated by man next to Africa.
Homo
Floresiensis : Nature magazine in 2004 reported that on a tropical island
between Asia and Australia a race of people with three and half foot height
lived, and these new human species were named Homo-Floresiensis. Nicholas Wade
in his report states: The little floresians lived on the island until at least
13,000 years ago, but they were not pygmy form of modern humans. They were a
downsized version of homo-erectus the eastern cousin of Neanderthals of Europe
who disappeared 33,000 thousand years ago. Their discovery means that archaic
humans who left Africa 1.5 million years earlier than modern people survived
for longer into recent times than was previously thought. The Indonesian island
of Flores is isolated and before modern times was inhabited by a select group
of animals that managed to reach it. These then became subject to unusual
evolutionary forces that propelled some to giant size and reduced the size of
others. The carnivorous lizards that reached Flores, perhaps on natural rafts
became giant sized and still survive although now they are confined mostly to
the nearby island of Komodo- they are called Komodo dragons. Elephants because
of their buoyancy are surprisingly good swimmers and those that reached Flores evolved
to dwarfs from the size of ox. Previous excavations by M.J.Morewood a member of
the team that found little Floresians showed that homo erectus arrived on
Flores about 8,40,000 years ago as was evident from crude stone tools.
Presumably the descendents of the homo erectus became subject to the same
evolutionary forces that reduced the size of elephants. The first little
Floresian, an adult female was found in September 2003 buried under the 20 feet
of silt that coats the floor of Liang Bua Cave in Flores. A team of experts
identified the skeleton which was not fossilized as a very small but otherwise
normal individual similar to homo erectus, reports New York Times drawing
substance from Nature magazine.
Neanderthals and
Homo erectus disappeared just before modern humans arrived, and now findings
point out to homo-floresiensis. Who is the immigrant who is not the immigrant,
how can learned judges debate and decide, when evolutionary history is still
shrouded in mystery. This makes us think why they chose to grant immigrant
status to Dravidians ? It is not a
hidden secret.
The book Hidden
History of Human Race pushes back the horizons of our amnesia not just 12,000
or 20,000 years , but millions of years into the past and showing everything we
have been taught to believe about the origins of evolution of our species rests
on the shaky foundation of academic opinion and on a highly selective sampling
of research results. Cremo and Thompson, the two authors of this book then set
about putting the record straight by showing all other research results that have been edited out of record
during the past two centuries not because there was anything wrong or bogus
about the results themselves but simply because they did not fit with
prevailing academic opinion. Anomalous and out of place discoveries reported by
Cremo and Thompson in the Hidden history of Human Race include convincing
evidence that anatomically modern humans may have been present on the Earth not
just for 1,00,000 years or less [the orthodox view] but for millions of years
and that metal objects of advance design may have been in use at equally early
periods. Moreover although sensational claims have been made before about out
of place artifacts, they have never been supported by such overwhelming and
utterly convincing documentation as Cremo and Thompson, writes Graham Hancock
in his preface.
So on a question
of human evolution when accepted theories are shaken by new discoveries, when
human spread due to continental drift had yet to be explained beyond an iota of
doubt, learned judges want to restrict historical enquiry to 10,000 years only
and confer immigrant status on Dravidians in order to hide the 1500 year old
immigrants, so called Aryans.
If all
continents had once been a super continent of Pangaea, all of us should be
immigrants. If Pangaea split into two
super continents, we should be immigrants from Gondwanaland. This Tamil
literature speaks as submerged continent of Kumari and in locating that continent
confusing theories existed. Now it is crystal clear that submerged lands extend
up to Pacific Ocean and gene markers establish the continuity from South India
to Australia and Pacific ocean islands.
Point 2 :
Learned Judges who learnt law , raised an unnecessary, irrelevant question to the
case they were dealing with, and examined who were the original inhabitants of
India ? as if it is vested upon them to deliver their judgment. “ At one time
it was believed that the Dravidians were the original inhabitants. However this
view has been considerably modified subsequently and now the generally accepted
belief is that the original inhabitants of India were the pre-dravidian
aborigines , that is ancestors of the present tribals or adivasis [ scheduled
tribes].
