On Thursday, the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education stated that it won’t conduct an investigation as directed by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) to identify non-Muslim students in the Madarsas. The Board said that doing so might create a divide between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities.
This is a month after NCPCR directed chief secretaries of all states and Union Territories to conduct a detailed inquiry into madarsas admitting non-Muslim children. The commission has also recommended mapping of all madarsas.
The letter written by the NCPCR to the chief secretaries read, “On perusal of various complaints received by the Commission from different sources, it is noted that children belonging to Non-Muslim community are attending Government funded/ Recognised Madarsas. Further, it is also learned by the Commission that some State/UT Governments are providing them with scholarships too. This is a clear-cut violation and contravention of Article 28(3) of the Constitution of India that prohibits educational institutions from obligating the children to take part in any religious instruction, without the consent of parent.”
The Commission had asked states and Union Territories to admit any or all such children in schools with immediate effect for getting a formal education. It added, “Madarsas, as institutions, are primarily responsible for imparting religious education to children. However, it is also learned that those Madarsas which are funded by the Government or recognized by the Government are imparting both religious and to some extent formal education to children.”
The Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education however opined on Thursday that conducting an investigation and identifying non-Muslim students may foster a divide between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities.
Reportedly, this also comes a day after the Uttar Pradesh government declared to introduce the NCERT syllabus to students studying in Madarsa. The government said that all the students in the Madarsa will be taught NCERT syllabus and that the teachers teaching at the Madarsa will be given the training to teach the syllabus.
On January 18, The Hindu’s N Ram spoke to a group of journalists in an online discussion on The Wire’s fabricated story about Meta and Bharatiya Janata Party’s IT Cell head Amit Malviya. Speaking at the Global Journalist Seminar by Reuters Institute for Study of Journalism on the topic ‘How The Wire’s Meta controversy could have been avoided’, Ram not only insinuated that the after-effects of the story would not affect The Wire too much but also implied that as The Wire has apologised, the case against them would not hold in court.
Mithali Mukherjee was the host of the seminar.
However, he did agree that there was no political conspiracy against The Wire, who fell for a story completely fabricated by its own reporter, Devesh Kumar.
‘How much sorry is enough’
When Mithali asked that The Wire apologised, but many have accused them of making investigative journalism difficult for others in the future, Ram replied with a question and asked ‘how much sorry is enough?’. He said the media house has admitted to the mistake and removed the stories. He mentioned that the reporter’s other story about the Tek Fog has also been put under internal investigation by The Wire. In such a case, how more the media house needs to apologise?
Giving the example of the New York Times which was accused of fabricating a story but the journalist never actually apologised for it, he said every organisation has a different style of working. Praising Siddharth Varadarajan, the founding editor of The Wire, he said, “I think Siddharth has been sorry enough. I saw those statements in my personal view [he has apologised for enough]. But some people feel he should have apologised to Amit Malviya. I think yes to him specifically rather than issue a public apology.”
Comparison of tech experts with product reviewers
During the seminar, Ram made a bizarre statement. He said, “It is fashionable to say now that Indian newsrooms lack Tech reporters. I don’t think that is completely true. Do you see the columns they have? They have reviews of technology products [and] consumer products, for example, cars. So I think there are a lot of skills, and I do not think we are short of IT skills and technology skills. Whether they are deployed is the question.”
It was a statement that made no sense. Many freelancers can write perfect reviews of the products without knowing the technical details of the products. Saying that all the media houses with writers to create content on products and technology may also have the know-how for in-depth technical investigation journalism is not true.
The level of sophistication required to debunk the Meta story broken by The Wire was not a beginner’s one. It required a number of technology experts to come together on social media platforms and use the combined information to prove that it was indeed fabricated. A technology writer cannot do that without understanding the fundamentals of what goes in the background of any program.
The ‘anonymous’ source
Ram said that if a journalist or a reporter says that he or she does not want by-line, it is a major red flag that The Wire missed. Reportedly, Devesh had asked to keep his name in the background from some of the stories. He further pointed out that if a source is proven to be fake, he would not think twice before throwing the source under the bus and revealing his or her identity.
Interestingly, he claimed that Devesh did not name the source. However, it was revealed in some reports one of the initial sources who allegedly gave him the PIR report on Instagram was Philip Chua. Siddharth himself revealed his name in a tweet. Siddharth was very well aware of the sources but did not verify the details from tech experts before publishing them.
