English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Delhi High Court issues notice to Centre on Shah Faesal’s detention

Published

on

The Delhi High Court yesterday (Monday, Aug 19) issued notice to the Centre and the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) administration seeking their response by Thursday, Aug 22, on a habeas corpus writ petition filed on behalf of Shah Faesal, an IAS topper from J&K who resigned earlier this year to take up politics, alleging that he was detained illegally at the New Delhi airport and taken to Srinagar against his wishes.

The plea was filed by Md Hussain Pader, the Pairokar or next friend on behalf of Shah Faesal who is allegedly under illegal detention in Kashmir. The court will hear the case on Friday, August 23.

The matter was heard by a Division Bench of Justices Manmohan and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal after it was mentioned for urgent hearing before Chief Justice DN Patel. The bench directed the Central government’s Bureau of Immigration, the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the J&K Police to file their replies to his habeas corpus plea, which also urges that his wife be allowed to meet him.

The Court has orally permitted the wife to meet Faesal for an hour.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, opposed Faesal’s contention and said that he will file a detailed response.

Shah Faesal, an IAS 2009 topper who quit the services to start his political party – Jammu and Kashmir People’s Movement (JKPM) party – had gone to Mumbai via Delhi on Aug 9 for an interview with the BBC on the Kashmir issue and returned to Delhi on Aug 10.

Also Read: Veteran music composer Khayyam passes away at 92 – Bollywood fraternity condoles

In the intervening night of Aug 14-15, the plea says that Faesal was illegally picked up from the New Delhi airport when he was on his way to take an international flight to USA, via Istanbul and Frankfurt, to complete his academic fellowship at Harvard University, US.

Faesal was reportedly detained under the Public Safety Act. He was whisked away to J&K against his wishes and reportedly accommodated in a makeshift detention centre at the Centaur Hotel in Srinagar.

The petition alleges high-handedness of concerned authorities in not disclosing the charges based on which the detention order may have been issued. JKPM office bearer Pader who filed the petition said he has derived all information through wife of Shah Faesal who was allowed to meet him once on Aug 17 at Centaur hotel in Srinagar.

While seeking the court’s directions to the authorities to “immediately set him at liberty”, Faesal submitted that his life is at “risk”, and the “illegal detention amounts abduction”.

The petition said Faesal’s illegal detention followed the abrogation of special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 by a Presidential order on August 5.

The petition states that not informing grounds of arrest to a detenue is violative of all safeguards mentioned in the CrPC. Shah Faesal was even not been produced before a Magistrate at New Delhi to seek transit demand from Delhi to Kashmir. The materials like twitter and facebook posts and the BBC interview are all speaking of the best intentions of Faesal where he asked people of Kashmir to maintain calm and use the judicial route to challenge the abrogation.

“At the immigration counter he (Faesal) was suddenly taken in for questioning and after that he was illegally detained. He was not allowed to board his international flight and the detaining authorities cancelled his boarding passes,” the petition said.

“The next day, it was learnt through the media that he had not been allowed to travel to Harvard University to complete his fellowship/academic commitments. Instead he has been whisked away to Srinagar,” the plea stated.

It claimed that Faesal has never committed any crime nor been named in any FIR. He is not part of any ongoing legal proceedings in any court of law and that there are no pending proceedings or cases against him.

Already six days in illegal detention, Faesal has not been made known of the grounds of arrest or detention, the plea added.

“All the safeguards mentioned in the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) before any arrest or detention have been violated. In particular, the petitioner (Faesal) was not produced before the local magistrate in New Delhi to seek the transit remand,” the plea contended.

“The petitioner has a wife, Iram Rashid, who is a KAS officer and they have a young child Jami, aged around four years. When his wife met him briefly on August 17 at the detention centre, Srinagar, he was looking very frail and was very apprehensive and fearful for his life, physical safety and liberty,” it said.

Faesal has been posting tweets and Facebook content critical of abrogation of Article 370 that gave special status to J&K, and split the state into two Union Territories.

On August 12, he had triggered controversy with his tweet that there would be “no Eid till the last bit of insult is avenged and undone” over what he termed as the “illegal annexation” of Kashmir.

Also Read: Yamuna above danger mark, over 10,000 evacuated in Delhi

Just before that he had tweeted: “There is no Eid. Kashmiris across the world are mourning the illegal annexation of their land. There shall be no Eid till everything that has been stolen and snatched since 1947 is returned back.”

