Law college rape survivor 'satisfied' with Kolkata Police probe, Calcutta HC told
According to Bar and Bench, a High Court bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Smita Das De was informed so by the gangrape survivor's lawyer during a hearing of a batch of petitions seeking an impartial probe in the case.
The 24-year-old law student was gang-raped on June 25, and the case recently sparked huge uproar. Her lawyer's submissions to the High Court came amid demands for a probe by a central agency.
A BJP fact-finding team recently raised suspicion on the Kolkata Police probe, alleging attempts being made to save the culprits.
The four-member team had also alleged that the names of the accused provided by the survivor in a written complaint were erased and replaced with letters J, G, S, M.
"When the police have tampered with the complaint itself, which is the basic document in the case, how can one hope that the victim and her family will get justice?" former Union minister and ex-Mumbai police chief Satya Pal Singh was quoted as saying by news agency PTI.
The Kolkata Police's actions, like "tampering with the FIR and swift arrest of four accused", raise a big suspicion, he added.
Four arrests have been made in the case so far, with Monojit Mishra, a former student of the college, being identified as the prime accused, and two senior students – Promit Mukherjee and Zaib Ahmed.
Besides, security guard Pinaki Banerjee was also arrested after 'his replies were incoherent' during questioning.
The student had alleged that she was raped by Mishra in the security guard's room in the ground floor of the college between 7:30pm and 10:50pm on June 25.
During the hearing on Thursday, the Calcutta High Court ordered the Kolkata Police to file a fresh progress report in four weeks.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
18 minutes ago
- Hans India
Vijayasai's kin booked for CRZ violations on Bheemili coast
Visakhapatnam: Police registered a case against a company owned by former MP V Vijayasai Reddy's daughter P Neha Reddy and son-in-law Rohit Reddy for alleged violation of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms at Bheemili Beach. The case has been registered on a complaint by Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority. The action was taken on the order of a Bheemili Court following the complaint by Coastal Zone Management Authority about the violation of CRZ norms. In March, the Andhra Pradesh High Court directed AP Coastal Management Authority to lodge a complaint with the police so as to initiate action against the company which allegedly constructed a wall in Bheemili, also known as Bheemunipatnam Beach. Jana Sena corporator Peetala Murthy Yadav had filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Andhra Pradesh High Court with regard to the alleged encroachments. Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC) had demolished alleged illegal construction in September last year after serving formal notices to Neha Reddy. The action was taken on the direction of the High Court, which had also sought a detailed report from GVMC. The High Court in March this year took serious note of alleged violation of CRZ norms after the petitioner complained that the wall was demolished only partially. Special government pleader had informed the court that all illegal constructions were demolished except for an old building and some toilets. A division bench of Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Cheemalapati Ravi ordered the constitution of a committee with the AP Coastal Zone Management Authority member secretary, GVMC commissioner and the Visakhapatnam Collector to assess the environmental damage and report to the court. The High Court had also directed that the cost of the demolition and the environmental damage should be recovered from the company.
