Two dead in Mumbai as anti-Assam riot protest turns violent

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

Kashmir, Mar 3: Four days after the National Investigation Agency made a major breakthrough in the Pulwama terror attack case over a year after the bombing, arresting one person who had sheltered the suicide bomber Adil Ahmad Dar, the NIA on Tuesday arrested two more people in the case - a father-daughter duo - who had also provided shelter to the bomber, officials said.

The NIA also claimed that the video of the suicide bomber was also recorded at their residence and released by the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) terror group from Pakistan after the attack. An NIA spokesperson in Delhi said: "Two more persons have been arrested by the agency in the Pulwama terror attack case and they have been identified as Insha Jan, 23, and her father Tariq Ahmed Shah, 50, who works as a tipper driver."

The official said that the father-daughter duo have been arrested from Hakripora area in Pulwama for their involvement in the attack. The two were arrested on early Tuesday morning after senior officials of the NIA raided their house on Monday night.

A senior NIA official related to the probe told IANS: "The video of Dar, who attacked the CRPF convoy, was recorded at the home of the duo. And the same video was released soon after the Pulwama terror attack by the JeM terrorists from a Pakistani IP address."

He said, "The video was shared by them to their handlers in Pakistan."

The spokesperson further claimed that during the probe Tariq Ahmed Shah disclosed that his house in Hakripora area was used by Dar, Mohammad Umar Farooq, a Pakistani terrorist and IED maker, Kamran - another Pakistani terrorist (both were later killed in encounters with security forces), Sameer Ahmed Dar, a Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorist from Pulwama and Mohammad Ismail aka Ibrahim, a Pakistani terrorist.

The spokesperson said that Shah facilitated all the terrorists at his house for sheltering and for planning of the heinous attack on the CRPF convoy. He said Jan, daughter of Shah, facilitated the terrorists at their home and provided food and other logistics during their stay on more than 15 occasions for two to four days each time, in their house during the year 2018-2019.

"Initial interrogation has revealed that Jan was in constant touch with Farooq and was in communication with him over telephone and other social media applications," the spokesperson said. The fresh arrests of the two accused brings the total number of arrests in the case to three.

The arrests were made on the revelations of Shakir Bashir Magrey, who was arrested by the anti-terror probe agency on February 28. According to senior NIA officials, more arrests will be made in the coming days. Magrey, a resident of Hajibal, Kakapora in Pulwama district of Jammu & Kashmir, is an overground worker (OGW) of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM).

According to agency sources, Magrey allegedly provided shelter and other logistical assistance to the Pulwama suicide bomber. He was sent to 15 days' NIA custody by a special NIA court in Jammu & Kashmir on Friday. During interrogation, Magrey revealed that he had harboured Dar and Pakistan-based terrorist Mohammad Umar Farooq in his house from late 2018 till the attack in February 2019 and assisted them in the preparation of the Improvised Explosive Device (IED). His shop is located near Lethpora bridge, and as advised by Mohammad Umar, he started conducting reconnaissance of the movement of CRPF convoys on Jammu-Srinagar Highway in January 2019, and informed Mohammad Umar and Adil Ahmad Dar about it.

Magrey was also involved in modifying the Maruti Eeco car and fitting the IED into it in early February, 2019 and was introduced to Adil Ahmad Dar in mid-2018 by Mohammad Umar and he became a full-time OGW of JeM.

"During his initial interrogation, he disclosed that on several occasions, he collected and delivered arms, ammunition, cash and explosive material to JeM terrorists, including those involved in the Pulwama attack," the agency had said on February 28.

"During investigation, the make, model and number of the car used in the attack was quickly ascertained by NIA to be a Maruti Eeco through forensic examination of the tiny remnants of the car which were found at the spot during extended searches," the agency stated.

"This has been corroborated by accused Shakir Bashir Magrey. The explosives used in the attack were determined to be ammonium nitrate, nitro-glycerin and RDX, through forensic investigation," it said.

London, Feb 14: Liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya once again asked the Indian banks to take back 100 per cent of the principal amount owed to them at the end of his three-day British High Court appeal on Thursday against an extradition order to India.

The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, wanted in India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to an alleged Rs 9,000 crores in unpaid bank loans, said the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are fighting over the same assets and not treating him reasonably in the process.

“I request the banks with folded hands, take 100 per cent of your principal back, immediately,” he said outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

“The Enforcement Directorate attached the assets on the complaint by the banks that I was not paying them. I have not committed any offenses under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) that the Enforcement Directorate should suo moto attach my assets," he said.

"I am saying, please banks take your money. The ED is saying no, we have a claim over these assets. So, the ED on the one side and the banks on the other are fighting over the same assets,” he added.

Asked about heading back to India, he noted: “I should be where my family is, where my interests are.

"If the CBI and the ED are going to be reasonable, it’s a different story. What all they are doing to me for the last four years is totally unreasonable.”

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bench presiding over the appeal, concluded hearing the arguments in the case and said they will be handing down their verdict at a later date after considering the oral as well as written submissions in the “very dense” case over the next few weeks.

On a day of heated arguments between Mallya’s barrister, Clare Montgomery, and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) counsel Mark Summers, arguing on behalf of the Indian government, both sides clashed over the prima facie case of fraud and deception against Mallya.

“We submit that he lied to get the loans, then did something with the money he wasn’t supposed to and then refused to give back the money. All this could be perceived by a jury as patently dishonest conduct,” said Summers.

“What they [Kingfisher Airlines] were saying [to the banks] about profitability going forward was knowingly wrong,” he said, as he took the High Court through evidence to counter Mallya’s lawyers’ claims that Westminster Magistrates Court Judge Emma Arbuthnot had fallen into error when she found a case to answer in the Indian courts against Mallya.

Mallya, who remains on bail on an extradition warrant, is not required to attend the hearings but has been in court to observe the proceedings since the three-day appeal opened on Tuesday. A key defence to disprove a prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation on his part has revolved around the fact that Kingfisher Airlines was the victim of economic misfortune alongside other Indian airlines.

However, the CPS has argued that “there is enough in the 32,000 pages of overall evidence to fulfil the [extradition] treaty obligations that there is a case to answer”. “There is not just a prima facie case but overwhelming evidence of dishonesty… and given the volume and depth of evidence the District Judge [Arbuthnot] had before her, the judgment is comprehensive and detailed with the odd error but nothing that impacts the prima facie case,” said Summers.

At the start of the appeal, Mallya’s counsel claimed Arbuthnot did not look at all of the evidence because if she had, she would not have fallen into the multiple errors that permeate her judgment. The High Court must establish if the magistrates’ court had in fact fallen short on a point of law in its verdict in favour of extradition.

Representatives from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as well as the Indian High Commission in London, have been present in court to take notes during the course of the appeal hearing.

Mallya had received permission to appeal against his extradition order signed off by former UK home secretary Sajid Javid last February only on one ground, which challenges the Indian government's prima facie case against him of fraudulent intentions in acquiring bank loans.

At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London in December 2018, Judge Arbuthnot had found “clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds” and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS on behalf of the Indian government.

Mallya remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April 2017 involving a bond worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his travel while he contests that ruling.