&w=3840&q=100)
The curious case of missing Indian woman who went to US for arranged marriage
Simran, a 24-year-old Indian woman, mysteriously vanished in New Jersey, the US, just days after arriving for an arranged marriage earlier this month. Those familiar with the case say that Simran has no known relatives in the US and does not speak English. She was last seen checking her phone and looking around, seemingly waiting for someone read more
Surveillance footage reviewed by Lindenwold police showed Simran standing alone, checking her phone, and appearing to wait for someone. Image courtesy: X
A 24-year-old Indian woman named Simran has mysteriously vanished in the United States , just days after she arrived for what was reportedly an arranged marriage, according to authorities in New Jersey.
As reported by the New York Post (NYP), Simran landed in the US on June 20 and was reported missing on June 26. The case is currently being investigated by police in Lindenwold, Camden County.
Police say Simran has no known relatives in the country and does not speak English. She was carrying only one phone—an international device that works solely when connected to Wi-Fi.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
So what exactly happened to Simran? What have investigators found so far? Here's what we know.
Tracing Simran's last known moments
Simran was last seen shortly after arriving in New Jersey from India on June 20. Surveillance footage reviewed by Lindenwold police showed her standing alone, checking her phone, and appearing to wait for someone.
Officers noted that she did not appear to be in distress in the video.
She was officially reported missing five days later, on June 26. Police later confirmed that Simran had travelled to the United States for what was believed to be an arranged marriage.
However, authorities are also looking into another possibility, that the arranged marriage may have been a pretext to secure free airfare to the US, according to The New York Post.
Those close to the investigation said she had no relatives in the US and does not speak English well, which has made matters more difficult.
Authorities have reportedly tried to contact Simran's family in India several times since her disappearance, but have not been successful. They have urged anyone with information to come forward and contact the Lindenwold Police Department immediately. Image courtesy: X
At the time she was last seen, Simran was wearing grey sweatpants, a white T-shirt, black flip-flops, and small diamond earrings.
Authorities have reportedly tried to contact her family in India several times since her disappearance, but have not been successful.
'At this time, there are no known family members in India to contact to obtain information on her possible whereabouts,' Lindenwold police said on Thursday, as reported by Patch News.
So far, foul play has not been confirmed in Simran's case. The police have urged anyone with information to come forward and contact the Lindenwold Police Department immediately.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
This came after a high-profile case emerged in March, 20-year-old Sudiksha Konanki, a University of Pittsburgh student and Indian citizen, went missing during a spring break trip at the Riu Republic Resort in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic.
Despite a massive multi-agency search effort, including an Interpol Yellow notice, there have been no signs of Sudiksha Konkani, the missing University of Pittsburgh student. Image courtesy: X
After days of extensive searching, her parents said they believed she had drowned while visiting the beach. Konanki was last seen on March 6.
The last person to see her was 22-year-old Joshua Riibe , a university student from Minnesota. According to him, they were swept into the water by a wave, and after helping her out, he lost sight of her.
He was detained and questioned by authorities, but later allowed to leave.
Following a trial that lasted over five hours, Judge Edwin Rijo ruled that Riibe, who remains classified as a witness in the case, should receive full rights under Dominican law and would face no restrictions on his movement.
