Hashim Ansari, oldest litigant in Babri Masjid case dies at 95

July 20, 2016

ansari

Ayodhya, Jul 20: The oldest litigant in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri mosque dispute, Mohammad Hashim Ansari died here today due to heart-related ailments.

Ansari, 95, took his last breath at his residence in the wee hours, according to his son Iqbal.

Ansari had been associated with the Babri mosque dispute case since December 1949.

In 1961, he along with six others became main plaintiff in the 'Ayodhya title suit' filed by the Sunni Central Waqf Board in the court of Faizabad civil judge.

Five other plaintiffs were Mohammad Farooq, Shahabuddin, Maulana Nisaar, Mahmood Sahab and Hashim Ansari.

He was first to file the suit in the court of civil judge of Faizabad on the matter.

Allahabad High Court in 2010 in its majority verdict allotted one-third of the disputed site in Ayodhya to Nirmohi Akahara. The other two-thirds portion has been given equally to be shared by the Waqf Board and the side representing Ram Lalla.

Soon after the verdict, Ansari had called for burying the dispute and making "a fresh start".

Comments

SK
 - 
Wednesday, 20 Jul 2016

Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi Rajivoon..... The man who fought for the justice as per the constitution of India.......

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 20,2020

Bengaluru, May 20: A mysterious "boom" heard in large parts of Bengaluru this afternoon left residents of the city and social media users puzzled. While the source of the sound is being investigated, the Indian Air Force (IAF) indicated that it could be the result of "routine test flights that necessitate going supersonic a times".

The sound was heard from as far as the Bengaluru airport in Devanahalli to the IT hub of Electronic City 54 km away. It was also heard in Kalyan Nagar in east Bengaluru, central Bengaluru's MG Road and areas such as Marathahalli, Whitefield, Sarjapur and Hebbagodi.

IAF said no aircraft of training command was flying in the area. "However, ASTE (Aircraft and Systems Testing Establishment) and HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) could have been undertaking their routine test flying, which necessitates going supersonic at times. These are done well beyond the city limits in specified sectors. However, considering the atmospheric conditions and reduced noise levels in the city during these times, the aircraft sound may become clearly audible even if it happened way out from the city," said the air force statement.

Many people had speculated that the sound could have been caused by a fighter jet such as a Mirage 2000.

"We have also asked the Air Force Control Room to check if it was a jet or supersonic sound. Bengaluru police are awaiting confirmation from the Air Force," Bengaluru police commissioner Bhaskar Rao said in a statement.

It was not an earthquake, Karnataka's state disaster monitoring centre had tweeted earlier.

"Earthquake activity will not be restricted to one area and will be widespread. We have checked our sensors and there is no earthquake activity recorded today," the Karnataka State Natural Disaster Monitoring Centre said, quoting its director Srinivas Reddy.

"The activity reported in Bengaluru is not due to an earthquake. The seismometers did not capture any ground vibration as generally happens during a mild Tremor. The activity is purely a loud unknown noise," the agency tweeted.

#Bangalore and #BangaloreBoom was among the top trends on Twitter this afternoon.

"We are trying to ascertain the source of the noise," a senior police officer said. "In Whitefield area, we have searched on the ground and so far, there is no damage to any property," he added. There were no calls to the police control room reporting any damage.

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 2,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 2:  With easing of COVID-19 lockdown curbs, the Karnataka excise department has accorded permission for fresh brewing or production of beer and to sell it in microbreweries as takeaways.

"Permission is hereby accorded to microbreweries for fresh brewing/production and sale of beer as takeaway in glass, ceramic or stainless steel container (up to 2 litre) till 30-06-2020, or until further orders, whichever is earlier," the Excise Commissioner in a letter dated June 1 to Deputy Excise Commissioners of all districts said.

The opening and closing hours of the microbreweries shall be from 9 am to 9 pm, it said, adding that all other conditions as laid down will remain unaltered.

Earlier, in a letter dated May 12, the Excise Commissioner had "conditionally" granted permission for microbreweries to sell their beer stock as takeaway on experimental basis for the period from May 14 to June 30 or until exhaustion of existing beer stock, whichever is earlier.

It had called for measures like social distancing, cleanliness, usage of masks and sanitizers, among others, and had said, microbreweries situated in containment zones are not allowed to function.

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
July 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The Karnataka High Court’s division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice H P Sandesh today rejected an application that wanted Amulya Leona’s case to be transferred from Karnataka Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

The bench, while observing that extraordinary jurisdiction can’t be exercised for transferring the case to the NIA, asked “What is so special that investigation should be transferred to NIA?”

The court, in its previous hearing, had questioned the maintainability of the petition seeking transfer of the sedition case against Leona to the NIA.

According to the petitioner, advocate Pavana Chandra Shetty, the case is a serious matter against national integration and unity and has not been investigated properly by the police. The state police also failed to file the chargesheet within 90 days, he said, and also asked for cancellation of her bail.

The bench asked the petitioner as to how a bail, already granted to a person, can be cancelled. “Is it not the indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if chargesheet is not filed within stipulated time? How can you make a prayer for cancellation of bail?”  the Court asked.

The counsel for the petitioner also stated that in cases of a cognizable offence, when the chargesheet is purposely not filed within the stipulated time, the matter will have to transferred to the appropriate authority.

The court responded to his contention by asking him how could the court override law and cancel the bail. “Where is the question of cancellation of bail? Can we override the law and say that bail should be cancelled?” said the bench.

Advocate Vishal Raghu had filed the petition for transfer of Leona’s case, who was accused of raising pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park. The advocate had blamed the probe team for not filing a chargesheet on time and has asked the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Leona.

Bengaluru student Amulya Leona was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi. She was arrested by the Bengaluru police for allegedly shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ slogans at an anti- CAA Protest in Bengaluru in February this year. On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

Her bail plea was earlier rejected by a Bengaluru court, after she had spent a three-month period in jail, stating that she may abscond if she is released. The sessions judge Vidhyadhar Shirahatti had also stated that if the petitioner is granted bail, she may abscond and may involve in similar offence which affects peace at large and hence her petition is liable to be rejected. The court had also noted that Amulya Leona is an influential person who may threaten and influence the witness and hamper the case in case of the prosecution and will abscond if released on bail.

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.