Mothers Are Awesome ( Mothers day Special )

Mothers Day Special ...
{ it takes a big heart to be a mother }

The only source of Human Existence is a mother ... we first open our eyes we see her ... The only living form of goddesses are Mothers for the powers our religious books refer to are nothing but the duties a mother has to obey ... Lordess Durga G with multiple hands is a mother with multiple duties of a sister , daughter , friend , teacher , phiolosopher everything possible ... Lordess Saraswati G a symbol of how mothers spend their entire  life's for growing us with education and talent , Lordess Kali maa the form of a mother when she sees her child in pain or distress to fight from the society ... We may argue with u , we may fight , we may scream at times but trust us nothing is because of u its because of us the stress that we go through we know there is no one we can ever Trust ... Maa , Mother , Ammi , Maa-mi , Maa-Si , Granny, Nani , Aunt, ma'am , mummy , mummaa no matter how You call your mother but remember at least for once tell her how lucky you are to have her besides you , Tell her how much you value her and remember she wants nothing more than you being happy the path could be hers but the reason will always be you ...
And I Admit we can never ever be anywhere near to the love that you are able to Give ... Thank You to my Lordess who brought me and protected me always like a shadow , who revived me like Lordess Parvati ...

I would also thank all those beautiful ladies who are Mothers or are going to be mothers because there is nothing much big and beyond this duty of a mother ... Like it's said the Product is how u manufacture even we humans are a product of how our parents help us while we were being built ... Thank you To all Mothers Ur love Is and will always remain unmatched .... it was because of you all that we could find love even if the mother for another son but her love was pure for us
#SaluteYouAll
HAPPY Mothers Day to all the Mothers in this world , May lord bless us all with just this one connectivity called love which we try to learn from you #ThankYou

   
                      A Small Story that always Brings a tear in my eye when i remember this day and I'm sure when you remember your mothers it will remind you of their sacrifice that they are or might have made .... "  

 -- Select A Topic -- Home Education Fables Family Inspiration Life Love Motivation Submit Story 

Mother’s Sacrifice

My mom only had one eye. I hated her… she was such an embarrassment. My mom ran a small shop at a flea market. She collected little weeds and such to sell… anything for the money we needed she was such an embarrassment. There was this one day during elementary school.

I remember that it was field day, and my mom came. I was so embarrassed. How could she do this to me? I threw her a hateful look and ran out. The next day at school… “Your mom only has one eye?!” and they taunted me.

I wished that my mom would just disappear from this world so I said to my mom, “Mom, why don’t you have the other eye?! You’re only going to make me a laughingstock. Why don’t you just die?” My mom did not respond. I guess I felt a little bad, but at the same time, it felt good to think that I had said what I’d wanted to say all this time. Maybe it was because my mom hadn’t punished me, but I didn’t think that I had hurt her feelings very badly.

That night… I woke up, and went to the kitchen to get a glass of water. My mom was crying there, so quietly, as if she was afraid that she might wake me. I took a look at her, and then turned away. Because of the thing I had said to her earlier, there was something pinching at me in the corner of my heart. Even so, I hated my mother who was crying out of her one eye. So I told myself that I would grow up and become successful, because I hated my one-eyed mom and our desperate poverty.

Then I studied really hard. I left my mother and came to Seoul and studied, and got accepted in the Seoul University with all the confidence I had. Then, I got married. I bought a house of my own. Then I had kids, too. Now I’m living happily as a successful man. I like it here because it’s a place that doesn’t remind me of my mom.

This happiness was getting bigger and bigger, when someone unexpected came to see me “What?! Who’s this?!” It was my mother… Still with her one eye. It felt as if the whole sky was falling apart on me. My little girl ran away, scared of my mom’s eye.

