Bail Granted | SabrangIndia

Victory for Sahid Ali: CJP’s legal battle brings relief in Ali’s citizenship crisis, bail granted by High Court

sabrang — Wed, 20 Nov 2024 08:24:39 +0000

In a significant victory for justice and human rights, the Gauhati High Court has granted bail to Sahid Ali, a resident of Bagheswar village in Assam, who had been declared a foreigner by the Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) in Darrang district. The said grant of bail to Sahid Ali by the Gauhati High Court has drawn attention to the plight of individuals in Assam who are unjustly labeled as foreigners. Sahid, a lifelong resident of the state with ancestral ties dating back generations, found himself declared a foreigner by the Foreigners’ Tribunal despite possessing substantial evidence of his Indian citizenship. This decision not only disrupted his life but also highlighted systemic flaws in the processes that determine citizenship in the region. His case underscores the pressing need for fairness and accountability in addressing such disputes.

Sahid’s story is emblematic of the struggles faced by many in Assam, where allegations of being a foreigner often arise from cursory investigations and inadequate verification of records. For Sahid, the intervention of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), a human rights organisation, proved to be a lifeline. Their relentless advocacy and legal support not only secured his release but also brought hope to others fighting similar battles. This case sheds light on the human cost of flawed systems and the power of collective efforts in ensuring justice and restoring dignity.

Sahid Ali’s ordeal: a citizen branded a foreigner

Sahid Ali, also known as Shwahid Ali, has lived his entire life in Assam, a state his family has called home for generations. Born and raised in Tupar village under Nagarbera Mouza, Boko police station in Kamrup district, Sahid’s citizenship seemed unquestionable. His grandfather, Jasim Mundal, possessed land records from 1957-64, and his name was also listed in the 1966 voter list. Furthermore, Sahid’s father, Basir Ali (also known as Bashiruddin Ali), appeared on the 1971 voter list for Tupamari village under Nagarbera Mouza.

Despite this strong documentary evidence, Sahid found himself ensnared in a legal battle when he was accused of being a foreigner by the Assam government. The case against Sahid Ali was initiated by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Darrang, based on allegations of foreign nationality, without conducting proper verification. This led the Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) to register a case against him and issue a notice, further intensifying his ordeal. Notably, Sahid’s family had been actively participating in the electoral process, casting their votes in the village of Fuhuratali under the No. 66 Sipajhar Legislative Assembly Constituency, a fact that should have supported his claim of Indian citizenship.

Sahid’s grandfather, Jasim Mundal, possessed certified land records from village Tupamari in Pachim Samariya Mouza, dating back to 1957-64 (Dag No. 580 New, Dag No. 480 Old). These documents, coupled with Sahid’s other evidence, clearly demonstrated his citizenship. However, on September 29, 2023, the Darrang Tribunal declared him a foreigner. This decision turned Sahid’s life upside down, leaving him in constant fear and severely impacting his health. With the looming threat of detention in a camp, Sahid faced an unimaginable future filled with uncertainty and despair.

The struggles following the Tribunal’s decision

The tribunal’s ruling shattered Sahid Ali and his family, plunging them into a nightmare of uncertainty and despair. Despite possessing substantial documentary evidence that firmly established his Indian citizenship—documents spanning generations that tied his family to Assam—Sahid was declared a foreigner. The tribunal’s decision not only stripped him of his identity but also left him facing the grim prospect of being sent to a detention camp, a fate that loomed like a dark shadow over his life. The thought of losing his freedom and being confined to such a camp deeply affected his mental well-being, causing his health to deteriorate as he struggled with relentless fear and anxiety. For Sahid, every passing day was marked by anguish and a sense of helplessness.

Just as Sahid’s hopes seemed to be slipping away, a ray of hope emerged in the form of the CJP Assam legal team. Senior legal member Advocate Mrinmay Dutta, recognising the glaring injustice, took up Sahid’s case with determination and compassion. Filing a petition in the Gauhati High Court, Dutta contested the tribunal’s ruling and sought to overturn the judgment that had upended Sahid’s life. This intervention not only brought hope to Sahid but also shed light on the broader systemic failures that plague many similar cases in Assam. Allegations of being a foreigner often arise from flawed investigations and cursory scrutiny of documents, leaving countless individuals like Sahid to bear the brunt of administrative oversight. His case is a stark reminder of the immense human suffering caused by these failings and the urgent need for fairness and due diligence in such matters.