A source’s anonymity should be protected but not at the cost of a nation’s reputation. Even the CBI court has said in a recent order that journalists are not exempted from revealing the sources of the stories. The investigating agency had submitted a closure report in the court. It said the journalists and channels who had published forged documents about the case refused to disclose their source. The court, in reply, told the investigation agency that there is no statutory protection for journalists’ sources, and further investigation was ordered.
Ram pointed out that before publishing a story, the editor-in-chief or someone designated to know the sources must be made aware of where the information, documents and other material came from. Just saying that sources’ anonymity is important will not cut the deal.
No evidence of political conspiracy
One of the most important aspects of the seminar discussion was that N Ram himself admitted that so far, he did not see any evidence that it was a well-planned political conspiracy against The Wire. He said, “I’ve not seen any evidence, and the people I talk to in The Wire also have not seen any evidence that it was some part of a great kind of political conspiracy. No, we don’t know who fabricated the original story about Amit Malviya. I don’t think it could have been invented completely by Devesh Kumar. He said he talked to a source…who the source was…we don’t know. I don’t think there is any indication it was a part of a grand political conspiracy and that The Wire was set up.”
He added, “I think common sense is not always a safeguard, but I think you can use a large dose of common sense to see whether it makes sense and ask, ‘Does this make sense?'”
Is there no case against The Wire?
N Ram claimed that the case against The Wire would not stand in a court of law. He further claimed this is why no further progress has been made in the case. However, The Wire has already been booked under several relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code, including 420. The Wire’s editor and journalist were actively involved with Devesh Kumar. The published stories have their bylines. As the case progresses, they will have to face the consequences. Saying that just because there is some delay in the matter, it would not be correct to say that the case would not stand a chance in court. Not to forget, a 2019 case against JNU’s former student leader, Shehla Rashid, paced up in 2023 after Delhi LG permitted proceedings against her. There are many cases that see a slow pace in the beginning but reach a conclusive decision in the end.
‘Who is responsible for giving a platform to fake story’ asked BJP’s Devang
OpIndia spoke to BJP’s Devang Dave who was mischievously named by The Wire in now-removed Tek Fog stories. Dave said it was absolutely wrong to say the case would not stand in court. He said, “The judiciary is an independent body and it will take its due course in the investigation. It is not correct to say there is no progress in the case because it would not stand in court.” Speaking about the responsibility of the platform, he said, “Who gave a platform to publish the Tek Fog stories or the Meta stories? Not one, but 25 of Tek Fog stories were published. Was it a public platform like Facebook? No, it was The Wire. They gave the platform to know the details of the story. Not only that, they used the opposition and further fueled the issue.”
Meta vs The Wire saga
On October 6, The Wire published a report that an alleged satire piece was removed by Instagram. This post had a byline of Jahnavi Sen, who is also named in a police complaint filed by Malviya. On October 10, The Wire published another story claiming it was Amit Malviya who got the post removed. This report, too, has only Sen’s byline. When Meta denied allegations, they came up with another story claiming Andy Stone, Head of Communication at Meta, was furious as the information regarding powers given to XCheck-linked accounts got leaked. This third story had Sen and Siddharth Varadarajan’s bylines. For the first three stories, in this Meta controversy where forged documents were published, only Sen and Varadarajan took bylines. Only in the subsequent articles was Devesh Kumar gave a byline as lead author.
This report contained verification of emails via DKIM (voiced by Ayushman Kaul) and the same had Ujjwal Kumar’s mail as well as ‘evidence’. All of which has now turned up fake. Kumar and Kaul had earlier paired up for The Wire’s ‘exposé’ on the Tek Fog app, which claimed to have superhuman powers, again powered by BJP. The ‘app’ never existed and here also it is likely all the screenshots provided by The Wire were fabricated. The Wire has taken down Tek Fog-related stories too. However, The Wire has filed a complaint only against Devesh Kumar till now with respect to Meta’s absurdity. Subsequently, cases were filed against The Wire and The Wire filed a complaint against Devesh Kumar as well. OpIndia’s complete coverage of the Meta vs The Wire saga can be checked here.
How N Ram manufactured the Rafale scam through digitally cropped documents?
One of the petitioners in the ‘Pegasus snooping scandal’ is N. Ram, the Chairman of Kasturi & Sons Limited and publisher of The Hindu. Ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the journalist desperately tried to create an anti-Modi wave by manufacturing a ‘defence scam’ in the Rafale deal.
