Dawood's nephew gets married in Mumbai, police keeps a hawk-eye

August 17, 2016

Mumbai, Aug 17: Fugitive underworld don Dawood Ibrahim's nephew Alishah Parkar today tied the knot with the daughter of a city-based businessman in a traditional Muslim ceremony here, with Mumbai police keeping an eye on the event.

nephew

Alishah, the son of Dawood's late sister Haseena Parkar, and Aisha Nagani got married at a mosque in Nagpada area of south Mumbai in the presence of their family members and close friends.

A handful of mediapersons were present outside the mosque and were kept at bay by family members.

The marriage rituals started at around 11 AM. The function lasted for about one-and-a-half hours and was attended by nearly 100 people.

The family would host a reception for the newly weds at a city hotel this evening and the fugitive don was likely to view the event via videocalling on Skype.

The Mumbai police crime branch has directed the anti-extortion cell to keep a close watch at the event.

Police personnel will maintain a strict vigil on the proceedings, a senior official said.

Police did not rule out rival gangsters trying to disturb the peace.

Alishah's elder brother Danish had died in a road accident in 2006. His sister Umaira got married in May 2015.

Comments

Rikaz
 - 
Wednesday, 17 Aug 2016

Is this news worthy?

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
April 25,2020

Udupi, Apr 25: Senior RSS leader H Somashekhar Bhatt received a call from Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday enquiring about his health.

Bhatt got emotional hearing the Prime Minister's voice at the other end, family sources said.

The Prime Minister called at 8.30 AM and began the conversation with 'Somashekharji' and spoke for about six minutes.

The 85-year-old veteran recalled how the Jana Sangh came to power in Udupi municipality under the leadership of V S Acharya in 1968 and about his association with the Sangh Parivar through the decades and his imprisonment during the Emergency.

Bhatt, former Udupi municipality president, later said it was a rare honour for him.

"I am very glad that PM Modi called and spoke to me. I shared the experience of meeting him at the Jaipur session.

Asked to take care of health and expressed concern," he said.

The Prime Minister has been calling senior functionaries of the party who worked for the Sangh Parivar in the time of adversities to build up the BJP in its present form and seeking advice from them.

He had also called in recent days former MLA Ram Bhat who was elected from Puttur in Dakshina Kannada and D H Shankar Murthy, who was former chairman of the state legislative council, BJP state president Nalin Kumar Kateel tweeted.

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
February 4,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 4: Taking the state government to task, the Karnataka High Court on Monday opined there was a need to rehabilitate or compensate migrant workers whose homes in Tubarahalli and Kundalahalli were demolished by a BBMP engineer last month.

On January 19, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) assistant executive engineer at Marathahalli had taken up a demolition drive stating that the migrant workers residing in the area were “illegal Bangladeshis”.

A division bench led by Chief Justice Abhay S Oka was hearing a petition by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties which contended that the evacuation of the workers was illegal. Stressing the need for relief, the court directed the state government to come clean on its stance and adjourned the hearing to February 10.

Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi submitted that the Union government had issued a circular last year to ascertain the presence of illegal Bangaladesh migrants. “On the basis of this circular, the BBMP officials had written a letter to Marathahalli police sub-inspector on January 18. Based on this letter, the residents in huts were evicted in a civilised manner,” he stated.

The bench, however, differed with the submission. “Who identified them as Bangladeshis before the eviction? Which is the competent authority to do so? Which police officer took up the inquiry?” the bench questioned.

The court also asked whether the government would take up similar eviction drives against illegal buildings of the rich. It also expressed displeasure over the action taken against the BBMP engineer.

“Instead of sending him home, you say you have transferred him. We can’t be mute spectators,” the bench said.

The court did not mince words as it castigated the authorities for failing to act judiciously. “The police and the BBMP are blaming each other. Your action appears to be dangerous. Going by the state of things, it seems that everything is not in order,” it 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.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court 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.