CJP steps in- a fight for justice

Recognising the glaring injustice in Sahid Ali’s case, the legal team from CJP, under the leadership of Senior Advocate Mrinmay Dutta, stepped in to provide crucial support. With unwavering dedication, they challenged the Foreigners’ Tribunal’s decision by filing a petition in the Gauhati High Court. Building a strong case grounded in documentary evidence—records spanning decades and proving Sahid’s Indian citizenship—they sought to overturn the ruling that had upended his life. Their efforts bore fruit when, on November 6, 2024, the High Court granted Sahid bail. This decision brought a wave of relief to Sahid and his family, marking a turning point in their ordeal and reaffirming their faith in the judicial system.

However, the battle was far from over. Securing bail was just the beginning of yet another formidable challenge—finding a bailor and completing the procedural formalities within a rigid timeline of ten days. Despite the urgency and limited time, the team at CJP demonstrated remarkable resolve. When their search for a bailor initially yielded no results, the organisation’s Darrang District Volunteer Motivator (DVM), Joinal Abedin, took it upon himself to ensure justice prevailed. Stepping forward as the bailor, Joinal’s selfless act underscored the essence of solidarity and commitment within the CJP team. His gesture not only expedited the process but also highlighted the collective effort required to combat systemic injustices. This critical milestone ensured that Sahid’s bail bond was submitted on time, symbolising hope and resilience in the face of adversity.

Formalities completed; freedom restored

On 13 November 2024, CJP’s Assam state in-charge, Nanda Ghosh, accompanied by Darrang DVM Joinal Abedin and Sahid Ali, submitted the bail bond at the Border Branch of Darrang. This crucial step marked significant progress in Sahid’s case. The following day, the formalities were completed at the local Border Branch under the Sipajhar police station, bringing a sense of closure to a process fraught with hurdles and urgency. The dedication and efficiency demonstrated by CJP’s team ensured that Sahid’s release was not delayed further, a testament to their commitment to justice and humanity.

When Sahid learned that his bail had been granted, his emotions overflowed with gratitude. “Now at least I can go out freely and work to feed my family. It’s because of you (CJP) that this became possible. Thank you, thank you so much,” he said, his voice trembling with relief and hope. These heartfelt words revealed the profound weight of the ordeal he had endured. Stripped of his identity, living under the constant threat of detention, and fearing for his family’s future, Sahid had been pushed to the brink. For him, the High Court’s decision was not merely legal relief—it was a lifeline, restoring a sense of dignity and freedom he thought he had lost forever.

However, the grant of bail is only a temporary reprieve. The fight to secure Sahid’s citizenship remains a daunting challenge. CJP has pledged to continue supporting him, determined to ensure that his identity as a legitimate Indian citizen is restored. This commitment extends beyond Sahid’s case, reflecting CJP’s unwavering resolve to stand by all those who face similar injustices. Their efforts underscore the critical need for systemic reforms to address the deeply flawed processes that brand individuals as foreigners, often without fair scrutiny or due process.

Sahid’s story is a microcosm of the broader crisis in Assam, where countless individuals are trapped in a web of suspicion and procedural failures. Despite having lived in India for generations, many are unjustly accused of being foreigners, with devastating consequences for their lives and livelihoods. His ordeal highlights the human cost of these systemic flaws, exposing the urgent need for a fair, transparent, and humane approach to resolving citizenship disputes. Sahid’s resilience, combined with the steadfast efforts of CJP, serves as a powerful reminder that justice is not a privilege—it is a right, and it must be accessible to all, especially the most vulnerable.

A testament to perseverance and advocacy

Sahid’s journey, from being unjustly branded a foreigner to finally securing bail, is a profound testament to the strength and resilience of individuals fighting for justice in a system that often fails to protect the most vulnerable. For Sahid, the process was not just a legal battle; it was a deeply personal fight for his dignity, his identity, and his right to live as a citizen in the land of his ancestors. The terror of being labelled an outsider, despite generations of living in Assam, compounded by the looming threat of detention, created a reality where every moment was filled with uncertainty and fear. Yet, throughout this tumultuous ordeal, Sahid’s perseverance and determination to prove his rightful place in India never wavered.

