Allahabad High Court Order- Seema Azad Case bail application rejected 2011


Court No. – 49

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 11679 of 2010

Petitioner :- Smt. Seema Azad
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Ankur Sharma,Daya Shankar Mishra,Ravi Kiran Jain
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Smt. Seema Azad in the case crime no. 37/2010, under sections 18, 20, 21, 23(2) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (in short ‘Act of 1967’) and section 120, 121, 121-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’), police station Khuldabad, district Allahabad.
Heard Mr. Ravi Kiran Jain, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ankur Sharma for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Mr. Ravi Kiran Jain, the learned senior counsel submitted that there is no evidence against the applicant except her own statement and the statement of co-accused Vishwa Vijai @ Kamal, who is the husband of the applicant. According to the F.I.R. the applicant Smt. Seema Azad and her husband are members of terrorist organisation, Communist Party of India (Maoist), [in short ‘CPI (Maoist)’] and they were found in possession of anti national literatures specified in the F.I.R. Mr. Jain further submitted that mere possession of pamphalates, magazines and other documents does not constitute the offences under sections 18, 20, 21 and 23(2) of the Act of 1967 and sections 120, 121 and 121-A IPC. There is no material to support that the applicant is an active member of the CPI (Maoist), which is alleged to be a terrorist organisation, within the meaning of the Act of 1967, and has been specified as such in the schedule to the said Act.
Mr. Jain placed reliance on Arup Bhuyan vs. State of Assam, AIR 2011 SC 957 in support of his submissions. In paragraphs 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the judgment, the Apex Court held as follows:
“12. In State of Kerala Vs. Raneef, 2011 (1) SCALE 8, we have respectfully agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Elfbrandt Vs. Russell, 384 U.S. 17 (1966) which has rejected the doctrine of ‘guilt by association’. Mere membership of a banned organisation will not incriminate a person unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or does an act intended to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence (See : also the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Kedar Nath Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SCC 955 para 26).
13. In Clarence Brandenburg Vs. State of Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) the U.S. Supreme Court went further and held that mere “advocacy or teaching the duty, necessity, or propriety” of violence as a means of accomplishing political or industrial reform, or publishing or circulating or displaying any book or paper containing such advocacy, or justifying the commission of violent acts with intent to exemplify, spread or advocate the propriety of the doctrines of criminal syndicalism, or to voluntarily assemble with a group formed “to teach or advocate the doctrines of criminal syndicalism” is not per se illegal. It will become illegal only if it incites to imminent lawless action. The statute under challenge was hence held to be unconstitutional being violative of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

14. In United States Vs. Eugene Frank Robel, 389 U.S. 258, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a member of a communist organisation could not be regarded as doing an unlawful act by merely obtaining employment in a defence facility.

15. We respectfully agree with the above decisions, and are of the opinion that they apply to India too, as our fundamental rights are similar to the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution.”

16. In our opinion, Section 3(5) can not be read literally otherwise it will violate Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It has to be read in the light of our observations made above. Hence, mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement to violence.”

