RSS behind Samjhauta, Malegaon blasts: Shinde


RSS Flag

 
CNN-IBN | 20-Jan 14:03 PM

New Delhi: Union Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde on Sunday alleged
that the training camps run by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)
and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were promoting Hindu terrorism.
He also alleged that the RSS and the BJP were behind the Samjhauta
Express, Meccca Masjid and Malegaon blasts.
“Training camps of both the BJP and the RSS are promoting Hindu
terrorism. Whether it is Samjhauta blast or Mecca Masjid blast or
Malegaon blast, they plant bombs and blame it on the minorities,” he
said on the last day of Congress Chintan Shivir in Jaipur.
Reacting quickly to the allegations made by the Home Minister, BJP
spokesperson Shahnawaz Hussain said: “Home Minister’s statement is
irresponsible and unfortunate. We condemn it.” He was joined by BJP
Vice President Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi who said, “It is sad that the Home
Minister is trying to disturb the peace of the country. The Congress
should apologise, Sonia Gandhi should also apologise, otherwise they
will have to face the consequences.”
Defending himself, Shinde said that he didn’t say anything new and
only spoke about saffron terrorism which has already been talked about
many a times in newspapers. “It is saffron terrorism that I have
talked about. It is the same thing and nothing new. It has come in the
media several times,” the Home Minister said.
Sources said that Shinde was warned by the Congress leadership to make
the clarification. Earlier in the day, Congress president Sonia Gandhi
in her address at the Chintan Shiviar had asked party leaders to gear
up for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections and not indulge in nepotism so
that they could win back people’s faith.
Congress leader and Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Rajiv
Shukla also clarified on Shinde’s statement saying he referred to
right-wing terrorism and not Hindu terrorism. “Terrorism has no
religion. The extremists and religious fanatics create terror. The
Home minister did not refer to Hindu terrorism instead he meant
right-wing terrorism,” he said.
Right wing activists are alleged to have plotted the Samjhauta Express
bomb blast. Six people, including Swami Aseemanand and Sadhvi Pragya
Thakur, have been chargesheeted by the National Investigation Agency.
Two bombs went off on the Samjhauta Express near Panipat on February
18, 2007 while it was on way to Lahore, killing 68 people.
Sadhvi Pragya is also one of the prime accused in the Malegaon blasts
case of September 29, 2008, in which six persons were killed and 100
others were injured. On January 19, 2009, Maharashtra Police had filed
a chargesheet in the Malegaon blasts case. According to the
chargesheet, Lt Col Prasad Purohit was the main conspirator, who
provided the explosives and Sadhvi Pragya arranged for the persons,
who planted the explosives.
In December, 2012, a man belonging to a right wing group was arrested
by the NIA in connection with the May 18, 2007 Mecca Masjid blast that
left 13 people dead in Hyderabad. Tej Ram was apprehended by NIA
sleuths from Ravidas Marg area of Depalpur, 15 km from Indore.

 

 

 

 

Gujarat-Sweet Deals Are Made Of Gas # Narendramodi #mustread


A dubious company registered in Barbados will enjoy a windfall of Rs 20,000 crore at the cost of Gujarat taxpayers thanks to an agreement inked under Modi’s watch

An Investigation By Ashish Khetan, Tehelka, Nov 29,2012

CORRUPTION AND cronyism in the allocation of natural resources have been dominating the national discourse for more than two years. The giving away of precious 2G spectrum and coalmines by the Congress-led UPA regime has triggered anti-graft movements and invited unprecedented scrutiny from institutions such as the CAG, the Supreme Court and the media. But in the heat and dust of accusatory politics and competitive journalism, there is one shady deal involving a precious natural resource worth billions of dollars that has escaped public scrutiny. The deal involves the Narendra Modi government and a dubious company incorporated in the Caribbean island of Barbados.


In perhaps what would qualify as one of the most scandalous contracts ever signed, the Modi regime gave away a 10 percent participating stake in an expansive gas field it had won in a bidding process to a company named GeoGlobal Resources that existed only on paper. The company, incorporated in Barbados, had a capital of just $64.

The deal was inked in March 2003, when the BJP was in power both at the state and the Centre. Shockingly, the Barbados-based company didn’t pay a single cent for its stake. Even the company’s 10 percent share to the cost of exploration was borne by a state PSU, the Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC). Within days of signing the contract with the Gujarat PSU, GeoGlobal parked 50 percent of its stake in the KG Basin to another shell company in Mauritius.