With input from agencies
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Who will Be denaturalised — and who won't: Trump administration draws the line in Justice Department memo
Who Is Eligible for Naturalisation? Categories at Risk: The 10 Denaturalisation Priorities Live Events Individuals who obtained citizenship through false statements or document fraud; Persons convicted of war crimes, genocide, or other human rights violations; Naturalized individuals with ties to terrorism or organised crime; Those convicted of serious financial fraud, including medical fraud or immigration scams; Individuals who concealed prior deportation orders or failed to disclose critical criminal history. Lighter Burden of Proof in Civil Cases First Casualty: Military Veteran Loses Citizenship 25 Million Naturalized Citizens in Focus Broader Civil Rights Concerns Naturalisation Going Forward: A More Cautious Path FAQs What does the new DOJ memo on naturalisation signify? Who remains eligible for U.S. naturalisation? (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel In a major policy signal with lasting implications for the future of US citizenship, the Trump administration has laid out clear parameters for who qualifies for naturalisation, and who may face denaturalization . A newly published memo from the Department of Justice, dated June 11, outlines a shift towards heightened scrutiny and enforcement against naturalized citizens suspected of having obtained citizenship through fraud, concealment, or criminal acts, as mentioned in a report by The move effectively sharpens the government's criteria for who will be naturalised in the future and who may be at risk of losing their US citizenship—part of a broader immigration realignment under President Trump's second-term the basic eligibility for naturalisation remains unchanged—requiring lawful permanent residency, continuous residence, good moral character, and knowledge of English and US civics—the memo signals stricter enforcement post-naturalisation. Immigration attorneys believe this reflects a shift toward not just assessing qualifications at the time of application, but retrospectively reviewing them years later.'The concern now is not just whether someone can be naturalised, but whether they can remain naturalised,' said Sameera Hafiz, policy director of the Immigration Legal Resource memo lists ten priority categories of naturalized citizens for potential denaturalization, as per the report by The Guardian. These include:The memo also empowers Justice Department attorneys to initiate civil denaturalization proceedings—which, unlike criminal trials, do not guarantee the right to an attorney and require a lower burden of of the most significant procedural changes is the reliance on civil litigation to revoke citizenship. 'This is a quiet but significant shift,' said a senior immigration litigator. 'Civil cases move faster, require less evidence, and don't give people the right to court-appointed lawyers. That's a dangerous mix for naturalized citizens.'Notably, naturalized citizens—unlike birthright citizens—can face denaturalization if authorities find that their original application omitted crucial facts or contained false statements, even June 13, a US judge revoked the citizenship of Elliott Duke, a military veteran originally from the UK, after it was revealed that Duke had concealed a past conviction involving child sexual abuse materials. Though his military service was not disputed, the Department of Justice argued that Duke's failure to disclose this history during his application rendered his naturalization believe this case sets a precedent for broader enforcement in years to to government data, over 25 million Americans are naturalized citizens—immigrants who obtained US citizenship after being born abroad. The Justice Department's memo has raised alarms among this demographic, as even decades-old infractions could now be reviewed under this expanding denaturalisation memo is part of a larger transformation of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, which is now being used to advance Trump administration goals such as ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and challenging race-based policies in education and one instance, the department recently initiated legal action against 15 US district attorneys in Maryland for delaying deportations. Meanwhile, the resignation of the University of Virginia President Jim Ryan has been linked to an ongoing investigation by the Civil Rights Division over race-conscious scholarship these upheavals, nearly 70% of lawyers in the division—approximately 250 attorneys—have reportedly exited the department since the pathway to US naturalization remains open, the post-citizenship landscape is clearly shifting. Immigration lawyers now advise applicants to be meticulous in documentation, transparent in disclosures, and proactive in legal counsel—especially given the growing emphasis on post-facto investigations.'This memo is not just about removing bad actors,' Hafiz cautioned. 'It sets the tone for how we define belonging in America.'The memo, dated June 11, outlines a tougher stance on both granting and retaining U.S. citizenship. It emphasizes post-naturalisation enforcement, allowing the government to pursue denaturalization of individuals suspected of fraud, criminal activity, or concealment during the naturalisation basic eligibility criteria—lawful permanent residency, continuous U.S. residence, good moral character, and English/civics knowledge—remain the same. However, the new policy introduces tighter scrutiny both before and after citizenship is granted.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Who will Be denaturalised — and who won't: Trump administration draws the line in Justice Department memo
