With SC case still pending, Assam man 'pushed' into Bangladesh returns home
He returned home two days ago after, what he claimed, the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) handed him and six others back to India, stating that they are not Bangladeshi nationals.
Islam, who is in his fifties, was declared a foreigner by a foreigners' tribunal in 2018. He challenged this in the Gauhati High Court but it upheld the tribunal's judgment. Foreigners' tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies which deal with the cases of suspected foreigners.
After he lost his case in the High Court, the police arrested him and sent him to a detention centre. He walked out on bail after two years in 2020 when the Supreme Court issued an order to decongest jails in the wake of Covid pandemic.
Islam told this newspaper on Saturday that he had then moved the Supreme Court and his case is still pending. He lamented that he was deported although the apex court is yet to deliver a judgment.
He said he had spent two days in Bangladesh and he did not face any problem there. 'The BGB had formally handed seven of us over to the BSF. The BSF did not protest it,' Islam said. 'I have no idea if the remaining seven are in Bangladesh or India,' he added.
Islam said following his handover, he was under the care of Assam Police until returning home two days ago. 'The joys of my family members knew no bounds when I arrived home. I am feeling very relaxed now. I celebrated Eid. I had no idea that I would be able to celebrate Eid at home after deportation,' he said.
Meanwhile, CM Himanta Biswa Sarma has said the process of identifying foreigners will now move at a faster pace.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Murder case: SC sets aside bail order, asks wrestler to surrender
New Delhi: Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the bail granted to Olympic medallist Sushil Kumar in the 2021 murder case of former junior national wrestling champion Sagar Dhankar at Chhatrasal Stadium in Delhi. A bench of justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra referred to the FIR's allegations, which described the capital as having become a "criminal playground" for settling scores with no regard for the law. The court directed Kumar to surrender within a week before the concerned trial court. The bench was hearing an appeal filed by Dhankar's father against Delhi High Court's March 4 order granting bail. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi | Gold Rates Today in Delhi | Silver Rates Today in Delhi Kumar and others are accused of fatally assaulting Dhankar and injuring his two friends in May 2021 over an alleged property dispute. "Undoubtedly, the accused (Kumar) is a celebrated wrestler and an Olympian, who has represented the nation at the international level. It cannot be doubted that he carries societal impact," the bench observed. However, it noted that his "domineering influence" over witnesses or efforts to delay trial proceedings could not be ruled out. Allegations of pressuring witnesses were raised before the bail order, and certain witnesses had lodged written complaints fearing threats to their lives at Kumar's behest. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Eating these 15 Foods Every Day Will Slowly Kill You Undo The bench noted that after the FIR was lodged, Kumar remained absconding and evaded arrest until his eventual arrest on May 23, 2021. "This court must also be cognisant of the seriousness of the allegations against the accused," the bench said. The court noted the accused allegedly abducted persons, violently attacked them with dangerous weapons, causing grievous injuries resulting in Dhankar's death. Prosecution records showed that when Kumar was granted temporary bail on five occasions, prosecution witnesses often turned hostile. "However, at this stage we refrain from affirming seal of approval thereupon. But pertinently, this pattern underscores the possibility of interference into the trial by the accused. Noticeably, out of 35 witnesses examined, 28 have turned hostile," the bench pointed out. The top court emphasised that bail is a discretionary remedy requiring careful balancing of legal and societal interests — upholding personal liberty on one side and considering the gravity of the offence and the trial's integrity on the other. pti Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Panels set up in April, but survey held up as Haryana yet to define ‘forest'
Gurgaon: Months after the Supreme Court ordered all states and Union territories to define "forest" and map all such areas, not a single survey has been carried out as part of the exercise in Haryana despite the state govt establishing expert committees in April. The catch — both district- and state-level committees cannot begin work until the state finalises its definition of "forest by dictionary meaning" — a step that remains incomplete, effectively stalling the entire exercise. In April, Haryana govt notified a state-level expert committee chaired by the additional chief secretary (environment, forests & wildlife). The panel includes senior officials from forest, revenue, agriculture, industries, town planning and urban local bodies departments. You Can Also Check: Gurgaon AQI | Weather in Gurgaon | Bank Holidays in Gurgaon | Public Holidays in Gurgaon | Gold Rates Today in Gurgaon | Silver Rates Today in Gurgaon District-level committees headed by deputy commissioners were also constituted, comprising municipal commissioners, divisional forest officers and other key officials. But the terms for the committees allow them a month to two to carry out surveys and submit their reports, with one key condition: they can start work only after the state provides the forest definition. On March 4, the Supreme Court ordered all states and UTs to first define "forest" and identify all such areas, including the Aravalis. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain | search ads Find Now Undo This exercise will allow protections to forest land under the Forest Conservation Act and prevent further loss of green cover in ecologically fragile zones. Asked why the process was delayed, Haryana's principal chief conservator of forests Vineet Kumar Garg said on Wednesday, "We have sent the forest definition for finalisation to the state govt. We will start the process once it is final." Experts and activists alleged that Haryana govts, over the decades, have avoided protecting Aravalis under FCA by stalling the process. "This is planned disobedience of the Supreme Court's Godavarman judgment. Constituting committees without giving them the definition is a tactic to ensure no actual work is done. Haryana is trying to give away what little forest it has to private builders by not recognising it as forest," said RP Balwan, retired conservator of forests, Haryana (South). The top court's March order came while hearing writ petitions challenging amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act. Citing the 2011 Lafarge judgment, the court ordered states/UTs to form expert committees within a month and warned that state chief secretaries would be held personally responsible for any lapses. The Lafarge order, linked to environmental approvals for mining in Meghalaya, had directed all states to identify and map forest land. This built on the landmark 1996 TN Godavarman case, which established that forests must be recognised based on the dictionary definition of "forest" — meaning any area with forest characteristics must be protected under FCA, regardless of its official status in govt records. This "deemed forest" concept significantly widened FCA's scope. However, successive Haryana govts have maintained there is no clear definition or criteria to identify forests. Forest analyst Chetan Agarwal highlighted the administrative impasse and said. "Govt has created a Catch-22 situation. They formed committees in April to comply with the March court order but tied their hands by saying the forest definition will be issued by the state govt, which has still not materialised." The case will next be taken up by the SC on Sept 9, where Haryana govt may be required to explain why it is yet to come up with a definition for 'forest'. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Historic EVM Recount Ordered By Supreme Court Overturns Haryana Sarpanch Election
The recounting process, a truly remarkable event, was conducted inside the Supreme Court building on August 6 In a rare and unprecedented move, the Supreme Court of India recently ordered a complete recount of votes for a sarpanch election, physically summoning Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and other poll records to its premises. The case involved a contentious election for the village head of Buana Lakhu in Haryana's Panipat district. The legal battle stemmed from the election held on November 2, 2022, where Kuldeep Singh was initially declared the winner, defeating his rival, Mohit Kumar. Kumar, however, challenged the result, alleging discrepancies in the vote counting. His petition was first heard by an election tribunal in Panipat, which ordered a recount of votes from a single booth. This order was subsequently set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, prompting Kumar to appeal to the Supreme Court. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and N Kotiswar Singh took up the matter. On July 31, the apex court issued a significant directive: it ordered the production of all six EVMs and associated records from the Buana Lakhu election before its registrar. The bench decided to go a step further than the initial tribunal's order, demanding a recount of votes from all booths (65 to 70), not just the one in dispute. The recounting process, a truly remarkable event, was conducted inside the Supreme Court building on August 6. It was overseen by a Supreme Court OSD (Registrar) and was fully videographed to ensure transparency. Representatives from both Kuldeep Singh and Mohit Kumar were present throughout the process. The recount results submitted to the court revealed a decisive shift. Out of 3,767 total votes cast, Mohit Kumar was found to have secured 1,051 votes, while Kuldeep Singh received 1,000 votes. Accepting this report, the Supreme Court, on August 11, set aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court's verdict and directed the Deputy Commissioner of Panipat to issue a notification within two days, declaring Mohit Kumar as the duly elected sarpanch. view comments First Published: 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.