On February 8, 2019, The Hindu had published a note from a defence ministry official who had objected to the Prime Minister’s office inquiring about the progress of the deal. This was despite the fact that the officer was not involved in the negotiations of the deal. The Hindu wanted to project that there was opposition to the Rafale deal in the defence ministry and only the Prime Minister was pushing for it. In doing so, the newspaper had cropped a vital part in the same document, a note by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar. The then defence minister had written that the officer was overreacting, and offices of Indian PM and French President were just monitoring the progress of the deal.
Immediately after the Hindu report, ANI had published the full document, which had proved that N Ram had used a cropped version of the document in his article. About 10 days after the incident, The Hindu came up with a clarification, saying that it did not doctor the document. In its column Readers Editor, it has claimed that the document published by it was an earlier version, which didn’t include the Defence Minister’s note. As proof of the same, The Hindu had noted that the document published by ANI had serial numbers on each note, while there were no serial numbers on the document published by Hindu.
To hide the evidence of Parrikar’s note, the Hindu cropped the document in two places, and even digitally erased part of a stamp that should have been visible even after cropping the same. And its claim that it did not doctor the document turned out to be false, because a date stamp before the defence secretary’s note was clearly removed from the document. As such, the petition in the Supreme Court over the alleged snooping scandal looks like another desperate attempt at anti-Modi propaganda.
According to media reports, the largest plantation drive in India has been announced by Gautam Adani, the richest man in the country. In keeping with its pledge to the Paris COP 21 conference, the company stated that it would plant 10 crore trees by 2030. Adani Group made the announcement during the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting currently being held in Davos, Switzerland.
The Adani group tweeted about the same on January 17, 2023.
At the World Economic Forum’s “Trillion Trees Platform,” the group promised to plant 100 million trees, in support of the program titled ‘UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration’. This is a multi-stakeholder platform leading a global campaign to conserve, repair, and cultivate 1 trillion trees by 2030.
In Davos, Switzerland, the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting began on January 16. This year’s conference will focus on “Cooperation in a Fragmented World.” The summit’s goal was to discuss the most pressing global problems and to support creative solutions.
“The sheer scale of ambition to plant a trillion trees is simply inspiring. It is a reflection of the resilience of humanity and what can be achieved through the collective power of like-minded people that are determined to fight for a cause,” Adani said about the group’s plantation pledge.
“Restoring ecosystems, reversing the loss of biodiversity, and reducing soil erosion are all essential for building a greener world. The move is part of India’s declaration to take a leading position in its commitment at Paris COP 21 to create additional carbon sinks of 2.5-3.0 billion tons of CO2,” the Adani Group Chairman added.
Additionally, by 2030, the Adani Group wants to plant 63.08 million terrestrial trees.
The trillion trees initiative seeks to slow down climate change by removing significant amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, bringing about much-needed advancements in the fields of biodiversity and climate.
Mangroves and other terrestrial trees would help the environment by lowering air pollution, preserving coastlines, preventing soil erosion and saline water intrusion, recharging groundwater tables, providing fish breeding grounds, and providing many other advantages.
Notably, in 2021, the Adani group sealed the world’s largest power purchase agreement (PPA) with the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI). The conglomerate had also signed a pact for a total of 6000 MW of green power generation with SECI. The remaining 2000 MW pact will be sealed in the coming months. The firm has a total operational and under-construction power generation portfolio of 20.3 GW. AGEL has signed a deal with France’s Total for 25 GW of green power generation by the year 2025. For an investment of $2.5 billion, Total has acquired a 20% stake in AGEL.
On the late night of Wednesday, January 18, Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) Chief Swati Maliwal was allegedly molested and dragged for 10-15 meters by a drunk driver opposite the Delhi AIIMS gate 2. Maliwal was dragged by the drunk driver after her hand got stuck in the car’s window. The driver was subsequently arrested by police.
According to police they received a PCR call at around 3:11 am, when the accused identified as Harish Chandra, a resident of Sangam Vihar, pulled up the window of his car as Maliwal was rebuking him for asking her to sit in his car. The caller told the police that a man inside a Baleno car dragged and molested a woman. The incident took place when Swati Maliwal was standing on a footpath along with her team.
