How long can a suspect be kept in jail, HC asks Delhi Police in 2020 riots case
A Bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar made the remark while hearing the bail plea filed by Tasleem Ahmed, an accused charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in the north-east Delhi riots 'larger conspiracy' case.
'Five years have gone by. Even arguments on the charge have not been completed. In matters like this, with 700 witnesses, how much time can a person be kept inside [jail]?' said the Bench.
The court's remarks came after the accused's advocate, Mehmood Pracha, sought relief for his client on the grounds of parity in relation to the co-accused in the trial.
'He [Ahmed] was arrested on June 24, 2020... He has already spent five years,' Mr. Pracha argued, citing the examples of co-accused Devangana Kalita, Asif Iqbal Tanha and Natasha Narwal, who were granted bail in 2021 on the grounds of delay in the trial proceedings.
Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad contended that the prosecution could not be blamed for the delay, as there were several occasions when the matter was adjourned on the request of accused persons.
The hearing will resume on Wednesday.
'Larger conspiracy' case
The 'larger conspiracy' case is among the many pertaining to the riots and is so named because the Delhi police have claimed that the communal violence was part of a 'deep-rooted conspiracy'.
Key accused in the case include former Delhi councillor Tahir Hussain and student activists Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
19 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Protests in Bengal's Siliguri over SC order to relocate stray dogs in Delhi-NCR
Animal lovers in Siliguri staged a protest on Monday against the recent Supreme Court directive mandating that stray dogs in Delhi-NCR be shifted to shelter homes within eight weeks. The protests followed the Supreme Court's August 11 order directing authorities to ensure that all localities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram and Faridabad are free of stray dogs.(Vipin Kumar/ANI File Photo for representation) The demonstrators expressed strong opposition, calling the ruling "inhuman" and urging the court to reconsider its decision. Holding placards and raising slogans, protestors gathered in Siliguri and argued that stray dogs are "voiceless creatures," and deserve compassion rather than displacement. "Dogs are voiceless creatures. They haven't done anything wrong to anyone... You can spare criminals, so why can't you spare dogs? Shame on you... This verdict is inhuman... This verdict should be taken back," said Anisha Paul, one of the protestors. A day ago similar protest had erupted in Chennai as well. The protests in Chennai came days after similar demonstrations in the national capital. On Friday, Delhi Police registered four FIRs in connection with protests held by dog lovers without prior permission on August 11 and 12 in the New Delhi district. Police said the demonstrations in Delhi were organised despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), formerly Section 144 of the CrPC, which is currently in force as part of security measures ahead of Independence Day. According to officials, the protests turned unruly when police attempted to disperse the demonstrators, leading to clashes at some sites. "Those who refused to leave the protest sites despite repeated requests were detained. Legal action will be taken against all those found violating the law," the Delhi Police said. One viral clip from the protests shows the Station House Officer of Tughlaq Road police station being manhandled by protesters, while another video shows a confrontation between a woman sub-inspector and a female demonstrator inside a bus. The protests followed the Supreme Court's August 11 order directing authorities to ensure that all localities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram and Faridabad are free of stray dogs. The court had ruled that captured animals should not be released back onto the streets. On August 14, a three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria reserved its order on petitions seeking a stay on the directive. The bench said it would pass an interim order after hearing arguments from all sides. At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi government, said there was a "loud vocal minority" opposing the order, while a "silent suffering majority" supported action. "In a democracy, there is a vocal majority and one who silently suffers. We had seen videos of people eating chicken, eggs, etc., and then claiming to be animal lovers. It was an issue to be resolved. Children were dying... Sterilisation did not stop rabies; even if you immunised them, that did not stop mutilation of children," Mehta submitted. Citing World Health Organisation data, the Solicitor General said 37 lakh dog bites were reported in 2024, with 305 rabies deaths, most among children under 15 years of age. "Dogs do not have to be killed... they have to be separated. Parents cannot send children out to play. Nobody is an animal hater," he added.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
TGMC tightens noose around fake med practitioners in state
Hyderabad: The Telangana Medicalcouncil (TGMC) has launched a 'SUO MOTU' investigation into shocking reports of illegal medical practices in Thungathurthi following the tragic death of a 26-year-old pregnant woman allegedly due to treatment by a fake medical practitioner. A fact finding team led by Dr. Srinivas and Dr. Vishnu visited Thungathurthi on Sunday and uncovered startling evidence of rampant illegal activities. The inquiry revealed that an RMP named Srinivas had been running a private facility called Sai Balaji Hospital for several years without any official license or government approval. According to local residents, Srinivas along with a network of other RMPs was not only offering unauthorized medical treatment but was also deeply involved in a mafia like nexus promoting gender determination tests and illegal abortions in rural areas. Residents reported that these activities had been going on secretly for years, targeting vulnerable women, particularly pregnant mothers. Police have already seized the hospital premises while the main accused RMP Srinivas is currently absconding. Authorities are investigating how many abortions were performed under his supervision and the extent of involvement of other RMPs in this illegal racket. Speaking to the media, Srinivas, Vice Chairman of the Telangana Medical Council confirmed that the case would be pursued under the provisions of the National Medical Commission (NMC) Act. He criticized the failure of earlier enforcement, noting that locals had previously complained to district medical officials but no action was taken at the time. 'Had strict action been taken earlier, the tragic death of a full term pregnant woman might have been prevented,' locals told the visiting officials. When contacted, Dr. Chandrasekhar the current District Medical Officer of Suryapet stated that the earlier complaints had not reached him as he had only recently taken charge. He assured that firm action would now be taken against any RMPs conducting illegal abortions, gender determination tests, or performing medical procedures beyond their qualifications. The Telangana Medical Council has vowed to intensify its crackdown on unqualified practitioners especially in rural areas to protect women from unsafe and unauthorized medical practices.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
NoC poser to construction near monuments
NEW DELHI: The National Monument Authority (NMA) has issued strict directions to all states and Union Territories (UTs) prohibiting any unauthorised construction or development within the vicinity of centrally protected monuments unless prior approval has been obtained from the designated Competent Authority (CA). In a letter addressed to all Principal Secretaries of Urban Development Departments, the NMA underlined that no construction must be permitted in either the prohibited (0–100 metres) or regulated (101–300 metres) zones around monuments without a valid No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the CA. These competentauthorities are senior officials designated by the Centre in each state or UT to oversee compliance with heritage protection laws. The directive stems from increasing concern over encroachments and illegal constructions near India's 3,697 centrally protected monuments. The warning comes in the wake of a recent Karnataka High Court order, which restrained the state from allowing any development near protected sites without statutory clearance. The case involved a petition seeking permission to construct a residential house just 64 metres from the Mangala Devi Temple, a centrally protected monument. The site fell squarely within the prohibited zone under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2010—commonly referred to as the AMASR Act. The High Court directed the Karnataka Urban Development Department to issue a circular barring such permissions. Under the AMASR Act, any area within 100 metres of a centrally protected monument is considered a prohibited area—where no construction, repair, or development is allowed under any circumstance. The adjoining regulated area, extending up to 300 metres, requires mandatory clearance from the NMA via the CA.