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Weak attempt at distraction': Obama offers rare rebuke on Trump's ‘treason' claims; Democrats call it Epstein diversion
Former President Barack Obama 's office issued a rare public response to President Donald Trump 's accusations of "treason" and election manipulation in 2016 and 2020. "Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response. But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," said Obama spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush, as quoted by NBC News. This comes as Trump was questioned about Jeffrey Epstein but redirected the conversation alleging "criminality" by Obama. Trump stated that Obama had been directly implicated and claimed the actions in 2016 and 2020 were criminal at the highest level. Read more: Trump slams ex-US president; dodges Epstein question Trump's assertions stemmed from claims by National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who suggested Obama administration officials had manipulated intelligence and undermined Trump's 2016 electoral victory. Gabbard initiated a criminal referral to the Justice Department on Friday. At a subsequent meeting with congressional Republicans, Trump continued his criticism of Obama and others, calling them "vicious, horrible people." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This Could Be the Best Time to Trade Gold in 5 Years IC Markets Learn More Undo Rodenbush countered that the administration was misrepresenting information. He noted that recent documents did not contradict the established conclusion about Russian influence in the 2016 election, as confirmed by the 2020 bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report under then-Chairman Marco Rubio. "Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes. These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio," Rodenbush further said. The controversy extends to various interpretations of a December 8, 2016, intelligence assessment regarding Russian cyber activities. Representative Gabbard alleges that documents demonstrate Russia did not seek to interfere in the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump, contradicting multiple investigations that indicated otherwise. 'On December 8 2016, IC officials prepared an assessment for the President's Daily Brief, finding that Russia 'did not impact recent U.S. election results' by conducting cyber attacks on infrastructure. Before it could reach the President, it was abruptly pulled 'based on new guidance.' This key intelligence assessment was never published,' Gabbard wrote in a post. The Obama administration did not assert that Russian cyberattacks affected the election results. 'I can assure the public that there was not the kind of tampering with the voting process that was of concern … the votes that were cast were counted — they were counted appropriately,' President Obama said from the White House, days after receiving the December 2016 brief referred to by Gabbard. The Obama White House stated that Russia attempted to interfere in the campaign by leaking hacked documents and utilising bots and troll farms to disseminate misinformation about the election—a finding later supported by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation and a Senate report. Meanwhile, Democratic officials characterised these developments as diversionary tactics. House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar suggested the focus on these matters was intended to deflect attention from the Epstein case. Recent activities include Trump's social media posts targeting political opponents and the Justice Department's release of files concerning Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination, alongside information about James Comey's investigation of Hillary Clinton's handling of classified information.
The Print
44 minutes ago
- The Print
7/11 blasts: HC disbelieved recovery of RDX on hyper-technical ground, Maha govt tells SC
Earlier in the day, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on behalf of the state government, mentioned the plea before an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai and sought an urgent hearing. The court agreed to hear it on July 24. The state government rushed to the top court a day after the high court acquitted all the 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case against them and it was 'hard to believe' that the accused had committed the crime. New Delhi, Jul 22 (PTI) The Maharashtra government has assailed a Bombay High Court judgment acquitting all 12 convicts in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case in the Supreme Court on grounds including that the recovery of RDX from an accused was disbelieved on a 'hyper-technical ground' that the seized explosives were not sealed with a lac seal. The state government, in its appeal, has raised several serious objections to the high court's order of acquittal. The plea has asserted that due procedural safeguards under Section 23(2) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) were observed, including proper sanctioning by senior officers like prosecution witness (PW) no. 185 Anami Roy. It said the high court overlooked the validity of these approvals despite no substantial contradiction in the prosecution's evidence. The plea has assailed the high court's rejection of the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one of the accused on the ground that it lacked a lac seal. The plea has said that RDX, being highly inflammable, was not sealed for safety reasons and the recovery was duly sanctioned and documented. 'That, the Hon'ble High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No. 1 on a hyper-technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It will be pertinent to note that the same was not sealed with a lac seal because RDX is an inflammable substance. 'It is pertinent to note that the High Court records that the sanctioning authority for explosive substances has been examined by the prosecution. However, the Hon'ble High Court has not found any infirmities in the evidence of PW 26, who is the sanctioning authority under the Explosive Substances Act for seizure of RDX from Accused No. 1. Therefore, the High Court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX from Accused No. 1,' the plea has said. It has also disputed the high court's dismissal of the confession of an accused for lacking minute details, such as the date of arrival of the Pakistani co-conspirators in India, the description of the six Pakistanis and information like whether they had trained in terrorist camps. 'The entire confessional statement has been disbelieved which is an unacceptable conclusion,' the plea has said, adding that omissions regarding the identities and origins of the Pakistani co-conspirators do not invalidate the overall confession. The appeal also challenges the high court's disregard of the recovery of detonators and explosive granules from another accused, pointing out that these items cannot be easily procured or planted, and their evidentiary value should not have been dismissed over technicalities. The petition says the high court failed to address the validity of the convictions under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Explosive Substances Act. It says the high court ignored key findings and legal interpretations from previous landmark judgments. The plea addresses the defence's contention that the accused did not meet the definition of 'continuing unlawful activity' under the MCOCA due to earlier offences being punishable by less than three years. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the plea says the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall under MCOCA provisions. Of the 12, five were sentenced to death and seven to life imprisonment by a special court. One of the death-row convicts died in 2021. More than 180 people were killed when seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on July 11, 2006. PTI SJK RC This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
