Man shot at near Chhatarpur Metro station in Delhi; police say case of personal enmity
A Delhi Police officer said 10 rounds were fired at Arun Lohiya, who was driving a Scorpio and was near the Commander Chowk in Mehrauli, when he was intercepted at 1 pm by the alleged assailants. 'The accused knew Lohiya and belonged to the same village as him. They had a dispute with him over some land in the village. Prima facie, it seems like a case of personal enmity,' the officer said.
Lohiya, a resident of Aya Nagar, was taken to the nearby hospital, where his condition is said to be serious.
While confirming the incident, Ankit Chauhan, Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), also pointed towards a possible case of personal enmity. 'On prima facie inquiry, it has been found that the victim, namely Arun Lohia, who was in his car, sustained bullet injuries. It seems to be a case of personal enmity wherein the alleged perpetrators are known to the victims as they are residents of the same village. There is a previous case history between the two parties,' he said.
'The accused involved in the incident have been identified, and multiple teams have been formed to trace them,' Chauhan said.
In November 2024, The Indian Express reported that 14 cases of extortion were reported in South Delhi in 2024, and 16 in 2023, as compared to 10 in 2022. Another report by The Express in July 2024 said Aya Nagar, from where Lohiya belongs, was one of the hotspots of the Rohit Chaudhary gang.
Crime data given by the Delhi Police showed that 107 cases of murder were reported between January 1 and March 31 in 2025, a slight uptick from 105 in 2024 during the same period, but lower than 2023, when it was 115. Attempt to murder cases, though, went down by 17.24 per cent to 168 as compared to 203 in 2024.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi's Game of Shadows: Secret terror drill plays out across city ahead of I-Day each year
What began in 1995 as a one-off preparedness exercise after the Jammu Mandi terror attack has evolved into an annual, month-long operation that plays out quietly across Delhi before Independence Day. Each year, the Delhi Police special cell plants fake bombs, stages dummy terror strikes, and deploys 'terrorists' carrying mock explosives — all to test the city's security apparatus without the knowledge of its civilian population. (Above) Security outside the Red Fort on Thursday, on the eve of the 79th Independence Day. The inspiration for these drills came in July 2015, when three gunmen in army fatigues stormed Punjab's Gurdaspur, hijacking a car, firing at a bus stand, and attacking a police station. (RAJ K RAJ /HT PHOTO) The drills are planned in complete secrecy. Only the deputy commissioner of the special cell knows the full blueprint — the chosen locations, the timing, and the decoys. Not even senior officers are privy to this information. 'We pick one district at a time, starting with crowded places like monuments, malls, markets, five-star hotels,' said a police office who has been part of the mock drill team. 'The devices have to be hidden well enough so that civilians don't stumble upon them, and we never use the same spot twice. The district staff can't know when or where we plant them. The operation's details are a complete secret.' The inspiration for these drills came in 1995, when an autorickhshaw filled with explosives detonated in the Mandi area of Jammu and killed more than 20 people and injured others. The incident was an unprecedented strike and prompted Delhi Police to prepare for the unexpected. A month later, in August 1995, they staged their first mock drill at Nizamuddin railway station, replicating elements of the Jammu attack. 'Back then, it wasn't well planned. We invited policemen and the public, planted IEDs, and staged a blast to see how people and police would react,' recalled a senior officer. In November 1995, a bomb blast in Delhi's popular restaurant Dilli Darbar left more than 20 people injured. The police then included Connaught Place and other crowded markets to their list of places where the drill would be held. Soon, the scope widened. Drills began targeting high-security spots such as the Red Fort, venues for Independence Day celebrations attended by the Prime Minister, as well as luxury hotels like the Taj and Claridges, and markets such as Sarojini Nagar and Connaught Place. For high-profile locations, the special cell makes detailed maps, fits dummy devices with GPS trackers, and dispatches covert teams to plant them. Sometimes, operatives play 'terrorists' carrying boxes of fake explosives, attempting to move undetected through sensitive areas. 'All materials are prepared well in advance and our staff is trained for such operations,' the officer said. Over the years, the drills have grown more elaborate — but so have the lapses. Officials admit that local police often fail to detect the mock threats. On August 8 this year, a dummy terrorist managed to enter the Red Fort, walk past multiple layers of security, and reach the children's enclosure with a fake explosives box, completely unnoticed. Just a week earlier, seven policemen were suspended over the arrest of five Bangladeshi nationals allegedly living illegally near the monument. Around the same time, the special cell also recovered two live cartridges from the area. Last year, local police managed to detect only about half of the dummy bombs planted near the Red Fort and in the Lutyens' zone. Senior special cell officers stress that the aim is not to embarrass the district police. 'It's not a competition,' one said. 'The idea is to keep them alert. If lapses occur, we call the teams in, discuss the misses, and brief them on improvements.' The tasks are intentionally difficult. 'We design them so they're tough to crack,' said an officer at police headquarters. Each year, close to 70 locations across Delhi — mostly in central, north, west, south, and New Delhi districts — are chosen for dummy bombs. Some sites are picked by the Special Branch, and paramilitary forces and other agencies are also roped in. 'It's purely for practice and to sharpen skills,' another officer said. 'Because when the real thing happens, there will be no second chance.'