His comments have invited strong criticism on social media.

Apart from Faesal, several other political leaders from Jammu & Kashmir, including former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Ministers Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah are currently under detention and house arrest since August 4.

In his interview to the BBC, Shah Faesal had remarked that Central Government’s move to take away Jammu & Kashmir’s special status was a “betrayal”.

India News

INDIA bloc likely to meet on September 30 over Gyanesh Kumar row

INDIA bloc parties are likely to meet in New Delhi on September 30 amid growing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Published

on

Rahul-Gandhi

Opposition parties belonging to the INDIA bloc are set to meet in New Delhi on September 30 to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and a proposed removal motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The proposed meeting comes amid growing coordination among opposition parties over the functioning of the poll panel and demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The parties are also discussing a possible joint response to the developments.

Why is the INDIA bloc meeting being planned?

The INDIA bloc meeting on September 30 comes amid reports of objections within the Election Commission over certain decisions and orders related to the SIR exercise. 

According to the report, Opposition leaders have been discussing a coordinated response to their concerns over the Election Commission and the electoral-roll revision process. 

The issue is also expected to be discussed at the Congress Working Committee meeting scheduled for September 29, a day before the proposed INDIA bloc meeting.

Gyanesh Kumar removal demand in focus

The demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has become a major point of contention between the Opposition and the Election Commission.

The CPI(M), CPI and CPI(ML)-Liberation have demanded Kumar’s removal and an immediate halt to the SIR exercise. Congress has also intensified its criticism of the CEC.

Opposition parties are also working on a fresh removal motion against Gyanesh Kumar. The September 30 meeting is expected to finalise the strategy for the motion, including the collection of signatures. According to the report, this would be the Opposition’s third such attempt. 

What is the SIR controversy?

The political dispute is linked to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, or SIR.

The controversy intensified following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on several occasions concerning decisions and orders related to the SIR process.

The Election Commission has said that differing views and observations are part of normal deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures, while stating that the final decisions on the SIR were taken unanimously. 

TMC and Left parties coordinate over the issue

The developments have also brought the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M) together on the Election Commission issue, despite their political differences in West Bengal.

CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby proposed an immediate meeting to discuss a joint strategy. According to the report, Mamata Banerjee spoke with M A Baby and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, after which the leaders settled on September 30 for the meeting. 

What could be discussed at the September 30 meeting?

The proposed meeting is expected to focus on:

  • Concerns surrounding the Election Commission
  • The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls
  • Opposition demands concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • A possible fresh removal notice against the CEC
  • A coordinated response by INDIA bloc parties

The exact agenda and participation will depend on the discussions among the opposition parties before the proposed meeting.

Continue Reading

India News

Gandhi Parivar vs Sangh Parivar, Revanth Reddy’s remark sparks BJP attack

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks contrasting the Gandhi Parivar with the Sangh Parivar triggered a BJP response accusing Congress of prioritising the Gandhi family.

Published

on

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks comparing the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar have triggered a political exchange, with the BJP hitting back at the Congress leader.

Speaking in Kerala on Friday, Mr Reddy described the contest over India’s future as a fight between the two “parivars”. He said the Gandhi family had made sacrifices for the country while accusing the Sangh Parivar of attempting to divide India on the basis of religion, caste, region and language.

What Revanth Reddy said

Mr Reddy cited Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi while speaking about what he described as sacrifices made by the Gandhi family.

He also referred to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi, saying they had given up positions, power and high office.

The Telangana Chief Minister said he had no remaining personal political ambitions and described his objective as working towards a Congress-led government at the Centre with Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister.

Mr Reddy also appealed to people to stand with the Gandhi Parivar and oppose the Sangh Parivar. He described the latter as a threat to India’s democracy.

BJP hits back

The BJP responded to Mr Reddy’s remarks on Saturday.

BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said the Telangana Chief Minister’s comments amounted to an admission that Congress’s objective was to bring the Gandhi family back to power.

He also linked Mr Reddy’s remarks to the ongoing political debate around “vote chori”, the Election Commission, the Constitution and democracy, arguing that the Congress’s focus was instead on the Gandhi family.

The exchange adds to the political confrontation between the BJP and Congress, with Mr Reddy presenting the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar as opposing forces in India’s political future, while the BJP has interpreted his remarks as evidence of Congress’s focus on the Gandhi family.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com