1. Home
  2. Sanjiv Bhatt case: Supreme Court seeks Gujarat govt's response

Sanjiv Bhatt case: Supreme Court seeks Gujarat govt's response

Agencies
September 24, 2018

New Delhi, Sept 24: The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Gujarat government's response on a plea by the wife of dismissed IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, alleging that she is compelled to move the court as her husband is being prevented from doing so.

Describing the allegation by Shweta Bhatt that her husband was not being allowed to sign 'vakalatnama' and other documents necessary for approaching the court as "very serious", the bench of Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Navin Sinha asked the Gujarat government to respond.

"This is something very serious, a person not being allowed to come to the court. His wife is being compelled to come," Justice Gogoi said.

"Before we go into the merit of the case, we will like the State of Gujarat to respond, as according to us the issue raised is of considerable importance as it pertains to the allegation against the State preventing a citizen from coming to court," said Justice Gogoi.

Asking senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, representing Gujarat, to respond by Friday, the court directed the hearing of the matter on October 4.

Sanjiv Bhatt was arrested by the CID Crime Branch of Gujarat Police on September 5 in connection with a 1996 case allegedly framing a Rajasthan-based lawyer, Sumersingh Rajpurohit, in a narcotics peddling case.

Bhatt was serving as the District Superintendent of Police in Banaskantha district when the lawyer was booked under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Police had claimed that the drugs were found from a hotel room occupied by Rajpurohit.

However, an investigation by Rajasthan Police later revealed that the lawyer was falsely implicated.

This, Rajasthan Police claimed, was done to compel the lawyer to let go a disputed property in Pali district in Rajasthan.

The Rajasthan Police also claimed that Rajpurohit was abducted by Banaskantha police from his residence at Pali.

Following this investigation, former Banaskantha Police Inspector I.B. Vyas had moved the Gujarat High Court in 1999 demanding a detailed probe into the incident.

The court in June handed over the probe to the CID and asked it to complete the investigation within three months.

Bhatt was dismissed from service in 2015 for "unauthorized absence" from service.

The Gujarat High Court had on September 11 sent Bhatt and retired police officer I.B. Vyas to 10 days police custody.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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

About text formats
  • 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 10,2020

New Delhi, July 10: Hours before gangster Vikas Dubey was killed in an alleged police encounter on Friday, a plea was filed in the Supreme Court demanding urgent listing for action into his "possible killing" by Uttar Pradesh Police.

Advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay had apprehended in his plea that there is a high possibility that Dubey will also be killed in a 'fake' encounter after his arrest from Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh a day ago.

Upadhyay claimed that the UP Police was expected to "concoct the same story of encounter" for Dubey like it did when four of his associates were killed after the 2 July incident.

Dubey was the primary accused in the killing of eight policemen in Kanpur on July 2. He was arrested from Ujjain on Thursday. He was killed in a police encounter, when he allegedly tried to flee on Friday morning.

"During the hunt for Dubey and co-accused, five of his accused aides were arrested/caught and then killed by the police in the name of encounter...Thus, there is every possibility that even Dubey shall be killed by Uttar Pradesh Police like other co-accused once his custody is obtained," Upadhyay feared.

He submitted that the killing of the accused by the police in the name of encounter no matter how heinous the crime was "against the rule of law and serious violation of human rights and nothing sort of Talibanisation of the country". Upadhyay sought hearing in the matter on Friday itself, citing extreme urgency.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
August 3,2020

Rajouri, Aug 3: Ashfaq Mehmood Choudhary, a 17-year-old boy from Chattyear of Jammu and Kashmir's Rajouri district, has developed a file-sharing app 'Dodo Drop' which would enable users to share audios, videos, images, and texts between two devices without Internet access.

While speaking to media persons, Ashfaq Mehmood said that the 'Dodo Drop' application is an alternative to the Chinese 'SHAREit' app. "The Indian government has banned several Chinese apps due to data breaching, and among those apps was SHAREit which was used for sharing files.

Users faced a lot of problems due to the ban, and so I decided to make this file-sharing app. With 'Dodo Drop', users can share audios, videos, images, and even texts," he said.

Ashfaq said that it took him four weeks to develop the application, and it was launched on August 1 this year. The 'Dodo Drop' application has a transfer rate of up to 480 mbps, which is faster than the SHAREit app and is "quite easy" to use.

"Users can transfer data comprising photos, videos, audios, apps, texts, etc. between two devices with no Internet access. The transfers are fully encrypted and secure," he added.

"Our Prime Minister has always asserted the need for decreasing the dependency on foreign products and apps and to focus on the development of India-based apps. I tried to be part of the initiative of 'Aatmanirbhar Bharat' by developing an India-based file-sharing app. I want to develop global-standard apps for India," he added.

"We support and cooperate with him. He generates his own income by working on some projects and utilises it. We will continue to support him," said Parvez Ahmed Choudhary, Ashfaq's father.

In July, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) banned 47 apps, which were variants and cloned copies of the 59 apps banned earlier in June. These banned clones included SHAREit Lite, Tiktok Lite, Helo Lite, BIGO LIVE Lite, and VFY Lite.

The 59 apps had been banned by the Centre in June in view of the information available that they were engaged in activities which were "prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity and defence" of the country.

Almost all the apps banned had some preferential Chinese interest and the majority had parent Chinese companies.

The ban came amid border tensions with China in the Eastern Ladakh region.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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.