Acquitted man takes three dailies to court for calling him “terrorist”

[email protected] (The Hindu)
December 1, 2012

HAIDER_MAN_AL


Kanpur, December 1: Alleging that he was being labelled a “terrorist” in media reports despite having being acquitted after serving an eight-year jail sentence, a 40-year-old has filed writs against three Hindi dailies.

 

Kanpur-based Syed Wasif Haider, who was arrested in August 2001 on 12 charges, has filed writs against Dainik JagranHindustan Dainik and Amar Ujala, for “running his media trial even after his acquittal” and frequently referring him as an “atankhi.”

 

Mr. Haider was part of the recent delegation led by Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary Prakash Karat that met President Pranab Mukherjee and handed over to him a memorandum outlining how Muslim youth were being targeted and persecuted in terrorism-related cases.

 

Mr. Haider was acquitted on August 12, 2009 after serving a sentence over charges of rioting, attacking a Provincial Armed Constabulary vehicle, murdering an additional district magistrate and involvement in the Swarup Nagar pressure-cooker explosion case.

 

According to Mr. Haider: “A December 9, 2010 report in Dainik Jagran [referred to me] as “atankhi Wasif,” in a story speculating the Kanpur connection of the 2010 Varanasi bomb attack. The report said the police were closely monitoring the normal lives of terrorists who had been released from jail, their phone records and sources of income. A similar report was published two days later.

 

“I was not booked under TADA or POTA, yet, even while I was under trial I was labelled an “atankhi.” Also, the special cell's charges of sedition were dismissed by the court even before they could be filed.

 

“So why is this media trial going on even when the court has acquitted me in all the cases?”

 

Mr. Haider's fight against the “irresponsible and prejudiced” media reporting during and after his trial has affected not only his economic standing but also his reputation. He and his family are now supported by his father and sister.

 

“After my release, I spent a good amount of time convincing people of my innocence. And, to some extent, people started trusting me again.

 

But with these reports, they have grown suspicious again and I have become a social outcaste. I have no job. Nobody wants to have any connection with me. My young daughter also gets taunted at school.”

 

Mr. Haider said the newspapers, to whom he sent legal notices in April regarding their reportage, were yet to respond. In September, he alleges, Amar Ujala published a story in which his father was referred to as a “Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist.”

 

“My father has won many awards in translating text. He is also a Sahitya Akademi award winner,” Mr. Haider said.

 

Mr. Haider's defamation case against Dainik Jagran is pending in the Allahabad High Court. The paper's Editor Sanjay Gupta said he was not aware of any such case or notice. The paper's legal advisor, B.K. Mishra, also said the management had received no such notice and it was the paper's prerogative whether or not to respond to any such notice.

 

The HR department of  Amar Ujala said it had received a notice from Mr. Haider but it could not confirm the content of the news reports as alleged by Mr. Haider.

 

On Tuesday, Mr. Haider filed a petition against Amar Ujala in the Supreme Court under Article 32.

 

Cases against Hindustan Dainik and Amar Ujala are pending with the Special Judicial Magistrate.

 

Hindustan Dainik was not available for comment.

 

Rihai Manch, a civil society group working for the release of innocent persons arrested in terror cases, said compensation and rehabilitation must be ensured to such innocent undertrials and proper enquiry called against police officers who wrongfully implicated such persons.

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
June 5,2020

With the scrapping of Mitron and Remove China Apps from its Play Store gaining a lot of attention in India, Google on Thursday said that it removed a video app "for a number of technical policy violations", while adding that it also does not allow an app that "encourages or incentivizes users into removing or disabling third-party apps".

Both the apps became immensely popular in India within a short span of time due to the prevailing anti-China sentiment amid border tensions between India and China in Ladakh and calls by Indian activists to boycott Chinese products.

Reports suggested that the Mitron app is a repackaged version of TicTic, which is a TikTok clone.

The Remove China Apps was designed to help users identify applications of Chinese origin.

Without naming the apps, Google hinted that the Mitron app may make a comeback on the Play Store once it fixes some technical issues, but the chances of the Remove China Apps are thin.