And I asked her, “Who are you? I don’t know you!!” as if I tried to make that real. I screamed at her “How dare you come to my house and scare my daughter! Get out of here now!!” And to this, my mother quietly answered, “oh, I’m so sorry. I may have gotten the wrong address,” and she disappeared. Thank goodness… she doesn’t recognize me. I was quite relieved. I told myself that I wasn’t going to care, or think about this for the rest of my life.

Then a wave of relief came upon me… one day, a letter regarding a school reunion came to my house. I lied to my wife saying that I was going on a business trip. After the reunion, I went down to the old shack, that I used to call a house…just out of curiosity there, I found my mother fallen on the cold ground. But I did not shed a single tear. She had a piece of paper in her hand…. it was a letter to me.

She wrote:

My son, I think my life has been long enough now. And… I won’t visit Seoul anymore… but would it be too much to ask if I wanted you to come visit me once in a while? I miss you so much. And I was so glad when I heard you were coming for the reunion. But I decided not to go to the school…. For you… I’m sorry that I only have one eye, and I was an embarrassment for you. You see, when you were very little, you got into an accident, and lost your eye. As a mother, I couldn’t stand watching you having to grow up with only one eye… so I gave you mine… I was so proud of my son that was seeing a whole new world for me, in my place, with that eye. I was never upset at you for anything you did. The couple times that you were angry with me. I thought to myself, ‘it’s because he loves me.’ I miss the times when you were still young around me. I miss you so much. I love you. You mean the world to me.My World Shattered.  I hated the person who only lived for me .   I cried for My Mother, I didn’t know of any way that will make up for my worst deeds…

Moral:  Never Ever hate anyone for their disabilities.  Never disrespect your parents, don’t ignore and under estimate their sacrifices.  They give us life, they raise us better than they had been, they give and keep trying to give better than they ever had.  They never wish unwell for their kids even in their wildest dreams.  They always try showing right path and being motivator.  Parents give up all for kids, forgive all mistakes made by kids.  There is no way to repay what they done for kids, all we can do is try giving what they need and it is just time, love and respect.

I respect women for they are or will be Mothers 

Mental Disorder - a point to think again

Mental disorder

The government survey talks about 12-15 million youth to suffer from mental disorder being faced by teens in India in the year 2005 . The approx census today should be somewhere near to 50 million people as discussed by our honorable health Minter again in the Parliament today. THE disease consists of both mental and physical torcher. As per he average tests done by the company the diseases usually observed are nothing but depression and anxiety and our parliament debates on it today .

    The problem isn't the debate but it actually is just the debate . It has been seen that the Indian Governments have been well known for their ability to stay well versed about its citizens and their status upon life where as since 60+ years All we have been engaged in is dialogs and being blind copy cats of the system . A great leader once said the power of work is not delivered by the power of his words but the determination to act for that work . It is very important that we start to take that determination within us to get this change in the society . The government we choose no matter who is on the chair will not fetch us any good .

The discussions upon such sensitive issues isn't the demand of the nation today . THE FUTURE DEMANDS  a strategy that should be futuristic enuff to tackle the conditions like change in the study method and practical approach to exams , re introduction of values etc . People don't just quit their lives and get into drugs they are indirectly forced into leading this because of the failure of our system . A System that we may agree to or not but we all actually consist of and govern both directly and indirectly . It is just our one wrong move and Bang GAME over....

It's time u gave a serious thought to what and how u want to up bring ur society around u  ... Start with u today and see the change tomorrow  .... values are an investment for which if done correct may make u earn huge chunks in the near future ...
Till then stay safe and think Big

JAI Hind

Netaji files declassified, family gets first access

The West Bengal government on Friday released 64 files related to the death of legendary freedom fighter, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, a longstanding demand by his family and a grateful nation which now hopes to reach some closure on the mystery surrounding his disappearance 70 years ago.

The West Bengal government on Friday released 64 files related to the death of legendary freedom fighter, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, a longstanding demand by his family and a grateful nation which now hopes to reach some closure on the mystery surrounding his disappearance 70 years ago.

