Accusing without evidence

Apart from this last paragraph, the rest of the article is about the arbitrariness of police detentions. If we are to take Vidya's contention that the law may be subverted, are we to assume there was no arbitraniness in Kanchi Shankaracharya's case? Close to 100 witnesses rounded up in a week's time should have raised a few eyebrows. Did Vidya bother to check the impact of false detentions on those witnesses, especially when some of them claimed in the courts that the confessions have been extracted by police under duress? After several years of investigation and a chargesheet running into a few thousand pages, has an iota of evidence been found in the cases against the Kanchi Acharya?
Having done her best to propagate the term Hindutva terror, without ever bothering to tell us what it means, she now gloats that the term has gained official recognition. Sadhvi Pragya Singh, one of the key accused, also claimed to have been tortured. Did Vidya fight for her human rights or do anything for that woman's cause? She indulges in selective battles but has no qualms accusing the BJP and RSS. By the way, does Vidya have evidence to prove that the due process of law is being followed in the investigations into the Ajmer, Malegaon or Samjhauta express blasts?
I also question the judgement of the editor who let these three lines pass through when they are so disconnected with the main premise of the article.
The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : Accused without any evidence

The BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are furious that Aseemanand and some other Hindutva names have emerged in recent terror investigations. The parivar has every right to demand that due process be followed in their cases. However, one wishes they had been similarly concerned about young Muslim boys jailed and charge sheeted without evidence.