Two arrested for abusing actor Ramya online; 11 more identified
The online abuse began after she shared a news report on July 24 about the Renukaswamy murder case proceedings in the Supreme Court, in which she demanded justice for the victim's family. Kannada actor Darshan is a prime accused in the case. Following a verification process, the CCB, along with the social media monitoring team, identified 13 accounts that were actively involved in the abuse, Singh said.
The two arrested individuals hail from neighbouring districts, he added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
HC says judges shouldn't be ‘bloodthirsty', commutes death sentence in murder case
'There are three cardinal pillars of punishment — retribution, deterrence and reformation. Whereas deterrence still holds good as a justification, retribution has gradually given way to the reformatory aspect of penalties in modern criminal jurisprudence, both in India and elsewhere,' the court said. Passing the judgment, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya said that the evolution of society has been towards a reformative approach towards penology, as opposed to a retributive approach. Kolkata: Observing that judges should never be 'bloodthirsty', the Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench of the Calcutta High Court has ordered commutation of the death sentence of a man to life imprisonment for the murder of his maternal uncle. Justice Bhattacharyya commuted the death sentence awarded to Aftab Alam by the Jalpaiguri sessions court for committing offence under Section 396 (dacoity with murder) to life sentence for the rest of his life, without any option of premature release for 20 years, unless exceptional circumstances are made out to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 'Judges should never be bloodthirsty. Hanging of murderers has never been too good for them,' Justice Bhattacharyya observed. Upholding the conviction of Alam by the trial court for the murder of his maternal uncle at Dhupguri in Jalpaiguri district on July 28, 2023, while committing dacoity at his house along with five other associates, Justice Bhattacharyya, while passing the judgment earlier this week, said that the crime does not fall under the 'rarest of the rare' category. Noting that in a landmark judgment in 1980 by the Supreme Court in the Bachan Singh versus State of Punjab case, a word of caution was put in, to the effect that 'judges should never be bloodthirsty'. 'The alteration of the names of jails from 'prisons' to 'correctional homes' in recent times is for a reason, reflecting the transition from the basic bloodthirsty instinct of society to take revenge to a more civilised policy of attempting to reform the accused, on the principle that one should hate the offence and not the offender,' Justice Bhattacharyya observed. He said that there has been a debate around the world as to the retention of the death sentence as a punishment, however heinous and grave the offence may be. 'The anti-death penalty camp argues that if deterrence is taken to be a reason for punishment, a lifetime of imprisonment is as good as a death sentence. Rather, a lifetime behind bars, which denudes the convict of his freedom for his entire life, is a preferable form to punish him than death, which takes place in a flash,' he noted. Justice Bhattacharyya observed that, pitting the pros and cons against each other, if a person is hanged or otherwise killed by dint of a death penalty, the damage done is irreversible. He said that even if subsequently some new light is shed on the investigation or there is discovery of some new evidence or something to justify the reopening of the investigation, 'there would be no chance of bringing back a life which has already been taken; thus, the death penalty is irreversible.' Alam's lawyer argued that there was no evidence to show that the murder was pre-planned or cold-blooded or to conclude that the same fell under the category of 'rarest of the rare' cases and that the trial judge did not consider the possibility of reformation at all. The additional public prosecutor, appearing for the state, contended that the crime was established beyond doubt and prayed that the capital punishment awarded to the appellant by the trial court be upheld. Holding that the court finds no evidence adduced by the state that the convict is beyond reform, Justice Bhattacharyya said that the young age of Alam, who is in his twenties, is another mitigating factor which precludes awarding the death sentence. Noting that Alam was residing at Delhi for a long time after leaving his maternal uncle's house at Dhupguri, where he had earlier stayed for some years, the high court said that the 'position of trust' approach cannot be applied, since at the time of the offence, the appellant was long gone from the shelter of his uncle. It noted that the 'betrayal' angle, per se, does not justify the death penalty. PTI AMR ACD This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content. Also Read: Death penalty is not justice, it is revenge