The Gujarat government has justified this sweetened deal on the sole ground that GeoGlobal was a technical expert and had helped the government in preparing the geological model for gas exploration. But in its latest report, the CAG has pointed out that GeoGlobal’s technical assistance has been so deficient that GSPC had to hire another technical expert to revise the geological model from scratch. The revised technical advisory work cost the government just Rs 2.64 crore. While for the same work, it had given GeoGlobal a permanent stake of 10 percent worth millions of dollars.

On 27 March 2002, the GSPC formed a consortium with GeoGlobal Resources India Inc and an Indian company named Jubilant Enpro Pvt Ltd. GeoGlobal was incorporated only six days before the formation of the consortium and was effectively controlled by a single person named Jean Paul Roy, a resident of Guatemala. The consortium was formed to bid for a gas block measuring approximately 4,57,000 acres in the Krishna-Godavari Basin off the east coast of India under the National Exploration Licensing Policy III framed by the BJP-led NDA government.

THE STORY AT A GLANCE
01. The Modi regime gave 10 percent stake in a KG Basin gas field to GeoGlobal Resources, a company only on paper, incorporated in Barbados02. GeoGlobal, a one-man firm controlled by Jean Paul Roy, was formed just six days before the JV with GSPC, and was incorporated with a capital of just $64

03. GeoGlobal was picked as JV partner in a whimsical and arbitrary manner. No tendering procedure or transparent methods were adopted in selecting the company for the project

04. The worth of 10 percent stake could run into millions of dollars with total gas reserve in the field expected to be between 2 and 20 trillion cubic feet

05. GSPC also gave GeoGlobal a carried interest, as per which its 10 percent share towards capital and operational cost was borne by the state PSU

06. GeoGlobal’s work was so deficient that GSPC had to hire another technical expert, for which it was paid Rs 2.64 crore. A job for which GeoGlobal got a stake worth millions of dollars

07. So far, GSPC has spent in excess of Rs 20,000 crore in drilling and exploration costs. GeoGlobal’s share of Rs 2,000 crore towards expenditure cost has been borne by GSPC

08. Within days of signing the contract, Roy transferred 50 percent of his share in the KG Basin deal to a dubious entity incorporated in Mauritius

09. The nominal value of each share of GeoGlobal at the time of incorporation was $0.001. In January 2006, the shares hit a high of $14.92 per share

10. The 15,000-time appreciation in the share price was achieved on the strength of the sweetened KG Basin deal

11. The commercial operations in the KG Basin offshore block would commence from July 2013. GSPC is expected to drill 11 deepwater wells

At the time of bidding, the Gujarat government claimed that the gas field, designated as Block KG — OSN — 2001/3, had over 45 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas. As per the Modi government’s own estimates, the gas field was worth about $20 billion.

The absurdity of the deal could be gauged from the fact that the Modi government gave away 10 percent stake, which in its own eyes was worth millions of dollars to GeoGlobal on the ground that the company had international experience and a proven track record in the oil and gas exploration field. On the other hand, in its disclosures before the US authorities, GeoGlobal told its shareholders that the company had no exploration experience before venturing into India and the GSPC-led joint venture was its first foray in the oil and gas exploration business.

TEHELKA’s investigation shows that the company was fully controlled by Jean Paul Roy, who is a geologist by profession and had worked with various oil companies as a geological expert before forming this company. After entering into a joint venture with GSPC, Roy used this deal to showcase his credentials as the head of a corporation and entered into nine more contracts with the Government of India, a majority of which were signed when the NDA regime was in power.

“We are in the early stage of developing our operations. We have a very limited operating history and we have realised very limited revenues from our activities. Our activities in the oil and natural gas exploration and production industry have primarily involved entering into 10 Production Sharing Contracts (PSCs) with the Government of India,” reads a company quarterly report for the period ending 30 June 2012.

Shockingly, GSPC also agreed to contribute GeoGlobal’s share of 10 percent to the venture fund set up for the exploration activities and the same was to be recovered only after the joint venture starts earning revenues from the sale of gas.

Reportedly, GSPC has so far spent around $3.069 billion towards exploration costs. GeoGlobal should have contributed $306.9 million out of the total cost. But it is the taxpayers of Gujarat who have been made to fund GeoGlobal’s share of expenditure.