Last week, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had announced her government's decision to declassify the crucial files, which will now be displayed at the Kolkata Police archives. "We released a set of DVDs for everyone today. For the public, the museum will be opened on Monday," a senior official said, adding that the freedom fighter's family gets the first access to the files. Read: Netaji files reveal Nehru govt knew of Bose's missing treasure chest

"Today is a historic day. Our govt has made all #NetajiFiles public. People have a right to know about the brave son of India," Mamata tweeted.

Ads by ZINC

70 years after his mysterious disappearance, Netaji's story is an enigma that continues to haunt the popular imagination in India. Did he die of third-degree burns on August 18, 1945, after his plane crashed in Formosa (now Taiwan) or did he survive and escape to Siberia? Or was the "crash" a mere hoax to help him flee to safety?

What is the Netaji mystery about?

The questions have been haunting, agitating and engaging Indians, in particular Bengalis, for 70 years, but the mystery endures. A section of Netaji's descendants, including his daughter Anita Pfaff, as also some Indian National Army (INA) veterans, hold that the revolutionary leader perished in the accident and his ashes have been interred at Tokyo's Renkoji temple.

But a large number of Netaji's admirers, researchers and family members don't buy the theory. Exclusive: Bose family's letter to PM Narendra Modi on Snoopgate

During her visit to Kolkata in 2013, Pfaff said she was convinced that he died when the Mitsubishi Ki-21 Japanese heavy bomber Netaji boarded at Saigon with his close aide Col. Habibur Rahman on August 17, 1945, purportedly to shift base to the erstwhile Soviet Union and continue his fight for India's independence, crashed in Japanese-occupied Formosa

"It would be the perfect homecoming for him if the ashes are brought to India. His ashes should be immersed in the river Ganges," Pfaff had said.

Netaji's grand nephew and Harvard University professor Sugata Bose is another big votary of the crash theory and has detailed his viewpoint in his book 'His Majesty's Opponent'. Bose bases his arguments on "overwhelming evidence", citing the testimony of six of the seven survivors of the crash as also that of doctors and paramedics who treated Netaji at the Taipei Military Hospital.

From India Today Magazine: When Nehru spied on Netaji

The Indian government's three attempts to unravel the mystery by constituting probe panels - Shah Nawaz Khan Committee (1956), GD Khosla Committee (1970) and the Justice MK Mukehrjee Commission which submitted its report in 2006 - have only fuelled the debate. While the first two panels concluded Bose perished in the Taipei crash, the Mukherjee Commission debunked the theory.

India-kashmir-Pakistan

The death of Muhammed Ali Jinnah in 1948, the conflict with India over the Princely State of Kashmir (which both countries claimed at independence), as well as ethnic and religious differences within Pakistan itself, all combined to stymie early attempts to agree on a constitution and an effectively functioning civil administration.
This failure paved the way for a military takeover of the government in 1958 and later on, a civil war in 1971. This saw the division of the country and the creation of the separate state of Bangladesh. Ever since then, military rule has been more often than not the order of the day in both countries.

India has maintained remarkable cohesion since independence, especially considering it is nearly the size of Europe.

At independence, in India and in Pakistan, civil unrest as well as ethnic and religious discord threatened the stability of the new country. However, the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on 30 January 1948 by a Hindu fanatic strengthened the hand of secularists within the government.
Indian politicians ratified a constitution, which led to the first democratic elections in 1951. This made India the world's largest democracy and consolidated governmental authority over the entire subcontinent.