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Lakhimpur Kheri violence: SC questions UP Police inaction on witness' complaint of threat, bribe
The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the Uttar Pradesh Police for not acting on a witness' complaint that he was threatened with 'dire consequences' and offered a bribe not to testify in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case involving former Union minister Ajay Mishra's son Ashish Mishra, Live Law reported. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh directed the police to verify the allegations. On June 20, Baljinder Singh filed a written complaint alleging that an unidentified person offered him Rs 1 lakh and threatened him with consequences if he testified in the case, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the complainant, told the court. Bhushan added that despite the written complaint, no first information report had been registered, Live Law reported. The Uttar Pradesh Police reportedly claimed that Singh had not appeared in person, which is why the FIR was not filed. The court said this explanation was unsatisfactory. 'In case the complainant has been reluctant in coming forward in support of his complaint, some senior police officer can be deputed to visit the complainant…to verify if complaint has been made by him,' Live Law quoted the bench as saying. 'If such contents are acknowledged it is imperative for police to investigate.' The court also directed the senior superintendent of police in Lucknow to verify the complaint and file an affidavit along with a fresh status report. The case pertains to the death of eight persons, including four farmers, on October 3, 2021, as violence had broken out after a vehicle belonging to Ashish Mishra had allegedly run over a group of demonstrators. The violence had taken place in Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh during a protest against the Union government's farm laws that were later repealed. During the hearing on Thursday, Bhushan also said that if Singh's allegations were found to be credible, Ashish Mishra's bail would have to be cancelled. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court in July 2024. Ashish Mishra's counsel opposed this, claiming the allegations lacked evidence. He told the court that 20 witnesses had already been examined by the trial court, while another 20 had been dropped by the prosecution. He also claimed that although the trial court was hearing the case thrice a month, 'nobody turns up'. While Bhushan requested a day-to-day hearing, the bench declined, saying it could impact other pending cases.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
How Bengaluru prison inmates are using WhatsApp to run extortion racket
An extortion racket allegedly being operated from inside Bengaluru Central Prison has exposed serious loopholes in the enforcement of mobile phone restrictions behind bars. These convicts manage to obtain contact details of undertrial inmates while in prison. (Pixabay/Representative) Despite multiple crackdowns on the use of phones in jail, convicted inmates, especially those with criminal histories as rowdy-sheeters, have been found using WhatsApp to extort money from undertrial prisoners who are recently released on bail. According to a report in The New Indian Express, these convicts manage to obtain contact details of undertrial inmates while in prison. Once the undertrials are released, the convicts reach out to them via WhatsApp, issue death threats, and demand money. (Also Read: Massive traffic jam on Bengaluru's Outer Ring Road leaves school kids stranded, sparks outrage) The victims are instructed to transfer the funds through UPI to various bank accounts linked to the convicts' relatives. These relatives, in turn, deliver the cash to the prison, helping the inmates sustain a relatively lavish lifestyle behind bars, the report further added. The racket came to light after Arul Kumar (36), who was released on bail in a drug case, lodged a complaint with the Central Crime Branch (CCB). In his complaint, Arul alleged that convicts Harshith and Gangaraju, both serving time for rape, along with another individual named Likith, were involved in the extortion scheme. The FIR also named Nelson Sawan alias Bablu, Viji alias Guru, Chetan, and Shankar as key players in the operation. The complaint further noted that Chetan, an undertrial in a murder case, was channeling extorted funds through a relative named Lokesh Rao. Another notorious rowdy-sheeter, Shekhar, was also found to have received money through this system. A CCB officer confirmed that the mobile numbers listed in the FIR would be verified and that an investigation was underway to trace the financial transactions. Initial estimates suggest that the extorted amounts ranged from ₹5,000 to ₹15,000 per transaction. (Also Read: This one crucial clue sealed Prajwal Revanna's fate in rape case: A saree hidden in his attic)