In a major policy signal with lasting implications for the future of US citizenship, the Trump administration has laid out clear parameters for who qualifies for naturalisation, and who may face denaturalization . A newly published memo from the Department of Justice, dated June 11, outlines a shift towards heightened scrutiny and enforcement against naturalized citizens suspected of having obtained citizenship through fraud, concealment, or criminal acts, as mentioned in a report by The Guardian. The move effectively sharpens the government's criteria for who will be naturalised in the future and who may be at risk of losing their US citizenship—part of a broader immigration realignment under President Trump's second-term agenda. Who Is Eligible for Naturalisation? While the basic eligibility for naturalisation remains unchanged—requiring lawful permanent residency, continuous residence, good moral character, and knowledge of English and US civics—the memo signals stricter enforcement post-naturalisation. Immigration attorneys believe this reflects a shift toward not just assessing qualifications at the time of application, but retrospectively reviewing them years later. 'The concern now is not just whether someone can be naturalised, but whether they can remain naturalised,' said Sameera Hafiz, policy director of the Immigration Legal Resource Center. Categories at Risk: The 10 Denaturalisation Priorities The memo lists ten priority categories of naturalized citizens for potential denaturalization, as per the report by The Guardian. These include: Live Events Individuals who obtained citizenship through false statements or document fraud; Persons convicted of war crimes, genocide, or other human rights violations; Naturalized individuals with ties to terrorism or organised crime; Those convicted of serious financial fraud, including medical fraud or immigration scams; Individuals who concealed prior deportation orders or failed to disclose critical criminal history. The memo also empowers Justice Department attorneys to initiate civil denaturalization proceedings—which, unlike criminal trials, do not guarantee the right to an attorney and require a lower burden of proof. Lighter Burden of Proof in Civil Cases One of the most significant procedural changes is the reliance on civil litigation to revoke citizenship. 'This is a quiet but significant shift,' said a senior immigration litigator. 'Civil cases move faster, require less evidence, and don't give people the right to court-appointed lawyers. That's a dangerous mix for naturalized citizens.' Notably, naturalized citizens—unlike birthright citizens—can face denaturalization if authorities find that their original application omitted crucial facts or contained false statements, even unintentionally. First Casualty: Military Veteran Loses Citizenship On June 13, a US judge revoked the citizenship of Elliott Duke, a military veteran originally from the UK, after it was revealed that Duke had concealed a past conviction involving child sexual abuse materials. Though his military service was not disputed, the Department of Justice argued that Duke's failure to disclose this history during his application rendered his naturalization fraudulent. Observers believe this case sets a precedent for broader enforcement in years to come. 25 Million Naturalized Citizens in Focus According to government data, over 25 million Americans are naturalized citizens—immigrants who obtained US citizenship after being born abroad. The Justice Department's memo has raised alarms among this demographic, as even decades-old infractions could now be reviewed under this expanding denaturalisation policy. Broader Civil Rights Concerns The memo is part of a larger transformation of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, which is now being used to advance Trump administration goals such as ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and challenging race-based policies in education and hiring. In one instance, the department recently initiated legal action against 15 US district attorneys in Maryland for delaying deportations. Meanwhile, the resignation of the University of Virginia President Jim Ryan has been linked to an ongoing investigation by the Civil Rights Division over race-conscious scholarship policies. Amid these upheavals, nearly 70% of lawyers in the division—approximately 250 attorneys—have reportedly exited the department since January. Naturalisation Going Forward: A More Cautious Path While the pathway to US naturalization remains open, the post-citizenship landscape is clearly shifting. Immigration lawyers now advise applicants to be meticulous in documentation, transparent in disclosures, and proactive in legal counsel—especially given the growing emphasis on post-facto investigations. 'This memo is not just about removing bad actors,' Hafiz cautioned. 'It sets the tone for how we define belonging in America.' FAQs What does the new DOJ memo on naturalisation signify? The memo, dated June 11, outlines a tougher stance on both granting and retaining U.S. citizenship. It emphasizes post-naturalisation enforcement, allowing the government to pursue denaturalization of individuals suspected of fraud, criminal activity, or concealment during the naturalisation process. Who remains eligible for U.S. naturalisation? The basic eligibility criteria—lawful permanent residency, continuous U.S. residence, good moral character, and English/civics knowledge—remain the same. However, the new policy introduces tighter scrutiny both before and after citizenship is granted.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Tripura government orders probe into assault of two school students
The Tripura government has ordered an investigation into an incident of assault of two students at the hostel of the State's first higher education school. The State's Tribal Welfare Minister, Bikash Debbarma, on Monday visited the Umakanta Academy, which was founded in 1890 by King Bir Chandra Manikya, and told the students in the higher classes not to indulge in ragging or physical assault in future. Parents of one of the two assaulted students had lodged a complaint with the West Agartala Police Station against three students in their higher classes. They alleged that the incident of physical assault and verbal abuse of three junior students occurred recently after they refused to get liquor from a marketplace. The school, named after a Bengali Minister of the royal court, Umakanta Das, now has an English branch. The victim students from junior classes are studying in the English medium. The hostel houses only tribal students, and they are given free accommodation and meals. The general school and its English branch, however, are open to all communities. Mr. Debbarma, along with officials, visited the school and hostel to inquire about the allegations first-hand. He said untoward incidents of such nature undermined the legacy of the school, which has produced laurels over the decades. He warned that the government would act strictly should there be a repetition of such an incident. He directed the hostel warden and guards to be vigilant. The Minister said that the incident was now under investigation.
