Sign in
  • Rights
  • Law & Justice
  • Hate & Harmony
  • Politics
  • Society
  • Environment
  • Economy
  • Themes
  • Specials
  • Videos
  • Podcast
  • Gallery
Sign in
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Password recovery
Recover your password
Search
  • Sign in / Join
Sign in
Welcome! Log into your account
Forgot your password? Get help
Password recovery
Recover your password
A password will be e-mailed to you.
  • Rights
  • Law & Justice
  • Hate & Harmony
  • Politics
  • Society
  • Environment
  • Economy
  • Themes
  • Specials
  • Videos
  • Podcast
  • Gallery
Home Hate & Harmony Communalism Latehar lynching case: Jharkhand HC rejects convict’s bail plea
  • Hate & Harmony
  • Communalism
  • Law & Justice
  • Rule of Law

Latehar lynching case: Jharkhand HC rejects convict’s bail plea

By
-
January 24, 2020
0
325
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
WhatsApp

    Latehar Lynching

    The Latehar lynching case refers to an incident that took place on March 18, 2016, when 32-year-old cattle trader Mazloom Ansari and his business partner’s 11-year-old son Imtiaz Khan were mercilessly beaten and hanged from a tree by cow vigilantes in Jhabar village. 

    8 people, Manoj Kumar Sahu, Mithilesh Prasad Sahu, Pramod Kumar Sahu, Manoj Sao, Awadhesh Sao, Arun Sao, Sehdav Sao and Vishal Tiwari were accused in the case. In December 2018, a Jharkhand court has convicted all 8 accused. But recently Vishal Tiwari moved the Jharkhand High Court seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

    Advocate Shadab Ansari who appeared for the victim along with Senior Advocate A Allam explained the arguments presented by Tiwari saying, “Their main argument was that the witness/informant did not name the accused persons in the FIR. They improved their version in court. They were not eye witnesses.”

    Meanwhile, the victims’ lawyers argued that all the eye witness had identified the accused persons. Advocate Ansari adds, “They were connected through phone before the incident and after the incident, and their location was shown at the place of occurrence. All these were proved through their call details and cell tower locations. Moreover, the oxen were recovered from their possession on the basis of their confessional statement.”

    The court could not be persuaded to grant bail and the application was dismissed as withdrawn.

    • TAGS
    • Latehar Lynchings
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Pinterest
    WhatsApp
      Previous articleThe Economist turns up the heat on Modi
      Next articleCAA-NPR-NRC means of harassing specific communities: Teesta Setalvad

      RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

      Vantara case against Himal Southasian dismissed by Delhi High Court

      SC: Interim bail granted to professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad; SIT to probe posts on Operation Sindoor

      “Shielding their own”: Supreme Court slams Madhya Pradesh police, transfers custodial death probe of a tribal man to CBI

      EDITOR PICKS

      POPULAR POSTS

      Minorities Commission forwards CJP’s complaint against Tejasvi Surya Bengaluru DGP

      January 11, 2022

      World Against Trump & US: Jerusalem

      December 22, 2017

      Farmers declare FCI Bachao Divas on April 5

      March 30, 2021

      POPULAR CATEGORY

      • Politics10078
      • Freedom7429
      • Rule of Law6913
      • Communalism6091
      • Minorities4764
      • Dalit Bahujan Adivasi3418
      • India3240
      • Violence3188
      • Communal Organisations3100
      ABOUT US
      FOLLOW US
      ©