AB Ibrahim cautions against withdrawal of cases against Pramod Muthalik

[email protected] (CD Network)
January 1, 2016

muthalikMangaluru, Jan 1: Dakshina Kannada Deputy Commissioner AB Ibrahim has expressed deep concern over the reports on possibility of withdrawal of more than a dozen cases against Sri Rama Sene leader Pramod Muthalik.

In a letter addressed to Additional Chief Secretary of the Home Department Mr Ibrahim cautioned against the proposal to drop 13 cases, including 12 hate-speech cases against Muthalik.

“Such a move would send wrong signals and demoralise the police force,” the deputy commissioner said.

It’s worth mentioning here that the Home Ministry had written to the Director of Prosecution to get the opinion of prosecutors on the proposal to drop the 13 cases, including the infamous 2009 pub attack case. Muthalik himself had expressed surprise and shock over the development.

Mr. Ibrahim, in his letter dated December 28, 2015 advised the government against giving freedom to those who indulge in immoral policing and spread communal hatred.

Withdrawal of cases against Muthalik could motivate other fringe elements to take law into their own hands, the DC said.

Comments

aharkul
 - 
Sunday, 3 Jan 2016

Very good decision taken by DC

A. Mangalore
 - 
Saturday, 2 Jan 2016

Excellent. It is the right decision of the District Commissioner.
Satyameva Jayathe. The honest officer never bent for any pressure. God bless you .

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
February 5,2020

Chennai, Feb 5: In order to ensure housing for all, the Madras High Court has proposed ban on non-resident Indians from purchasing houses in India, prohibit speculative sale, and impose 100 per cent extra stamp duty on purchase of second house.

The court on its own impleaded the Union housing and finance ministries as party respondents.

It has directed them to answer a series of questions including as to how many families have basic amenity of housing in India as well as in Tamil Nadu, population and housing ratio in the country and in the state, when 'Housing for All' mission of the central government would be achieved.

"Why the government does not consider imposing such restrictions to control escalation of house prices and to provide a house to every family in the country, a division bench of Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose wondered.

Directing the authorities to inform as to whether the central and state have got special schemes to provide housing for the marginalized and economically weaker sections including SC/ST communities, the bench has also sought the details of the number of families that possess more than one house.

"Why the governments do not restrict families/individuals from purchasing/possessing more than one housing unit/flat/plot till "Housing for all" is achieved?

Why not the government charge 100 per cent more or extra stamp duty to discourage buying more than one house by a family while purchasing second house?

Why not the government conditionally allow the families to purchase more than one house provided the said family pays 100 per cent extra statutory dues like property tax, electricity charges, water and sewerage charges on the second property?" the bench said.

This apart, the court also wanted the authorities to know as to why it should not prohibit the NRIs from purchasing houses in India to bring down the cost of housing.

Justifying its directions, the court said "Lakhs and lakhs of people are living on platforms, roads, and cement pipes, slums, under the trees and on banks of water bodies without proper shelter and basic amenities and safety."

It is true that the Centre had taken a policy decision to provide housing unit to every family.

It should be achieved at the earliest, the court said, adding it could become fruitful when restrictions are put on persons who hold more than one housing units.

The court passed the order while hearing an appeal moved by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board challenging a single judge order against acquisition of about 369 acres of private land in Thudiyalur and Vellakinar areas of Coimbatore for a housing scheme.

Comments

Suresh SS
 - 
Wednesday, 5 Feb 2020

We believed that only Indian Govt. ministers, MP and MLAs has this disease, now it is spreading everywhere even Indian High courts. it is certainly very harmful virus  

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
June 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 29: Bengaluru continued to see a sharp spike in covid- 19 cases as 738 more people tested positive on Monday that took the city's tally to 4052 of which 3427 is active.

The surge in Bengaluru pushed up the number of positive cases to 1105 across Karnataka. The total number of cases in Karnataka now stands at 14,295 of which 6382 are active.

The death toll stood at 230 as 19 more people died in the 24 hours till 5 pm on Monday.

Karnataka, particularly Bengaluru, has seen a sharp rise in cases over the last two weeks indicating the possibility of community transmission and further rise in cases.

Estimates by government authorities project that Karnataka will have around 25,000 cases by mid-August.

R.Ashok, the revenue minister incharge of covid- 19 in Bengaluru on Monday told doctors that they would have to dedicate another six months to contain the virus indicating that authorities were expecting the case count to rise in subsequent days and months.

The city reported over 3,200 cases since 19 June as against 844 cases between 8 March and 18 June.

There are around 500 containment zones in Bengaluru that is likely to have an impact of business and activities in the state's growth capital and its efforts to revive the economy.

The state government on Monday held meetings with private hospitals to increase the number of beds available for treatment of covid- 19.

The number of people in intensive careunits (ICU) jumped to 268.

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
May 22,2020

It has been 33 years since the night of 22 May, 1987 when nearly 50 Muslim men from Hashimpura, a settlement in Meerut were rounded up and packed into the rear of a truck of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC), an armed police of Uttar Pradesh. It was the blessed month of Ramadan and all the Muslims were fasting.

That night 42 of those on board the truck were killed in two massacres in neighbouring Ghaziabad district. One along the Upper Ganga canal near Muradnagar, the other along the Hindon canal in Makanpur, on the border with Delhi.

The cops had returned home after dumping the dead bodies into the canal. A few days later, the dead bodies were found floating in the canal and a case of murder was registered. 

Vir Bahadur Singh was the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh and Rajiv Gandhi was the prime minister of India when this incident took place. 

Not much has changed for the survivors and the relatives of the victims even today. The wounds are still fresh. Hashimpura remains devoid of basic municipal amenities, the erring silence on the narrow lanes of the locality amid the activities of a daily life speaks of the horror of the fateful day in 1987.

The massacre was the result of one among the many outcomes of the decision taken by the Rajiv Gandhi government to open the locks of Babri Masjid. After a month of rioting, the situation was tense in various parts of Meerut, and a lot spilled over in the nearby areas.

Timeline

May 22, 1987

Nearly 50 Muslims picked up by the PAC personnel from Hashimpura village in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
Victims later shot and bodies thrown into a canal. 42 persons declared dead.

1988

UP government orders CB-CID probe in the case.

February 1994

CB-CID submits inquiry report indicting over 60 PAC and police personnel of all ranks.

May 20, 1996

Charge sheet filed against 19 accused before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad by CB-CID of Uttar Pradesh police. 161 people listed as witnesses.

September 2002

Case transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court on a petition by the families of victims and survivors.

July 2006

Delhi court frames charges of murder, attempt to murder, tampering with evidence and conspiracy under the IPC against 17 accused.

March 8, 2013

Trial court dismisses Subramanian Swamy's plea seeking probe into the alleged role of P Chidambaram, then Minister of State for Home, in the matter.

January 22, 2015

Trial court reserves judgement.

March 21, 2015

Court acquits 16 surviving accused giving them benefit of doubt regarding their identity.

May 18, 2015

Trial court decision challenged in the Delhi HC by the victims' families and eyewitnesses who survived the incident.

May 29, 2015

HC issues notice to the 16 PAC personnel on Uttar Pradesh government's appeal against the trial court verdict.

December 2015

National Human Rights Commission is impleaded in the matter. NHRC also seeks further probe into the massacre.

February 17, 2016

HC tags Swamy's appeal with the other petitions in the matter.

September 6, 2018

Delhi HC reserves verdict in the case.

October 31, 2018

Delhi HC convicts 16 former PAC personnel for life after finding them guilty of the murder of 42 people.

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.