The aforesaid case of Arup Bhuyan (supra) was under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (in short ‘TADA Act’), which was, according to Mr. Jain, pari materia with the Act of 1967. In para 16 of the aforesaid judgment, the Apex Court further held that section 3(5) of the TADA Act can not be read literally otherwise it will violate Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It has to be read in the light of our observations made above. Hence, mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement to violence. It was lastly submitted by Mr. Jain that the applicant is in jail from 7.2.2010 without any evidence/reasonable basis, therefore, the applicant, who is a woman, is entitled to bail.
The learned AGA, on the other hand, submitted that the CPI (Maoist) is a terrorist organisation and has been declared as such by the notification dated 22.6.2009 (Annexure CA-1). He further submitted that various incriminating pamphalets, articles and other materials were recovered from the possession of the applicant and her husband at the time of their arrest and there is adequate evidence that the applicant is an active member of the aforesaid terrorist organisation and she had been actively associated with the illegal activities of the CPI (Maoist) against the security and integrity of the nation. Learned AGA further submitted that the investigating officer had taken the applicant on police remand and on her pointing out recovered some more incriminating articles like Dastak magazine, Operation Green Hunt, Ganga Express Way, twenty six page confidential documents and a Nokia Mobile Phone set, therefore, it can not be said to be a mere case of possession of pamphlets, magazines and other articles. Learned AGA further submitted that the aforesaid twenty six page confidential documents so recovered were provided to the applicant by one Balraj @ Bachcha Prasad Singh, a Polit-bureau member of CPI(Maoist), who made such statement during the investigation. The 26 page confidential documents so recovered, prima facie, reveal that the activities of the applicant were connected with the propaganda of Agenda relating to insurgency operation against the State. It was next submitted that the documents recovered on the pointing of the applicant match with the documents recovered from the laptop through Forensix Science Laboratory, Hyderabad. The laptop was recovered from the possession of the aforesaid Balraj @ Bachcha Prasad Singh. Most of the States like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Maharashtra are affected from the insurgency operation of the CPI (Maoist) on account of which 75 CRPF personnel lost their lives. The responsibility of such killing has been undertaken by the CPI (Maoist). If the applicant, who is an active member of the aforesaid organisation, is enlarged on bail, she will tamper with the evidence and would flee away from the clutches of the law, therefore, she is not entitled to bail. It was further submitted that the investigating agency is still investigating the matter and has collected so many incriminating evidence against the applicant.
At the stage of bail, when the investigation is still in progress, it is not proper to express any opinion on the merits of the case.
The Apex Court has settled the legal principles in bail matters relating to heinous crimes like murder etc. in various decisions and they are the cases of State of U.P. through CBI v. Amarmani Tripathi, 2005 (53) ACC 484 (SC), Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT, Delhi and another, 2001 (42) ACC 903 (SC), Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh and others, 2002 (45) ACC 45 (SC), State of Maharashtra v. Ritesh, 2001 (43) ACC 547 (SC), Pancham Mishra v. Digambar Mishra and others, 2005 (51) ACC 929 (SC), Vijay Kumar v. Narendra and others, (2002) 9 SCC 364, and Anwari Begum v. Sher Mohammad and another, 2005 (53) ACC 766 (SC). The Apex Court has propounded the principle that at the stage of bail the Court should avoid elaborate examination of the evidence and detailed reasons touching the merits of the case which may cause prejudice to the accused but it is also necessary to indicate the reasons for prima facie concluding why bail is being granted particularly where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. The discretion conferred on the Court in bail matters should be exercised judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the settled principles, which among other circumstances are:
1.Whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence;
2.nature and gravity of the accusation;
3.severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;
4.danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;
5.character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused;
6.likelihood of the offence being repeated;
7.reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and
8.danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the crime, complicity of the applicant and the nature of evidence, I do not consider it proper to release the applicant on bail.
The bail application is, therefore, rejected.
Order Date :- 26.5.2011

Seema Azad Yearns For Freedom

Human rights activist Seema Azad and her husband are in jail on dubious charges. On 8th February 2010, Seema Azad and her husband were arrested by the Allahabad Special Task Force, under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, for their alleged links with Maoist organizations. The only evidence provided was a book carried by Seema Azad containing information on Maoist politics. From then, they have been detained in custody, and have been refused bail.

Seema Azad is a grassroots journalist and civil liberty activist. She has relentlessly raised her voice against local scams and injustices, denouncing the working condition of mining workers, exposing the practices of the local mafia and its nexus with the police force. She created a bi-monthly magazine — Dastak — as a platform to publicize all the wrongs around her. It is clear to human rights activists that Seema Azad and her husband have been jailed for political reasons. Campaigns have been launched to support her and to put an end to her unfair detention.

The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), of which she is an active member, has petitioned the National Human Rights Commission to plead for her release and to expose the iniquity of her treatment. Till date, Seema Azad has seen no improvement in her situation. Ajeet Bahadur hopes that his video will mobilize people all over the country to support Seema Azad, and other activists, jailed because of their fight for political and social justice.