However, major tensions have persisted among both Muslim and Sikh communities, which suffered most from the violence and land loss resulting from partition. These tensions erupted most seriously in the 1980s in a violent campaign for the creation of a separate Sikh state which led ultimately to the assassination of Indira Gandhi.
Renewed victimisation of Muslims has also occurred, notably with the destruction of the Muslim shrine at Ayodhya in 1992 and anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat in 2004. With such notable exceptions, however, India has maintained a remarkable level of cohesion since independence, especially if one considers that it is a country nearly the size of Europe.
For both India and Pakistan, the most singular conflict unresolved since partition has concerned the former Princely State of Kashmir, whose fate was left undetermined at the time the British left. Lying as it did on the border, Kashmir was claimed by both countries, which have been to war over this region on numerous occasions.
The conflict has wasted thousands of lives and millions of dollars, but is closer to a solution now than at any time since independence. If achieved, it might finally bring to fruition the dreams of Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Mahatma Gandhi and once more set an example for post-colonial societies elsewhere in Africa, Asia and the Middle East to imitate and follow.

How India would have evolved if Subhash Chandra Bose would have been the first Prime Minister of India instead of Pundit Nehru?

"Give me blood, and I shall give you freedom!" -- Bose on 4 July 1944.

Even though Bose and Mohandas K. Gandhi had differing ideologies, the latter called Bose the "Prince among the Patriots" in 1942.

Bose is self reliant; Nehru's achievements in academics were rather pale compared to Bose. Nehru was always propped up by his father Motilal.

• He secured the second position in the matriculation examination of Calcutta province in 1911.
• He came 4th in the ICS examination and was selected but he did not want to work under an alien government which would mean serving the British. He resigned from the civil service job and returned to India in 1919.

Bose was ELECTED the President of All India Youth Congress and also the Secretary of Bengal State Congress. In contrast Nehru was always NOMINATED - backed by Gandhi because of the monetary support to the Congress by Motilal Nehru.

 

 

Bose stood for unqualified Swaraj (self-governance), including the use of force against the British. This meant a confrontation with Mohandas Gandhi, who in fact opposed Bose's presidency, splitting the Indian National Congress party. Bose attempted to maintain unity, but Gandhi advised Bose to form his own cabinet. The rift also divided Bose and Nehru. Bose appeared at the 1939 Congress meeting on a stretcher. He was elected president again over Gandhi's preferred candidate Pattabhi Sitaramayya. Due to the maneuverings of the Gandhi-led clique in the Congress Working Committee,Bose found himself forced to resign from the Congress presidency.

But for this India would have got independence prior to World war II i.e. 1939.  On the outbreak of war, Bose advocated a campaign of mass civil disobedience to protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow's decision to declare war on India's behalf without consulting the Congress leadership. Having failed to persuade Gandhi of the necessity of this, Bose organised mass protests in Calcutta calling for the 'Holwell Monument' commemorating the Black Hole of Calcutta, which then stood at the corner of Dalhousie Square, to be removed

Bose saw industrialization as the only route to making India strong and self-sufficient.

Bose's achievement in integrating women and men from all the regions and religions of India in the Indian National Army. 

Since a true nationalists Bose - Patel combination would have not budged to anything either internal or external would have made a formidable independent India.

Bose expressed admiration for the authoritarian methods (though not the racial ideologies) which he saw in Italy and Germany during the 1930's, and thought they could be used in building an independent India. Nevertheless, Bose's tenure as Congress Party President (1938–39) did not reflect any particular anti-democratic or authoritarian attributes.

Beyond doubt we can say -- India would have been a merit-o-democratic, and India would not have so much divided on lines of regions and religions

 

(Narayana Rallabandi, Solution Architect @ Oracle India)

India famously rejected a UN Security Council permanent seat. How did that decision affect India's history over the years?

The offer was made but was not formal. It was given to isolate our country from the world politics. Hence it was politely declined by NEHRU.
      Since long India has been fighting for a place as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). However, this struggle for a permanent UNSC seat is turning out to be a losing battle and would seemingly continue to be so for a variety of reasons for possibly many more decades to come. Before going into the pros and cons of the intriguing international situation, so vitally associated with the entry of a new permanent member to the UNSC, over a billion people in India reserve the right to question as to why the first Prime Minister of the country, Jawaharlal Nehru, refused the offer of a permanent UNSC seat made by the United States in 1955. Was it an unpardonable bungling by Nehru or a clever diplomatic move to save India from ignominy and enmity of powerful nations?

