Telecom fraud: 3 more Mangaluru expats freed from Saudi prison after 13 years

New Delhi, Jun 8: Two civil defence employees have been arrested by the Rajasthan Police today in Jaipur based on Military Intelligence (MI) inputs that they had been passing on sensitive information to Pakistan's spy agency ISI.

The arrested are: Vikas Kumar (29), a civil defence employee at an army ammunition depot near Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan) and Chiman Lal (22), a civil contractual employee of the army's Mahajan Field Firing Range (MFFR), Bikaner. 

Both were working as espionage agents on behalf of Pakistan's intelligence agency and were giving out details of Ammunition and MFFR, vital military installations in India's Western front. 

The MI Lucknow's operation named Desert Chase assumes great importance as the Shri Ganganagar Ammunition Depot and Bikaner MMFR are strategically important military installations on the western front along the Pakistan border.

The work on the "operation" began in August 2019, when the MI Lucknow, through its sleuths, learnt about an espionage agent near Sri Ganganagar who was passing military information to his handlers in Pakistan. The individual was identified as Vikas Kumar - the civil defence employee at an army ammunition depot near Sri Ganganagar.

The MI Lucknow shared the case with UP ATS in the month of January 2020. Vikas's activities were monitored and analysed by a joint team of MI Lucknow and UP ATS. The operation was code-named 'Desert Chase'.

Based on these, it was learnt that Vikas is acquiring photos of a "water distribution register" at a water point/pump house in MFFR through a contractual civil employee named Chiman Lal. The development of the case was halted due to the start of the lockdown period all across the country.

Finally, the case shared with Rajasthan Police Intelligence in the first week of May 2020. A joint team was formed between Rajasthan Police-Intelligence and MI Lucknow.

Fresh leads were found as new payments were detected along with a trail of sensitive information being passed on to Pakistan by two accused.  

Vikas Kumar confessed to having passed the following information to Pakistan:

•    Details received from Chiman Lal about Army units and their strength coming to MFFR.
•    Details of ammunition coming to his ammunition depot including their type, quantity, mode of transportation, date of arrival on a routine basis (almost every time it came to his notice).
•    Details of ammunition (to include their type, quantity and mode/date of transportation) further distributed/transferred to local army establishments/units (including two local brigades) and elsewhere from his ammunition depot.
•    ORBAT (Order of battle; composition related details) of two local army brigades and all changes in them as they came to his notice.
•    Name, rank and personality traits of some Senior Military Officers in the two army brigades nearby, his ammunition depot and others who visited the military station.
•    Photos of arms, ammunition, tanks other military vehicles (with their tactical numbers) at MFFR whenever he could visit it after April 2019.

Vikas also confessed to having received at least Rs 75,000 in total from his Pakistani handler for the information he has shared during this entire period. He used to receive them mostly on bank accounts of his and his brother, Hemant Kumar. The latter was found to have no links to the espionage case otherwise. Out of this sum, he had paid approximately Rs 9,000 in total to Chiman Lal for his assistance in lots of Rs 1000- Rs 2000 since their first meet.

Dubai, Apr 11: An Indian expat in the UAE is facing police action for allegedly insulting Islam on social media in response to a Facebook post on the coronavirus, according to a media report.

Rakesh B Kitturmath, who worked as a team leader at Emrill Services, an integrated facilities management (FM) headquartered in Dubai, was sacked on Thursday after his post sparked outrage on social media, the Gulf News reported.

“Kitturmath’s employment stands terminated with immediate effect. He will be handed over to Dubai Police. We have a zero-tolerance policy towards such hate crimes,” said Stuart Harrison, CEO of Emrill Services.

"As an organisation, we have worked hard over the years to embrace diversity and create a culture of inclusion, where every nationality, religion and background is welcomed and celebrated. We have a strict social media policy for our employees to ensure they respect our values, both inside and outside of work," the newspaper quoted Harrison as saying.

Harrison said they are trying to find out if Kitturmath was still in the UAE, according to the report.

“We have over 8,500 employees so this may take a while. That said, we have fired him. If he’s still in the country, he will be handed over to Dubai Police,” he said.

For latest updates on coronavirus outbreak, click  here

Originally from Ranebennuri, Karnataka, Kitturmath joins an ever-growing list of Indian ex-pats who have landed in trouble for alleged Islamophobic messages in recent days.

Earlier this week, Abu Dhabi resident Mitesh Udeshi was sacked for posting a cartoon mocking Islam on his Facebook page while a police complaint was filed against Sameer Bhandari of Future Vision Events & Weddings’ in Dubai after he asked a Muslim job seeker from India to go back to Pakistan.

The UAE outlaws all religious or racial discrimination under a legislation passed in 2015.

The anti-discrimination/anti-hatred law prohibits all acts “that stoke religious hatred and/or which insult religion through any form of expression, be it speech or the written word, books, pamphlets or via online media.”

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.