ADGPs' transfer order withdrawn
, will continue as ADGP of the armed forces battalion.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Similarly, Balram Kumar Upadhyay, appointed as the director of KEPA, will be retained as ADGP prisons.
ADGP Mahipal Yadhav, who was appointed ADGP crimes, will continue as excise commissioner. IG K Sethuraman, who was appointed director general of prisons, will continue as KEPA director. ADGP S Sreejith has been given charge of
apart from the current postings. ADGP H Venkitesh will hold the additional charge of ADGP Crimes.
IG Sparjan Kumar has additional charges of the posts of Inspector General of Police, Crimes II (Ernakulam) and Inspector General of Police, Crimes III (Kozhikode). IG P Prakash has been posted in the
and IG A Akbar has been posted in the coastal police. tnn
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
06-08-2025
- Hindustan Times
Willow Cafe firing case: Punjab ADGP's son Angad joins probe after 5 months
Punjab additional director general of police (ADGP) Paramraj Singh Umranangal's son Angad Sukhraj Singh Dhaliwal, who was the prime suspect in the Sector 10 Willow Cafe firing case, joined investigations on Monday, after five months of being on the run. During the bail proceedings, Angad's counsel claimed that the firearm was a dummy weapon carried for his personal security, and that no one was harmed in the incident. (Shutterstock) The Chandigarh Police have recovered the weapon, allegedly used in the firing, from one of his co-accused, who is a Punjab Police personnel. The investigation so far has revealed that Angad fired the shot using a weapon belonging to one of the Punjab cops accompanying him. These security men were deployed at the official residence of his father. The firing incident was captured on the cafe's CCTV footage, clearly showing Angad drawing the weapon and firing into the air. However, during the probe, Angad did not disclose any definitive reason for the firing, and no clear motive has emerged so far. Angad, 33, a US citizen currently residing in Dubai, had filed for anticipatory bail in the case registered at the Sector-3 police station on February 17. He was booked under Sections 125 (acts endangering human life or safety), 126 (wrongful restraint), 238C (disappearance of evidence), 249C (harbouring offender), and 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 25, 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act. The case was based on a complaint filed by Balbir Ram, a staff member at Willow Cafe, who alleged that on the evening of February 16, Angad, accompanied by friends and a security guard, fired a shot into the air while seated on the cafe's terrace. CCTV footage reviewed the next day showed Angad, dressed in a black hoodie with white stars, pulling out a pistol and firing a round. The footage was later handed over to the police. During the bail proceedings, Angad's counsel claimed that the firearm was a dummy weapon carried for his personal security, and that no one was harmed in the incident. He argued that Angad had not received any notice to join the investigation during his visit and left India on February 22. Despite strong opposition from the prosecution, which labelled the charges as serious, the court granted him interim anticipatory bail. Additional sessions judge Dr Harpreet Kaur noted that no recovery was pending from the accused as the weapon had already been seized from a co-accused. The court directed Angad to join the investigation within 10 days, surrender his passport, not influence witnesses, and refrain from leaving the country without prior permission. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on August 11.
New Indian Express
02-08-2025
- New Indian Express
Madras HC temporarily restrains Savukku Shankar from making defamatory remarks against ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has issued a gag order to YouTuber 'Savukku' Shankar, temporarily restraining him from making defamatory statements against senior police officer S Davidson Devasirvatham, the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) – Law and Order, over the Sivaganga custodial death. Justice P Kumaresh Babu, on Friday, passed interim orders on the civil suit and applications filed by the police officer. 'A reading of the statements made against the applicant (Davidson Devasirvatham) would prima facie conclude that they have been making statements in derogatory and defamatory manner, which would affect his reputation as he is holding high office,' the judge said. He added that Article 19(2) of the Constitution carves out a restriction to Article 19(1)(a) – freedom of speech and expression – providing protection to the citizen from being defamed. The interim injunction will be in force for four weeks. The judge also ordered notice to Savukku Shankar, directing him to file a reply to the petition within four weeks, and accordingly adjourned the case. Davidson Devasirvatham moved the application praying for an order of interim injunction restraining the YouTuber, his agents, followers or representatives from publishing, broadcasting, uploading or circulating, in any manner whatsoever, in print, digital or audio-visual form, any contents containing allegedly defamatory allegations, insinuations or imputations against him with respect to the custodial death of Ajith Kumar.
