Complainant seeks confiscation of suspected leopard tooth jewellery worn by Union Minister Suresh Gopi
The complainant, A. A. Muhammad Hashim, an office-bearer of the INTUC Young Workers Council, raised the demand while giving his statement to forest officials on Monday (July 21, 2025) .
The Pattikkad Range Forest Officer had summoned Mr. Hashim, who had approached the Divisional Forest Officers of Thrissur and Kannur with the complaint, on the day to record his statements.
Mr. Hashim also raised the demand for ascertaining the period of the making of the ornament worn by Mr. Gopi, apprehending that the ornament could be 'manipulated.'
Media links of the visuals aired by TV channels in which the actor was seen wearing the suspected ornament were handed over to the officials. The complainant also demanded that the original visuals be obtained from the TV channels to check the veracity of the complaint.
In his complaint, Mr. Hashim had stated that he had seen TV visuals of Mr. Gopi wearing the ornament at two functions, one in Thrissur and another in Kannur.
Prompted by Vedan incident
Mr. Hashim said he decided to take up the case following social media discussions that ensued after the arrest of popular rapper Vedan (Hirandas Murali) for wearing a suspected leopard-tooth-studded pendant. The Forest department acted against the singer after being alerted by police, which arrested him for possessing ganja. The investigation in the case was progressing, according to forest officials.
Possession of a wildlife trophy, which includes cured and uncured animal parts, is an offence under the Wildlife Protection Act 1972. Those found guilty can get a jail term of up to seven years and a fine or both.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Three May Day calls, six engine shutdowns reported so far in 2025, Centre tells RS
NEW DELHI: Three May Day calls (emergency distress calls seeking help) have been reported in 2025 so far, the Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation, Murlidhar Mohol, informed the Rajya Sabha. In his written reply to a question on Tuesday, Mohol said, "During 2025, from January to July (till date), a total of 6 incidents of engine shutdown and a total of 3 incidents of May Day calls have been reported." The Minister shared data which revealed that the Ahmedabad to London Gatwick flight which crashed on June 12 had issued a May Day call. 260 lives were lost in this mishap Air India Express and Indigo reported the other May Day calls. There were six engine shutdowns involving four airlines, each in Indigo and Spicejet and one each in Alliance Air and Air India. All angles explored in June 12 plane crash A PTI report said that in response to another query on the probe into the June 12 crash, the Minister said the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's preliminary report, published based on available factual information on July 12, does not contain any conclusion about the Air India plane crash and that the probe is still in progress. To a query on whether the government will investigate the crash from a sabotage angle as well, Mohol said, "every aspect is being looked into for determining the probable cause(s)/contributory factor(s) leading to the accident".
Hans India
3 hours ago
- Hans India
Blueprint to tackle Maoists in Rourkela
Bhubaneswar: Odisha Police chalked out a 'blueprint' to enhance security measures in Rourkela police district to deal with Maoists, a senior officer said on Tuesday. The measure comes after suspected Maoists carried out three improvised explosive device (IED) blasts on railway tracks along the Odisha-Jharkhand border on Saturday and Sunday, police said. The two blasts, which caused damage to the tracks, occurred at separate locations, one in Odisha and another in Jharkhand. In one of the blasts that took place on the tracks in K Nuagaon police station area in Sundargarh district, a railway personnel was killed and another was injured. The Sundargarh revenue district has two police districts -- Sundargarh and Rourkela. ADG (anti-Naxal operations) Sanjeeb Panda, who visited the incident sites and held discussions with the local police officers, said there had earlier been no Maoist-related incident in Rourkela police district in the last seven years. The last Maoist incident in the police district was reported in 2018, he said. 'However, Maoist activities resurfaced recently in the district. So, we have decided to revise our response. We have chalked out a blueprint to deal with the Maoists,' Panda told reporters in Rourkela on Tuesday. The blueprint was prepared in accordance with the target set by the Union Home Minister for eradicating Maoism by March 2026, he said. 'We will strengthen our security infrastructure in the district. We will set up new security camps, deploy additional Special Operations Group (SOG) teams and strengthen our intelligence network. We strongly believe that we will succeed in our motto,' the Odisha Police ADG said. Pamda said the Maoists have a presence in Saranda forest in Jharkhand, from where they come to Odisha sometimes. To deal with them, Odisha Police, in coordination with their counterparts in Jharkhand, will conduct joint anti-Maoist operations in the area, he said. Commenting on security arrangements at railway tracks, he said, 'Our bomb disposal squad has cleared the tracks on the Odisha side.'
Hans India
5 hours ago
- Hans India
Centre opposes lowering age of consent
New Delhi: The Union government has objected before the Supreme Court to any move to reduce the age of consent under child protection laws from 18 to 16 years, warning that such a change would open the floodgates to trafficking and other forms of child abuse under the garb of assent. 'Introducing a legislative close-in-age exception or reducing the age of consent would irrevocably dilute the statutory presumption of vulnerability that lies at the heart of child protection law,' the Centre, represented Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, clarified in written submissions placed on record. To buttress its argument, the Centre cited a 2007 Ministry of Women and Child Development study which found that 53.22% of children reported facing one or more forms of sexual abuse. It noted that in 50% of these cases, the abusers were persons in positions of trust or authority, including parents, relatives, neighbours, and school staff. 'The report concluded that children are particularly vulnerable when the offender is a known figure, as the abuse is concealed, normalised, or silenced through emotional manipulation or fear,' the Centre explained. The Centre's position is in contrast to that of senior advocate and amicus curiae Indira Jaising, who has argued before the court that consensual sexual activity between adolescents aged 16 to 18 should not be classified as 'abuse' or criminalised under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Jaising urged the court to read a 'close-in-age exception' into the law, which would apply to consensual sexual activity where both individuals are adolescents aged between 16 and 18. She submitted that the term 'child' under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act should not include adolescents in this age group engaged in consensual sexual relationships. Such an exception, she argued, would align with the protective intent of POCSO while avoiding its misuse in cases involving non-exploitative adolescent relationships. However, the Centre maintained that defining 'child' as a person below 18 years was a 'deliberate choice, grounded in the recognition that minors lack the legal and developmental capacity to give meaningful and informed consent in matters involving sexual activity.' 'The decision to criminalise sexual acts with children under 18 years reflects a clear understanding of the vulnerability of minors, the common occurrence of coercion and manipulation in such situations, and the challenges in proving the absence of consent when minors are involved… This legislative position embodies the collective will of Parliament, acting in furtherance of its constitutional duty to protect children,' the Centre submitted. 'The legislative intent is further reinforced by the age threshold adopted in other enactments, including the Indian Majority Act, 1875, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006… The legal position is again affirmed under Section 375 of the IPC and is retained under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, where sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age constitutes rape per se, regardless of her purported willingness,' the Union government submitted. The government said the legislative framework on the age of consent under Indian law was rooted in a clear and unambiguous intent to provide a 'robust, non-negotiable shield' to minors against sexual exploitation.