(DCW chief)Swati Maliwal,dragged by car for 10-15 meters,at around 3.11 am opp AIIMS gate 2, after her hand got stuck in car’s window as driver, Harish Chandra, suddenly pulled up glass window while she was reprimanding him as he asked her to sit in his car: Delhi Police pic.twitter.com/fZh5GXhbIP
The police informed that the 47-year-old accused was in an inebriated state when he allegedly misbehaved with the DCW chief, adding that he has been detained on charges of molestation and voluntarily causing hurt.
“Our special patrolling vehicle had made the PCR call after the personnel spotted a lady outside the hospital,” said Chandan Chowdhary, DCP (South).
“Her name was Swati Maliwal. She said that a drunk driver of a Baleno pulled up next to her and asked her to get inside with bad intentions. He asked her to sit in the car, and when she declined, he left before returning and asking her again. She resisted once again and walked up to his side to scold him. Her hand got stuck as the car’s driver quickly rolled up the window. She was then dragged for ten to fifteen meters,” DCP Chaudhary added.
Swati Maliwal confirmed the incident through a post on Twitter. “Late last night I was inspecting the situation of women’s security in Delhi. A car driver molested me in an inebriated condition and when I caught hold of him, he locked my hand in the car window and dragged me. God saved my life. If the Chairperson of the Women’s Commission is not safe in Delhi, then imagine the situation,” Maliwal’s tweet in Hindi read.
कल देर रात मैं दिल्ली में महिला सुरक्षा के हालात Inspect कर रही थी। एक गाड़ी वाले ने नशे की हालत में मुझसे छेड़छाड़ की और जब मैंने उसे पकड़ा तो गाड़ी के शीशे में मेरा हाथ बंद कर मुझे घसीटा। भगवान ने जान बचाई। यदि दिल्ली में महिला आयोग की अध्यक्ष सुरक्षित नहीं, तो हाल सोच लीजिए।
An FIR has been filed under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 341 (wrongful restraint), 354 (criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty), and 509 (act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) as well as sections of the Motor Vehicle Act. Apart from arresting accused Harish Chandra, police also seized the car involved in the incident.
This comes after days after the Kanjhawala hit and drag case wherein a 20-year-old woman was hit by and dragged by a car for over 12 kilometers. On January 1, 20-year-old Anjali Singh died in an accident in Kanjhawala. The woman was on her way home on a scooty when a car hit her and dragged her for about 12 km. The police had arrested seven people, including five occupants of the car, in connection with the case.
On Wednesday, 18th January 2023, the dead body of Mukarram Jah Bahadur, the nominal eighth Nizam of Hyderabad, was buried at the Makka Mosque in Hyderabad. He was the grandson of Nizam Mir Usman Ali Khan who was the ruler of the Nizam state at the time of Operation Polo through which the territory in the Deccan was merged with India. The full name of this nominal Nizam was ‘Mir Barkat Ali Khan Mukarram Jah Bahadur Asifjah the Eighth’.
The 89-year-old heir of the Nizam dynasty died on 14th January 2023 in Turkey. His dead body was kept at the Chowmahalla palace for the locals of Hyderabad who wanted to pay him respects one last time. Though it was supposed to be held till 1 pm on Wednesday, many prominent admirers of the Nizam rule from the old city gathered in the palace delaying it to 2 pm.
The dead body was brought to the Makka Mosque at around 4:30 pm where Maulana Hafiz Qari Qureshi offered funeral prayers. The nominal Nizam’s lifeless body was buried after the evening Namaz. The funeral was attended by his relatives, many other trust members, and a large number of Muslims.
Telangana’s chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao paid floral tributes to the nominal Nizam at Chowmahalla Palace. The Telangana government led by KC Rao gave the guard of honour at this time, which is seen as a disrespect to thousands of Hindus who fought against the Islamic rule of Nizam to get the state merged with India, in the 75th year of their independence which they got 13 months later than rest of the then British India. Notably, according to his last wish, this nominal Nizam’s dead body was wrapped in the flag of the Nizam state.
KC Rao is in alliance with the All India Majlis e Ittihadul Muslimin (AIMIM) which is an ideological successor of the Islamic ruler Nizam. The decision of giving a guard of honor to the nominal Nizam was taken by the state government in its own capacity neglecting the fact that Mukarram Jah had nothing to do with India. The decision was taken by the government because the AIMIM allegedly asked the state government to do so. Though Mir Usman Ali Khan was named the governor of the Hyderabad region after the province was merged with India, his heirs – especially Mukarram Jah had nothing to do with India.
