Connect with us

Crime News

Maharashtra Police to Transfer over 700 officers posted in Mumbai for over 8 years

Published

on

Purva Palande & Pal Pariawala, Mumbai Uncensored, 2nd July 2021:

On March 24, as many as 86 Mumbai police staff, including 65 from the Mumbai branch, were moved on the account of bad behavior. The move had come not long after the sketchy Mumbai Police official Sachin Vaze was caught by NIA.

The Maharashtra Director General of Police has ordered for moving all auditor unit officials who have served for over eight years in Mumbai, outside the city. As needed, the Mumbai police on Monday, June 28, delivered a rundown of such a workforce, including police auditor, collaborator police overseer and police sub monitors.

Somewhere around 727 police officers of different positions from sub-inspector to the senior investigator, who have accomplished eight years of administration in Mumbai, are probably going to be moved to a different locale, an authority said on Wednesday, June 30. Be that as it may, every one of these staff won’t be moved out of Mumbai on similar occasions as there could be some additional things to consider, like clinical grounds or an official approaching retirement, the authority added. In such cases the officials concerned can be excluded from the transfer after a survey by the foundation board, he said.

Of the 272 police personnel, 89 are senior police inspectors, 253 are inspectors, 375 assistant police controllers and 10 sub-inspectors. In the notification, the Joint commissioner of Police, Rajkumar Vhatkar trained the officials posted in different units of the city police power, to submit three spots of their decision for the new posting. Before March 24, upwards of 86 Mumbai police workforce, including 65 from the Mumbai Crime branch, were moved. The move had come soon after questionable Mumbai cop Sachin Vaze was captured by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) regarding Antilia Explosives Case and the murder of Thane Auto parts vendor Mansukh Hiram. Among the 65 moved Crime branch personnel, 28 were police assessors, 17 Assistant police officers and 20 police sub-inspectors.

Crime News

Twitter, Rana Ayyub among nine booked by UP Police over Ghaziabad viral video

Published

on

Aashwin Shanker, Mumbai Uncensored, 6th July 2021:

As of late, nine people were arrested under Sections 153, 153A, 295A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code 1860, for spreading a bogus and doctored video where purportedly an older Muslim man was being thumped by couple of Hindus and had to recite Jai Shree Ram in the Loni area of Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.

One of those booked, Rana Ayyub asserted that the FIR and the judicial procedures that followed this doctored video were discretionary and intended with the purpose of smothering the ability to speak freely and articulation and to control the privileges of the columnists.

She set forth her cases in an Opinion article in The Washington Post on June 29 named ‘The Indian government continues to harass journalists. I’m facing jail over a tweet.”

Point out that a video having claims particularly ones that can spread mutual disharmony and upset the harmony between two communities which can have repercussions should be confirmed to discover reality in the matter and checked altogether prior to being spread and shared particularly in regions like Loni, such news can easily stir violence. 

Journalists and writers these days appear to fail to remember that they can be held liable and are expected to take responsibility for the news they distribute and that they are not resistant if the news can cause viciousness and disrupt public harmony. They need to comprehend the way that getting out bogus words, particularly one that can spread disharmony among general society, is an offense and they can be expected to take responsibility.

No right is absolute, not even Freedom of Speech and Expression. The right to speak freely of discourse and articulation have special cases under Article 19(2).

Article 19(2) States : Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause ( 1 ) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

In the present case, the video shared by Rana Ayyub not just can possibly upset public harmony but on the other hand is fit for prompting violence in the region. 

Moreover, Rana Ayyub has concurred throughout the examination that she didn’t check the “realness” or reality in the video prior to having something very similar. This makes her responsible and liable for the video she distributed and consequently the FIR was enlisted under offenses under Sections 153, 153A, 295A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

For a clearer image of the law, how about we examine the phrasings of the segments under which Rana Ayyub and other journalists have been booked.

Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code states- “Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot—if rioting be committed; if not committed.—Whoever malignantly, or wantonly by doing anything which is illegal, gives provocation to any person intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause the offence of rioting to be committed, shall, if the offence of rioting be committed in consequence of such provocation, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both; and if the offence of rioting be not committed, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.”

Similarly Section 153A of the Act prescribes that “Promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.—(1) Whoever— (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility, [or]

(c) organizes any exercise, movement, drill or other similar activity intending that the participants in such activity shall use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, or participates in such activity intending to use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, against any religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community and such activity for any reason whatsoever causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm or a feeling of insecurity amongst members of such religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community,] shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

(2) Offence committed in place of worship, etc.—Whoever commits an offence specified in sub-section (1) in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.”

Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code states “Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.—Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of 7 [citizens of India], 8 [by words, either spoken or written, or or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise], insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 9 [three years], or with fine, or with both”.

In the instant case, Rana Ayyub’s false tweet of a doctored video without looking at the truth of the matter or even enquiring about the same shows the intent of the alleged Journalist to spread disharmony and incite violence and feelings of hate between the two communities and this action is duly covered under Section 153 and Section 153A(a) and 153A (b) and Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

Rana Ayyub is responsible and liable to investigation for her as the video and her posts have prompted the induction of viciousness and public disharmony in the district and both these fall under the exception of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution.

On the off chance that she feels that she has not submitted an offense, she can deliver confirmation for the equivalent during the enquiry and will be allowed an opportunity to be heard in the preliminary as to the equivalent. Thus, rather than blaming the public authority for checking free discourse, she ought to rather investigate her activities which are in clear infringement of the Indian Penal Code and furthermore fall as special cases with the expectation of complimentary discourse.

Your opportunity closes where the other individual’s starts and individuals of the area of Loni reserve the option to life in a protected climate with nobility and the activities of Rana Ayyub plainly upset both wellbeing and poise of individuals of the locale as she has acted in a way that can possibly affect viciousness in the district.

Rana Ayyub should help the examination as opposed to charging the public authority and the law implementation offices. In a nation run by law and order, this is the least that can be anticipated from journalists, writers and columnists.

Continue Reading

Crime News

ED to oppose NCP Leader Anil Deshmukh’s plea in SC seeking protection in money laundering case

Published

on

Aashwin Shanker, Mumbai Uncensored, 5th July 2021

Former home minister of Maharashtra, Anil Deshmukh, on Sunday appealed to the Supreme Court, for protection against any extreme action in a money-laundering case. The Enforcement Directorate on Saturday, issued fresh summons for the 71-year-old NCP leader, for his appearance on July 5 in the case.

The ED has, up until this point, given three notifications to Deshmukh, who has been approached to record his assertion at the central agency office in south Mumbai on Monday.

Deshmukh has moved the top court, looking for assurance from any coercive activity, Mumbai-based lawyer Inderpal B Singh said in a video message delivered for the media.

The previous home minister had avoided the two previous summons, referring to his “weakness” to Covid as the justification of rebelliousness in his last interaction to the office. He rather offered the ED to record his assertion through video-conferencing.

The new request by ED was given regarding a criminal case enrolled under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, identifying with a supposed Rs 100 crore pay off cum-blackmail racket that prompted Deshmukh’s abdication in April.

The first summon was followed after raids led by the ED at his premises in Mumbai and Nagpur and at his assistants and others last month.

The agency consequently captured two of his associates in this case, personal secretary Sanjeev Palande (51) and personal assistant Kundan Shinde (45). They are in ED care till Tuesday.

The agency, sources said, aside from the current case needs to interrogate Deshmukh regarding his and his relatives’ supposed connections with certain shell organizations that were utilized to launder much before the current claims of bribery was exposed to the Mumbai police.

Continue Reading

Crime News

ED summons former Maharashtra HM Anil Deshmukh in a money laundering case, arrests his aides

Published

on

Aashwin Shanker, Mumbai Uncensored. 26th June 2021:

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Saturday (26 June) captured two assistants of former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh regarding a claimed ‘hafta’ case, authorities said here.

They are Kundan Shinde and Sanjeev Palande functioning as close to home staff members with Deshmukh, a senior leader of the NCP – Nationalist Congress Party.

ED officials said the two aides of Deshmukh were not cooperating with probing officers. The aides were quizzed for around nine hours at ED’s Ballard Estate office in Mumbai. Next, the two will be produced at a special PMLA court in Mumbai later on Saturday. Reports suggest that ED will seek custody of Deshmukh’s aides for custodial interrogation. Earlier, ED raided offices of the two men & also of Deshmukh’s in Mumbai, Nagpur. Around eight officials reached Deshmukh’s place at 7.30pm along with a CRPF team. No one was allowed to enter the house & search continued till filing of the report.

Suspected transactions worth Rs 20 crore, allegedly routed through a clutch of Kolkata-based shell companies, are at the centre of a probe by investigative agencies against former Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh.

These companies are mostly linked to Deshmukh’s relatives and associates, they said. The source of these funds is believed to be ‘protection money’ paid to Deshmukh, including around Rs 4 crores ‘paid’ by bar owners in Mumbai.

Deshmukh and his associates are under the scanner of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Directorate of Enforcement (ED). On Friday, the ED carried out searches at multiple locations, including Deshmukh’s residence at GPO Chowk in Nagpur.

Continue Reading

Trending