𝑀𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐵𝐽𝑃. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑖𝑥 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑦.
𝑀𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛-𝑎𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑅𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑎𝑠 𝑢𝑛𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐵ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑦𝑎 𝐽𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑅𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑚𝑒𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛'𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑀𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑛𝑡ℎ𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡, 𝑠𝑖𝑥 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑦. 𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡.
𝐼𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑒𝑑, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 37 𝑡𝑜 43 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑦 𝑖𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 46 𝑡𝑜 47. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑠𝑘𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑠𝑢𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑏𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 31.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑛𝑜𝑤 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑓 83 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠. 𝐸𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑟, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦, 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐿𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑘ℎ, 𝑤𝑎𝑠 87. 𝐻𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟, 𝑖𝑛 2019, 𝐿𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑘ℎ 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢, 𝑑𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐿𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑘ℎ 𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑖𝑡.
𝑁𝑜𝑤, 𝑖𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛'𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑒𝑑, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒 90, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛 𝑎 𝑑𝑜𝑧𝑒𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠.
𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟'𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜-𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛'𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑠, 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐵𝐽𝑃.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑣𝑒-𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒'𝑠 𝐴𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐺𝑢𝑝𝑘𝑎𝑟 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑃𝐴𝐺𝐷), 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑇𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐽𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑢 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠. ۔
"𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 370. 𝑊𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒
