26/11 Mumbai terror attack: Delhi court allows Tahawwur Rana to make single phone call to family; seeks detailed health report
Tahawwur Rana (File photo)
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Monday granted 26/11 Mumbai terror attack accused Tahawwur Rana permission to make a single phone call to his family for the time being.
The call will be strictly conducted in accordance with jail regulations and under the supervision of a senior official from the Tihar jail authorities, reported news agency ANI.
The Patiala House Court has also sought a detailed status report on Rana's health issues, which must be submitted within 10 days.
Tahawwur Rana had filed a petition in a Delhi court for allowing him to communicate with his family. Rana has requested access to jail-provided facilities for family interaction, in accordance with regulations.
Meanwhile, the ministry of home affairs has appointed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan, and Advocate Narender Mann as lead prosecutors in the National Investigation Agency (
NIA
) case against Tahawwur Rana.
"The Central Government hereby appoints a team of Special Public Prosecutors, led by Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India, alongside SV Raju, Additional Solicitor General, Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan, and Advocate Narender Mann (previously notified as Special Public Prosecutors," a circular issued by the home ministry read.
"This team will oversee the trial and all related proceedings concerning NIA case before the NIA special courts in Delhi, the high court of Delhi, and the Supreme Court of India," it added.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Eat 1 Teaspoon Every Night, See What Happens A Week Later [Video]
getfittoday
Undo
"Their tenure will extend for three years from the publication date of this notification or until the completion of the trial, whichever occurs first, under the terms and conditions outlined in the Department of Legal Affairs' notification.
"
Earlier on May 9, Rana was presented before the Patiala House Court from NIA remand, a day earlier than the scheduled date due to security concerns. The NIA Special Court has ordered his judicial custody until June 6, 2025.
Rana, a 64-year-old Canadian businessman of Pakistani origin, was extradited from the United States in connection with his purported role in the deadly 2008 terror strike on Mumbai. According to NIA, Rana is also suspected to have devised similar terror plots to target other cities in the nation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Judge lets 26/11 accused Tahawwur Rana make one phone call to family in Canada
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Monday allowed Tahawwur Hussain Rana, the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks accused in Tihar prison, to make one phone call to his family in Canada after the prison authorities and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) did not object to his request. Judge Chander Jit Singh permitted Rana to make the call as a one-time measure to convey his well being on the condition that the call would be strictly governed by the jail manual and the rules laid down by Tihar authorities. The judge also asked Tihar jail to submit a detailed report on the feasibility of allowing Rana to speak to his family every month and asked the authorities to list the conditions that would need to be imposed on him. Lakshay Dheer, who is appearing for Rana along with Piyush Sachdev before the city court, said the application submitted to the court listed a contact number of Rana's daughter based in Canada for the phone call. Dheer said the jail authorities and NIA didn't object to the request for a one-time phone call. 'While no specific time has been set for the call, it will be conducted only once,' he said. Rana, a Canadian citizen and former captain in the Pakistan army, was extradited to India on April 10 in connection with charges that he conspired with his childhood friend David Coleman Headley, to conduct reconnaissance of targets in Mumbai for the 26/11 terror attacks. NIA has also accused Rana of conspiring with operatives of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Harkat-ul-Jihadi Islami (HUJI), both designated terrorist organisations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), along with other Pakistan-based co-conspirators. NIA arrested him after his extradition and interrogated Rana for 30 days before sending him to Tihar prison. Under Rule 631 of the Delhi Prison Rules, inmates charged with offences against the state, terrorism, or other serious crimes, such as those under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), the National Security Act (NSA), or the Public Safety Act (PSA), are generally denied phone call facilities over concern that they might misuse the privilege to communicate with their associates. However, prison rules do allow for exceptions, based on individual circumstances which must be approved by senior officials. According to the jail manual, undertrial and convicted inmates are entitled to at least one phone call per week, with the frequency subject to factors such as the prisoner's conduct, the nature of the case, and the identity of the person being contacted. All phone numbers must be pre-approved by the jail administration. To be sure, Rana's request to speak to his family was rejected by the court in April when he was still in custody of the NIA> At the time, the court held that allowing him to contact his family could compromise the ongoing investigation, citing concerns that he might use coded language to leak information. In his application before the additional sessions judge, Rana's lawyers reasoned that he had a fundamental right to communicate with his family, particularly to inform them about his physical and mental condition in custody. 'We also informed the court that our client does not have access to a hearing aid and is facing health issues in jail,' Dheer said. The court has told the jail authorities to file a detailed report on Rana's health within 10 days. Rana's judicial remand was extended to July 9 on Friday when he was produced before the judge via video conference. As part of the ongoing investigation, NIA has been permitted to collect Rana's handwriting and voice samples to match them with certain documents and voice recordings recovered during the probe.
