7 suspected terror launch pads targeted in surgical strike; several killed

September 29, 2016

New Delhi, Sep 29: Seven terror launch pads were targeted across the LoC by special forces of the Indian Army during the 'surgical strike' overnight in which heliborne and ground forces were used, defence sources said today.

Kashmir

The sources said the operation began at around mid-night last night and ended at around 4:30 AM this morning. The terror launch pads targeted were in the range of 2 to 3km from the Line of Control(LoC) and were under surveillance for over one week, the sources said. They said the operation was a combination of heliborne and ground forces.

The announcement of the sudden action by the army was made today by the DGMO Lt Gen Ranbir Singh, 11 days after the terror strike by Pakistan-based terror outfit JeM on an Indian army camp in Uri in Kashmir over which Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the attackers will not go "unpunished" and that the sacrifice of 18 jawans will not go in vain.

"Based on very credible and specific information which we received yesterday that some terrorist teams had positioned themselves at launch pads along the Line of Control with an aim to carry out infiltration and terrorist strikes in Jammu & Kashmir and in various other metros in our country, the Indian army conducted surgical strikes last night at these launch pads." Gen Singh told a news conference during which External affairs ministry spokesman Vikas Swarup was also present. The strikes were carried out across the LoC, he said.

Pakistan, however,dismissed as "fabrication of truth" India's claim that it has conducted a military operation across the LoC to target terrorist launching pads, terming it as a "quest" by India to create media hype by rebranding cross-border fire as surgical strike.

"There has been no surgical strike by India, instead there had been cross border fire initiated and conducted by India which is existential phenomenon," Pakistan army said in a statement in Islamabad.

The announcement of the strikes by the Indian army was made soon after Prime Minister Narendra Modi chaired a meeting of Cabinet Committee on Security(CCS).

Prime Minister Modi informed President Pranab Mukherjee, J and K Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti and former Premier Mahmohan Singh among others on the surgical strikes.

Details of duration of the surgical strikes or when exactly it was conducted or the places targeted were not immediately given.

Sources said that at least two terror camps were struck during the surgical strikes. Sharing details, Gen Singh said the operations were basically focused to ensure that the terrorists do not succeed in their design of infiltration and carrying out destruction and endangering the lives of citizens of our country.

"During these counter terrorist operations, significant casualties have been caused to the terrorists and those who are trying to support them.

"The operations aimed at neutralizing the terrorists have since ceased. We do not have any plans for continuation of further operations. However the Indian armed forces are fully prepared for any contingency that may arise," he said.

The DGMO said he had spoken to the Pakistani Director General of Military Operations and explained India's concerns and also shared with him details of the operation.

"It is India's intention to maintain peace and tranquility in the region, but we can certainly not allow the terrorists to operate across the Line of Control with impunity and attack the citizens of our country.

"In line with Pakistan's commitment made in January 2004 not to allow its soil or territory under its control for any terrorist activities against India, we expect the Pakistani army to cooperate with us with a view to erase this menace of terrorism from our region."

Comments

Shaan
 - 
Thursday, 29 Sep 2016

56 inch Chest Rocks, right decision by indian army, proud of indian army and thanks to indian (Modi) government for understanding the feelings of people of india. Jai ho, Jai hind, Vande matharam.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 19,2020

Hyderabad, May 19: Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao has hit out at the Narendra Modi-led NDA government over the fiscal stimulus package, accusing it of treating states like "beggars" and imposing "laughable" conditions for increasing borrowing limits under the FRBM Act.

"This is 'pure cheating. Betrayal. Jugglery of numbers. All gas. The Centre has reduced its own prestige," he said while referring to conditions linked to the increased borrowing limits for states under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act.

Rao cited international journals that had commented on whether the Union Finance Minister's aim was to revive the GDP or to reach the Rs 20 lakh crore number (the stimulus package announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi).

"This is a very cruel package. It is fully in a feudal policy and dictatorial attitude. We fully condemn this. This is not what we asked for," Rao, who had supported several measures taken by the Centre so far in the fight against coronavirus, said.

At a time when the finances of states were paralysed due to COVID-19 global pandemic, the state governments wanted funds to reach them so that they can help people in different forms, he said. "When we asked for it, you treat states like beggars, what did the Centre do? Is this the way reforms are implemented in India?" he asked during an interaction with media on Monday after a cabinet meeting.

For example, two per cent increase under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act (about Rs 20,000 crore in Telangana) has been given.

But, the conditions put are "laughable" and "very nasty" though the loan was to be fully repaid by the state, he said.

Explaining the situation, Rao said Rs 2,500 crore would be given if reforms were implemented in power sector and Rs 2,500 crore would be allowed if reforms in market committees as suggested by the central government are accepted.

"Is this a package? What is this? This cannot be called a package. Very sorry.. This is not the policy to be followed in a federal system... Then what are the state governments for?" the Telangana Rashtra Samithi supremo asked and said they were also constitutional governments and not subordinates.

The CM said he felt anguished and the way the Centre was wielding control over states was against the spirit of federalism.

"Prime Minister ji said cooperative federalism. This has proved that it is totally hollow and bogus," he added.

The state, however, has already fulfilled certain conditions, he added.

On the occasion, Rao also outlined his government's certain policy guidelines for regulatory farming proposed to be implemented.

On the additional water proposed to be drawn by the neighbouring Andhra Pradesh from Srisailam project, he said there was no question of compromising on the states interests.

Flaying Opposition criticism against his government for allegedly failing to protect the state's interests, Rao said he had sought peaceful co-existence with all the neighbouring states.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 31,2020

Hyderabad, Mar 31: Six people from Telangana who attended a religious congregation in Delhi's Nizamuddin died due to the novel coronavirus, the state government said on Monday.

"Coronavirus has spread among some of those who attended a religious prayer meeting from March 13 to 15 at Markaz in Nizamuddin area in Delhi," according to an official release. "Among those who attended were some persons from Telangana."

Two of the six died at the Gandhi Hospital, one each in two private hospitals, and one each in Nizamabad and Gadwal towns, the statement said, without mentioning the time of their deaths.

The special teams under the collectors have identified the persons who came in contact with the deceased and they are shifted to the hospitals, it said.

Police and paramilitary personnel cordoned off a major area in Nizamuddin West in south Delhi on Monday and over 200 people have been kept in isolation in hospitals after several people who took part in a religious congregation there showed symptoms of coronavirus.

The Telagana government asked those who participated in the prayers to inform the authorities. It will conduct tests and offer treatment to them free of cost, according to the release.

The government also requested the people to alert if they come to know about those who participated in the prayers.

Earlier a separate government release said a person died of COVID-19 in Telangana, taking the toll to two and the total number touched 77 after six fresh cases were reported on Monday.

As many as 13 patients who underwent treatment for the virus were discharged on Monday, a media bulletin on COVID-19 issued by the state government said.

A techie, the first COVID-19 case in Telangana, has been discharged recently. The state now has 61 active cases, the bulletin said.

Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao had on Sunday said barring a 76-year-old person, who had other ailments, the other patients were doing well.

Rao had said 25,937 people were under surveillance and being watched by 5,746 teams and they would be out of watch after completing their mandated 14-day quarantine period. He had said all those who are under observation would be out of vigil by April 7 if there are no fresh suspected cases.

"From March 30, their time is nearing completion. After that, they do not need to be under any surveillance. By April 7, we will have a situation of zero... We pray God that we should not get new cases,"

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.