Uttar Pradesh: Court Says No Proof to Detain Seema Azad

The Uttar Pradesh Police received a setback on Saturday when they failed to submit any evidence in court against Seema Azad, the state secretary of People’s Union for Civil Liberty (PUCL) and her husband Vishwavijay Azad.

The Special Task Force had arrested Seema and Vishwavijay on February 8 in Allahabad. They were booked under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for their alleged links with a banned Maoist organisation.

Judicial Magistrate Vikas Kumar rejected the application of the Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) seeking a week’s remand for Seema and Vishwavijay. Dismissing the application, the judged observed that the police have not come up with any concrete evidence against them. “There was no need to accept the request for police remand of the accused and the police did not mention any concrete ground for the remand,” the court observed.

Lalji Kaithwas, Seema’s advocate, argued that the ATS did not even record the statement of the accused before seeking their remand. “The police cannot seek remand without recording the statement of the accused. Remand is taken only after the police are convinced during the recording of statement that they can get evidence or make recovery in support of their claim against the accused,” he added.

Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the judge observed: “How could the ATS know that they could get some more information without recording the statement of the accused? The permission for police remand for mere interrogation of the accused cannot be granted as the police can interrogate the accused even in jail. When there is no claim of any recovery by the police, there is no need for granting police remand.”

On Monday, a local court will hear Seema and her husband’s bail application. On February 8, the STF had arrested three alleged Naxalites from Allahabad and Gorakhpur. While Seema and Vishwavijay were arrested from Allahabad, Asha alias Heerman Munda was arrested from Gorkhapur.

(Indian Express, 22nd February, 201o)

Letter to the NHRC- Seema Azad Case

Following is the letter submitted in Feb 2010, when Seema  was arrested alongwith her husband

Letter to the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi

We want to acknowledge you that Seema Azad, journalist, human rights worker and executive member of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), her husband former student leader Vishwavijay, and friend Asha, were detained by the police on Allahabad Railway Junction without any proper reason on Saturday(6th Feb 2010).  Both of them were returning from World Book Fair, New Delhi by the Reewanchal Express.  According to police they all are Naxalite.

Sir, the organization wants to highlight the background of detention.  PUCL has continuously raised the voice against the atrocity done by the police-Bahubalies nexus in kachhari region of Allahabad and Kausambi district on the sand mining labours.  Due to the pressure of politician and Bahubalies, DIG of Allahabad has framed many fraud cases against the labour movement leader.  DIG had banned the ‘Lal Salam‘ cited it as against the nationality.  PUCL had condemned the ban saying that it was natural address of Communist party.  According to PUCL ‘Lal Salam’ is a common address of labourer across the world.

Raising the cause of fighting labour against the illegal collection and illegal mining of sand in Nanda ka Pura village of Kausambi, the minister Seema Azad and advocate K. K. Roy of PUCL has issued a report on human rights violations.  In past one month the police and PAC jawans has unleashed the Lathicharge couple of times in Nanda ka Pura village.  Police had torched the local office of CPI (ML) New Damocracy in Nanda village.  And their leader were detained in the jail for several days in fraud cases.  The voice against them, doesn’t suit the mood of DIG of Allahabad and police.  Police doesn’t want that the voice should be raised by any organization against their working style.

The arrest of Seema Azad, her husband Vishwavijay and friend Aasha is done by the police in revenge.  Seema Azad has no connection with the Naxalites and she is working in the field of human rights for past several years.  She is also editor of a monthly magazine ‘Dastak’.  She has made reports on serious issues like human right situation in eastern Utter Pradesh, labour movement, SEZ, situation of Mushar cast and Encephalitis disease.  Vishwavijay, husband of Seema Azad, and his friend Aasha were active student leader of Central university of Allahabad for a long time.  They have strongly raised the concerned problem of students under the banner of ‘INQUALABI CHHATRA MORCHA’.  The persons which are naxalite, according to the police, are working in between students and labour for a long time.

