Youth dies of ‘forced drug injection' in Mohali's Mataur village, family alleges police inaction
According to Sonu's mother, Meera, he was at home the previous day when two individuals, Bunty and Dilkhush, came and took him along saying they were going to help him get employed. 'About three hours later, they dropped Sonu back outside the house. He was in a terrible condition, almost unconscious,' said Meera.
Seeing his deteriorating state, the family rushed him to the Civil Hospital in Phase-6. From there, he was referred to GMCH-32, Chandigarh. When Sonu briefly regained consciousness at GMCH-32, he revealed that 'Bunty and Dilkhush forcibly injected me with chitta (a street name for heroin)'. Sonu succumbed during treatment at the hospital.
Meera and her daughter Shivani alleged that even after informing the Mataur police about the incident, no concrete action has been taken. 'We clearly told the police that Bunty and Dilkhush administered the drug injection, but the police have neither questioned them nor made any arrests,' they claimed.
When contacted, Mataur SHO Amandeep Singh Kamboj said, 'The family has not given any statement to us regarding drug use. In fact, in their official statement, they wrote that they don't suspect anyone and don't want any action taken.' Based on this, the police have initiated proceedings under Section 174 of the CrPC (relating to unnatural death).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
2008 Malegaon blast case: NIA court says all charges against Prasad Purohit not baseless
Mumbai: The special NIA court clarified that sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was not necessary for Lt Col Prasad Purohit, a government servant, under the circumstances of the case. The judge observed that the charges of ATS and NIA against Purohit were serious and based on the evidence they had collected during the course of investigation. The judge noted that Purohit's association with Abhinav Bharat Trust or Abhinav Bharat organization would not be per-say illegal and was the part of his. However, the judge said that those charges itself show that, he floated the Abhinav Bharat Organisation and was the founder member of Abhinav Bharat, collected huge funds and had control over the financial transactions. He has accepted the thousands of rupees from co-accused and utilised those amounts for private use, the judge noted. "Nothing material came on record to show that, all those allegations or charges were fake, baseless and all those acts are done by Purohit with the permission of his superior officer. Merely the prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused in the absence of cogent evidence doesn't mean that, all the charges were baseless or without foundation," the judge said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like These Are The Most Beautiful Women In The World Undo The judge also said that the charges of murder, criminal conspiracy were also levelled Purohit alongwith other charges. "Those were serious, showing the involvement of Purohit and hence, their own officer had handed over the custody of accused to ATS. Ongoing through the papers, it is sufficient to hold that, the act done by him was not in discharge of his official duty. He has done those acts which were never permitted by his office. Those acts could not be covered or protected under the garb of section 197," the judge said. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Telangana HC quashes criminal case against KTR, Jagadish
Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Friday quashed a criminal case against BRS working president KT Rama Rao and former minister G Jagadish Reddy registered in 2024. The court found that the allegation made against them in the case was vague and lacked necessary particulars. The Medipally police booked a case against the BRS leaders based on a complaint lodged by MLC Chinthapandu Naveen Kumar alias Teenmar Mallanna. In his complaint, Mallanna alleged that KTR circulated fake videos on social media platforms during the MLC elections. He claimed that the videos were circulated to impact the electoral outcome of the poll. Stating that the allegation of circulating fake videos on social media platforms was too broad and devoid of any particulars, a division bench, comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar, ruled that the allegations did not constitute the offence alleged. Even if they did constitute an offence, they were not supported by clear evidence. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad The court further noted that Mallanna, the de facto complainant in the case, did not submit any evidence despite being served two consecutive notices in April and June 2025. "There is no absolute rule preventing the quashing of an investigation at an early stage if it clearly lacks merit, and the court has inherent power to intervene in order to prevent abuse of the law or to uphold justice according to the provisions of the CrPC," observed the court, while concluding the hearing in the matter.
Indian Express
8 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘Vague, without necessary particulars': Telangana High Court quashes FIR against KTR in fake videos case
The Telangana High Court Friday quashed the proceedings against Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) legislator K T Rama Rao in a criminal case registered against him at the Medipally police station last year. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged based on a complaint lodged by then MLC candidate Chintapandu Naveen alias Teenmaar Mallana. Naveen alleged that Rama Rao, along with Ramesh Babu, the personal assistant of Suryapet MLA G Jagdish Reddy, were involved in a 'vicious, scandalous and malicious campaign' against him. He alleged that they were circulating 'fake videos' on social media platforms to damage his reputation, and sway the electoral outcomes in the ensuing MLC elections for the Warangal-Nalgonda-Khammam constituency. While dealing with the criminal petition, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya observed the complaint's contents do not satisfy any of the provisions mentioned in the FIR, and the only allegation that the petitioners were circulating fake videos… was 'vague and without necessary particulars'. The court also stated that the de facto complainant (Naveen) failed to provide any evidence despite being served two notices by the police in April and June 2025. 'Inherent power under Section 482 (of CrPC) can be exercised either to prevent abuse of law or to secure the ends of justice. The present case qualifies under both these yardsticks,' Justice Bhattacharya stated. The bench added that no cognizable offence or offence of any kind is disclosed against the petitioners in the complaint FIR for the court to permit the investigation to continue against the petitioners. The accused were charged under sections 505(2) (statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and sections 66-C and 66-D (identity theft and punishment for cheating by personation using a computer resource) of the Information Technology Act. Ramana Rao T V, the counsel for KTR, contended the allegations were false and fabricated, and that the complaint does not disclose any criminal intent on the part of the accused. He contended that the alleged statements, even if true, would not create rumours, promote enmity, hatred, or ill-will between classes of people. He described the complaint as vague and absurd, as it lacked specifics about the alleged fake video, the date it circulated on the specific social media platforms used. Stating that there is no allegation of identity theft or cheating by personation using a computer resource, the counsel argued that there were no ingredients for charges under the IT Act.