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
15-year-old boy caught selling 16 rolls of banned Chinese manjha in central Delhi
NEW DELHI: A 15-year-old boy was apprehended with 16 rolls of banned Chinese manjha which he was allegedly selling in central Delhi. The boy told police during questioning that he had obtained the manjha from a friend in the same locality. Delhi Police's Crime Branch on Thursday received a tip-off and reached near Masjid Turkman Gate. A person was involved in selling banned Chinese manjha. A raid was conducted around 12.30 pm and the suspect was apprehended who was found in possession of a white plastic bag containing 16 rolls of banned Chinese manjha, Deputy Commissioner of Police (crime) Vikram Singh said. He revealed that he obtained the manjha from his friend, a resident of Ballimaran in Hauz Qazi. Investigation is going on to trace the supply chain and identify other parties involved, the DCP said. Earlier this week, the Delhi Police arrested three people in separate incidents and recovered a total of 112 rolls of banned Chinese manjha from different parts of the city. A police officer said, 'We keep telling people that using and selling Chinese manjha is banned in the national capital as it can lead to severe injury and also deaths.' The Chinese manjha was banned in Delhi in 2017, and the National Green Tribunal also imposed a similar ban on nylon or synthetic threads used for kite flying. These bans were put in place to prevent harm to humans, birds, other animals and the environment.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Choice to marry someone from different faith safeguarded by Constitution: Delhi High Court
New Delhi The choice to marry someone from a different faith is safeguarded under the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, even if it challenges social norms and family expectations, the Delhi High Court has held. (Representative photo) The choice to marry someone from a different faith is safeguarded under the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, even if it challenges social norms and family expectations, the Delhi High Court has held, while directing the Delhi Police to continue protecting an interfaith couple facing threats from their families. A bench of justice Sanjeev Narula made the observation on August 8, while dealing with a plea filed by a 26-year-old Muslim man and a 25-year-old Hindu woman, seeking police protection and accommodation in a safe house. In a petition filed last month, the couple asserted that despite solemnising their marriage after a relationship of over seven years, there was strong opposition from the woman's family. The petition said that despite writing to the deputy commissioner of police for the southeast district on July 23, requesting police protection, the police forcibly separated the woman from her husband and detained her at Nirmal Chhaya Shelter Home on July 24. The plea stated that the woman married the man voluntarily, without any coercion. On July 25, the high court directed the DCP to look into the matter personally and, if the woman affirmed her wish to live with her husband, to ensure appropriate arrangements for the couple's safety. The counsel for the woman's father, on August 8, asserted that his client was deeply troubled by his daughter's decision to marry the man without his consent and that he was concerned for his daughter's welfare. Considering the contentions, the court directed Delhi Police to continue providing them protection and accommodation in a safe house, till they solemnise their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. The bench said that parents' anguish over their daughter choosing her life partner without consultation cannot eclipse the right of an adult to choose a life partner, since Article 21 of the Constitution safeguards an individual's right to marry a person of one's choice. 'The constitutional guarantee under Article 21 enables every adult citizen may shape the course of their own life, free from fear, coercion or unlawful restraint. The choice to marry, especially across lines of faith, may test the resilience of social norms and familial expectations, yet in law, it remains a matter of personal liberty and individual autonomy, immune from any external veto. While the anguish of a parent is understandable, it cannot eclipse the rights of a major to select their life partner,' the court said. It added, 'The court is mindful of the anguish of the girl's father, who opposes the relationship on grounds that he perceives as legitimate and rooted in his concern for his daughter's welfare. However, upon attaining the age of majority, the right to make decisions regarding marriage becomes the individual's personal prerogative. Parental preference, however well-intentioned, cannot legally override that autonomy.' Noting the couple's allegation of being forcibly separated, the court directed the DCP to submit a report on whether any unlawful separation had occurred and, if so, to identify the officer responsible. The direction came after the woman claimed she was taken to a shelter home by the police against her will, while the police maintained that no coercion, unlawful action, or procedural lapse had taken place. The matter will next be heard on September 12. The same bench, in a similar plea filed by another couple, also ruled that a family's disapproval cannot override the right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and live together peacefully. 'The right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and to live together in peace is a facet of their personal liberty, privacy, and dignity protected under Article 21. Family disapproval cannot curtail that autonomy,' the court said in an order on August 5.