He did not hold any constitutional post. He was not a noted public figure in India. He was not a Padma Awardee. He was not a war veteran or someone who gave supreme sacrifice in the national interests. He was not some great messenger of humanity whose death should be mourned by the state by giving him a guard of honour. He represented the dynasty of the last recognized Islamic state on Indian soil and unapologetically said that his last wish is to be wrapped in the flag of the Nizam state that persecuted Hindus to the worst level an Islamist rule can degrade at. An Indian state giving him a guard of honor for wooing Muslim voters is therefore an insult to the freedom fighters.
The dead body of the nominal Nizam was wrapped in the flag of the Nizam state. Image Source: Siasat
Mukarram Jah – the nominal Nizam – was born on October 6, 1933, in France. Azam Shah, son of Mir Usman Ali Khan was his father, and Durru Shehvar, the imperial princess of the Ottoman Empire was his mother. In this way, he was related to the Ottoman dynasty of Turkey. He was coronated as the Eighth Nizam on April 6, 1967, as Mir Usman Ali Khan died in February 1967. This nominal Nizam lived in Australia till 1996. After that, he sold everything he had in Australia and settled in Turkey where he finally died.
The coronation ceremony of the nominal Nizam.
This nominal Nizam is survived by his wife Esra and their children among others. The nominal Nizam was an heir of the Nizam dynasty that persecuted Hindus who were its subject before getting annexed to India in 1948, a year after the so-called independence.
Persecution of Hindus in the Nizam rule
At the time of partition in 1947, the Nizam of Hyderabad Mir Osman Ali Khan was in a dilemma to choose which union he’d like his country to merge with and initially agreed to the ‘standstill agreement’ where the Republic of India would handle the external affairs and defense of Hyderabad but won’t interfere in the internal affairs. This was however violated by the state of Hyderabad when it secretly loaned 15 million pounds to Pakistan and raised a semi-private military (Razakars) in the country.
Under the rule of Nizams, Hindus were brutally suppressed by the rulers. Hindus were routinely discriminated against due to their religion during their appointment to government posts and the state army. Of 1765 officers in the State Army, 1268 were Muslims, 421 were Hindus, and 121 others were Christians, Parsis, and Sikhs. Of the officials drawing a salary between Rs. 600 and 1200 per month, 59 were Muslims, 5 were Hindus and 38 were of other religions. The Nizam and his nobles, who were mostly Muslims, owned 40% of the total land in the state, showing the vast inequality in the distribution of wealth.
Frightened by the growing awareness amongst the Hindu population in Hyderabad, Nizam Khan ordered the formation of a semi-private army called ‘Razakars’ to suppress the agitations. The Razakars were a wing of the Majlis-e-Itihadul Muslimeen (MIM, or AIMIM as it is presently known). The Razakars managed to raise 1 lakh Jihadis in their army within a span of days. The army managed to suppress the Hindus by mass-murdering and abducting Hindus in Urban Telangana, the Marathwada section of present Maharashtra, and the northeast Karnataka region of present Karnataka.
By 1948, Nizam didn’t want the growing public opinion of Hindus that Hyderabad should accede to India to grow roots in the state and ordered the Razakars to suppress the Hindu population brutally. Qasim Razvi was made the chief of the Jihadi forces.
Toothless-ness of Nehru and the wrath of Patel
After receiving the details of the exodus of Hindus by the Nizam of Hyderabad, India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was afraid that any attack on the princely state would attract retaliation from West and East Pakistan. Nehru was hesitant to take the decision to storm into the state and annex it.
On the insistence of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Nehru hesitantly agreed to the annexure of Hyderabad and ordered the Indian Army to annex the state of Hyderabad and storm into the state from all fronts.
On 13th September 1948, the Indian Army launched an attack on Hyderabad; this operation was named ‘Operation Polo’. The Indian Army, in a 5-day battle, annexed Hyderabad from the Nizam and integrated it into the territory of India.
Tushar Gandhi continues the Nehruvian legacy
MK Gandhi’s grandson Tushar Gandhi mourned the death of the nominal Nizam of the Islamic state in the Deccan and displayed his colonial mindset. He tweeted, “Rest in Peace, Al Vida, Nizam Muqarram Jah, the 8th and last Nizam of Hyderabad Khuda Hafiz.”
Rest in Peace, Al vida, Nizam Muqarram Jha, the 8th and last Nizam of Hyderabad Khuda Hafiz??
