Indian family offloaded from British Airways flight 'over crying 3-yr-old'

TNN
August 9, 2018

New Delhi, Aug 9: An Indian family has alleged that a leading European airline offloaded them from the flight because their three-year-old child was crying. While the child’s mother had managed to comfort the child when the plane was taxiing for take off, the allegedly intimidating behaviour of a cabin crew while asking the child to be seated scared the kid even more and then he started sobbing inconsolably.

The aircraft then returned to the terminal and the Indian family, along with a few other Indians seated behind them, were offloaded. This alleged racial behaviour took place on British Airways London-Berlin flight (BA 8495) of July 23 with a 1984 batch officer of Indian Engineering Services currently posted in the road transport ministry and his family.

The joint secretary-level officer has now complained to aviation minister Suresh Prabhu, alleging “humiliation and racial behaviour” by the airline. ABritish Airways spokesperson said: “We take such claims like this extremely seriously and do not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We have started a full investigation and are in direct contact with the customer.”

The officer’s letter to Prabhu says: “After security announcement for seat belt, my wife fastened the seat belt to my three-year-old baby... (Seated on a separate seat) my son felt uncomfortable and started crying. My wife managed to (comfort) him by taking him in her arms…. male crew member approached us and started shouting.. scolded my son to go to his seat...” “...My son got terrified and started crying (inconsolably). (An)other Indian family sitting behind us offered the child some biscuits to console him. My wife again put the boy on his designated seat and fastened the seat belt even though he kept on crying...,” the letter says.

The aircraft then started taxiing to the runway. “(The) same crew member came again and shouted at my son that ‘you bloody keep quiet otherwise you will be thrown out of the window’ and we would be offloaded. We were petrified,” it adds.

The plane then returned to the terminal. The officer says the crew member called in security personnel to the aircraft who took away their boarding cards and of those seated behind them. “My family and other Indian family, which had offered biscuits to my son, were offloaded….,” the complaint said.

The family then made its own arrangement to travel from London City airport to London. “…the crew member made racist remarks and used words like ‘bloody’ about Indians…. I request to have the matter investigated and take strictest possible action,” he concludes.

Comments

Ali
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

poor culture & cheap behaviour from london. if the educated perason behaves like this, what we can expect from others?? they are opportunists.  learn from great india even though you have stolen our kohinoorlike thieves, we satisfied with what we have... We are LAGAAN boys

Rajeev
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

We should treat them also in same way. Embassy should do something. They need compensation

Ibrahim
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

What our ministers can do is ignoring. US people humiliating many Indian famous personalities for airport customs checkup

Ramprasad
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

If they offloaded only one family then it may not be racial issue. But Airlines people offloaded another family who offered biscuts

Danish
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

100% racial discrimination behind the incident

Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 9 Aug 2018

British Airways advt shows they will treat us like anything. But in real nothing

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
January 26,2020

Guwahati, Jan 26: Four powerful grenade explosions--three in Dibrugarh and one in Charaideo districts--rocked Assam Sunday morning as the country celebrated Republic Day, police said.

In Dibrugarh district, an explosion took place at Graham Bazar and another beside a gurudwara on A T Road, both under Dibrugarh police station.

Another explosion rocked the oil town of Duliajan whose details are still awaited, police said.

Another explosion rocked Teok Ghat under Sonari police station of Charaideo district, they said.

Senior officials have rushed to the explosion sites and details of casualty are awaited, police 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
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.
Agencies
February 17,2020

New Delhi, Feb 17: The Supreme Court said on Monday that people have a fundamental right to protest against a law but the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there has to be a balancing factor.

Hearing pleas over the road blocks due to the ongoing protests at Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), a bench comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said its concern is about what will happen if people start protesting on roads.

Democracy works on expressing views but there are lines and boundaries for it, the bench said.

It asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde and advocate Sadhana Ramachandran to talk to Shaheen Bagh protestors and persuade them to move to an alternative site where no public place is blocked.

The matter has been posted for next hearing on February 24.

People have a fundamental right to protest but the thing which is troubling us is the blocking of public roads, the bench said.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Shaheen Bagh protestors should not be given a message that every institution is on its knees trying to persuade them on this issue.

The apex court said that if nothing works, we will leave it to the authorities to deal with the situation.

Protestors have made their made their point and the protests have gone on for quite some time, it said.

Restrictions have been imposed on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and the Okhla underpass, which were closed on December 15 last year due to the protests against CAA and Register of Citizens.

The top court had earlier said the anti-CAA protesters at Delhi's Shaheen Bagh cannot block public roads and create inconvenience for others.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni, who had approached the Delhi high court seeking directions to the Delhi Police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which was blocked by anti-CAA protesters on December 15.

While dealing with Sahni's plea, the high court had asked local authorities to deal with the situation keeping in mind law and order.

Separately, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg has filed a petition in the apex court seeking directions to the authorities to remove the protestors from Shaheen Bagh.

One of the pleas has sought laying down of comprehensive and exhaustive guidelines relating to outright restrictions for holding protests or agitations leading to obstruction of public place.

In his plea, Garg has said that law enforcement machinery was being "held hostage to the whims and fancies of the protesters" who have blocked vehicular and pedestrian movement from the road connecting Delhi to Noida.

State has the duty to protect fundamental rights of citizen who were continuously being harassed by the blockage of arterial road, it said.

"It is disappointing that the state machinery is muted and a silent spectator to hooliganism and vandalism of the protesters who are threatening the existential efficacy of the democracy and the rule of law and had already taken the law and order situation in their own hand," the plea had said.

In his appeal, Sahni had sought supervision of the situation in Shaheen Bagh, where several women are sitting on protest, by a retired Supreme Court judge or a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court.

Sahni has said in his plea that protests in Shaheen Bagh has inspired similar demonstrations in other cities and to allow it to continue would set a wrong precedent.

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.