Y-level security for ‘Udaipur Files' producer Amit Jani; he thanks PM Modi, Amit Shah
The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel will now provide security to Jani. Y-category security includes a detail of 8 to 11 personnel, including commandos, to protect the individual around the clock.
Amit Jani thanked the central government for the security arrangement in a post on X. He said,"Heartfelt thanks to Honourable Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji and Home Minister Shri Amit Shah ji for providing Y-category security from the Centre."
The producer was embroiled in controversy after the Delhi High Court ordered a stay on the release of the film 'Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder' on July 11, and producer Amit Jani stated that he would move to the Supreme Court to challenge the verdict.
'Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder' is based on the 2022 murder of Kanhaiya Lal, a tailor in Udaipur, Rajasthan, who was brutally killed in broad daylight by two men allegedly angered by a social media post in support of former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. The incident had triggered national outrage and raised serious concerns about radicalisation and communal violence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
26 minutes ago
- News18
India Avenges Pahalgam Attack: Three Pakistani Terrorists Neutralized #brasstacks
India Avenges Pahalgam Attack: Three Pakistani Terrorists Neutralized #brasstacks | News18 Last Updated: India Videos In a significant operation, Indian security forces neutralized three Pakistani terrorists involved in the Pahalgam attack, avenging the April 22 civilian tragedy. The operation showcased precision and collaboration among the army, CRPF, and local police, with strong forensic evidence confirming their identities. n18oc_indiaWatch News18 Mobile App -
News18
3 hours ago
- News18
Delhi HC upholds Medha Patkars conviction in defamation case by LG Saxena
New Delhi, Jul 29 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Tuesday upheld the conviction and punishment awarded to activist Medha Patkar in a defamation case filed by Delhi LG V K Saxena in 2000. Justice Shalinder Kaur said the trial court order, against which Patkar had approached the high court, did not require any interference. 'Upon perusal this court finds no illegality in the order (by trial court) and requires no interference, and (appeal) accordingly dismissed," Justice Kaur said. Saxena filed the case 23 years ago when he was heading an NGO in Gujarat. The high court said there was illegality or material irregularity in the findings of the trial court and added that the order of conviction was passed after due consideration of evidence and the applicable law. It said that Patkar failed to demonstrate any defects in the procedure which was followed or any error in the law which resulted in the miscarriage of justice. The judge also upheld the order on sentence, where Patkar was released on 'probation of good conduct", and said it did not require any interference. Probation is a method of non-institutional treatment of offenders and a conditional suspension of sentence in which the offender, after conviction, is released on bond of good behaviour instead of being sent to prison. The high court, however, modified the condition of probation imposed by the trial court, requiring Patkar to appear before the trial court once in every three months, and allowed her to either appear physically or through VC or be represented through the lawyer during the appearances. The court also dismissed Patkar's plea against dismissal of her application to introduce and examine an additional witness to prove her defamation case lodged against Saxena. While 70-year-old Patkar was represented by senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, advocate Gajinder Kumar argued on behalf of Saxena. The Narmada Bachao Andolan leader challenged the April 2 sessions court order upholding her conviction handed out by a magisterial court in the case. The sessions court, which upheld Patkar's conviction in the case, released her on 'probation of good conduct"on furnishing a probation bond of Rs 25,000 on April 8 and imposed a precondition on her of depositing Rs 1 lakh as fine. The magisterial court on July 1, 2024 sentenced Patkar to five months of simple imprisonment and slapped a Rs 10 lakh fine after finding her guilty under Section 500 (defamation) of the IPC. Saxena filed the case as president of the National Council of Civil Liberties against Patkar for her defamatory press release against Saxena issued on November 24, 2000. On May 24, 2024, the magisterial court held that that Patkar's statements were not only per se defamatory but also 'crafted to incite negative perceptions" about him. The accusation that the complainant was 'mortgaging" the people of Gujarat and their resources to foreign interests was a direct attack on his integrity and public service, it had said. On April 2, the sessions court had dismissed a challenge to the order and held Patkar was 'rightly convicted" and there was 'no substance" in the appeal against the verdict of her conviction in the defamation case. PTI UK ZMN view comments Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Delhi HC upholds Medha Patkar's conviction and sentence in L-G VK Saxena's 2000 defamation case
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday upheld the conviction and sentence of activist Medha Patkar in a defamation case brought by now Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena against her in 2000. Patkar was accused of making defamatory statements against Saxena in 2000, labelling him a 'coward', and alleging his involvement in hawala transactions. A magistrate court held the statements to be defamatory on May 24, 2024, and on July 1, 2024, Patkar was sentenced to a five-month jail term and was directed to pay a Rs 10 lakh fine. Appealing against the conviction, Patkar had approached the sessions court, which dismissed her appeal on April 2 and upheld the conviction. The sessions court, however, reduced the punishment from a five-month jail term to a one-year probation, and the fine from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 1 lakh in an order on April 8. Pronouncing the verdict in open court, Justice Shalinder Kaur upheld the conviction and sentence while only modifying a condition of the probation. The sessions court had stipulated that Patkar shall appear before the trial court once every 3 months. The Delhi High Court modified this, granting Patkar the liberty to appear physically or virtually or be represented through an advocate during such appearances before the trial court. 'This court finds no illegality, perversity or material irregularity in the findings recorded by the learned trial court/appellate court. The order under challenge appears to have been passed after due consideration of the evidence on record and the applicable law. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate glaring defects from following the procedure or manifest error on the point of law resulting in a grave miscarriage of justice that would justify interference by this revisional jurisdiction…,' Justice Kaur held. A detailed order is awaited to be made public.