By virtue of this agreement, it’s the taxpayers who have been made to finance GeoGlobal’s activities, while the company has walked away with a 10 percent Participating Interest in the gas field, a national wealth.

Soon after the deal was signed, Roy made a string of questionable share transactions by which he transferred half of GeoGlobal’s 10 percent stake in a company he incorporated in Mauritius. The contract between GeoGlobal and GSPC was signed in March 2003. In the same month, GeoGlobal entered into a “Participating Interest Agreement” with Roy Group (Mauritius) Inc, a corporate entity fully controlled by Roy, by which the company assigned 50 percent of the benefits and obligations of the production-sharing contract pertaining to the KG offshore block, i.e., 5 percent of its participating interest, to this newly incorporated entity in Mauritius. This transfer of 50 percent of its stake by GeoGlobal within days of inking the deal with GSPC raises serious questions about its motives and the mala fide of the entire deal.

After around five months, GeoGlobal effected a reverse takeover of a US company named Suite101.com. By this deal, all outstanding capital stock of GeoGlobal was exchanged for 34 million shares of Suite101.com. In addition, Roy was paid $2 million. As per the deal, 14.5 million shares of Suite101.com were delivered to Roy and the remaining 19.5 million shares were held in escrow to be released on the occurrence of certain events related to the KG Basin offshore exploration. On 2 February 2004, Suite101.com changed its name to GeoGlobal Resources Inc. The nominal value of the shares of GeoGlobal was one-tenth of a US cent ($0.001). But within a few years, in January 2006, the shares reached a trading rate of $14.92. In other words, there was a 15,000-time appreciation in the share value, which was primarily on the strength of the sweetened KG block deal.

The joint venture between GSPC and GeoGlobal raises serious questions about the management of natural resources, in general, and the production-sharing contracts signed between private parties and the Government of India in the oil and gas sector, in particular. Sources at the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons (DGH) told TEHELKA that GSPC would start gas production by July 2013 and it is scheduled to drill 11 deepwater wells. As of today, the DGH reckons that the gas discovered so far is about 2 trillion cubic feet, which would be worth more than $1 billion. However, DGH sources added that it was possible that the company could discover more gas in the future.

TEHELKA sent detailed questionnaires to both the Gujarat government and GeoGlobal, and waited for more than 10 days for their response. Despite repeated reminders, both the parties failed to respond.

The so-called technical expertise provided by GeoGlobal and its promoter Roy has now been described as sub-standard, misleading and deficient by the CAG. According to sources, beyond the 10 percent stake, GSPC also paid hefty consultation fees to Roy for his technical assistance. TEHELKA could not get a confirmation or denial of the same by any of the parties concerned.

Geoglobal prepared an erroneous and deficient Geological model, says the CAG

IN APRIL, the CAG tabled a report on state PSUs in the Gujarat Assembly where it made a series of damning observations on the structure and the implementation of the joint venture between GSPC and GeoGlobal. However, unlike the CAG’s reports on 2G and coalmines, the audit body’s report on GSPC and its joint venture with GeoGlobal has gone unnoticed.

“Though the services of a technical expert could be measured and determined in monetary terms, the company admitted GeoGlobal Resources with 10 percent Participating Interest without any basis,” the CAG noted. The audit body also observed that GeoGlobal submitted a deficient and erroneous geological model, which not only delayed the exploration activities, but also led to a steep escalation of costs. The technical model prepared by GeoGlobal was so deficient, the CAG observed, that GSPC had to hire another technical expert viz, Petrotel USA, at a cost of Rs 2.64 crore. “The geological model of GeoGlobal had failed in respect of well depth estimate, its location and exploration cost estimates. Hence, Petrotel was engaged to thoroughly revise GeoGlobal’s geological model,” says the report.

After entering into a JV with GSPC, Jean Paul Roy used this deal to enter into nine more contracts with the Government of India, a majority of which were signed when the NDA was in power

The question that arises is that if the preparation of a new geological model, which has also yielded results, costs just Rs 2.64 crore, why did the Gujarat government give away a 10 percent permanent stake to GeoGlobal for the same kind of work — though it has proven to be deficient and faulty?

In its defence, the Gujarat government told the CAG that, “Mr Jean Paul Roy of GGR, being a technical expert in the field, was admitted as a joint-venture partner for the block. He would not have agreed to solely carry out a technical evaluation of the block for bidding without being offered a Participating Interest in the block” (GSPC’s reply as paraphrased in the CAG report).