Behind Sahid’s victory stands the unwavering support of organisations like CJP, whose commitment to social justice and human rights played a pivotal role in challenging the flawed system that nearly robbed him of his citizenship. The collective advocacy, led by CJP’s legal team, helped bring the necessary legal pressure to secure his temporary relief. This victory, however, is not just about one man’s case—it represents a broader fight for fairness, dignity, and the recognition of rights for all individuals, particularly those marginalised by systemic failures. CJP’s work underscores the critical role that organisations committed to social justice play in challenging injustice and empowering individuals to reclaim their lives and rights.

As Sahid begins to breathe easier with his newfound freedom, his story is a powerful reminder of the importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights of every individual, especially those whose voices are most often silenced. His case illustrates the vulnerability of individuals caught in a web of bureaucratic oversight and legal ambiguities, and how vital it is for society to rise to their defence. For Sahid, the road ahead is still fraught with challenges, but the grant of bail represents a significant first step in a long and arduous journey towards reclaiming his full rights as an Indian citizen. His story is a call to action—to ensure that no one, regardless of their background or status, is denied justice or the fundamental right to live free from fear. It is a powerful reminder that, no matter how insurmountable the odds may seem, justice must always prevail, and the fight for it is worth every step.

Assam citizenship crisis: Aadhaar and the shadows of exclusion and administrative labyrinth

Assam detention camps tighten rules, leaving families struggling to visit loved ones detained in Matia transit camp

The post Victory for Sahid Ali: CJP’s legal battle brings relief in Ali’s citizenship crisis, bail granted by High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

4 years behind bars, bail granted to two accused arrested under UAPA

Fri, 21 Apr 2023 08:50:42 +0000

Image: Live Law

On April 17, the Supreme Court granted bail to two accused who were alleged to belong to the CPI (Maoist) and were further alleged to have a role in the murder of two Telugu Desam Party (TDP) leaders. In this 2018 murder case of TDP leaders, the court granted bail on the grounds that the accused had been detained for more than four years and that charges had not yet been framed.

The Court also observed that the materials on record fail to provide reasonable grounds for believing that the allegations against the appellants of commission of an offense under the UAPA are prima facie true, and thus the bar against granting bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act was not invoked.

“We have examined material relied upon against the appellants in paragraph 5 of the additional affidavit of the respondent as well as the chargesheet. Taking the material against the appellants as it is and without considering the defence of the appellants, we are unable to form an opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against the appellants of commission of offence under the UAPA are prime facie true. Hence, the embargo on the grant of bail under proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 43D will not apply in this case.” (Para 21)

The division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal also noted that:

“The appellants are in custody for four and half years. The charge has not been framed and the prosecution proposes to examine more than 140 witnesses. Some of the accused are absconding. Thus, there is no possibility of the trial commencing in the near future.” (Para 22)

Brief background of the case:

On September 23, 2018, Kidari Sarveswara Rao, a member of the Legislative Assembly and whip of the Telugu Desam Party in the Legislative Assembly, and Siveri Soma, a former Telugu Desam Party MLA, were killed near the village Livitiputtu, Pothangi Panchayat, within the jurisdiction of Dumbriguda Police Station in Visakhapatnam.

On the same day, the Personal Secretary of the deceased, a sitting MLA, filed a FIR against 45 accused persons allegedly affiliated with the Communist Party of India (Maoist), a designated terrorist organisation specified in the first schedule of the UAPA.

Previously, the investigation was conducted by a Special Investigation Team, which was later transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The appellants (accused nos. 46 and 47, respectively) were arrested on October 13, 2018, and their chargesheets were filed on April 10, 2019. The chargesheet named 79 (originally 85) accused persons and 144 witnesses. The charges have yet to be framed.

Submissions made by the counsel for the appellants:

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves informed the Court that there is no evidence against either of the accused to show that they provided shelter and logistical support to the Maoists or co-accused, or that they planted landmines. He also claimed that there is no prima facie evidence of the two appellants’ involvement in the offense of murder in question.

It was argued that the charges in the case had not been framed, and that with 144 prosecution witnesses to be examined, the trial would take years, and that the appellants’ continued incarceration would amount to a violation of their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Submissions made by the counsel for the state:

The ASG, K. M. Nataraj, appearing for the Union of India, on the other hand submitted that according to the Memorandum dated October 13, 2018 under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 shows that a steel can weighing about 10 kg, containing bolts, nuts, and filled with explosive material, and connected to a detonator through a wire, was recovered at the instance of accused no. 46.

