Don’t use my son’s murder to spread communal tension, pleads Ankit Saxena's father

News Network
February 5, 2018

New Delhi: Days after 23-year-old photographer, Ankit Saxena, was brutally stabbed to death by the family of his Muslim girlfriend in west Delhi's busy area Khyala in full public view, the bereaved father of Ankit said that the murder should not be given a communal twist and exploited to whip up trouble.

"I don't want any inflammatory statements. I feel very saddened by what happened, but I don't want anyone to create a hostile environment against Muslims. I have nothing against any religion," Ankit's father Yashpal Saxena said.

"Yes, those who killed my son were Muslim...but every Muslim can't be branded for this. Don't use me to spread communal tension, don't drag me into it...I appeal to everyone not to link this to religion and vitiate the atmosphere," he said.

Ankit was attacked and stabbed by his girlfriend, Shehzadi's father, mother, uncle and 14-year-old brother on a road near his home in west Delhi on Thursday February 1. In CCTV footage, he was seen talking on the phone just moments before he was attacked.

"It is very sad...A person's throat is slit, that too with such planning and precision that a man dies within two-three seconds. There were thousands there, but not one person helped or tried to take him to a hospital," lamented Yashpal condemning that people were just watching his son die.

Ankit, he said, kept shouting to his girlfriend's mother, "Aunty, I have done nothing... I didn't take your daughter. Whatever you want to do, I am here." But seconds later, he was on the street, his throat slit.

Finally, it fell on a shattered father to carry his son's limp body to the hospital.

"I was in shock at the sight of my son's bloodied body. Crying, screaming, I somehow took him to hospital. I had a tiny hope that maybe he is alive and just unconscious, maybe by some miracles doctors can save him. But nothing like that," he said, breaking down.

Yashpal said he was unaware of Ankit's relationship, though he knew his son was friends with Shehzadi.

Ankit and his girlfriend Shehzadi were neighbours a few years ago. The family moved away but the two continued seeing each other, the police believe. The woman's family was strictly opposed to the relationship because Ankit was Hindu.

"Ankit told me, don't worry. If there is anything, I will tell you myself. You can arrange my marriage but I will be the one to choose. I felt reassured that everything was fine...I had no idea...," Yashpal said.

Ankit's father wants his son's killers to be hanged.

On Thursday evening when Ankit's mother was informed about her son being stabbed by Shehzadi's family, she rushed out of their home and trying to stop the assault, but she too, was attacked.

In front of his helpless mother, Ankit was stabbed in the neck with a knife by his girlfriend's father and uncle.

The situation remains tense in the area in west Delhi and police personnel have been deployed to check any possible fallout of the killing.

Comments

abdul aziz s.a
 - 
Thursday, 15 Feb 2018

words cannot express , for the tragedy , killers should be punished severly ,

my deep condolences to the parents of Ankhit

Habeeb
 - 
Tuesday, 6 Feb 2018

Heartfelt condolenses to Ankit;s parents.  This is absolutely wrong.  Parents of the girls should have consulted with parents of Ankit and taken necessary step.   they should not have killed Ankit.  This is not justifiable.  I appreciate and respect Ankit Father for not turning the issue as communal as certain political party may misuse it.   My heart is with Ankit and his parents.  I condemn the henious act of shahzadi relatives.   there are other options too to solve the issue.   Killing someone is not a solution for everything.   I know that they did it in anger.  But, they should have controlled their anger.    This reminds me about the case of one innocent Muslim boy who was tortured by mad sangh parivar mob in Kashgunj.   Though this boy lost his eye sight, he pardoned the attackers and requested his relatives to be clam.   I salute the statement of Ankit Father.   He is a real human being.  May God bless him and his family.   May Ankit soul rest in peace.  

abbu
 - 
Tuesday, 6 Feb 2018

LOVE JIHAD CASE.. RIP to Ankit.. Heartly condolenses to Ankit's Family..

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 28,2020

New Delhi, Feb 28: The Congress on Friday reacted sharply to the petition in the court seeking registration of a First Information Report against Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra for alleged hate speeches. It said the petition was to save BJP leaders Pravesh Verma, Anurag Thakur and Kapil Mishra, referring to the trio as "PAK".

Congress leader Jaiveer Shergil told news agency, "It is political interest litigation to hide the failure of the government and to put a lid on the BJP's involvement in fuelling the fire in Delhi riots.

"This is to hide and save BJP's PAK -- Pravesh, Anurag and Kapil," said Shergil.

The BJP has two parameters, the laws for the common man and citizens of the country are different from those for the BJP leaders, added Mr Shergil.

The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notices on a petition for the registration of an FIR against Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and others on charges of delivering hate speeches.

Congress said that the PIL was politically motivated and the inaction on the hate speeches made by the BJP leaders, which led to the riots, was shocking.

"When there are 48 cases registered, why three cases against the BJP leaders are not registered," asked Mr Shergil.

A Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel sought responses from the Central and Delhi governments apart from Delhi Police on a petition filed by Lawyers Voice. The matter will again be heard on April 13.

The petition also sought a case against Aam Aadmi Party leaders Manish Sisodia and Amanatullah Khan, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen leaders Akbaruddin Owaisi and Waris Pathan, and lawyer Mehmood Paracha.

"Issue directions to constitute an SIT to look into these hate speeches and take appropriate action. Issue direction to register an FIR against those named in the petition," the petition 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
June 26,2020

New Delhi, Jun 26: "Iam Indira Gandhi's granddaughter, not an undeclared BJP spokesperson like some of the opposition leaders," Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on Friday said, as she alleged that the Uttar Pradesh government is threatening her through various departments for speaking the truth. Priyanka Gandhi's dare to the Uttar Pradesh government came days after the Agra administration asked her to withdraw within 24 hours the claim of high coronavirus deaths in the district.

The Congress general secretary in-charge UP East has accused the Yogi Adityanath government of indulging in propaganda instead of dealing with the pandemic. "As a public servant, my duty is towards the people of Uttar Pradesh. And this duty is to put out the truth before them and not to put forth government propaganda. The UP government is wasting its time by threatening me through its various departments," Priyanka Gandhi said in a tweet in Hindi.

"They can take whatever action they want, I will keep putting forth the truth. I am Indira Gandhi's granddaughter not an undeclared BJP spokesperson like some of the opposition leaders," she said. This week, Priyanka Gandhi repeatedly attacked the Uttar Pradesh government over the "high" COVID-19 mortality rate in Agra and on other issues related to the state government's handling of the pandemic.

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

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench 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.