But the CAG has rejected GSPC’s contention. “The reply is not tenable. The company’s contention that Mr Roy would not have agreed to carry out the technical evaluation without a Participating Interest being offered to him was an invalid apprehension not supported by any documents.”

GSPC’s reply also admits the fact that an individual geologist was passed off as a company for the purpose of forming a consortium and participating in the bid.

TEHELKA spoke with many retired ONGC, GAIL and DGH officials. Though none of them agreed to speak on record, they all agreed that natural resources need to be explored and utilised in a more transparent and just manner. They also raised questions on the pre-bid qualification process.

“The joint venture between GSPC and GeoGlobal should have failed at the pre-bid stage itself,” says an industry insider. “There is a difference between a company with years of experience, proven track record and a team of experts as its employees, and an individual geologist. It defies logic why GSPC should tie up with a shady company for such a difficult and complex deepwater exploration work.”

There is not much information available on Jean Paul Roy in the public domain except his Linkedin profile, which describes him as a geologist with “excess of 28 years of geological and geophysical experience in basins worldwide. Since 1981, he has held geophysical positions with Niko Resources, Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation, Reliance Industries, Cubacan Exploration, Petro-Canada, GEDCO, Eurocan USA and British Petroleum”.

GSPC manipulated the bidding cost to win the KG block, says the CAG

THE CAG report has slammed GSPC for deliberately underestimating the cost of exploration to qualify for the bid. The total net worth of the consortium between GSPC, GeoGlobal and Jubilant was $60.5 million. The consortium submitted that the estimated cost of drilling during Phase 1 would be $59.23 million.

The CAG’s Problems with the Gas Deal
THOUGH the services of a technical expert could be measured in monetary terms, GeoGlobal was given 10 percent stake without any basisGEOGLOBAL’S geological model had failed with respect to well depth estimate, its location and exploration cost estimates

THE TECHNICAL MODEL prepared by GeoGlobal was so deficient that GSPC had to hire another technical expert at a cost of Rs 2.64 crore

GSPC’S CONTENTION that GeoGlobal would not have agreed to do the technical evaluation without a stake that was not supported by any documents

GSPC MANIPULATED the cost of exploration and underestimated the cost of hiring a rig at the time of bid submission

GSPC HAS SUFFERED a loss of interest running into hundreds of crores of rupees by agreeing to contribute GeoGlobal’s share of 10 percent to the venture fund

“We observed that the estimated cost of Phase 1 was worked out on the lower side and if the cost of hiring rig and associated services that prevailed at the time of submission of bid was considered realistically, the estimated cost would have been $169.270 million, i.e., almost three times of the cost projected,” the report said.

GSPC deliberately kept the estimated cost less than its net worth so that it qualified the pre-bid stage.

So far, the state PSU has spent $3.069 billion towards exploration costs, more than 60 times of its estimate given at the time of bidding. By deliberately underplaying the cost of bidding and keeping it at an unrealistically low level, GSPC could justify its joint venture with a nonentity like GeoGlobal.

TEHELKA was told by a senior Gujarat IAS officer (now retired), who at one point was involved with the affairs of GSPC, that sometime in 2006-07, the government realised that the deal was scandalous and could be a source of embarrassment for the government. To correct things retrospectively, GSPC wrote to GeoGlobal and asked it to contribute towards the escalating exploration costs.

GSPC contended that the excess amount spent towards exploration costs was not within the terms of the Carried Interest Agreement, as per which GSPC had agreed to spend GeoGlobal’s share of 10 percent towards the project costs and recover the same from the company only after the commencement of commercial operations. But GeoGlobal has refused to pay anything to GSPC citing the contract.

“We estimate that the amount of GSPC’s claim as of 30 June 2012 to be approximately $306.9 million plus interest, of which 50 percent is for the account of Roy Group (Mauritius) Inc,” GeoGlobal has disclosed in its latest shareholders report.

In another report, GeoGlobal has stated its legal counsels have advised it that it was not liable to pay any amount to GSPC. “We have advised GSPC that it has no right to seek the payment and that we believe the payment GSPC is seeking is in breach of the Carried Interest Agreement,” says one of GeoGlobal’s quarterly reports filed before the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

In effect, GeoGlobal has walked away with a substantial stake in the KG Basin offshore block without investing a dime and without making any meaningful technical contribution.

