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.
News Network
January 31,2020

New Delhi, Jan 31: The Supreme Court Friday dismissed the plea filed by one of the four death row convicts in the Nirbhaya gang-rape and murder case, Pawan Gupta, seeking review of its order rejecting his juvenility claim.

The review plea filed earlier in the day was taken up for consideration in-chamber by a bench comprising Justices R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan and A S Bopanna. 

On January 20, the apex court had rejected the plea by Pawan who had challenged the Delhi High Court's order dismissing his juvenility claim.

Advocate A P Singh, who is representing Pawan in the case, said he filed a petition on his behalf seeking review of the top court's January 20 order on Friday.

While dismissing the plea, the top court had said there was no ground to interfere with the high court order that rejected Pawan's plea and his claim was rightly rejected by the trial court as also the high court.

It had said the matter was raised earlier in the review petition before the apex court which rejected plea of juvenility taken by Pawan and another co-accused Vinay Kumar Sharma and that order has attained finality.

Singh had argued that as per his school leaving certificate, he was a minor at the time of the offence and none of the courts, including trial court and high court, ever considered his documents.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi Police, had said Pawan's claim of juvenility was considered at each and every judicial forum and it will be a travesty of justice if the convict is allowed to raise the claim of juvenility repeatedly and at this point of time.

The trial court on January 17 issued black warrants for the second time for the execution of all the four convicts in the case -- Mukesh Kumar Singh (32), Pawan (25), Vinay (26) and Akshay (31) -- in Tihar jail at 6 am on February 1. Earlier, on January 7, the court had fixed January 22 as the hanging date.

As of now, only Mukesh has exhausted all his legal remedies including the clemency plea which was dismissed by President Ram Nath Kovind on January 17 and the appeal against the rejection was thrown out by the Supreme Court on January 29.

Convict Akshay's curative petition was dismissed by the top court on January 30. Another death row convict Vinay moved mercy plea before President on January 29, which is pending.

Singh has also approached the trial court seeking stay on the execution scheduled on February 1, saying the legal remedies of some of the convicts are yet to be availed.

A 23-year-old paramedic student, referred to as Nirbhaya, was gang-raped and brutally assaulted on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012, in a moving bus in south Delhi by six people before she was thrown out on the road.

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
May 19,2020

New Delhi, May 19: In a fresh blow to saffronite journalist Arnab Goswami, the Supreme Court of India today rejected his plea seeking transfer of the investigation of a case, filed against him for defaming Congress interim president Sonia Gandhi, to the CBI. The court also refused to quash the FIRs filed against him.

Goswami, editor-in-chief of Republic TV, has been booked in connection with a TV show on the gathering of migrants outside Bandra railway station on April 14. This apart, multiple FIRs have been filed against him for his show on Palghar lynching. In that show, he had posed certain questions on the incident to Congress President Sonia Gandhi, following which Congress workers lodged complaints against him in various states.

Extending Goswami’s interim protection from arrest by three weeks, the Supreme Court said, “Right of a journalist under 19 1 (a) higher…Free citizens can’t exist if news media can’t speak.”

During the earlier hearing, Senior Advocate Harish Salve, appearing for Goswami, had urged the court to transfer the probe to an agency like CBI. He said the “nature of the” second FIR against Goswami over a show on the migrant gathering outside Bandra station on April 14 “shows that it’s arm-twisting tactic”. 

“They are trying to stifle an unpleasant voice. This is a political party targeting a journalist. All complainants are members of one political party. They have a problem with the government. They want to teach this journalist a lesson,” he added.

Objecting to Salve’s plea to transfer the case to the CBI, Maharashtra government counsel, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, had said, “CBI investigation will go into your hands”. 

Sibal denied that Goswami was being harassed and said he was only asked relevant questions. He said Goswami should “stop this communal violence and communal mongering”.

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
January 21,2020

Pune, Jan 21: The Pune session court on Tuesday rejected the bail application of accused Vikram Bhave in the Dabholkar murder case.
Last year, Pune Sessions Court had granted an extension of 90 days to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file a charge-sheet against Bhave.

On August 17, 2019, the court had rejected Bhave's bail plea.

During the course of hearing, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Prakash Suryavanshi, appearing for the CBI, had in June last year contended that Bhave helped the assailants to escape.

The CBI had arrested Bhave and another accused Sanjeev Punalekar from Mumbai on May 25, 2019 in connection with the matter.

Founder of the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (MANS), Dabholkar was shot dead by bike-borne assailants while returning home from a morning walk on August 20, 2013. 

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.