Two get death, Abu Salem, another get life term in 1993 Mumbai blasts case

Agencies
September 7, 2017

Mumbai, Sept 7: A Special TADA Court on Thursday awarded the death penalty to two convicts, life sentences to two others, including gangster Abu Salem, while giving 10 years jail to one accused in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case.

Special Judge G.A. Sanap pronounced the death verdicts on convicts Mohammed Taher Merchant and Feroze Khan for their role in the blasts, said Special Public Prosecutor Deepak Salve.

Besides Salem, the Special Court awarded life sentence to Karimullah Khan and 10 years rigorous imprisonment to the fifth convict, Riyaz Siddiqui.

The Special Judge also slapped varying amounts of fines on the convicts after finding them guilty on various charges, including murder, conspiracy to hatch the blasts, supplying arms and ammunition, and other serious offences, Salve told mediapersons after the ruling.

All the six accused were earlier pronounced "guilty" by the Special Court on June 16, including Mustafa Dossa, who died on June 28.

The much-awaited verdict on the quantum of sentencing came 24 years after the March 12, 1993 serial blasts and nearly 80 days after they were found guilty (on June 16) by the Special Court.

On a quiet afternoon of March 12, 1993, the country's commercial capital was shattered by a series of 13 blasts in quick succession at various locations in the city and suburbs, creating the worst unprecedented mayhem in the country, killing 257 and injuring 700 others.

The prime targets included the Air India Building, Bombay Stock Exchange, Zaveri Bazar, then existing five star hotels, Hotel SeaRock and Hotel Juhu Centaur, and others leading to damage to public and private properties worth Rs 27 crore.

Comments

Abdullah
 - 
Thursday, 7 Sep 2017

What about Malegaun, Samjotha express, Makkah masjid, Gujarath blast terrorists???

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.
News Network
March 9,2020

Mumbai, Mar 9: India's Yes Bank will not be merged with State Bank of India, which is set to infuse funds in the beleaguered lender, the newly appointed administrator leading the rescue plan said in a television interview on Monday.

"There is absolutely no question of a merger," Prashant Kumar, the administrator, told the CNBC TV18 channel.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Thursday took control of Yes Bank, after the lender - which is laden with bad debts - failed to raise the capital it needs to stay above mandated regulatory requirements.

Placing Yes Bank under a 30-day moratorium, the central bank imposed limits on withdrawals to protect depositors and said it would work on a revival plan. The move spooked depositors, who rushed to withdraw funds from the bank.

Kumar, a former finance chief at SBI, assured depositors their money was safe and that the moratorium on Yes Bank might be lifted much before the deadline on April 3 and normal banking operations might resume as early as Friday.

He also mentioned that the withdrawal limit of Yes Bank may be removed by March 15, 2020.

SBI Chairman Rajnish Kumar said on Saturday the state-run bank would need to invest up to 24.5 billion rupees ($331 million) to buy a 49% stake in Yes Bank as part of the initial phase of the rescue deal, adding that the survival of troubled lender was a "must".

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 13,2020

New Delhi, Jun 13: In a bid to provide relief to small businesses amid the coronavirus pandemic, the GST Council on Friday decided to halve the interest rate on late filing of GSTR-3B returns for the period of February, March and April 2020.

The interest rate on late return filing will be 9% from the usual 18% till September 30, 2020. The benefit will be available for small taxpayers with aggregate turnover of up to Rs 5 crore.

For the three months, small taxpayers will not be charged any interest till the notified dates for relief and thereafter 9% interest will be charged till September 30, a Finance Ministry statement said.

"For small taxpayers (aggregate turnover upto Rs 5 crore), for the supplies effected in the month of February, March and April 2020, the rate of interest for late furnishing of return for the said months beyond specified dates (staggered upto 6th July 2020) is reduced from 18 per cent per annum to 9 per cent per annum till 30.09.2020," said the statement.

The Council has also extended relief to small taxpayers for subsequent period of 2020 through waiver of late fees and interest if the returns in Form GSTR-3B for the supplies effected in the months of May, June and July are furnished by September 2020.

It has also decided to reduce the late fee on the filing of GSTR-3B returns for the period between July 2017 and January 2020. The late fee has been capped at Rs 500, but interest will be charged at the existing rate on the due tax liability.

Speaking to the media in New Delhi after a GST Council meet through videoconference, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that those entities with no tax liability will not have to submit the late fee for the period.

For entities with tax liability but which have not filed returns or have filed returns late, the late fee has been capped at Rs 500 without interest. Interest will, however, be payable on the tax component at the applicable rate for delays.

To facilitate taxpayers who could not get their cancelled GST registrations restored in time, the Council has provided an opportunity for filing of application for revocation of cancellation of registration up to September 30, 2020, in all cases where registrations have been cancelled till June 12, 2020.

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.
News Network
January 27,2020

Jan 27: The Andhra Pradesh Cabinet passed a resolution on Monday setting in motion the process for abolishing the state Legislative Council.

A similar resolution will now be adopted in the Legislative Assembly and sent to the Centre for necessary follow-up action.

With just nine members, the ruling YSR Congress is in minority in the 58-member Legislative Council. The opposition Telugu Desam Party (TDP) has an upper hand with 28 members and the ruling party could get a majority in the House only in 2021 when a number of opposition members will retire at the end of their six-year term.

The move by the Andhra Pradesh cabinet came after the Y S Jaganmohan Reddy government last week failed to pass in the Upper House of the state legislature two crucial Bills related to its plan of having three capitals for the state.

Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council Chairman M A Sharrif on January 22 referred to a select committee the two bills -- AP Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Bill, 2020, and the AP Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) Act (Repeal) Bill -- for deeper examination.

The chairman had said that he was using his discretionary powers under Rule 154 while referring the Bills to the select panel in line with the demand of the TDP.

Following this, the chief minister had told the Assembly, "We need to seriously think whether we need to have such a House which appears to be functioning with only political motives. It is not mandatory to have the Council, which is our own creation, and it is only for our convenience."

"So let us discuss the issue further on Monday and take a decision on whether or not to continue the Council," he had said.

In fact, the YSRC had on December 17 first threatened to abolish the Council when it became clear that the TDP was bent on blocking two Bills related to creation of a separate Commission for SCs and conversion of all government schools into English medium.

As the Legislature was adjourned sine dine on December 17, no further action was taken. But last week, the issue cropped up again as the TDP remained firm on its stand on opposing the three-capitals plan.

The YSRC managed to get two TDP members to its side, but the government failed to get the three capitals Bills passed in the Council.

"What will be the meaning of governance if the House of Elders does not allow good decisions to be taken in the interest of people and block enactment of laws? We need to seriously think about it… Whether we should have such a House or do away with it," the chief minister had said in the Assembly.

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.