He stated that accused no.46’s disclosure statement on January 16, 2019 shows that he had also purchased a large quantity of medicines worth Rs.8000/- and handed them over to a Maoist.

It was also claimed that the appellants were in constant contact with each other via cell phones for 18 days prior to the incident, after which the accused no.47’s cell phone was turned off.

He maintained that there is strong prima facie evidence against the appellants and that, as a result of the proviso to subsection (5) of Section 43D of the UAPA, the appellants are ineligible for bail.

Observations made by the court:

One of the most important considerations for the bench in deciding this case was that the accused no. 84 had been granted bail by the High Court on the grounds that he was not a suspect in the crime. Because, as the state’s counsel argued, the medicines were purchased by accused no. 46 at the request of accused no. 84, who had already been granted bail, the court made the following observation:

“We fail to understand how the purchase of medicines worth Rs.8000/- by accused no.46 at the instance of accused no.84 much before the incident has any connection with the incident which took place on September 23, 2018. This is apart from the fact that accused no.84 has been granted bail by the High Court.” (Para 12)

Concerning the disclosure statement date of January 16, 2019, the Court stated that the first condition for the applicability of Section 27 is that the information provided by the accused must lead to the discovery of the fact as a direct result of such information. The Court made the following observations:

“Now looking at the Discovery Memo dated 16th January 2019, at the highest, it means that accused no.46 showed the shop from which the medicines were purchased. Thus, he led the police to the shop. There was no discovery of any fact as a result of the information supplied by accused no.46. The same is the case with the other allegation that accused no.46 showed a Xerox shop where accused no.47 and one Kiran were allegedly standing on 23rd September 2018. Therefore, the statements of accused no.46 that he would show the medical shop and the Xerox shop may not be, prima facie, admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.” (Para 14)

The court also stated that the appellants made confessional statements immediately after the police apprehended them, even before their arrest was recorded, which raises questions about the authenticity of the statements. The court said the following:

“In any case, accused no. 46 and 47 were not present at the time of the commission of the offence. Therefore, we cannot form an opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against accused no. 46 are prima facie proved.” (Para 18)

Based on the observations made by the court above, the court concluded that the materials on record do not state reasonable grounds for believing that the allegations of commission of an offense under the UAPA against the appellants are prima facie true. The court then ruled that the prohibition on bail provided under proviso to subsection (5) of Section 43D does not apply in this case. Thus, after hearing the appellants and respondent, the Court directed the Special Judge, NIA to release the appellants on bail within a week on appropriate conditions.

The complete judgment can be read here.

Journalist detained for interrogation for report on right wing groups

Journalist Shashikant Warishe murdered for uncovering anomalies in the Barsu Refinery project

Journalist Siddique Kappan’s release after 28 months in a UP jail, where a black hole with opaque procedures affected release

Gujarat HC: Mere filing of FIRs insufficient grounds for arrest under the Preventive Detention Act

The post 4 years behind bars, bail granted to two accused arrested under UAPA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Siddique Kappan granted bail in the PMLA case by the Allahabad Court

Fri, 23 Dec 2022 13:20:40 +0000

Image Courtesy: eastcoastdaily.in

In a suit filed against him under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court granted journalist Siddique Kappan bail on December 23, 2022.

The Enforcement Directorate had filed the PMLA complaint in February 2021 against Kappan and others. In September, he had been granted bail in connection with a charge brought under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. However, he remained in jail due to the ED case, for which he was denied bail in October by a Lucknow sessions court. He had moved to the High Court seeking bail earlier in October 2022. The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has now granted him bail. The order has not been made available yet.

However, Kappan will still not be able to walk free immediately as the High Court order will have to be presented to the PMLA court and the vacation may stand in the way.

The order of the Allahabad High Court paves way for release from prison, 3 months after he was granted bail by Supreme Court in all other cases regist

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India U.U. Lalit and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat passed the order while allowing the appeal filed by Kappan against the PMLA court denying him bail. The verification sureties, including the one given by former vice-chancellor of Lucknow University, Roop Rekha Verma, have still to be completed by the authorities.

What were the charges against him under PMLA?

In the PMLA case, the ED had arrested Kappan on charges that he had obtained money from a foreign country without authorization and used it to commit crimes against the interests of the country.