The Delhi High Court issued a series of directions to help reduce the trauma of POCSO victims, including hybrid and in-chamber hearings, after noting that many of these victims were being invariably made to face their alleged tormentors when they appear physically or virtually in court for bail application hearings of the accused.
The bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh in an order passed last week noted that many of the victims in Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) cases were being asked to appear physically or virtually in Court at the time of hearing bail applications of the accused. This has led to a situation where the victims were being forced not only to interact potentially with the alleged accused person but also be present in Court when arguments regarding the offence were taken up for hearing.
The court while issuing directions said, if these directions are implemented in their true letter, spirit, and intent may help in reducing the trauma of POCSO victims.
The psychological impact on a POCSO victim being present in Court during the arguments is grave as there are allegations, accusations, doubting the integrity, character, etc. of the prosecutrix, her family, etc. The presence of the prosecutrix victim in Court at the time of arguments, according to me, has an adverse impact on the psyche of the prosecutrix, said the Court.
The prosecutrix is forced to be present in Court with the accused, who is the same person who has allegedly violated her. It was felt that it would be in the interest of the victim that she is not traumatized again and again by reliving the said incident by being present in Court proceedings.
In this view of the matter and in addition to the practice directions issued earlier, it is further directed that during bail hearings of a POCSO case, the Investigation Officer shall ensure that timely service of notice of bail application is made on the victim/ prosecutrix so that she gets a reasonable amount of time to enter appearance and make her submissions.
The victim can be produced virtually before the Court (either by the IO/ Support person before the Court) (by way of Video Conferencing) or by taking assistance from the District Legal Services Authority.
A hybrid form of hearing bail applications would suitably address the concerns of the victim while at the same time safeguarding the rights of the accused. The victim and the accused shall not come face to face in this manner and this can prevent the re-traumatization of the victim, said the court.
If the victim gives it in writing that her counsel/ parent/guardian/ support person shall appear on her behalf and make submissions on the bail application, insistence on the physical or virtual presence of the prosecutrix shouldn’t be made.
A written authorization of the victim authorizing another to make submissions on her behalf (after the victim is duly identified by the IO) and said authorization is forwarded by the SHO, should suffice, directed Delhi High Court.
Whenever the victim comes to court for a hearing on the bail application, the support person provided to her should be present with her so as to provide the necessary psychological or logistical support to the victim/prosecutrix.
In certain exceptional cases, in-chamber interaction with the victim can be done and her submissions qua the bail application can be recorded in the order sheet passed on that day so that the same may be considered at a later stage.
While recording the submissions/ objections/ statement of the victim qua the bail application, appropriate questions may be put to the victim to elicit her responses instead of bluntly asking her, “Do you want bail to be given to the accused or not?” Rather questions can be put to her to ascertain what her apprehensions and fears are in case the accused is granted bail in the matter, for bail is to be granted by the Court concerned on the basis of overall appreciation of facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of well-settled principles governing the grant of bail.
It may further be clarified that the victim’s presence may not be insisted on in cases under the POCSO Act, where the accused is a child in conflict with the law because the considerations for grant of bail to the child in conflict with the law are not dependent on the apprehensions of the prosecutrix.
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 delineates separate parameters for considering the grant of bail to children in conflict with the law, and giving an audience to the prosecutrix will not have any bearing on the same, Delhi High Court said while issued several more practice direction in POCSO Case.
(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)
The Delhi High court on Thursday dismissed the plea of Aam Aadmi Party’s leader Amanatullah Khan challenging the order of Delhi Police declaring him as a “bad character”. Amanatullah Khan is a member of the Delhi Legislative Assembly and represents the Okhla assembly.
Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, while dismissing the plea, granted liberty to Amanatullah Khan to move representation before the concerned Authority on Thursday. The Court had kept the order reserved in October 2022.
Earlier, Advocate M Sufian Siddiqui appeared for Amanatullah and argued that the order of the Delhi Police is mechanical, without material and application of mind. There is a malafide intention on the part of the Delhi Police to malign the image of the petitioner MLA.
He also argued that the history sheet which is supposed to be confidential was leaked to the spokesman of a rival party and was on social media. This news was taken up by all the media houses and this affected the image of the petitioner.
Advocate Siddiqui had argued that there was no material to form an opinion about the petitioner for opening the history sheet. There is not a single complaint by any neighbour. He also argued that the Delhi Police has not even initiated an inquiry into the leakage of the history sheet. This demonstrates that the action of the police was malafide and maligning the image of the petitioner.