The Hindu
02-08-2025
- The Hindu
Madras HC restrains Savukku Shankar from defaming ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham in Sivaganga custodial death case
The Madras High Court has restrained YouTuber 'Savukku' Shankar alias A. Shankar from making defamatory allegations, insinuations or imputations against Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) S. Davidson Devasirvatham in relation to the alleged custodial death of B. Ajith Kumar of Sivaganga district in June this year. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu granted the interim injunction for a period of four weeks pursuant to a defamation suit filed by the ADGP (L&O) accusing the YouTuber of presenting concocted tales woven out of unverified gossip, with a tone of certainty, in order to mislead the people at large and create suspicion and hostility. The judge agreed with senior counsel P.H. Arvindh Pandian, representing the ADGP, that the derogatory and defamatory manner in which the statements had been made would prima facie affect the reputation of his client holding high office and that Article 19(2) of the Constitution protects a citizen from being defamed. In an exhaustive affidavit filed in support of his injunction application, Mr. Devasirvatham recalled his professional accomplishments since he joined the Indian Police Service (IPS) in 1995 and said that the YouTuber had, however, exhibited a longstanding pattern of targeting him with false and malicious allegations. The ADGP said that the YouTuber had in July 2022 launched a targeted smear campaign linking him with the fake passport scam. The online slander extended to repeated demands for his suspension and removal from service and the defamatory outbursts quietened only after the Madras High Court gave a clean chit to him. Though the reputational damage caused due to that campaign, spearheaded by the YouTuber directly and also through his proxy Varaaki, remained unremedied, 'I chose not to respond publicly and continued to discharge my official duties with discipline and commitment,' the ADGP said. However, after the recent Sivaganga custodial death of a temple security guard, the YouTuber had once again taken to the social media to level a series of grave and unfounded allegations against him, the ADGP complained and said that a completely false narrative had been constructed linking him with the death. 'The statements are entirely false, wholly unverified and manufactured without any basis. However, they were presented by the first respondent with a tone of authority and a pretense of insider knowledge thereby misleading the public into believing that they are grounded in official sources or confidential information,' the ADGP said. He went on to state: 'The truth, however, is that the first respondent possesses no personal knowledge of any such instructions, has no access to official communications, and is utterly devoid of evidence to support these reckless and defamatory allegations.' Claiming that the intention of the YouTuber was to deliberately sow doubts in the minds of the public, the ADGP said, 'these falsehoods are pushed by the first respondent with sensationalism, using provocative and conspiratorial language to stir public emotion and tarnish my name.' Mr. Devasirvatham said, the insidious allegations were amplified by other social media influencers leading to an orchestrated wave of repetition across digital platforms. 'What started as one person's false and harmful claim quickly grew into a digital echo chamber where repeating the lie made it seem like a fact,' he lamented. Apart from praying for an interim injunction specifically against the YouTuber, the ADGP also sought a John Doe/Ashok Kumar order (an order passed against unknown people) against all those unidentified individuals indulging in a malicious campaign against him in the digital space. 'Unlike accredited journalists governed by professional ethics, institutional oversight and legal consequences for irresponsible reporting; the respondents herein are often self-styled 'commentators' or 'digital influencers' who exploit the viral mechanics of platforms such as YouTube, X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook to spread scandalous narratives solely for sensationalism and viewership. Their content is unfiltered, unverified and unaccountable and crafted not with a sense of public duty but with the sole aim of gaining clicks, followers, or political mileage,' he said.