On October 6, 2020, Kappan and three other people were arrested while they were on their way to Hathras in Uttar Pradesh where a Dalit woman had died after allegedly being gang-raped. The police had claimed that the accused was trying to disturb the law and order in Hathras, and also alleged that the accused had links with the Popular Front of India (PFI). The journalist had initially been detained by police for violations of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The ED then filed a case against him in accordance with the anti-money laundering law.

The central agency had charged Kappan, Rahman, Ahmed, and Alam with receiving money from the now-banned Popular Front of India to “incite riots”. Rahman is the national treasurer of the Campus Front of India, a student body of the PFI. Ahmed is the general secretary of the Campus Front of India’s Delhi unit, while Alam is a member of the outfit as well as the PFI.

Bail in the Hathras Conspiracy Case

Siddique Kappan had been granted bail in the UAPA charges levied against him, after spending more than 2 years in jail. All the charges have now finally been cleared against him. It is important to note that three months ago, on September 9, the Supreme Court had granted bail to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan, who has been under the custody of the Uttar Pradesh Police since October 6, 2020, on his charges filed under the UAPA.

Kappan had been kept under custody for alleged offences under Sections 17/18 of UAPA, Sections 120B 153A/295A IPC, 65/72 IT Act for alleged conspiracy to incite riots following the gangrape-murder of a Dalit minor girl in Hathras. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court bench comprising of Chief Justice of India U.U. Lalit and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat in all the above-mentioned sections.

The order can be read here.

The post Siddique Kappan granted bail in the PMLA case by the Allahabad Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mumbai Court grants bail to three students in the Bulli Bai app case

Wed, 22 Jun 2022 13:25:17 +0000

Image Courtesy: thehindu.com

The Mumbai sessions court on Tuesday, June 21, 2022 granted bail to the three accusedAumkareshwar Thakur, NeerajBishnoi and Neeraj Singh in the ‘Bulli Bai’/’Sulli Deals’ cases who were still in custody. As the three other accused, Shweta Singh (18) and MayankRawat (21), who hail from Uttarakhand and Vishal Jha (21) a resident of Bangalore in the cases had already been granted bail earlier this year, all six accused in the cases are now out on bail. All three accused have been restricted from travelling abroad without prior permission of the court and have also been directed to appear before the police once every month.

According to the live Law, The FIR against them was registered earlier this month against necessary Twitter handles and the developer of Bulli Bai The offences are Sections 153A (promoting enmity on grounds of religion etc), 153B (imputations prejudicial to national-integration), 295A (insulting religious beliefs), 354D (stalking), 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), 500 (criminal defamation) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 (publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

As part of its relentless HateWatch campaign, CJP had complained to Twitter in May-June 2021 against abuse and intimidation at Muslim women through twitter accounts. In response, Twitter had taken action against 21 twitter accounts for threatening Muslim women with sexual violence and violating the Twitter rules and guidance in early July 21.

CJP in its complaint dated May 26, had also brought to Twitter’s attention certain posts made through these accounts that that demeaned Muslim women as “sex objects for Hindu men”. The content displayed pornographic videos of women in hijab with inflammatory captions presenting Muslim women as objects meant to be sexually exploited, and also photoshopped pictures of Hindu men and pregnant women in saffron hijab. Out of these, Twitter has removed 11 posts for violating Twitter norms.

In addition to this, certain reported accounts had already been removed after our complaint and thus, Twitter could not take appropriate action. Twitter also informed us that another online post reported by us was not hosted by it, and appeared to be posted on a third-party website (Facebook). CJP shall pursue this with Facebook and it intends to keep a close track of such content on all digital platforms and file complaints before appropriate authority as part of our sustained Hate Watch Campaign.

Facts of the case

On January 1, 2022, several Muslim women found themselves on ‘auction’ on an app called Bulli Bai. The app hosted by the GitHub platform had used their photographs, many of them doctored. According to the victims, the profiles, which contained images and other personal details of the victims, were created and being propagated without the consent of the women.

On March 28, 2022, Dr. Pankaj Sharma, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) of Patiala House Court in Delhi granted bail to Aumkareshwar Thakur (26), the alleged creator of ‘S**li Deals’ app as well as NeerajBishnoi (21), alleged creator of ‘B**li Bai’ app.After bail had been first refused in January 2021, chargesheets had been filed against the ‘prime accused’ Aumkareshwar Thakur and NeerajBishnoiinearly March 2021. Both accused have been charged with allegedly running the “S**li Deals and B**li Bai mobile apps to auction Muslim women in the virtual space.”

