Follow Us
Manmeet Singh Gill
Tribune News Service
Amritsar, May 21
Sukhjinder Raj Singh Lali Majithia, Congress leader from Majitha constituency, has rubbished Bikram Singh Majithia’s claims that Congress workers attacked his vehicle at yesterday’s police-public meeting.
Lali, at a press conference here today, said “It was a police-public meeting. I was not invited so I had not gone. Only the area residents were invited. It was the public who had expressed anger as they were not comfortable talking about Bikram’s excesses in his presence.” When not invited, Bikram should not have gone there, he stated.
Talking about Bikram’s claims that criminals close to Lali were occupying front seats at the meeting, the Congress leader said “The persons he (Bikram) has named as criminals are Balwinder Singh, former sarpanch of Marari, and Mohan Singh, a former sarpanch of Nibberwind. A total of 22 cases were registered against Balwinder’s family and they have been acquitted in all. Mohan Singh’s family had 18 cases against them and in most of them they have been acquitted.”
Lali said no one had the right to term people acquitted by courts as criminals.
He alleged that all cases against the two were registered on Bikram’s instructions as they people had not bowed before the musclemen of the Akali leader.
Lali also presented three Dalit families at the press meet. One of them, Hardev Singh, had contested the Block Samiti elections against the wishes of Bikram, he claimed. “Now, Hardev is not able to walk without help. He keeps staring into the void all day. He was booked in three cases and sent to jail,” said Lali, with Hardev Singh sitting beside him, covering himself with a ‘lohi’ even in this weather.
A Dalit woman, Kashmir Kaur, alleged that his son was killed by three people and she was forced to compromise with the accused at the behest of the Akali leader.
Lali said, “Bikram has no threat from people, it is the society which is threatened by him. Besides, Congressmen do not have to attack him as law will punish him for the excesses committed by him and his associates.”
9