Very few people know that in 1955 the then US President Dwight David Eisenhower was caught in an unenviable situation of choosing between the People’s Republic of China under the Communist regime led by Mao Tse Tung and the then Formosa or the present Republic of China for a permanent seat at the UNSC. While Communist revolution was new and was beginning to find a firm footing in the Chinese mainland or the present People’s Republic of China, Washington’s blue-eyed boy Seng Kai Sek was compelled to find shelter in the island of Formosa after fleeing from the Chinese mainland. While the US was dead against Communist China becoming a permanent member of the UNSC, Eisenhower could clearly visualize that any offer made in favour of Formosa, then ruled by a fleeing dictator, would be vehemently opposed by other permanent members of the UNSC, more particularly by the then Communist USSR.

With the Cold War between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries being the order of the day in 1955 and India maintaining equidistance from both the blocks, perhaps President Eisenhower thought it prudent that India could fit into the permanent Asian seat in the UNSC, and accordingly the offer was made.

On the other hand, reports indicate that the then Communist USSR, a permanent member in the UNSC, mounted pressure on New Delhi to vouch for Communist China for the permanent Asian seat in the UNSC, promising that an elusive sixth UNSC permanent member seat to be offered to India in the coming years.

Today, 55 years later, as New Delhi runs from pillar to post for a permanent member seat in the UNSC, a review of Nehru’s decision to go by Moscow’s persuasion and plea in favour of China for a permanent UNSC seat could be of great significance. Perhaps a leader with lesser understanding of the then international scenario would have jumped to the conclusion of saying ‘‘Yes’’ to the US offer and possibly would have landed up biting dust. The crux of the matter at that point of time was the Cold War. The US, UK and France openly belonged to one block while of the Warsaw Pact countries USSR was the sole member in the UNSC. Moscow’s gameplan was obviously to have another Communist power as a permanent member in the UNSC to face the challenge of the NATO even within the security council. And hence the pressure on New Delhi to surrender the US offer in favour of China.

Any observer with adequate knowledge of the raging Cold War and the international scenario in 1955 would agree that Washington’s offer of a permanent UNSC seat could never ensure India a cake walk into the Security Council. With every permanent member enjoying veto power it was clear as daylight that any proposal for the fifth member’s name made by a member of one block would be vetoed by the member(s) of the other block. Accordingly, in the face of a standing US offer, possibly Nehru could see through the Soviet gameplan of vetoing any member’s name till China made the entry into the Security Council as the permanent member from Asia. Perhaps realizing a near impossible task of making way to the Security Council with the two Cold War blocks calling the shots in tune with their confrontation, Nehru possibly could clearly visualize the ineffectiveness of the US offer and hence turned down the offer.

Another reason why Nehru possibly rejected the US offer could possibly be to maintain friendly relations with all countries, regardless of blocks, or at least not to incur the wrath of any country, more particularly powerful nations. Perhaps Nehru was highly convinced that the American gameplan would come a cropper, leaving India to bite dust while relations with the Soviet Union and China would deteriorate to an all-time low.With the situation ensuring an almost certain fall and ignominy, it was only natural for New Delhi to reject the US offer. After all, any fool can aim for the moon, but the wise and the intelligent would always consider if a greater risk of crash-landing or still worse nose-landing could be on the cards. And certainly Nehru did not want to see India crestfallen after fighting a losing battle.

Meanwhile, much water has flowed down the Mississipi, the Volga, the Ganga and the Yangtze Kiang in the last 60 years. Looking back now, nothing perhaps is as easy as criticizing Nehru for giving up the Security Council permanent member seat even by one without any knowledge of the Cold War that raged for decades together till the Soviet Union collapsed in the eighties.

