Latest news with #VIII
Time of India
24-05-2025
- Time of India
Beed windmill firing case: Security guard arrested for culpable homicide not amounting to murder
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: A security guard at a windmill company was arrested on Saturday by the Neknoor police in Beed for culpable homicide. The guard had discharged his weapon while attempting to thwart an attempted dacoity, resulting in one fatality, on Friday. Roopsingh Tak, a former serviceman working as a security guard, was remanded in two-day police custody after court proceedings. Meanwhile, the deceased man, one of the armed dacoits who targeted the windmill factory, has been identified as 24-year-old Raju Kale. Beed SP Navneet Kanwat told TOI, "We have registered two cases, one each based on the complaints from two sides. The first FIR is for the armed dacoity committed by the unidentified suspects at the windmill, while the second is against the security guard for culpable homicide not amounting to murder." The SP noted that while the guard has protection under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the investigation would reveal the circumstances surrounding the use of the firearm. Kanwat clarified that self-defence firing should only prevent further attacks on oneself or protected property. "If this causes death, then the person who fired bullets, even if it is from a licensed firearm, is liable for prosecution under relevant sections of law," said Kanwat. High court advocate Ganesh Gadhe said, "The guard's action falls within the scope of self-defense under sections 96–106 IPC, now mirrored in Chapter VIII of the BNS. However, courts assess if the response was reasonable and proportionate. If death is caused while exceeding the right, the act does not amount to murder but culpable homicide. Therefore, BNS section 105 is invoked here." "The case of State v. Chaturbhuj Singh, decided by the Delhi high court, is a strong precedent supporting the legal proposition that a security guard acting in the course of his duty to repel a robbery attempt, resulting in the death of a robber, is protected under the right of private defence. The arrest appears to be procedural at this stage and not necessarily an indictment of guilt. The ultimate determination will depend on whether Roopsingh Tak used force within reasonable limits under the law of private defence. If it is found that he exceeded the right, but without intent to kill, then section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) would be sustainable. Otherwise, he may be exonerated entirely under the protection of the right to private defence," advocate Gadhe elaborated. On Friday morning, 20-25 suspected dacoits targeted a windmill facility in the Mahajanwadi hamlet of Limbaganesh village, Beed district. After the suspects forcibly entered the facility and allegedly committed theft, Tak confronted them. Following stone pelting by the suspects, he fired twice — once in the air and once towards the group. Police discovered a body with gunshot wounds during their site inspection at 10am on Friday. Police seized Tak's weapon and placed the unidentified body in the civil hospital morgue. The windmill company's representative filed a dacoity complaint. Later on Friday, Vishnu Kale from Tauljapur, Dharashiv district, identified the deceased as his son Raju. Assistant inspector Chandrakant Gosavi, of the Neknoor police station, told TOI, "After Vishnu Kale reached Beed late on Friday, the identity of the deceased man was established. Based on Vishnu's complaint, we have registered a case under section 105 of BNS for culpable homicide not amounting to murder against the windmill company's security guard Roopsingh Tak and arrested him." The authorities emphasised that licensed firearms are intended for self-defence, not causing fatalities. Investigations revealed the deceased had previous charges including robbery, theft and dacoity. Similar cases were registered against Vishnu as well. Police are investigating potential connections to the current dacoity incident.
Daily Mirror
20-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Mirror
Deathly decision to boost profits killed thousands in infected blood scandal
A new ITV documentary reveals the terrible truth about Britain's biggest medical disaster, the infected blood scandal From 1970 until the early 1990s, an estimated 30,000 people across the UK were unknowingly involved in the infected blood scandal that was buried for decades. The story of the "worst treatment disaster" in the history of the NHS is set to be explored in a new documentary, The British Blood Scandal: Poisoned at School, following survivors of the 'hushed-up' scandal, and will detail their battle for the truth and justice. Most victims had hereditary bleeding disorder haemophilia - whereby a person's blood doesn't clot properly - and were reassured that a new blood-clotting product, known as Factor VIII, would give them a better chance at a normal life. Instead, they were infected with life-threatening diseases like HIV and Hepatitis C through contaminated blood products provided by the NHS. In 1974, in an effort to address the shortage of Factor VIII, the NHS began importing blood products sourced from America where donors were paid. This encouraged them to lie about their medical past. These imported products were therefore often sourced from high-risk populations, including prisoners and individuals with substance abuse issues. As a result, the blood products were highly susceptible to contamination with deadly viruses, further exacerbating the risks for patients relying on them for treatment. By 1976, concerns were emerging within the NHS about the safety of these imported blood products. Internal memos and reports highlighted the potential risks of contamination, particularly with viruses like Hepatitis C, then known as non-A/non-B hepatitis. However, these warnings are largely ignored, allowing the distribution of dangerous blood products to continue unchecked. The UK government failed to achieve self-sufficiency in blood products, leading to increased dependency on imported Factor VIII concentrate. This product, sourced from large donor pools, carries a heightened risk of viral contamination. The failure to address these risks effectively sets the stage for the widespread infections that would soon follow. In 1982, the US reported the first death of a man with haemophilia who'd been infected by AIDS. Other warnings followed in 1983 in The Lancet and from the WHO, stating that haemophilia patients should be warned of the risks. At this time, The Haemophilia Society (THS) released statements reassuring those with bleeding disorders that Factor VIII treatments were safe. The organisation later 'apologised unreservedly' for these reassurances, which 'while well-intentioned and based on expert advice, have subsequently been shown to be damaging to the community and false'. The British government, as well as leading clinicians, failed to heed warnings and didn't take appropriate action to switch back to safer products. Meanwhile, as per THS, pharmaceutical companies and clinicians also did not appropriately inform patients about the risks. As chair of the inquiry, Sir Brian Langstaff, put it when handing down recommendations: "Wrongs were done at individual, collective, and systematic levels." It only took one contaminated sample to infect the entire batch. Heat treating the products could have reduced risks, but this would have cut profit margins due to the product quantity being reduced. By comparison, Canada, which also received infected blood products, made 'humanitarian payments' to victims beginning in the late 1980s, and by the 1990s, a public inquiry had been held and compensation paid. Several organisations and individuals, including the Canadian Red Cross, also faced criminal charges. A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: "This was an appalling tragedy, and our thoughts remain with all those affected. We are clear that justice needs to be delivered for the victims and have already accepted the moral case for compensation. "This covers a set of extremely complex issues, and it is right we fully consider the needs of the community and the far-reaching impact that this scandal has had on their lives. The Government intends to respond in full to Sir Brian's recommendations for wider compensation following the publication of the Inquiry's final report on 20 May 2024." The 2,527-page report from the Infected Blood Inquiry, published last year on May 20, found the scandal 'could largely have been avoided' and there was a "pervasive" cover-up to hide the truth. It identified a "catalogue of systemic, collective and individual failures" that amounted to a "calamity". Former prime minister Rishi Sunak issued a "wholehearted and unequivocal" apology to the victims, saying the publication of the report into the disaster was 'a day of shame for the British state'. Speaking to reporters on a trip to Austria the following day, Mr Sunak said: "What has happened over decades has been a failure on multiple levels and it is important that yesterday was a day for the community to be heard, and they have waited an incredibly long time for justice and the truth. "That is why I, rightly as Prime Minister, offered an unequivocal apology to everyone affected by this appalling scandal. The infected, the affected, everyone impacted in the community, they have fought under considerable pressure facing prejudice over many decades. "Anyone reading the report will have found it harrowing, indeed devastating, and I am glad that yesterday was a moment for reflection on everything that has happened, and their voices could be heard and they received the apology that they so rightly deserved." Asked if there should be criminal prosecutions of those found to have done wrong during the course of the scandal, Mr Sunak said: "As I said yesterday, anyone, people, individuals, where there is evidence of wrongdoing, of course there must be justice and accountability for that. "But the report is very long, it is very comprehensive, and what I am committed to is the government will now take the time to go through it properly and rigorously before responding in Parliament, and, of course, any individual cases will be a matter for the relevant authorities.' Following the publication, some victims of the scandal have restarted legal action against the government, with their lawyer claiming there was a "misfeasance in public office". It was put on hold in November 2018 but has been relaunched, with around 500 victims putting their name to the lawsuit.