Sir, in past also UP Police has threatened the leader of PUCL working for the human right concern.  PUCL has raised the questions against the encounter of Kamlesh Chaudhoury in Chandauly dated 9th November.  After that , in a press conference dated 11th November 2009, DGP Brijlal has articulated that “the action would be taken against the PUCL leader”(see Dainik Hindustan of November 12, 2009).  The Allahabad arrest of Seema Azad is a chain of the same retaliation.

Hence, we appeal for the prompt action in the matter and also we appeal that police atrocity and human right violation should be stopped.  We also demand that Seema Azad and her friend should be released as soon as possible.

– Sincerely

Vandana Mishra, General Secretary, PUCL, U.P.
Chitranjan Singh, National Secretary, PUCL
K.K. Roy, Advocate, state executive member, PUCL
Ravikiran Jain, state executive member, PUCL
Satendra Singh, Convener, People’s Union for Human Rights (PUHR)
Sandeep Pandey, winner of Magsaysay award and state executive member, PUCL
S. R. Darapuri, former police director, state executive member, PUCL
Anshu Malviya, Shehri Garib Sangharsh Morcha
Shahnawaz Alam, Organization Secretary, PUCL
Rajeev Yadav, Organization Secretary, PUCL
Vijay Pratap, freelance journalist and human rights worker

Seema Azad, journalist, human rights worker and her husband sentenced to life for waging war against India

NDTV, june 8, 2012

AllahabadA couple who were arrested by the Uttar Pradesh special task force in February 2010 and suspected of being Naxals have been sentenced to life imprisonment by a lower court in Allahabad.

Seema Azad and her husband Vishwa Vijay were found guilty of waging war against the state, criminal conspiracy under various sections of the Unlawful Activities Prevention act.

The case against the two was being tried for more than two and half years in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates in Allahabad.

They were detained in the Khuldabad area of Allahabad on February 3, 2010, while they were returning from Seema’s brother’s house in Delhi.

Banned Maoist literature and Rs. 40,000 were found on Azad and her husband Vishwa Vijay which the police claimed was being used to exhort people to become Naxals.

32-year-old Seema Azad, a Master in Psychology from Allahabad University was the Organising Secretary of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) in Uttar Pradesh. She also edited a magazine called Dastak.

In 2010, several PUCL members had opposed the couple’s arrest alleging that they had been framed because they were working extensively against land mafias and unfair policies of the government.

Their arrests were made by the special task force, but the case was later handed over to the anti-terrorism squad of UP.

The Supreme Court had ordered a day to day trial in the case.

After the sentencing was announced today, the couple’s lawyer Lalji Kaithwas said that he still believes this is a case of poor evidence and that he will challenge their conviction and sentencing in the High Court.

Chinese dissident Li Wangyang found dead in ‘strange circumstances”

A leading Chinese dissident imprisoned after the 1989 Tiananmen pro-democracy protests has been found hanged in hospital.

Officials suggested Li Wangyang had committed suicide, but family members questioned this account.

His body was found on Wednesday in Shaoyang city, in the southeast of the country.

He was on his feet next to his bed, with a white strip of cloth tied tightly around his neck and connected to a window bar above, according to his brother-in-law Zhao Baozhu .

Al Jazeera’s Steve Chao, reporting from Hong Kong, said relatives doubted that Li would have been physically able to hang himself.

“They pointed out the fact that he was virtually blind and deaf and unable to walk properly from his years of mistreatment in prison,” he said.

“They also pointed out that as a leading dissident, he was being monitored by sometimes up to 10 police officers 24 hours of the day and they wonder how he may have managed to slip a bandage around his neck and tie it to a window without them noticing.”

‘Always very strong’

Li, 62, was released from jail last year after two decades in custody, but had been detained again several times since.

Even though he had so many illnesses and spent more than 20 years in jail, he never talked about suicide

– Zhao Baozhu, brother-in-law

Zhao said he was suspicious about Li’s death because the activist had never expressed a desire to kill himself despite hardships he went through.

He said that Li had seemed normal over dinner the previous night.

“He was always very strong, there was no sign at all that he was thinking of killing himself,” Zhao told the AP news agency.

“Even though he had so many illnesses and spent more than 20 years in jail, he never talked about suicide. So I don’t believe it.”

