&w=3840&q=100)
Indian man injured in racist attack near Dublin, envoy seeks justice
According to local reports, the victim had arrived in Ireland a few weeks ago when he was targeted in an assault at Parkhill Road in Tallaght on Saturday evening. The Gardai, as the police are known in Ireland, have opened an investigation into the case.
"Garda in Tallaght were alerted to an incident at Parkhill Road, Tallaght, Dublin 24 on the evening of Saturday 19th July, 2025, at approximately 6pm, the local police said in a statement.
Garda attended the scene and a male, aged in his 40s was taken to Tallaght University Hospital with injuries, the statement added.
Indian Ambassador to Ireland Akhilesh Mishra was among those taking to social media to express his shock over the attack and also questioned some of the Irish media coverage of the violent assault.
How can an ALLEGED' assault cause such horrible injury and bleeding? Aghast at the insensitivity & obfuscation of RTE [Ireland's national media outlet] Hope the perpetrators are brought to justice, he posted on X.
The Irish Independent' newspaper reported that the Fine Gael party Councillor for Tallaght South, Baby Pereppadan, met with the man on Monday and said he remains in shock.
"He couldn't speak much because of the shock he was in, he only arrived in Ireland three weeks ago. He is not taking any visitors at the moment, Pereppadan told the newspaper.
"I am calling for more Garda (police) presence in the area. Small incidents like these are happening frequently in Tallaght. People need to understand that many Indian people moving to Ireland are here on work permits, to study and work in the healthcare sector or in IT and so on, providing critical skills, he said.
Meanwhile, a Stand Against Racism protest has been planned by the local community in condemnation of the "vicious racist attack" and to express solidarity with migrants to the region. The demonstration, organised by United Against Racism and Dublin South West Together, will take place on Friday at the roundabout on Treepark Road in Kilnamamagh, a residential area in Tallaght.
Dublin South West Together said in a Facebook post: A vicious racist attack in Kilnamanagh which left an Indian man needing hospital treatment. The man was walking through Kilnamanagh when he was set upon by a gang of youths. The man was stabbed, beaten and stripped. False accusations about the man were later spread on social media in an attempt to justify the attack.
Racists and Far Right groups have stoked the fire against immigrants for months and this has fuelled racism across Dublin city. Our local community will be taking a stand against this attack. The people being attacked are our neighbours, their children are the children of our neighbours. We must stand by them and not allow racists who inflict violence to gain any more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
26 minutes ago
- News18
TIP-ping Point: 7/11 Blasts And Judicial Lottery
The 7/11 case has yet again raised disturbing questions about the moral compass of Indian criminal jurisprudence. The conscience of the nation stands enraged. Both possibilities speak volumes of systemic failure. Either the then coalition Government in Maharashtra in 2006 oversaw a catastrophic collapse in investigation and prosecution, letting terrorists walk free. Or we incarcerated innocent men for the last 19 years. Both scenarios paint a profoundly disturbing picture of our justice system. The 11 dark minutes of July 11, 2006, when seven coordinated bomb blasts ripped through Mumbai's suburban railway network, scarred the city forever. The carnage claimed 209 lives and injured over 700. Swift arrests followed; 13 men were accused, 12 were convicted – five sentenced to death, the rest to life imprisonment. But on July 21, 2025, the Bombay High Court acquitted all 12 convicted men. The Court found the prosecution to have faltered at the most fundamental level. The judgment exposes a central tension: a conflict between state capacity and judicial threshold. Crimes of this nature are intrinsically difficult to investigate and prosecute. Probes must navigate intricate webs of terror planning and execution, all while racing against time. Every passing moment results in evidentiary decay. Yet, when this challenge of capacity meets the rigorous standards of 'innocent until proven guilty', verdicts like the one in this case become inevitable. This case has yet again raised disturbing questions about the moral compass of Indian criminal jurisprudence. A recurring affliction in our criminal system is the doctrine of 'uncertain-fatality', an interpretive fragility that leaves outcomes to the temperaments of individual judges. The United States follows a clear standard- the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, where any illegally procured evidence is automatically inadmissible. India has adopted a different course. Indian courts are notably more liberal in admitting evidence, even if tainted by illegality, choosing instead to assign it probative value after scrutiny. Our courts separate the wheat from the chaff, i.e., they painstakingly distinguish believable evidence from the rest. Yet this process of legal surgery varies by the skill and subjectivity of the surgeon. Similar cases with similar flaws have passed the muster before other courts. But the Bombay High Court, in this case, deemed the lapses to be fatal. The real fatality, it seems, is even-handed justice. Your ability to secure relief as a kin of the deceased now hinges disproportionately on the courtroom lottery. In this case, the Bombay High Court took a sword to the scalpel, with one blow, it declared the prosecution's case to have 'utterly failed.' The concern lies not in the judges having taken a particular view, but in the inconsistency and subjectivity with which criminal justice is dispensed. The Bombay High Court, while acquitting all convicts, based its reasoning primarily on the flawed Test Identification Parade (TIP). Put simply, in a TIP, the accused is made to stand in a lineup with others of similar physique and features, and the eyewitness is invited to pick out the suspect. The very act of correctly identifying the accused lends strength and credibility to the witness's courtroom testimony. Under Section 7 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, TIP serves a dual purpose: first, it helps the investigating agency confirm if they are on the right track; second, it offers corroboration for in-court identification. It becomes a critical evidentiary tool, helping place the accused at the relevant location and time. The procedure, however, is stringent. TIPs must be conducted by a Magistrate, not the police, and preferably within jail premises to minimise external influence. Witnesses must be called individually, barred from communication with each other, and asked to describe what they saw. Every reaction must be recorded in detail. In this case, the Bombay High Court excluded the identification evidence entirely. It held that TIPs were conducted by Shri Barve, a Special Executive Officer, who had no legal authority to carry them out. This procedural violation- TIPs must be supervised by a Magistrate, was not a mere technical lapse. According to the Court, it rendered the identification process void and left it open to manipulation. Consequently, the identifications made by witnesses were deemed inadmissible. The prosecution, which had heavily relied on these TIPs, now found itself without the very foundation of its case. What remained was dock identification, witnesses identifying the accused in court nearly four years later. But that raised a pivotal legal question: can someone credibly identify an individual they only saw momentarily, years ago, without memory aids or prior interaction? The High Court concluded they could not. No distinguishing features. No extended observation. No credibility. Thus, even the courtroom identifications were stripped of their evidentiary weight. The very eyewitness testimony on which the prosecution had built its case crumbled, ironically, not due to falsehood, but due to the prosecution's own procedural lapses. This would be an acceptable outcome, had other courts taken such a strict approach. But that is not the case. Courts across India continue to admit TIP evidence despite glaring procedural irregularities. That inconsistency needs urgent review by the Supreme Court of India. Another major blow to the prosecution was its reliance on stock witnesses- individuals who appear as panch or eyewitnesses in multiple unrelated cases. For instance, Vishal Parmar claimed to have seen Accused No. 4 board the train with a black rexine bag and disembark without it. The Court flagged him as unreliable, as he had served as a panch witness in multiple prior cases, including those involving officers from this very trial. His employer, Mukesh Rabadiya, was similarly discredited as a stock witness. Yet in Nana Keshav Lagad v. State of Maharashtra (2013), the Supreme Court clarified that merely appearing as a witness in multiple cases does not invalidate testimony by itself. This raises legitimate questions about the Bombay High Court's choice to outright dismiss such testimony here. The trouble is, this was bound to happen. When judicial discretion is left unbounded by consistent thresholds, some courts interpret lapses as fatal, others see them as fixable. This divergence undermines the rule of law. And the stakes are extraordinarily high in cases involving such enormous human tragedy. Just as troubling is the message this sends to the investigative machinery: that mistakes may or may not matter, depending on the bench. Impunity thrives in uncertainty. We urgently need clear, consistent, and constitutionally sound standards, replacing what has become a wild west of discretion in criminal procedure. Criminal justice must be precise. We must know what is acceptable and what is not. top videos View all The Supreme Court has issued notice in the criminal appeal. The legal questions answered by the Bombay High Court now await constitutional scrutiny. The author is a Senior Supreme Court Advocate and former Additional Solicitor General of India. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. tags : 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Mumbai train blasts view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 28, 2025, 15:57 IST News opinion Opinion | TIP-ping Point: 7/11 Blasts And Judicial Lottery 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.
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
PAN 2.0 Fraud Exposed: Why There's NO Such Card
Are you getting emails promising a new "PAN 2.0" or e-PAN card? STOP! This is an urgent scam alert, especially for Indian citizens! The Indian Government has issued a serious warning about a dangerous phishing scam designed to steal your most sensitive personal and financial information – including your PAN, Aadhaar, and bank details. Read More
Hindustan Times
36 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Man wearing Pakistan jersey argues with security at India-England Test, told to cover up: 'Take me with force'
A video from the recently drawn fourth Test between England and India at Old Trafford has stirred controversy online, after security officials confronted a fan wearing a Pakistan cricket jersey and asked him to cover it. A fan wearing a Pakistan jersey at the India-England Test was asked to cover it up, sparking debate after the video of the incident went viral.(X/@CricketopiaCom) (Also read: Pakistanis react to British man wearing Team India's Dream11 jersey on Lahore streets: 'Is it safe?') Jersey not allowed, says stadium staff The clip, widely shared on X (formerly Twitter), shows the fan sitting among spectators in the stands, dressed in a green Pakistan shirt. Stadium officials can be seen approaching him and stating that jerseys of non-participating countries were not permitted within the venue. The fan, however, firmly refused to remove or cover his jersey, insisting that none of the Indian fans around him were offended or had raised any complaints. At one point, he can be heard telling the security personnel, 'Take me with force.' As the situation drew more attention from fellow spectators, some began filming the exchange. Additional security staff and local police were later seen arriving to manage the scene, which remained peaceful but tense. Watch the clip here: Mixed online reactions The video quickly went viral, prompting divided opinions online. Several users labelled the action discriminatory and unnecessary, arguing that a fan's choice of attire should not be policed in such a manner. On the other hand, many cited venue rules to justify the officials' actions. According to a report by The Times of India (TOI), Old Trafford has a policy in place for international fixtures. The guideline states that fans are expected to wear clothing that supports the participating teams — in this case, England or India. The controversy comes shortly after the cancellation of a World Championship of Legends match between India Champions and Pakistan Champions, reportedly called off due to off-field tensions.