Court’s Order

In the session’s court’s June 21 order, additional sessions judge A.B. Sharma directed that the accused be released upon furnishing a Rs 50,000 bail bond along with one or two sureties of the same amount,Bar and Benchreported.Their bail conditions included that they must pay monthly visits to the cyber police station and that they can not leave the country without the prior permission of the court. In the bail application, submitted through advocate ShivamDeshmukh, several grounds were put forth arguing for the grant of bail. It argued that the accused had been falsely implicated in the case and have not committed the alleged offences; that they are not the creators of the app and were merely followers, which does not constitute an offence; and that since the punishment for the offences is less than three years, incarceration is unwarranted.

Further, the application argued that they had already been granted bail from a Delhi court and that their co-accused had already been granted bail; and that since all the relevant electronic evidence has been seized, the cannot tamper with it.Interestingly, Deshmukh even contended that the charges against the applicants which allege the incitement of disharmony among different religions do not hold because only one religion (Islam) was targeted.Finally, the application argued that the accused hail from ‘respectable’ families and that the alleged act is, therefore, ‘beyond imagination’. Yet, it stated that even if the allegations are true, the court should take a “fatherly view” and that the accused require counselling rather than incarceration.

Bulli Bai/Sulli Deals

Sulli Deals’ put up photographs of Indian Muslim women, listing them for “sale”, a similar website and app by the name of ‘Bulli Bai’ has triggered outrage. For those who may not be aware, ‘Bulli/Sulli’ are Islamophobic slurs referring to Muslim women, alterations of the term ‘Mulli’ often used by the right wing to troll Muslim women.

In July 2021, nearly 80 Muslim women were targeted and put up “for sale” on the S**li Deals app, on Githuband in January 2022, over 100 Muslim women were targeted using the B**li Bai app. Both B**li and S**li are sexually derogatory words used to target Muslim women. In both cases, there was no real sale of any kind – the purpose wass to degrade and humiliate Muslim women by sharing their personal images, and also to harass them by sharing their personal information.

While Delhi police arrested NeerajBishnoi from Jorhat, Assam on January 6, 2022, AumkareshwarThakurwas arrested from Indore, Madhya Pradesh on January 9, 2022. Arrests were also made by Mumbai Police around same time wherein Vishal Kumar aka Vishal Jha a 21-year-old from Bengaluru, Karnataka, 21-year-old MayankRawal and 18-year-old Shweta Singh, both from Uttarakhand. The FIR in the case was registered under sections 153A, 153 B, 295A, 354D, 509, 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) along with Section 67 Information Technology Act.

As reported by Sabrangindia, the UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, Dr Fernand de Varennes, has taken note of the vile anti Muslim ‘S**li Deals’ as hate speech. Varennes said such harassment of Muslim women in India must be condemned and the law should act against it “as soon as they occur”. He added that “all Human Rights of minorities need to be fully & equally protected.”

What’s also important to note here is that in January 2022, an ecosystem of TRADs had come to light when the Delhi police revealed that both Aumkareshwar Thakur and NirajBishnoi were members of TRAD groups online. According to the police, Thakur had joined a TRAD group named Tradmahasabha using the @gangescion Twitter handle. He reportedly told the police that the idea to target and defame Muslim women came from discussions among members of this group. However, he had eventually deleted his online footprint.

TRADs are Hate groups of people identifying themselves as “Traditionalists” or “Trads”. The name stems from the fact that these groups are operating predominantly on Telegram, Reddit, 4chan and Discord (thus TR4D or TRAD). They run an elaborate social media campaign to popularise these apps, trolling anyone who does not agree with their extreme right-wing supremacist views. Moreover, they claim to be preserving “tradition” by targeting those who speak up against it and thereby targeting outspoken Muslim women whose images, names and Twitter handles were misused by the said auction apps.

In January 2022, fifty organisations including the Citizens for Justice and Peace (cjp.org.in) had written to the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, urging him to ensure that the real masterminds behind both the Su**I Deals and Bu**I Bai Apps are investigated and prosecuted. Other organisations included: Forum Against Oppression of Women (FAOW), Jan SwasthyaAbhiyan (Mumbai), Justice Coalition of Religious (West India), People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) – Maharashtra, Bebaak Collective, Haq Hai, Parcham Collective, and many others. The Mumbai police has since filed a chargesheet in the case.