After Li’s death was discovered, more than 40 police descended on the hospital and took his body away, preventing the hospital and family from confirming the exact cause of death, Huang Lihong, a local activist, told AFP.

Zhou Zhirong, an activist and family friend, also said that Li’s relatives were escorted away from the hospital and then detained at a hotel.

“Li’s sister and brother-in-law have been taken away by the police and they were told that the death was due to suicide,” he said.

“Family friends and supporters and other activists have been strongly warned not to cause trouble and have been placed under police surveillance.”

‘Propaganda and incitement’

Activists looking at photos of the scene on the internet also doubted Li had hanged himself since his feet were touching the ground.

He was being treated at Daxiang District People’s Hospital for illnesses including heart disease, diabetes, failing eyesight and hearing.

Li was arrested for his labour activism on June 9, 1989, five days after the bloody military crackdown on protesters in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

Sentenced for “counterrevolutionary propaganda and incitement,” he spent much of his 11-year term at hard labour.

The subsequent 10-year sentence for inciting subversion centred on his demands for government help for health problems caused by beatings and mistreatment in prison.

Watch aljazeera video here

Iraq: End harassment of oil union activists

Iraqi government agencies frequently interfere with internal union affairs, punishing union activists by imposing forced transfers, demotions, fines, travel restrictions, and other penalties allowed by Iraq‘s labor law, which dates from the Saddam Hussein regime, as well as the law governing state employees. The suppression of worker rights has been most severe in the oil sector, where the Oil Ministry has worked hand in hand with the oil companies to enforce these punishments.

This harsh approach is evident in the April 17, 2011, arrests of 26 workers at the Maysan Oil Company in southern Iraq who were peacefully demonstrating against corporate corruption. Even though they had received advance permission to hold their demonstration, a Ministry of Oil investigation led to the reprimand of eight workers and a warning to 18 others. All 26 were instructed that further actions would lead to greater penalties being applied against them. Individual letters sent by the company on December 13, 2011, essentially stated that the workers’ livelihoods would be jeopardized if they continued to engage in such activity.

Additionally, Abdul Kareem Abdul Sada, vice president of the General Federation of Trade Unions and Workers’ Councils of Iraq (GFTUWCI)–Basra Branch, received a reprimand and six-month suspension of his salary bonus, in accordance with recommendations made by investigative committee No. 1129 on January 11, 2012. Hassan Juma’a Awwad, president of the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU), received a three-year grade demotion; Adel Abood, a board member of the southern oil union of the IFOU and member of the IFOU assembly board, received multiple written reprimands; and Abdul Khaliq Naser, a member of the GFTUWCI Oil union, received a warning letter, based on the recommendations of the same investigative committee. All were accused of “inciting unrest.”


IMMEDIATE RELEASE- Rights Groups Slam Nellai Collector for Delaying Bail for K-activists


Rights Groups Slam Nellai Collector for Delaying Bail for K-activists
8 June, 2012. CHENNAI — Four days after the Madras High Court granted bail to anti-nuke activists Sathish Kumar and Mughilan, release of the duo is being delayed by the Tirunelveli district administration. The Village Administrative Officer has refused to sign the property papers of eight Idinthakarai residents — four each for Mughilan and Sathish — who had come forward to produce surety valued at Rs. 10,000 each as per the Court’s orders. The papers were readied and handed over to the VAO as early as 30 April, 2012, when bail for the cases involving charges of sedition and waging war was granted.

Endorsing the surety papers is a matter of routine if the pledged property is valued at more than the surety amount. However, the VAO said he cannot do it as he has not received any instructions from the DIstrict Collector. Disturbed by the irregular delay in endorsing the papers, senior CPI leader Nallakannu met the Tirunelveli DIstrict Collector Mr. Selvaraj and DIG Varadarajulu yesterday. Both assured the delegation of immediate action. However, the VAO maintains that no instructions have been conveyed to him.