It was argued that there were 18 cases against the petitioner, out of which in 14 cases there was an acquittal, discharge or compounding. In two cases out of four, the investigation is pending. One case has been challenged before the Allahabad High Court. There is no material to form an opinion against the petitioner.
On the other hand, ASG Sanjay Jain had submitted before the court that there was no malafide on the part of the police, there was an application of mind and approval was given on the basis of material forwarded by the forwarding authority. There was sufficient material to form an opinion on the matter.
Earlier, it was also submitted that declaring a person a bad character is confidential. This information about the process can not be shared with the person against whom the process started.
He had also submitted that the decision is taken by a competent authority on the basis of material available with DCP, in this case, including a list of cases.
It is right that the petitioner is not a convict but there are cases against him.
On this basis, his name has been entered into the register and a history sheet has been opened. This decision was taken with the proper application of mind.
It was submitted that the information can’t be shared with the petitioner but it can be shared with the court for judicial scrutiny.
Earlier the High Court had issued notice to Delhi Police on a plea moved by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan. He has challenged the order issued by Delhi Police declaring him a bad character of the area.
The petitioner had stated that the dossier was leaked to the media in contravention of rules and regulations, which mandates it to be kept confidential. The petitioner said it is a classic case of brazen abuse of the process of law by the Delhi police.
(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)
On Thursday, Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat was asked to step down from the stage during a wrestlers’ protest against Wrestling Federation of India coaches and officials at Jantar Mantar in Delhi. The video of the incident went viral over the internet where wrestler Bajrang Punia could be seen requesting Karat not to “politicize” the protest and to leave the platform.
“Madam, I request you to please come down. Please don’t politicise the protest. This is the wrestler’s protest. Please get down from the stage,” Punia could be heard saying to the CPI (M) leader.
#WATCH | CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat asked to step down from the stage during wrestlers’ protest against WFI at Jantar Mantar in Delhi. pic.twitter.com/sw8WMTdjsk
In a video shared by ANI, Brinda Karat was seen being insistent on getting to the podium and speaking. However, Bajrang Punia, who was speaking, was alerted by other wrestlers about her presence. The Olympian then asked Brinda and others to get off and not to politicise the protests.
Olympians and renowned wrestlers Sakshi Malik, Vinesh Phogat, and Bajrang Punia and many others have levelled harassment allegations against Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) officials and coaches on Wednesday and staged a sit-in protest against the national federation President’s dictatorship at Jantar Mantar, which entered its second day today.
Wrestler Babita Phogat arrived at the protest location on behalf of the government, promising an impartial investigation into the situation. “I have assured them that the government is with them. I will try that their issues are resolved today,” Phogat said after addressing the gathering in Delhi.
According to the Sports Authority of India (SAI), the Union Sports Ministry has also requested an explanation from the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) about claims of sexual exploitation levelled by wrestlers including Olympic and Commonwealth Games medalists. The Ministry has asked WFI to respond to the wrestlers’ allegations within 72 hours, it added.
Meanwhile, WFI President Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh denied claims of sexual misbehaviour and stated that pressure was put on some wrestlers to conduct sit-in protest against him over allegations of sexual harassment.
He said that wrestlers Bajrang Punia and Sakshi Malikkh met him a week earlier and they had no problem then. “Maybe, they didn’t like some of the decisions I took as President but I only took those decisions in the interest of the sport,” he said.
On Thursday, January 19, Bigg Boss fame actress Rakhi Sawant Fatima was reportedly arrested by Amboli Police in connection with a case filed against her by actress Sherlyn Chopra in November last year. It is notable that Rakhi Sawant changed her name to Rakhi Sawant Fatima last year after she converted to Islam to marry Adil Khan Durrani.
Taking to Twitter, Sherlyn Chopra said that Rakhi Sawant has been arrested and that her anticipatory bail application was rejected by Mumbai Sessions Court.
“Amboli Police has arrested Rakhi Sawant in respect of FIR 883/2022. Yesterday, Rakhi Sawant’s ABA 1870/2022 was rejected by the Mumbai session court,” Chopra tweeted.
BREAKING NEWS!!!