The post Mumbai Court grants bail to three students in the Bulli Bai app case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Madras HC shoots down Bar Association’s resolution to not offer legal assistance to certain accused

Thu, 26 May 2022 10:42:29 +0000

Image Courtesy:indianexpress.com

On April 19, 2022 the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court presided by Justice K. Murali Shankar in the Criminal case of Ganapathy & Ors. v/s. State of Tamil Nadu, granted bail to three people charged under section 294(b), 427, 448, 324, 307, 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. They were being held in judicial custody and their path to justice had been derailed after the Karaikudi Bar Association passed a resolution to not represent them.

The Court condemned the resolution and it to be illegal, and said, “Restraining its members not to appear for the petitioners is illegal and null and void and the same has no force of law. No doubt, any attack on the advocates can’t be viewed lightly and the same is to be condemned sternly and that the attackers are to be dealt with iron hands.”

Brief background of the case

The bail petition is filed by three accused pertaining to a First Information Report (FIR) registered in Karaikudi South Police Station as Cr. No. 47 of 2022 in Sivagangai District. The Complainant of this case along with his wife, are practicing advocates in the Courts at Karaikudi. The first Petitioner’s brother Kazi resides in a house opposite to that of the complainant. Kazi holds the Complainant and his wife responsible for the matrimonial dispute and separation from his wife.

On March 21, 2022 around 08:30 P.M, accused no. 1 to 3 allegedly trespassed into the complainant’s house, abused the complainant with filthy language, had attacked the complainant and his wife with knife, sword and wooden logs and also threatened them with dire consequences. The Complainant and his wife had suffered with serious injuries.

During the Complainant’s treatment, the police recorded the complainant’s statement and registered a FIR as Cr. No. 47 of 2022 under sections 294(b), 427, 448, 324, 307, 506 (ii) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. The accused 1 and 2 have surrendered on March 21, 2022 and accused 3 have surrendered on March 26, 2022 before the Karaikudi Police Station and they have been remanded to judicial custody.

On March 22, 2022 Karaikudi Bar Association passed a resolution stating that no one should file bail applications in Cr. No. 47 of 2022 before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi. The Petitioners argued that the members of Bar Association have prevented the Petitioner’s Counsel from appearing before the concerned Court, and hence on April 04, 2022, the bail application of the Petitioners was dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution.

The members of the Bar Association had also prevented the Petitioners Counsel to file a copy application for getting dismissal order and thereby prevented them from filing any bail petition before the District Court, Sivagangai. Hence the Petitioners were left with no other option but to approach the High Court directly for bail. The Petitioner had hence filed a bail application along with a Petition seeking permission to move the bail petition before this Court without moving to the concerned Sessions Court.

Court’s observation and Order

On the Complainant’s objection about the filing of the bail application directly to this Court before approaching the Sessions Court, the Court held, “It is pertinent to mention that Section 439 / 438 Cr.P.C., confers jurisdiction on the High Court and the Sessions Court, an application should be ordinarily filed before the Sessions Court at the first instance and not directly before the High Court. But at the same time that for filing an application directly before the High Court, the applicant has to demonstrate and satisfy the High Court that there exists exceptional, rare or unusual reasons for him to approach the High Court directly.”

The Court, to elaborate on the ‘rare and special circumstances’, relied upon the Allahabad High Court Judgments in the case Vinod Kumar v/s. State of UP and Anr. (2019), where the Court had held that a bail application can be directly filed in the High Court provided there are strong, cogent, compelling and special circumstances.

The Court further observed that the learned Principal District Judge, Sivagangai had already stated that the Bar Association had passed the resolution and also the Bar Association had itself admitted that they had passed such resolution. Considering this fact the Court held, “Considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is satisfied that there existed unusual and exceptional reason for moving this Court directly and accordingly, permission sought for, is granted.”

The Court for the resolution aspect relied upon the A.S Mohammed Rafeeq v/s. State of Tamil Nadu, where the Court held that:

“Sometimes the Bar Association passes a resolution that they will not defend a person who is alleged to be a terrorist or a person accused of a brutal or heinous crime or involved in a rape case. In our opinion, such resolutions are wholly illegal, against all traditions of the bar, and against professional ethics. Every person, however, wicked, depraved, vile, degenerate, perverted, loathsome, execrable, vicious or repulsive he may be regarded by society has a right to be defended in a court of law and correspondingly it is the duty of the lawyer to defend him.”