Meanwhile, the District Collector is not reachable for comments, and the two youngsters are likely to remain in jail over the weekend. The Chennai Solidarity Group for Koodankulam Struggle has condemned the vengeful and petty behaviour of the District Collector, and urged senior officials to intervene. The groups also said that civil rights activists will approach the Chief Secretary with a complaint about the District Collector.

Less than a week ago, a committee led by Justice AP Shah released a report condemning the violation of democratic rights by the State Government and the police machinery. Clearly, the State Government has chosen to ignore the recommendations and instead take revenge on two innocent youngsters, the Solidarity Group said.

For further details, contact:
Chennai Solidarity Group – 9444082401

IMMEDIATE RELEASE- Activists Urge for More Openness in Green Policy Drafting


Activists Urge for More Openness in Green Policy Drafting

8 June 2012. CHENNAI – Thirty-eight environmental and social organisations from across Tamil Nadu have expressed their disappointment with the Department of Environment’s lack of seriousness and consultation in drafting the State Environmental Policy. The fact that a draft outline of the policy note was on the Department of Environment’s website for public comments came to light only on 5 June through a newspaper article, they said. The deadline for submission of comments is 9 June. Even this draft is in English, thereby denying the Tamil-speaking majority, including many of our elected representatives, an opportunity to influence the policy.

The activists said they welcome the Government’s initiative to draft an environmental policy. However, an environmental policy for a rapidly industrialising state needs to actively seek out the concerns of affected people, they said. Passive and elite consultation through the internet reflects poorly on the transparency ideals professed by the State Government.

The first meeting to develop the outline was held on 5 April in GRT Grand Hotel. The “Record of Discussions” uploaded to the website contains a list of “core group” members to “finalise the Tamilnadu State Environment Policy.” Activists have faulted the Department of Environment for including only industry representatives in the “core group” calling it a conflict of interest. No NGOs or social activists were involved in the drafting of the outline.

The activists have urged the Department of Environment to translate the policy outline in Tamil, extend the deadline for comments by at least two months, and conduct widespread consultations, at least at district level, among farmers, fisherfolk, workers and other public interest citizen groups. They have called for removal of industry representatives from the core committee, and inclusion of eminent leaders and people’s representatives with a proven track record of protecting the environment in their place.

For more information, contact: Nityanand Jayaraman — 9444082401

Statement by:


South Indian Fishworkers Welfare Association (Then India Meenavar Nala Sangam)

Tamil Nadu Fisher People’s Association (Tamilnadu Meenava Makkal Sangam)

Tamil Nadu Fisherfolk Development Association (Tamilnadu Meenava Munnetra Sangam)

All India Fisherfolk Traditional Association (Akhila India Meenava Parampara Sangam)

Indian Fisherfolk Association (India Meenava Sangam)

Nochikuppam Fisherfolk Livelihood Organisation (Nocchikuppam Meenava Vazhvurimai Iyakkam)

Human Rights Advocacy and Research Foundation

People Union for Civil Liberties – Tamil Nadu & Pondicherry

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives


Poovulgain Nanbargal

The Other Media

Save Chennai Beaches

Reclaim Our Beaches

Save Tamils Movement



Save Coimbatore Wetlands

Discover Wild Foundation

Nature Conservation Society


Environmental Conservation Group






SIPCOT Area Community Environmental Monitors


Tamizhaga Nadigal Padhukappu Koottamaippu

Tamil Nadu Environment Council

CEDA Trust


Tamil Nadu Fisherpeople’s Federation


Coastal Action Network


Nilgiris Wildlife and Environmental Association


Speak Out Salem

Salem Citizens Forum

Tamil Nadu Green Movement

Tamil Nadu People’s Right Movement, Salem

Kanjamalai Padhukappu Iyakkam

Mettur Padhukappu Iyakkam


All India Fisherfolk Federation, Thoothukudi

Veeranganai Penngal Iyakkam


Kractivism-Gonaimate Videos

Protest to Arrest

Faking Democracy- Free Irom Sharmila Now

Faking Democracy- Repression Anti- Nuke activists


Kamayaninumerouno – Youtube Channel


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,224 other subscribers

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 1,869,454 hits


June 2012
%d bloggers like this: