Home stay attack: Court discharges journalist Naveen Soorinje from all charges

Dubai, Jul 5: Three Indians, who were repatriated on a chartered flight from the UAE on Friday, have been held in the state of Rajasthan after officials seized gold worth Dh2.2million from them, the government announced on Saturday.

They are likely to be placed under arrest along with 11 others, who were repatriated from Saudi Arabia, from whom gold worth Dh5.5million was seized, a statement from the government tweeted by Press Information Bureau in Rajasthan said.

The gold bars were hidden in emergency lamps, photos attached to the tweets showed.

The 14 passengers had arrived at the Jaipur International Airport by two chartered flights.

They were intercepted by the Customs team at the airport and 31.9kg of gold valued at Rs156,759,820 (Dh7.7million) concealed in the baggage was recovered from these passengers.

Three passengers arrived from Ras Al Khaimah by Spice Jet Flight SG9055 and 12 gold bars/bricks weighing 9.3kg valued at Rs.45,761,100 (Dh2.2million) were recovered from them, the statement said.

The Indian Consulate in Dubai confirmed to Gulf News that the flight was chartered by a private company for repatriating its employees.

It is suspected that the passengers were used as carriers to smuggle gold.

The other 11 accused had arrived from Riyadh and 22.65kg of gold bars, predominantly with Suisse markings, valued at Rs110,998,720 (Dh5.5million) were recovered from them.

“The said recovered gold bars have been seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. The said passengers are being interrogated and are likely to be placed under arrest in terms of section 104 of the Customs Act, 1962,” the statement added.

Indian media had earlier reported similar cases in which stranded Indians were apparently lured to be carriers for smuggling gold on repatriation flights from various countries.

A spike in gold smuggling attempts using Indians getting repatriated after losing jobs was also reported from the Indian state of Kerala.

Mangaluru, June 23: G Jagadeesha, deputy commissioner of Udupi, who is heading the magisterial inquiry into the December 19 police firing case in Mangaluru, has sought more time from the government to submit the report.

Two innocent passersby - Nauseen Kudroli (49) and Abdul Jaleel Bengre (23) - were killed when policemen opened fire randomly after caning the alleged anti-CAA protesters in Mangaluru. 

The chief minister B S Yediyurappa led Karnataka state government had commissioned two inquires, one magisterial and the other CID, into the incident. 

“Due to the covid-19 pandemic the probe couldn’t be complete on time. I have asked the government for more time. Two more hearings are to be conducted,” said Mr Jagadeesha, who was expected to submit the report before the government on Tuesday.

Bengaluru, Feb 19: A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Karnataka High Court, seeking a stay on Anand Singh functioning as Minister of Forests, Environment and Ecology contending that there are criminal cases filed against him by the Ministry.

"A stay be granted prohibiting Anand Singh from functioning as the Cabinet Minister for the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology. Any other order that the Honourable Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity," the PIL prays.

The petition, filed by advocate Vijay Kumar, said that the Chief Minister has allocated the portfolio of the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology to Singh without considering the fact that there are several criminal faces filed against him by the Ministry.

It said that the allocation of the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology portfolio to Singh is in the conflict of interest.

"The holding of the post of Cabinet minister for the Ministry of Forests, Environment and Ecology is against public interest and completely in conflict of interest as he has business for which the subject Ministry is the overseeing authority and further he will also have access to the case files which again is in conflict of interest," the PIL said.

PIL adds that "it is pertinent and absolutely necessary" to deny the incumbent from accessing files related to his cases and from taking any decisions which may provide him with pecuniary benefits through his businesses.