"We have an established process of working with developers to help them fix issues and resubmit their apps. We've given this developer (of the video app) some guidance and once they've addressed the issue the app can go back up on Play," Sameer Samat, Vice President, Android and Google Play, said in a statement.

Google said that its Android app store was designed to provide a safe and secure experience for the consumers while also giving developers the platform and tools they need to build sustainable businesses.

Samat said that Google Play recently suspended a number of apps for violating the policy that it does not allow an app that "encourages or incentivizes users into removing or disabling third-party apps or modifying device settings or features unless it is part of a verifiable security service".

"This is a longstanding rule designed to ensure a healthy, competitive environment where developers can succeed based upon design and innovation. When apps are allowed to specifically target other apps, it can lead to behaviour that we believe is not in the best interest of our community of developers and consumers," Samat said.

"We've enforced this policy against other apps in many countries consistently in the past - just as we did here," 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.
Agencies
March 8,2020

Consumer watchdog Which? has claimed that more than one billion Android phones and tablets are vulnerable to hackers as they no longer supported by security updates.

According to the research report, the most at-risk phones are any that run Android 4 or older and those smartphones running Android 7.0 which can not be updated are also at risk.

Based on data from Google analysed by Which?, two in five android device users around the world are no longer receiving the important updates. Currently, those devices are unlikely to have issues, but the lack of security leaves them open to attack.

"It is very concerning that expensive Android devices have such a short shelf life before they lose security support, leaving millions of users at risk of serious consequences if they fall victim to hackers," Kate Bevan editor Which? said in a statement.

"Google and phone manufacturers need to be upfront about security updates with clear information about how long they will last and what customers should do when they run out. The government must also push ahead with planned legislation to ensure manufacturers are far more transparent about security updates for smart devices and their impact on consumers," Kate added.

Android phone released around 2012 or earlier, including popular models like the Samsung Galaxy S3 and Sony Xperia S, are particularly at risk to hackers.

Which? has made suggestions to Android users on what to consider if they have an older phone that may be at risk.

Any Android device which is more than two years old, check whether it can be updated to a newer version of the operating system. If it is on an earlier version than Android 7.0 Nougat, try to update via Settings> System>Advanced System update.

In case a user is not able tto update the phone, the device could be at risk of being hacked if it is running a version of Android 4 or lower.

A user also need to be careful about downloading apps outside the Google Play store and should also install a mobile anti-virus via an app.

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
June 27,2020

Mumbai, Jun 27: The Bombay High Court observed that COVID-19 patients from poor and indigent sections cannot be expected to produce documentary proof to avail subsidised or free treatment while getting admitted to hospitals.

The court on Friday was hearing a plea filed by seven residents of a slum rehabilitation building in Bandra, who had been charged ₹ 12.5 lakh by K J Somaiya Hospital for COVID-19 treatment between April 11 and April 28.

The bench of Justices Ramesh Dhanuka and Madhav Jamdar directed the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in the court.

The petitioners had borrowed money and managed to pay ₹10 lakh out of ₹12.5 lakh that the hospital had demanded, after threatening to halt their discharge if they failed to clear the bill, counsel Vivek Shukla informed the court.

According to the plea, the petitioners were also overcharged for PPE kits and unused services.

On June 13, the court had directed the state charity commissioner to probe if the hospital had reserved 20% beds for poor and indigent patients and provided free or subsidised treatment to them.

Last week, the joint charity commissioner had informed the court that although the hospital had reserved such beds, it had treated only three poor or indigent persons since the lockdown.

It was unfathomable that the hospital that claimed to have reserved 90 beds for poor and indigent patients had treated only three such persons during the pandemic, advocate Shukla said.

He further argued that COVID-19 patients, who are in distress, cannot be expected to produce income certificate and such documents as proof.

However, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, who represented the hospital, said the petitioners did not belong to economically weak or indigent categories and had not produced documents to prove the same.

A person who is suffering from a disease like COVID-19 cannot be expected to produce certificates from a tehsildar or social welfare officer before seeking admission in the hospital, the bench noted and asked the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in court within two weeks.

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.