Recent developments give the impression that Hindus as a community are orphans. There are no leaders who are prepared to, leave aside fight for the community, even guide them. The Economic Times of March 14, 2012 reported that Rinkel Kumari, a 19 year old Hindu student, disappeared from her home in Mirpur Mathelo of Sind province. Soon thereafter it was discovered that she was abducted by a Muslim and forcibly married with her name changed to Faryal Bibi. No notice was taken by any leader in our country. But what must prove even more embarrassing is that on March 25 it was reported in New York Times that a US Congress man, Brad Sherman, has exhorted the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to take action and return Rinkel Kumari to her parents.

The High Court of Delhi has in December 2011 questioned the Government of India as to how no asylum is being given to terrified Pakistani Hindus who have taken refuge in Delhi and are camping at Majnu-ka-Tila. The refugees themselves have petitioned to the President of India, the Prime Minister as well as the National Human Rights Commission for an asylum followed by citizenship as their lives would be in grave danger if they were to return to Pakistan. India is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and yet the government has not appeared to have responded.

If this inaction were in the spirit of secularism, it speaks volumes for the communal bias of our government as well as its leading political parties. Or is it in the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi's tradition? For example, when a former Congress President, Annie Besant, a lady of Irish origin, wrote on November 29, 1921 in a then publication called New India that : Mr. Gandhi should be taken to Malabar to see with his own eyes the ghastly horrors that have been committed. Committed by those whom he has called his loved brothers namely Maulanas Muhommad and Shaukat Ali. There were thousands of casualties in the one sided riots let loose by Moplahs. Many Hindus were butchered, many more were converted and even women were not spared. Mrs. Besant said that ladies were stripped naked in the presence of their husbands and brothers whose hands had been tied behind them, and raped. There were any number of persons who commented on these ghastly atrocities including a Committee led by K.P. Keshava Menon, Secretary, Kerala 
Provincial Congress Committee, T.V. Mohamad, Secretary, Ernad Khilafat Committee. Their report, inter alia, stated : the brutal murder of inoffensive Hindus, men, women and children in cold blood, without the slightest reason except that they are kaffirs.

The unquestioned leader of the Congress, Mahatma Gandhi, reacted to the comments of Mrs Besant as well as the Committee, in his journal Young India : �It is clear that Moplahs have succeeded in taking half a dozen lives and have given already a few hundred. Malabar is under martial law.� In the same article, he praised the Moplahs for �being among the bravest in the land and God fearing�. Gandhiji's humanity rose to further heights in the same journal a month later. He stated : Be the Moplahs be ever so bad, they deserve to be treated as human beings.

Swami Shraddhananda, the successor of Swami Dayananda Saraswati, was murdered by one Abdul Rashid in 1926. Swami was recovering from an attack of pneumonia and was in bed when he was killed. The distinguished Congressman Asaf Ali became Abdul Rashid's defence counsel. Nevertheless, Rashid was sentenced to death and hanged. When the condolence resolution was discussed at Guwahati session of the Congress, Gandhiji was quoted by later President Pattabhi Sitaramayya in the following words: Gandhi expounded what true religion was and explained the causes that led to the murder. Now you will perhaps understand why I have called Abdul Rashid a brother and I repeat it, I do not even regard him as guilty of Swami's murder.

The Press Trust of India has on April 1, 2012 reported that the Darul Uloom has ruled that a marriage to a non-Muslim girl would be illegal under the Shariat law. If the girl converts to Islam without any pressure, nikah would be justified. The Hindu of March 30, 2012 on the subject of talaq stated that Ittehad-i-Millat Council president Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan, who belongs to the rival Barelvi school, defended the Darul Uloom fatwa. Even if talaq or divorce given in a state of drunkenness, it is valid. Commenting further the Maulana likened talaq to a pathar (stone) and nikah (marriage) to a sheesha (glass) and said if a stone is thrown at the glass, the glass will break! 

To a layman, the question arises as to if consuming liquor is haram how is the talaq given under the influence of liquor is halal? Secondly, since talaq is so casual, what if a Hindu girl who converts to Islam in order to marry a Muslim boy, gets divorced any time, perhaps sooner than later? This is not an inter-religious question. If a Hindu girl marries a Christian she need not be so anxious about the threat of divorce. In fact Roman Catholics do not permit divorce.

The well known scholar of Muhammadan Law, Professor Asaf A.A. Fyzee wrote decades ago that the greatest defect of the Islamic system is the absolute power given to the husband to divorce his wife without cause. (Outlines of Muhammadan Law, OUP, London, 1949). Unfortunately, the wife does not enjoy similar power to secure her liberty from the husband. Fyzee's great objection was that the implicit threat of being divorced any time was a source of continuous anxiety to the woman. This according to him therefore was the 'one sided engine of oppression in the hands of the husband'..