‘RIP justice’: All 6 accused in Pehlu Khan lynching case acquitted by court!

News Network
August 14, 2019

Two years after the violent and public murder of Pehlu Khan made the nation tremble, all the six people accused of lynching him have been acquitted by a court in Alwar, Rajasthan.

The verdict was pronounced by the court of the Additional District Judge in Alwar. Despite video evidence, the court acquitted the six accused "cow vigilantes" who beat Khan to death with rods and sticks in Alwar on April 1. The court ruled that the video, which went viral after the lynching, was not admissible evidence in court.

The verdict instantly caused outrage, and many took to social media to voice their discontent.

Khan was one of many victims to become targeted by cow vigilantes in 2017-18. A dairy farmer from Haryana's Nuh district, Khan had had left his village to purchase cattle in order to increase milk produce for Ramadan.

Surrounded by a mob of cow vigilantes on the Delhi-Alwar highway on April 1, 2017, he tried to save himself by showing his purchase receipts, but was lynched with rods and sticks.

Comments

Abdullah
 - 
Thursday, 15 Aug 2019

Nobody will kill Indian Muslims every time. The whole world knows who killed except the Indian court.

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
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order 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.
coastaldigest.com news network
August 3,2020

Bengaluru/ Mangaluru, Aug 3: For the first time in many days, if not weeks, the number of recoveries in Karnataka was higher than new covid-19 cases in the state raising hope of some relief against the virus.

Karnataka confirmed 4752 new covid- 19 cases while the number of recoveries stood at 4776 in the 24 hours until 5 pm on Monday. The state also recorded 98 deaths. 

Medical education minister K.Sudhakar said that the recovery rate in Karnataka is at around 42%

"Everyday there is increase in recovery rate which is higher by 9.17% in Bengaluru city. Overall recovery rate of the state by Sunday evening was 42.81 % and it is 35.14% in Bengaluru," the minister posted on Twitter.

The total number of cases in Bengaluru crossed the 60,000 mark including 1497 cases on Monday.

The total number of cases in Mysuru breached 5000 cases as 372 persons tested positive. The mineral-rich district of Ballari recorded 305 cases. Other parts of Karnataka has seen a surge in cases with 15 out of the 30 districts reporting at least a 100 cases.

Dakshina Kananda

Dakshina Kannada district alone has recorded 153 new cases and seven deaths. 
Among the 153 new cases, 119 are from Mangaluru, 11 from Bantwal, six from Beltangady, four from Puttur, one from Sullia, and 12 from other districts.

The total number of covid positive cases in the district mounted to 6,168. Out of these, 3,138 cases are currently active. As many as 2,854 persons have recovered and been discharged, and 176 deaths have occurred so far.

Udupi

Udupi reported 126 fresh cases past 24 hours, according to health bulletin released by the Udupi district administration. They include 58 from Udupi, 34 from Kundapur, 28 from Karkala, and six from other districts. 

A total of 34,500 samples have been collected so far. 29,174 have turned out to be negative. As many as 4,800 confirmed cases of coronavirus have been reported so far in the district. 

As many as 2,812 patients have been discharged so far, and 1,952 cases are currently active. As per district bulletin, 36 deaths have occurred so far. One positive case has been transferred to Dakshina Kannada.

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
April 24,2020

Thiruvananthapuram, Apr 24: Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Thursday said that there is no community spread or the expected phase three spread of coronavirus in the state so far but the threat continues.

Speaking to media persons here on Thursday, Vijayan said that Kasargod, Kannur, Kozhikode, and Malappuram districts will be in the red zone with full restrictions.

"All the other ten districts in the State will be in the orange zone. With the detection of new cases today, the status of Kottayam and Idukki districts have been changed from green to orange. The district administration will decide on the hotspot areas to be closed," he said.

He said there would be an increase in the number of random tests in the red zones.

"In an effort to confirm that there is no community spread in the State, random antibody tests would be conducted among health workers, police personnel, home delivery persons, volunteers and migrant labourers," he added.

The Chief Minister said that COVID-19 labs set up at the Pariyaram Government Medical College at Kannur and the Kottayam Medical College have got the approval from the ICMR for coronavirus testing. The lab at Kannur Medical College will start functioning from Friday.

The UV sterilised lab, spread over 2,200 sq ft is equipped with four real-time PCR machines. In the first phase, this lab will be able to do 15 tests per day, which will be gradually increased to conduct 60 tests in the next phase.

"With the opening of these two new labs, tests to detect COVID-19 will be conducted in 14 government labs in Kerala. Apart from this, there are two private labs also in Kerala which are doing these tests. Since the number of coronavirus cases is again increasing in the State, the government has decided to procure ten real-time PCR machines to ramp up testing," 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.