Ashish Khetan is Editor, Investigations with Tehelka.
ashish.khetan@tehelka.com

Goa Illegal Mining Battle now in Supreme Court


Panaji, Nov 3 (IANS): Away from the mining dust-lined bowels of the Goan hinterland, the fight against mining will now be fought in the stately interiors of the Supreme Court of India. This is a battle that promises to be gritty.

Nearly a month after imposing a month-long ban on mining in Goa, the Supreme Court Friday began to hear arguments that will go towards deciding the fate of mining in Goa, which has been beset with controversy for the last few years.

The ban on mining in the state followed a petition by civil society activist Prashant Bhushan and Claude Alvares, who runs the Goa Foundation, an NGO that focusses on environmental issues.

The petitioners said that a sympathetic administration was allowing illegal mining to continue, despite the fact that a judicial commission headed by former Supreme Court judge M.B. Shah had nailed a Rs.35,000 crore scam in Goa.

“The failure of the state to control illegal mining has led to large-scale destruction of both forest and non-forest land and as such has adversely affected the livelihood of local people, especially the rural poor,” the petition said.

The mining lobby, represented by the Goa Mineral Ore Exporters Association (GMOEA), is also in the process of filing an intervention petition before the Supreme Court.

Shivanand Salgaocar, a leading mining operator and president of the GMOEA, claims that they have been wrongly painted as “villains” in the illegal mining saga.

“Each passing day, more and more missiles are fired at us. So it is imperative that we offer clarification of the notional loss of Rs.35,000 crore to the state government that has been attributed to us by the Shah Commission,” said Salgaocar, whose mining company has also been indicted in the Shah Commission report for encroaching on government property.

With the ban on mining stretching over a month now, employees of mining companies have also decided to take matters to the apex court seeking nationalisation of Goa’s mining industry.

The newly formed Goa Mining Labour Workers Union (GMLWU) has also filed an intervention petition “seeking an order from the court to direct the state government to take over the mines and form a government-operated corporation to run the same”.

“These scams are a result of corporate greed. The Goa government should be made to form a corporation which will run the mines. This will give job security to the workers, who are at present in suspense over the future of their employment,” union general secretary Christopher Fonseca said.

The Bharatiya Janata party-led government, which has been accused by the opposition and anti-mining activists of being close to the mining lobby, is also expected to file an affidavit in court seeking early resumption of legal mining in the state.

“Legal mining should not be hampered. Let the culprits responsible for illegal mining be investigated and punished. But those who have been working legally should be allowed to carry on with their activity,” a senior official said, even as the Shah Commission report said that nearly all mines in Goa were operating without the necessary permission and clearances.

Meanwhile, a central empowered committee (CEC) appointed by the Supreme Court to probe illegal mining in Goa returned to Delhi Tuesday after a three-day field trip here.

The CEC had been mandated by the apex court in October to probe evidence related to illegal mining in Goa for a month before submitting a report.

 

The Dirty Picture or how not to be a Porngate hypocrite


First Post, Feb 9, 2012

by M. Svairini

Confession: I have sex. I watch porn on the Internet and on film. I write erotic stories, I’ve stripped for audiences, and, so far, I’ve acted in one film that could be considered “blue.” I talk about the sex I have and the sex I want to have and the sex I think is hot.

This makes me a lawbreaker in some places, but not a hypocrite. And if you don’t want to be a sexual hypocrite either (listen up, Karnataka state legislators), if you don’t want to keep on colluding with a nation of hypocrites, read on.

Warning: It will be an uphill battle.

All over India, at this very moment, thousands of boys and men and even some women are huddled over mobile phones and laptops, or sitting in internet cafes or at their office computers, watching porn.

In the urban epicenters, crores of rupees are trading hands in order to shoot, edit, market, and distribute “blue” films. Businessmen watch pay-per-view porn delivered by satellite from their five-star hotel beds. In each of India’s 5,500 cities and towns, men know which vendors keep an under-the-counter stash of illicit DVDs.

And in the Karnataka legislature, three men watching porn on a mobile phone were forced to resign. There are reports that 40 more lawmakers may have passed around the dirty picture.

In their defense, the men have claimed they weren’t watching porn; they were watching a rape. That, apparently, is supposed to be better.

