28-yr-old man rapes 8-month-old cousin; girl undergoes three hour surgery

Agencies
January 30, 2018

New Delhi, Jan 30: An eight-month-old baby, who was raped by her 28-year-old cousin in northwest Delhi’s Netaji Subhash Place, needed a three-hour-long surgery for her injuries, after which she is in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Doctors said she is stable.

The baby was rushed to a local hospital on Sunday evening with severe wounds and bleeding. The surgery took place on Monday.

The baby was assaulted when both her parents were out for work, according to the police.

"I left for duty and later my wife also had to leave for about an hour," said the baby's father, a labourer. The child was left with her aunt who stays in the same building.

Since it was a Sunday, the son of the relative was at home.

When the accused saw that his mother was not around, he allegedly forced himself on the baby, police said.

When the girl’s mother, who works as a domestic help, returned home at around 12:30 pm, she found the baby crying on a bed that was covered in blood. She immediately informed her husband.

The baby was rushed to a hospital, where it was confirmed that she was sexually assaulted, police said.

The family told the police that they suspected the child's cousin -- also a father of a boy -- who was missing.

The victim was arrested on Monday evening. According to police, the 28-year-old also confessed to raping the baby under the influence of alcohol, said a senior police officer.

According to reports, he had allegedly taken away the baby saying he wanted to play with her.

"This man puts humanity to shame. Despite being a father he did this," Delhi Commission for Women, Swati Maliwal said.

Attacking the police in a series of tweets, she raged: "This is not the rape of an eight -month-old child but the rape of the Delhi Women's Commission."

The accused man has been charged with offences for which he could face life term.

Laws on rape were made stringent after a young medical student was gangraped on a moving bus in the national capital in December 2012.

Comments

abbu
 - 
Thursday, 1 Feb 2018

very sad.. but even sadest thing will be when this bastard come out on bail after few days or months. for our govt. triple talaq is more important than the girls rape... there is no single rule for rapist.

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 8,2020

Aurangabad, May 8: At least 15 migrant workers, who were sleeping on the railway tracks while going back to their native places, were run over by a goods train between Maharashtra's Jalna and Aurangabad, officials said on Friday.

A senior railway official confirmed that 15 migrant labourers were run over by a goods train between Jalna and Aurangabad of Nanded Divison of South Central Railway.

The official said that the incident happened around 5.30 am on Friday when the migrant workers, who were on way back to their homes and sleeping on the railway tracks.

However, it is yet not clear from where this group hailed and where they were going.

Amid the nationwide lockdown, thousands of migrant workers stranded in several other cities have started their journey to return to their native places on foot.

The interstate bus service, passenger, mail and express train services have been suspended since March 24.

The railways has started running Shramik Special trains to transport the stranded migrants to their native places since May 1.

Till Thursday railways has run 201 Shramik Special trains.

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 18,2020

New Delhi, Feb 18: Election strategist-turned-politician Prashant Kishor on Tuesday questioned the Nitish Kumar government's development model, even as he sneered at the chief minister for making ideological compromises to stay in an alliance with the BJP.

Kishor, who has been vocal about his opposition to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), said Kumar needs to spell out whether he is with the ideals of Mahatma Gandhi or those who support Nathu Ram Godse.

"Nitish ji has always said that he cannot leave the ideals of Gandhi, JP and Lohiya... At the same time, how can he be with the people who support the ideology of Godse? Both cannot go together. If you want to stay with the BJP, I don't have any problem with it but you cannot be on both sides," he said.

"There has been a lot of discussion between me and Nitish-ji on this. He has his thought process and I have mine. There have been differences between him and me that the ideologies of Godse and Gandhi cannot stand together. As the leader of the party you have to say which side you are on," he added.

In a direct assault on Kumar's model of governance, Kishor said Bihar was the poorest state in 2005 and continues to be so.

"There has been development in Bihar during the last 15 years, but the pace has not been as it should have," he added.

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 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

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.