“Blood samples
from three South Indian populations , the Piranmalai Kallars, Yadhavas and
Saurastrians all of whom live in Madurai, the Azhagiri land, have showed up
genetic markers identical to those found in 10 percent of Malaysians, 15
percent of New Guineans, and 60 percent of Australian aborigines evidence which
had not been obtained by archaeology so far” says Professor R.M.Pitchaiappan
Head of the Department of Immunology , School of Biological Sciences. Madurai
Kamaraj University. These blood samples were collected from hill, coastal and
plain based communities like Piranmalai Kallars,Yadhavas, Saurastrians,
Moolakurumbas, Kurumbas, Irulas, Paniyas, Kotas, Thodas, Kanikars, and
Paravars. What has come as a surprise is
nearly 50 percent of a 30,000 year old gene marker among Piranmalai Kallars.
The Yadhavas and Saurastrians possessed a 10,000 year old gene marker. So
instead of trying to look for immigrants from North West, wherefrom Aryans
came, the learned judges must look for immigration from Pacific and Indian
Ocean lands of submergence. The gene markers of South Indian Dravidian people
proves to be 30,000 year old and disproves the theory propounded by learned
judges that they are immigrants and not aborigines.
Now let us quote
from passages of renowned scholars,
which speak Dravidians migrated to Australia .
Elkin [1938] :
The available evidence points to Southern India as their [ Australian
aboriginals] hiving off ground.
Lockwood [ 1963]
All Australian aborigines are supposed to be descended from Dravidians who
migrated about 15000 years [ later research has pushed back this date to beyond
40,000 years ago from India and Ceylon.
Aboriginal Australians have been in that
continent for more than 40,000 years and though proto-australian language
brought by them into Australia millennia ago has now diversified into more than
200 languages scholars like R.M.W.Dixon [ The languages of Australia ,
Cambridge University Press, 1980] agree that all of them still retain features
of their original genetic unity. Dixon points out that as regards of affinity
of Proto-Australian with other language families of the world only the
Dravidian suggestion deserves to be taken seriously.
P.Ramanathan in
his research paper raises a pertinent question to which learned judges have to
blink without proper reply. “ When the Australian aborigines entered Australian
continent more than 40,000 years ago the sea level was 400 to 600 feet lower
than now. The continental shelf now lying submerged under the sea was then part
of the land mass and land areas of all continents were larger, Australia, New
Guinea and Tasmania were all comprised in one big continent. Only a few miles
of sea would have separated Timor from that big continent. It is considered the
ancestors of all Australian aborigines entered Australia by catamarans and
other mode from Timor and Indonesian islands after crossing the narrow sea in
few hours. Once they entered Australia it is thought that they were able to
spread throughout Australia and Tasmania within about 500 years as established
by the archaeological records. By 15000 B.C sea level rose about 200 feet. It
further rose and reached present levels by 6000 B.C. Thus Australia had been a
separate island continent for about 8000 years whose inhabitants i.e
aboriginals have had no contact with the peoples of anyother continent since
then. This was the position till Europeans discovered the continent in 18th
century.”
“ If as assumed
under the model of Dravidian Descent”
the proto-Dravidians had left the near-east by 3000 B.C, and reached
Tamilnadu by 1000 B.C how could there be such remarkable genetic similarities
between Tamil on the one hand and the Australian aboriginal languages on the
other hand spoken by people who were cut off from rest of mankind for 8000
years ? ”asks P.Ramanathan.
So Dravidians
migrated towards East, they are not immigrants from East. If scholars establish
that even Australian aboriginals have descended from Dravidians, how come
learned judges adopt a policy to show Indian aboriginals as not belonging to
Dravidian family. May be the Aryan mind is disturbed over the fact they are
immigrants and wants to thrust that status on Dravidians and find sadistic
satisfaction. I could see neither logic nor legal compulsion in judges choosing
to interpret Indian history in a case which has no relevance to this question.
Dravida Peravai
condemns this portion of their judgment wherein they have tried to heap insult
to Dravidian history, and we thank The Hindu dated January 12 of 2011 for
having brought this fact to light, for whatever reasons, and provoked the
Dravidian spirit.
N.Nandhivarman
General
Secretary Dravida Peravai