Today in India, hypocrisy is the only moral constant. The shamed politicians belong to a right wing that has vociferously asserted anti-sex “family values” in India in recent years. But the opposition, which in its outrage about “defiling the Temple of Democracy” has called for criminal charges to be filed against the phone-wankers, suffers no shortage of its own sex scandals. Everyone is appalled and shocked by sex and porn; no one has ever, you know, apparently enjoyed it.

Blame, if you want, Queen Victoria. It was her men who wrote our first obscenity laws. Back on their cold little island, the British now embrace most of what they once criminalised in the colonies. Pornographers, like everyone else in the UK, possess a right to free speech that covers everything except the most “extreme” sex acts.

But here in the former Jewel in the Crown, Victorian hypocrisy lives on. Brown sahibs carry on their former masters’ work, criminalising sexuality and shaming its many expressions. They sit in government offices or organise street protests or come on television to deliver longwinded speeches about morals.

And these moral guardians, too, watch porn.

Somehow, Indians have forsworn their older heritage of sexual choice. Somehow, we have decided that freedom of speech does not extend to the freedom to go beyond titillation. Authors routinely sign contracts guaranteeing that they have not written anything obscene or profane. People who want to make work about sexuality do so underground, in secret, by paying bribes, or by going overseas.

At the same time, sex and the consumption of sexual content is widespread. As Delhi-born sexpot Anjali — well known to fans of Bangkok porn — says, “I think I am and was way better than those hypocritical girls who look homely and docile but live secret lives of sin.”

Countries where sexual hypocrisy runs deep, love sex scandals. In India our sexual hypocrisy runs especially deep. So India’s response is even more heated. The reported mobs of impromptu protesters in Karnataka are not composed, surely, of cold-blooded young men who have never looked at or been titillated by pornography. At least some of the journalists frothing over the story are surely aficionados themselves. They aren’t morally outraged; they are excited. A scandal gives everyone an excuse to talk and think and write about sex, while keeping absolutely quiet about their own desires.

In the pre-intermission climax of the Bollywood film “The Dirty Picture,” based loosely on the life of the late actress Silk Smitha, Silk delivers a powerful speech to a film industry audience.

“You call me ghatia, sexy, dirty. … But it’s you who make sex films, sell them, watch them, distribute them so others can watch, even give awards for them.” (Here she brandishes her golden statuette award before the audience.) “Don’t worry. I’m going now. But I won’t leave you alone. I will go on making your dirty pictures, and I will go on showing people your dirty secret.”

Personally, I’m not interested in being or having a dirty secret. I like having a dirty, filthy, fulfilling real life.

I know there is confusion out there. You see it in #porngate and every other time a sex scandal rises to the surface: mass confusion and debate about what, exactly, the problem is. Is it that they were doing the naughty thing, or that they were caught? Or was it where they were doing it and on whose time? Was it sex that someone enjoyed, or was it rape? Which is worse? Who was turned on, and when did they know it?

In all this confusion, no one seems to understand the right way to handle sexuality and its stories. The problem is, if you talk one way and act the other, you will always be confused.

When it comes to sexuality, there is only one rule to living to a non-hypocritical life. Repeat after me: It is ok to have and enjoy sex. Really.

By sex, I don’t mean “only within marriage,” “only in the missionary position,” “only if you are a heterosexual man,” etcetera. I mean that all expressions of sexuality between consenting adults are 100% acceptable and healthy.

The key word above is “consenting.” By consent, I don’t mean “she dressed like she wanted it,” or “he didn’t actually say no before I put it in him,” or “she needed medicine for her kid so she said yes to the money.” I mean that you are 100% sure that the other person is 100% passionately excited about being there, doing that, with you.

And that includes pornography. Generally speaking, you can tell when you’re watching whether the people want to be there or not. If you have any doubt, you can look for films and clips with the names of porn stars who have clearly taken charge of their own business. You can tell because they give interviews, and they talk about their work without a sense of shame.

Besides Anjali, women like Priya Rai, Poonam Pandey, and Sunny Leone are making a name — and loads of cash — for themselves. And for fans of vintage shake-and-wiggle, there’s always Silk Smitha. As her Vidya Balan filmi avatar says:

“You feel you can’t watch my films with your family. But watching my films in secret, you’re inspired to make bigger families!”

Those are my kind of family values.

M Svairini writes naughty stories online and can be followed slavishly at http://www.twitter.com/msvairini .