However, it is most unfortunate and ironic that today China is apparently turning out to be a mighty roadblock in India’s quest for a permanent seat in the UNSC. Likewise, the United States also has a different gameplan. Washington would not like to offend Pakistan, one of its frontline buyers of arms and other goods, by supporting India in the matter of a permanent seat in the UNSC. Ironically, today India can almost be certain of Moscow’s support among the powers enjoying veto in the Security Council. However, with raging turbulence than ever before on all fronts in the international arena, one can never be sure as to how many more decades India may have to wait for an opportune moment to enter the Security Council as a permanent member or if a UNSC permanent seat would remain an elusive dream for this nation for all times to come.The offer was made but was not formal. It was given to isolate our country from the world politics. Hence it was politely declined by NEHRU.
      Since long India has been fighting for a place as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). However, this struggle for a permanent UNSC seat is turning out to be a losing battle and would seemingly continue to be so for a variety of reasons for possibly many more decades to come. Before going into the pros and cons of the intriguing international situation, so vitally associated with the entry of a new permanent member to the UNSC, over a billion people in India reserve the right to question as to why the first Prime Minister of the country, Jawaharlal Nehru, refused the offer of a permanent UNSC seat made by the United States in 1955. Was it an unpardonable bungling by Nehru or a clever diplomatic move to save India from ignominy and enmity of powerful nations?

Very few people know that in 1955 the then US President Dwight David Eisenhower was caught in an unenviable situation of choosing between the People’s Republic of China under the Communist regime led by Mao Tse Tung and the then Formosa or the present Republic of China for a permanent seat at the UNSC. While Communist revolution was new and was beginning to find a firm footing in the Chinese mainland or the present People’s Republic of China, Washington’s blue-eyed boy Seng Kai Sek was compelled to find shelter in the island of Formosa after fleeing from the Chinese mainland. While the US was dead against Communist China becoming a permanent member of the UNSC, Eisenhower could clearly visualize that any offer made in favour of Formosa, then ruled by a fleeing dictator, would be vehemently opposed by other permanent members of the UNSC, more particularly by the then Communist USSR.

With the Cold War between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries being the order of the day in 1955 and India maintaining equidistance from both the blocks, perhaps President Eisenhower thought it prudent that India could fit into the permanent Asian seat in the UNSC, and accordingly the offer was made.

On the other hand, reports indicate that the then Communist USSR, a permanent member in the UNSC, mounted pressure on New Delhi to vouch for Communist China for the permanent Asian seat in the UNSC, promising that an elusive sixth UNSC permanent member seat to be offered to India in the coming years.

Today, 55 years later, as New Delhi runs from pillar to post for a permanent member seat in the UNSC, a review of Nehru’s decision to go by Moscow’s persuasion and plea in favour of China for a permanent UNSC seat could be of great significance. Perhaps a leader with lesser understanding of the then international scenario would have jumped to the conclusion of saying ‘‘Yes’’ to the US offer and possibly would have landed up biting dust. The crux of the matter at that point of time was the Cold War. The US, UK and France openly belonged to one block while of the Warsaw Pact countries USSR was the sole member in the UNSC. Moscow’s gameplan was obviously to have another Communist power as a permanent member in the UNSC to face the challenge of the NATO even within the security council. And hence the pressure on New Delhi to surrender the US offer in favour of China.

Any observer with adequate knowledge of the raging Cold War and the international scenario in 1955 would agree that Washington’s offer of a permanent UNSC seat could never ensure India a cake walk into the Security Council. With every permanent member enjoying veto power it was clear as daylight that any proposal for the fifth member’s name made by a member of one block would be vetoed by the member(s) of the other block. Accordingly, in the face of a standing US offer, possibly Nehru could see through the Soviet gameplan of vetoing any member’s name till China made the entry into the Security Council as the permanent member from Asia. Perhaps realizing a near impossible task of making way to the Security Council with the two Cold War blocks calling the shots in tune with their confrontation, Nehru possibly could clearly visualize the ineffectiveness of the US offer and hence turned down the offer.