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Naming your child in the UAE? This law says you can't choose just any name
In the UAE, naming your child comes with legal boundaries, Wadeema's Law bans names that insult dignity or defy cultural and religious norms/ Image: Stock (Pexels) Federal Law No. 3 of 2016 – known as Wadeema's Law – outlines what names are legally acceptable for children born in the UAE. A recent viral social media post has brought fresh attention to a lesser-known but important law in the UAE: naming regulations for newborns under Federal Law No. 3 of 2016, widely known as Wadeema's Law. This law, introduced in memory of Wadeema, a child whose tragic death sparked national outrage, was enacted to protect children's rights across all areas of life in the UAE. Among its many provisions is a clear guideline on how children may be named at birth. The law behind naming: What article 8 says According to Article 8 of Wadeema's Law, 'A child has the right from birth to a name that does not imply humiliation or insult to their dignity and is not contrary to religious beliefs or social customs.' This means parents in the UAE are legally prohibited from giving a child a name that could be deemed: Offensive Insulting to the child's dignity In conflict with religious values Inappropriate in the context of local culture or customs The law does not list banned names explicitly, but the language makes it clear: the choice of a name must align with social respect, cultural norms, and religious sensitivity. Additional rights under Wadeema's Law The law contains several other critical rights that cover a child's identity and legal status in the UAE. These include: Article 7: Every child has the right to life and personal safety, and the state guarantees the child's growth, development, and care in accordance with the law. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Undo Article 9: A child must be registered immediately after birth in the official births register in line with the applicable legal system. Article 10: A child has the right to acquire a nationality, according to the laws in force within the UAE. Article 11: Every child has the right to legal parentage and family affiliation. The child must be affiliated with their lawful parents under prevailing national laws. In addition, both parents or the child's legal guardian are required to obtain all necessary legal documents related to the child's birth, identity, and nationality. This includes: Birth certificate Nationality papers Any other state-issued identification documents Why it matters While naming a child might seem like a personal choice, the UAE government sees it as part of the child's fundamental dignity and legal identity. By regulating names, Wadeema's Law ensures that no child is burdened with a name that could affect their self-worth, cultural belonging, or legal standing. This renewed public attention serves as a timely reminder to parents and guardians to be fully aware of their legal responsibilities, not just in caring for a child, but in safeguarding their identity from day one.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
NIH scientists go public to criticize Trump's deep cuts in public health research
Cardboard tombstones symbolizing canceled research grants at the NIH Visitors Center in Bethesda (AP) WASHINGTON: In his confirmation hearings to lead the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya pledged his openness to views that might conflict with his own. "Dissent, he said, "is the very essence of science. " That commitment is being put to the test. On Monday, scores of scientists at the agency sent their Trump-appointed leader a letter titled the Bethesda Declaration, a frontal challenge to "policies that undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe." It says: "We dissent." In a capital where insiders often insist on anonymity to say such things publicly, more than 90 NIH researchers, program directors, branch chiefs and scientific review officers put their signatures on the letter - and their careers on the line. Confronting a 'culture of fear' They went public in the face of a "culture of fear and suppression" they say President Donald Trump 's administration has spread through the federal civil service. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political momentum over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," the declaration says. Named for the agency's headquarters location in Maryland, the Bethesda Declaration details upheaval in the world's premier public health research institution over the course of mere months. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo It addresses the abrupt termination of 2,100 research grants valued at more than $12 billion and some of the human costs that have resulted, such as cutting off medication regimens to participants in clinical trials or leaving them with unmonitored device implants. In one case, an NIH-supported study of multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis in Haiti had to be stopped, ceasing antibiotic treatment mid-course for patients. In a number of cases, trials that were mostly completed were rendered useless without the money to finish and analyze the work, the letter says. "Ending a $5 million research study when it is 80% complete does not save $1 million," it says, "it wastes $4 million." The mask comes off The four-page letter, addressed to Bhattacharya but also sent to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress who oversee the NIH, was endorsed by 250 anonymous employees of the agency besides the 92 who signed. Jenna Norton, who oversees health disparity research at the agency's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, recently appeared at a forum by Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, D-Md., to talk about what's happening at the NIH. At the event, she masked to conceal her identity. Now the mask is off. She was a lead organizer of the declaration. "I want people to know how bad things are at NIH," Norton told The Associated Press. The signers said they modeled their indictment after Bhattacharya's own Great Barrington Declaration of October 2020, when he was a professor at Stanford University Medical School. His declaration drew together likeminded infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists who dissented from what they saw as excessive COVID-19 lockdown policies and felt ostracized by the larger public health community that pushed those policies, including the NIH. "He is proud of his statement, and we are proud of ours," said Sarah Kobrin, a branch chief at the NIH's National Cancer Institute who signed the Bethesda Declaration. Cancer research is sidelined As chief of the Health Systems and Interventions Research Branch, Kobrin provides scientific oversight of researchers across the country who've been funded by the cancer institute or want to be. But sudden cuts in personnel and money have shifted her work from improving cancer care research to what she sees as minimizing its destruction. "So much of it is gone - my work," she said. The 21-year NIH veteran said she signed because "I don't want to be a collaborator" in the political manipulation of biomedical science. Ian Morgan, a postdoctoral fellow with the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, also signed the declaration. "We have a saying in basic science," he said. "You go and become a physician if you want to treat thousands of patients. You go and become a researcher if you want to save billions of patients. "We are doing the research that is going to go and create the cures of the future," he added. But that won't happen, he said, if Trump's Republican administration prevails with its searing cuts to grants. The NIH employees interviewed by the AP emphasized they were speaking for themselves and not for their institutes or the NIH. Dissenters range across the breadth of NIH Employees from all 27 NIH institutes and centers gave their support to the declaration. Most who signed are intimately involved with evaluating and overseeing extramural research grants. The letter asserts that "NIH trials are being halted without regard to participant safety" and that the agency is shirking commitments to trial participants who "braved personal risk to give the incredible gift of biological samples, understanding that their generosity would fuel scientific discovery and improve health." The Trump administration has gone at public health research on several fronts, both directly, as part of its broad effort to root out diversity, equity and inclusion values throughout the bureaucracy, and as part of its drive to starve some universities of federal money. A blunt ax swings This has forced "indiscriminate grant terminations, payment freezes for ongoing research, and blanket holds on awards regardless of the quality, progress, or impact of the science," the declaration says. Some NIH employees have previously come forward in televised protests to air grievances, and many walked out of Bhattacharya's town hall with staff. The declaration is the first cohesive effort to register agency-wide dismay with the NIH's direction. A Signal group became the place for participants to sort through NIH chatter on Reddit, discern rumor from reality and offer mutual support. The declaration took shape in that group and as word spread neighbor to neighbor in NIH offices. The dissenters remind Bhattacharya in their letter of his oft-stated ethic that academic freedom must be a lynchpin in science. With that in place, he said in a statement in April, "NIH scientists can be certain they are afforded the ability to engage in open, academic discourse as part of their official duties and in their personal capacities without risk of official interference, professional disadvantage or workplace retaliation." Now it will be seen whether that's enough to protect those NIH employees challenging the Trump administration and him. "There's a book I read to my kids, and it talks about how you can't be brave if you're not scared," said Norton, who has three young children. "I am so scared about doing this, but I am trying to be brave for my kids because it's only going to get harder to speak up. "Maybe I'm putting my kids at risk by doing this," she added. "And I'm doing it anyway because I couldn't live with myself otherwise."