AMBOLI POLICE HAS ARRESTED RAKHI SAWANT IN RESPECT WITH FIR 883/2022
YESTERDAY, RAKHI SAWANT’S ABA 1870/2022 WAS REJECTED BY MUMBAI SESSIONS COURT
— Sherlyn Chopra (शर्लिन चोपड़ा)?? (@SherlynChopra) January 19, 2023
Rakhi Sawant Fatima was taken to Amboli Police Station for further questioning, said the Mumbai Police. The police will present Sawant in the Andheri court later in the day. Rakhi Sawant’s anticipatory bail application was rejected by a Mumbai sessions court on Wednesday, after which she was arrested on Thursday.
Sherlyn had filed a complaint against Rakhi Sawant alleging that she released her objectionable photos and videos on social media.
It is notable that Rakhi Sawant and Sherlyn Chopra were at loggerheads last year after Rakhi Sawant came out in support of MeToo accused filmmaker and BiggBoss contestant Sajid Khan. Sherlyn Chopra had earlier accused Sajid Khan of sexually harassing her. In October last year, Chopra filed a police complaint against him for criminal intimidation and sexual harassment.
In November last year, both Rakhi Sawant and Sherlyn Chopra filed FIRs against each other. On November 8, the Amboli police filed an FIR under sections 354A (sexual harassment), 500 (defamation), 504 (intentional insult), and 509 (insulting a woman’s modesty by act, word, or gesture) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67 (transmission of obscene content in electronic form) of the IT Act against Sawant and her lawyer Falguni Brahmbhatt. Following this, the Oshiwara police filed an FIR under sections 354A and 509 of the IPC against Chopra on the basis of Rakhi Sawant’s complaint.
Rakhi reported to the police that on November 6, 2022, Sherlyn Chopra posted a video on YouTube and Instagram in which she made offensive remarks about her and used abusive language.
Irked by the support extended by Sawant for Sajid Khan, Sherlyn not only released several videos on Instagram but also spoke to the media on multiple occasions. On November 4, videos of Sherlyn went viral on social media where she was speaking to the paparazzi. She hit out at Sawant and called her ‘dimag se paidal’ (brainless).
Besides her spat with Sherlyn Chopra, Rakhi Sawant is also in news over her Nikah with longtime beau Adil Khan Durrani, conversion to Islam, and changing her name to ‘Rakhi Sawant Fatima’.
On January 19, reports emerged that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) probing the murder of Bharatiya Janata Party Yuva Morcha worker Praveen Nettaru in Karnataka, has announced a cash reward to anyone who would provide information leading to the arrest of the two absconding accused involved in the case.
According to the NIA, anyone providing information regarding the accused, Mohammed Sherif (53) of Kodaje in Bantwal taluk and K A Masud (40) of Nekkiladi, will be rewarded with Rs 5 lakhs. According to the central agency, the two are members of the now-banned Islamist terrorist organisation PFI and have been on the run since the incident happened in July last year.
The identity of informers would be kept strictly confidential, according to the NIA. People with information can contact the office of NIA, 8th floor, Sir M Visvesvaraya Kendriya Sadana, Domlur, Bengaluru- 560071 or call 080 29510900 or 8904241100 (Email: [email protected]), the agency added.
NIA declares cash rewards for information on 4 absconding PFI members accused in murder of Praveen Nettaru
It may be recalled that in November 2022, NIA announced Rs 5 lakh each for information on the two accused and Rs 2 lakh each for information on the two other accused, and therefore a total of Rs 14 lakh had been announced.
According to the reports, the accused PFI jihadis on whom the reward was declared were identified as Mustafa Paijaru of Budu house in Bellare village of Sulya taluk (Rs. 5 lakhs cash reward), M.H. Tufail of Madikeri city, Kodagu district (Rs. 5 lakhs reward), M.R. Umar Farooq of Sullia (Rs 2 Lakh reward) and Abu Bakr Siddique alias Painter Siddique alias Gujari Siddique of Bellare village in Sullia (Rs. 2 lakhs reward).
The case
On July 26, a Bharatiya Janata Party Yuva Morcha worker Praveen Nettaru was hacked to death by unidentified assailants. In the late evening, the killers came on a bike in Bellari, Dakshina Kannada of Karnataka, and attacked Nettaru with sharp weapons. Nettaru, who ran a poultry business, was coming returning home when the attack happened. The assailants escaped after the attack. Nettaru was rushed to the hospital, but he could not be saved.
Two assailants identified as Zakir (29) from Savanoor in Haveri district and Mohammed Shafiq (27) from Bellare were arrested in July in the case. The case was then transferred to the NIA on July 29.