Another reason why Nehru possibly rejected the US offer could possibly be to maintain friendly relations with all countries, regardless of blocks, or at least not to incur the wrath of any country, more particularly powerful nations. Perhaps Nehru was highly convinced that the American gameplan would come a cropper, leaving India to bite dust while relations with the Soviet Union and China would deteriorate to an all-time low.With the situation ensuring an almost certain fall and ignominy, it was only natural for New Delhi to reject the US offer. After all, any fool can aim for the moon, but the wise and the intelligent would always consider if a greater risk of crash-landing or still worse nose-landing could be on the cards. And certainly Nehru did not want to see India crestfallen after fighting a losing battle.

Meanwhile, much water has flowed down the Mississipi, the Volga, the Ganga and the Yangtze Kiang in the last 60 years. Looking back now, nothing perhaps is as easy as criticizing Nehru for giving up the Security Council permanent member seat even by one without any knowledge of the Cold War that raged for decades together till the Soviet Union collapsed in the eighties.

However, it is most unfortunate and ironic that today China is apparently turning out to be a mighty roadblock in India’s quest for a permanent seat in the UNSC. Likewise, the United States also has a different gameplan. Washington would not like to offend Pakistan, one of its frontline buyers of arms and other goods, by supporting India in the matter of a permanent seat in the UNSC. Ironically, today India can almost be certain of Moscow’s support among the powers enjoying veto in the Security Council. However, with raging turbulence than ever before on all fronts in the international arena, one can never be sure as to how many more decades India may have to wait for an opportune moment to enter the Security Council as a permanent member or if a UNSC permanent seat would remain an elusive dream for this nation for all times to come.

If Netaji Bose died in a crash , then y spying ....

EMAIL

PRINT

25COMMENTS

File photo of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose

Mumbai:  After the explosive revelation that relatives of freedom fighter Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose were spied on for two decades, his family has said it was always aware of the surveillance and saw it as a sign that the leader was alive long after he was presumed dead.

Here are the latest updates in the controversy

1. Netaji's nephew Ardhendu Bose, a former model and businessman, has said that his father believed the phones at their home in Mumbai were tapped.
2. He said this was taken as proof that the iconic leader didn't actually die in a plane crash in 1945. "My father never believed Netaji died in the plane crash," Mr Bose told NDTV.
3. Files declassified recently revealed that the Intelligence Bureau kept relatives of Netaji under close surveillance for two decades, mostly during the rule of Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India.
4. Mr Bose said his family believed the only leader to be a "threat" to Jawaharlal Nehru was Subhas Chandra Bose. "If Netaji were really dead and perished in the air crash then why all this? Obviously there was some element of fact that Bose was alive, lurking around somewhere and would make an appearance," he said.
5. The declassified files have revealed that Netaji's close relatives, including his two nephews Sisir Kumar Bose and Amiya Nath Bose - sons of his brother Sarat Chandra Bose - were spied upon for 20 years between 1948 and 1968. Mr Nehru was Prime Minister for 16 of these 20 years.
6. Intelligence Bureau officials allegedly intercepted and copied letters written by the Bose family and even trailed them on foreign tours.
7. Netaji quit the Congress before Independence over differences with Mr Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi and launched an organised military resistance against the British after raising the Indian National Army. But he was said to have died on August 18, 1945, two years before India won freedom.
8. Netaji's death has been one of the most enduring mysteries in India's history and has been debated for decades. Ardhendu Bose said, "The conjecture is Subhas Bose was made to disappear in Siberia under the powers that be in India at that time."
9. Against the backdrop of the snooping controversy, Netaji's grandnephew Surya Kumar Bose is likely to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Germany and demand declassification of all secret files related to the freedom fighter.
10. "Subhas Bose did not belong just to his direct family. He had himself said that the whole country is his family. I do not think it's just the duty of the family to raise this issue (of declassification of Netaji files)," Surya Kumar Bose, the president of the Indo-German Association in Hamburg, said