Sadhvi Pragya, Purohit to face trial in Malegaon blast case

Agencies
December 27, 2017

Mumbai, Dec 27: Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Lt Col Prasad Purohit and six others will face trial under an anti- terror law in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case as the special NIA court here today dismissed their applications for discharge.

The court has, however, dropped provisions under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against all the accused.

It discharged three accused - Shyam Sahu, Shivnarayan Kalsangra and Praveen Takalki - from the case.

The court said the accused persons will face trial under sections 16 (committing a terror act) and 18 (criminal conspiracy) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), and sections 120(b) (punishment of criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder) and 326 (intentionally causing harm to others) of the IPC.

"The UAPA sections 17 (raising funds for a terrorist organisation or a terrorist attack), 20 (being part of a terrorist organisation) and 23 (aiding somebody who is part of a terrorist organisation) have been dropped against all accused," special NIA judge S D Tekale said.

Apart from Sadhvi and Purohit, the accused who will now face trial in the case are: Sudhakar Dwivedi, retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay, Sameer Kulkarni, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Ajay Rahirkar.

Two accused - Jagdish Mhatre and Rakesh Dhawde - will face trial only under the Arms Act, the court said.

The court has asked all the accused persons to appear before it on January 15 for the formal framing of charges against them.

On September 29, 2008, there was a bomb explosion near Bhiku Chowk at Malegaon in Nashik district, killing six persons and injuring several others.

The blast took place by an improvised explosive device (IED) fitted upon an LML Freedom motorcycle.

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
January 12,2020

Kolkata, Jan 12: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday said a section of the youth is being misguided about the Citizenship Amendment Act and asserted that it will not take away anybody's citizenship.

Modi also said whoever has faith in India and believes in its Constitution can become an Indian citizen.

“There are a lot of questions among the youth about the new citizenship law, and some are being misled by rumours around it... it is our duty to clear their doubts,” the PM said during an address at Belur Math in Howrah district.

“I want to make this clear again that the CAA is not about taking away anybody's citizenship, but about granting citizenship,” he added.

Modi said that some people with political interests are deliberately spreading rumours about the new citizenship law.

Lauding the youth for speaking against religious persecution of minorities, the prime minister said the energy of the country's young will form the basis of change in the 21st century. The PM is on a two-day visit to the city.

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
May 22,2020

Riyadh, May 22: The family of murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on Friday said that they forgave his killers. Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who had written columns critical of Saudi Arabia, was brutally killed in October 2018, allegedly at the behest of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

“In this blessed night of the blessed month [of Ramadan] we remember God’s saying: If a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah,” Jamal Khashoggi’s son Salah Khashoggi said in a tweet. “Therefore, we the sons of the Martyr Jamal Khashoggi announce that we pardon those who killed our father, seeking reward [from] God almighty.”

The legal outcome of this announcement is not yet clear. Earlier, Salah Khashoggi said he had “full confidence” in the judicial system, and that the accused were trying to exploit the case.

Jamal Khashoggi’s body was said to have been dismembered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and disposed of elsewhere, but his remains were never found.

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
January 14,2020

New Delhi, Jan 14: The curative petitions of Vinay Sharma and Mukesh, who were sentenced to death in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, was on Tuesday rejected by a five-judge Supreme Court Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana.

In a three-page order, the Bench concluded, after an in chamber consideration that began about 1.45 p.m., that there was no merit in their pleas to spare them from the gallows.

“We have gone through the curative petitions and relevant documents. In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra. Hence, the curative petitions are dismissed,” the court held.

Curative is a rare remedy devised by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the Rupa Ashok Hurra case in 2002. A party can take only two limited grounds in a curative petition - one, he was not heard by the court before the adverse judgment was passed, and two, the judge was biased. A curative plea, which follows the dismissal of review petition, is the last legal avenue open for convicts in the Supreme Court. Sharma was the first among the four convicts to file a curative.

The Bench also rejected their pleas to stay the execution of their death sentence and for oral hearing in open court.

Besides Justice Ramana, the Bench comprised Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.

Curative petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by both convicts on January 9. The petitions had come just days after a Delhi sessions court schedulled the execution of all the four convicts in Tihar jail on January 22.

Sharma and Mukesh, in separate curative petitions, argued that there was a “sea change” in the death penalty jurisprudence since their convictions. Carrying out the death sentence on such changed circumstances would be a “gross miscarriage of justice”.

In his plea, Sharma said the Court had commuted the death penalty in several rape and murder cases since 2017, when it first confirmed the death penalty to the Nirbhaya convicts.

“fter the pronouncement of judgment in 2017, there have been as many as 17 cases involving rape and murder in which various three-judge Benches of the Supreme Court have commuted the sentence of death,” the petition contended.

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by Akshay Singh, another of the four four condemned men, to review its May 5, 2017 judgment confirming the death penalty. It also refused his plea to grant him three weeks' time to file a mercy petition before the President of India.

A Bench led by Justice R. Banumathi had said it was open for the Nirbhaya case convicts to avail whatever time the law prescribes for the purpose of filing a mercy plea.

Akshay (33), Mukesh (30), Pawan Gupta (23) and Sharma (24) had brutally gang-raped a 23-year-old paramedical student in a moving bus on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. She died of her injuries a few days later.

The case shocked the nation and led to the tightening of anti-rape laws. Rape, especially gang rape, is now a capital crime.

One of the accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar jail. A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board. He was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.

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.