Latest news with #Shahjahan
The Hindu
17 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Will bring Sandeshkhali perpetrators to justice after BJP comes to power in W.B., says Suvendu
Leader of the Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly Suvendu Adhikari on Sunday said that the Bharatiya Janata Party will bring the perpetrators involved in the violence and sexual assault at Sandeshkhali, including former Trinamool Congress leader Sheikh Shahjahan, to justice within days of the party coming to power. The Assembly election is due in the State in 2026. Addressing a public gathering at Sandeshkhali, Mr. Adhikari said that the regime of Mr. Shahjahan had ended and that the perpetrators will be brought to justice soon after the BJP came to power. The BJP leader promised the gathering that he will ensure that 'Sheikh Shahjahan is hanged' after the party assumes power. Also Read | 2024: A year of protests and electoral status quo in West Bengal Mr. Shahjahan, once an influential Trinamool leader from Sandeshkhali block in North 24 Parganas district, faced allegations of land grab and sexual assault by several women of the region, and was arrested by the West Bengal Police in February 2024. He had remained behind bars since then. The women of the region had rallied against the alleged excesses of the local Trinamool leaders and the issue had become a major poll plank for the BJP in the 2024 Lok Sabha election. While the BJP bagged the most votes in the Sandeshkhali Assembly seat, the party lost the Basirhat Lok Sabha seat, under which the Sandeshkhali seat falls, to the Trinamool. On Sunday, hours after the BJP leader's rally, a team of officials of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) visited Sandeshkhali and recorded a statement from a woman who had made allegations against Mr. Shahjahan. Also Read | Sandeshkhali on the boil again over allegations of a woman's abduction The Trinamool leadership took a swipe at the developments and said Mr. Adhikari has set the ground so that the investigating agencies could work accordingly. Speaking at the public rally in Sandeshkhali, Mr. Adhikari alleged that 'Hindu BJP Karyakartas Pradip Mandal, Debdas Mandal and Sukanta Mandal' were killed on June 6, 2019 in Sandeshkhali by 'Trinamool Congress leader Shahjahan Sheikh and his gang'. Mr. Adhikari said that the three were killed in Sandeshkhali for being 'Hindus', similar to the murder of the father-son duo Hargobinda Das and Gobinda Das during the Murshidabad riots of April 2025. COMMENT | Sandeshkhali, the untold story 'I went to Dhulian and Samserganj after a court order. Their family said they voted for the Left parties but the perpetrators didn't kill them because they were leftist. They were killed because they were Hindus,' the BJP leader said. The West Bengal Police had earlier this week filed a chargesheet in the double murder against 13 persons. Mr. Adhikari also once again called for unity among Hindu voters and said that irrespective of caste and other differences, 'Hindus have to unite for the 2026 Assembly election in West Bengal' to defeat the Trinamool Congress.
Time of India
20-05-2025
- Time of India
HC acquits 2 convicted in electrocution case in 2004 that resulted in man's death
Raipur: Citing lack of evidence, direct link and the deceased's own negligence, the Chhattisgarh High Court has acquitted two men convicted in an electrocution case. The court overturned the lower court's verdict, which had sentenced the men to six months' rigorous imprisonment in the two decades old case. "The prosecution has utterly failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died because of the act of the accused persons/applicants," the court said in its judgment. "The death of the deceased was wholly of his own negligent act. The deceased was not trained in electrical work but skilled in mechanical tasks. Despite this, he climbed the electric pole to connect a wire, indicating his own negligence. Being an adult and sensible person, he was expected to understand the risks involved in handling electricity. If he chose to proceed despite the dangers, he alone is responsible for the consequences," Justice Radhakishan Agrawal remarked in his order. The case stemmed from an incident on May 4, 2004, where Shahjahan died after being electrocuted while connecting a thresher machine to an electric pole at Sitapur in Surguja district. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Viral Video: मृत्यू कसाही येऊ शकतो! सीसीटीव्हीत कैद झाली काळीज पिळवटणारी घटना Latest News Read More Undo The prosecution alleged that the accused, Shabbir Khan and Shamim Khan, had asked Shahjahan to connect the wire, assuring him the power was disconnected. The trial court and the appellate court had convicted the men under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with causing death by negligence. However, Justice Agrawal, in his order, noted that the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused's actions and the deceased's death. The court observed that key witnesses, including Mansoor Khan, the deceased's brother, admitted in their statements that they did not witness the incident. Mansoor also acknowledged that his brother was not an electrician but a mechanical worker. HC noted that the deceased was an adult and aware of the dangers of working with electricity. The court also pointed out inconsistencies in the witnesses' statements, including the omission of Shamim Khan's name in the initial police report. The judge cited Supreme Court rulings, emphasising the need for a direct nexus between the accused's negligence and the victim's death. The high court allowed the criminal revision and acquitted Shabbir Khan and Shamim Khan. Their bail bonds will remain in effect for six months, as per legal procedure.
Time of India
09-05-2025
- Time of India
Bhopal woman, daughters booked for duping couple of Rs 15L in name of govt job
Kanpur: A couple accused a Bhopal based woman and her two daughters of a fraud of Rs 15 lakh after giving false assurance of govt employment for their daughters. A case has been lodged against the three on the couple's Hussain, resident of Mirpur Cantt, Railbazar area of the city, stated that his daughters, Sana Fatima and Hina Fatima, worked as contract employees at Maroni CHC in Lalitpur. The daily commute between Kanpur and Lalitpur was becoming challenging for them. In 2021, he and his wife met Shahjahan Khan from Govindnagar, Bhopal who claimed to have influential contacts in Bhopal and Delhi. She offered the couple to arrange govt positions for his daughters in either a hospital or collected educational certificates of both his daughters and in July 2021, she asked for Rs 15 lakh in three separate payments for the job arrangements. In March 2022, Shahjahan informed Hussain and his wife that their daughters have secured positions in Bhopal and would receive appointment letters for their jobs shortly. However, when they did not get any appointment letter within the specified period, they requested a refund from Shahjahan but she avoided them. Upon visiting her Bhopal residence, Shahjahan and her daughter Ruby behaved inappropriately and dismissed them. Shahjahan's other daughter, Shireeza, identifying herself as a lawyer, issued threats of false imprisonment this the couple approached the police and filed a complaint against Shahjahan and her daughters. Station officer Bahadur Singh confirmed that a case was registered for fraud, intimidation, and additional offences, and investigations are underway in the case.
New Indian Express
28-04-2025
- New Indian Express
Sharia Court, in any name & form, has no recognition in law: SC
NEW DELHI: In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that a 'Court of Kazi,' 'Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat,' 'Sharia Court,' etc., by whatever name or style, have no recognition in law. The Court made this ruling while allowing a Muslim woman's maintenance plea filed under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The bench of the top court delivered this judgment after hearing a plea filed by a woman, Shahjahan, who was challenging the Allahabad High Court's 2018 order. The order had dismissed her revision petition against a 2010 family court decision in Jhansi, which denied her maintenance. The family court had only allowed Rs 2,500 for her two children. A two-judge bench of the top court, led by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, stated that any declaration made by such courts is not binding on anyone and is unenforceable by coercive measures. "The only way such a declaration or decision can withstand scrutiny in the eyes of the law is when the affected parties accept such declaration/decision by acting on it or accepting it, and when such action does not conflict with any other law. Even then, such declaration/decision, at best, would only be valid inter se the parties that choose to act upon/accept it, and not a third party," the bench said. Explaining the legal position, the top court referred to various previous judgments, including Vishwa Lochan Madan versus Union of India. It cited a case where a Muslim man initially filed a plea in a 'Court of Kazi' and 'Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat' seeking divorce from his wife. In the present case, the family court had allowed only Rs 2,500 for her two children. As per records, the marriage between the appellant and the respondent (husband) was solemnized on September 24, 2002, according to Islamic customs, rituals, and traditions. This was the second marriage for both parties. The top court held that maintenance could not have been denied to the appellant-wife under the prevailing circumstances. It directed the payment of Rs 4,000 per month as maintenance to her, starting from the date of filing the maintenance petition before the family court. The top court also said, "A family court is not an institution to sermonize society on morality and ethics." The appellant woman had claimed that her husband had caused mental harassment and cruelty to her because she was unable to fulfill his demand for a motorcycle and Rs 50,000. On this, the family court had stated that since it was their second marriage, there was no possibility of the man demanding dowry, as he would be trying to rehabilitate his household. The top court, after reviewing the family court's observations and order, stated that such reasoning or observations were unknown to the canons of law and were based on mere conjecture and surmise.