The Court while speaking about the resolution passed by the Bar Association said, “This Court has no hesitation to hold that the resolution passed by the Karaikudi Bar Association dated 22.03.2022 restraining its members not to appear for the petitioners is illegal and null and void and the same has no force of law. No doubt, any attack on the advocates can’t be viewed lightly and the same is to be condemned sternly and that the attackers are to be dealt with iron hands. But at the same time, the Bar Association is not expected to pass such a resolution, violating the Constitution and the Law of the land declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

The Court while granting bail to the Petitioners held, “Considering the facts that there existed previous enmity between the de facto complainant’s family and the family of the first petitioner’s brother Kasi, that the injured have been discharged from the hospital, that the petitioners 1 and 2 are not having any bad antecedents, that the third accused is not a hooligan as stated by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also taking note of the fact that the petitioners 1 and 2 are in custody from 21.03.2022 and the third accused from 26.03.2022, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.”

The Petitioners were granted bail on following conditions:

The Petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) to the credit of Government of Tamil Nadu, CMPRF (Chief Minister Public Relief Fund) without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court and produce the receipt/acknowledgment before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi.
On production of such receipt/acknowledgment, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi.
The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity.
The Petitioners shall stay at Chengalpattu and report before the Chengalpattu Town Police Station daily at 10.30a.m., for a period of 15 days and thereafter before the respondent police daily at 10.30a.m., until further orders.
The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness.
The petitioners shall not abscond during trial.
On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed.
If the accused / petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

The Court also directed the Registry to call for an explanation from the Karaikudi Bar Association as to why necessary directions should not be issued to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry for taking action to de-recognise the Bar Association and as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against the office bearers of the Karaikudi Bar Association and directed to submit the explanation on or before 27.04.2022.

The Order may be read here:

The post Madras HC shoots down Bar Association’s resolution to not offer legal assistance to certain accused appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Delhi: Hindu College associate professor Rattan Lal granted bail

Sat, 21 May 2022 13:17:54 +0000

Delhi University’s Hindu College associate professor Rattan Lal was granted bail on Saturday evening, hours after his late night arrest on Friday. A city court granted bail to Prof Lal, on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 and one surety of the same amount. Delhi Police had arrested Lal under Indian Penal Code sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) and 295A (deliberate act to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion).

According to a report in Indian Express, Lal was produced before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Siddhartha Malik at the Tis Hazari court by the Delhi police, who sought his 14-day judicial custody. Lal’s lawyers had moved his bail application before the CMM arguing that his arrest was in violation of Supreme Court guidelines in the Arnesh Kumar judgement and that he did not incite anyone through his social media post.

The FIR, that led to his arrest, had been filed based on a complaint filed by Vineet Jindal, a Delhi-based lawyer on Tuesday night. Vineet Jindal had accused Lal of sharing a “derogatory, inciting and provocative tweet” on the “Shivling” that was allegedly discovered in the Wazu Khana (ablution tank) of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi.

According to the bail order, the social media post made by Prof Ratan Lal was “clearly speculative in nature with regard to a structure/ symbol which as of now is not accessible in public domain”. The court said considering the context, his post was at best a “failed attempt at satire regarding a controversial subject which has backfired.”

The court added that “the Indian civilisation was “one of the oldest in the world and known to be tolerant and accepting to all religions. The presence or absence of intention to create animosity/ hatred by words is subjective in nature as is the perception of the recipient who reads/ hears a statement. India is a country of more than 130 crores people and any subject can have 130 crore different views and perceptions.”

Appearing for Delhi Police, Additional public prosecutor Atul Shrivastava, stated before the court that “prima facie some comments have been passed that have the potential to disturb the public tranquillity… the most important aspect, not expected from such an educated person,was after making such type of remarks, he has not stopped there, he has been defending himself through different videos uploaded on YouTube.”

The court observed that, “the feeling of hurt felt by an individual cannot represent the entire group or community and any such complaint regarding hurt feelings has to be seen in its context considering the entire spectrum of facts/ circumstances.”

Meanwhile, Lal’s lawyers had reportedly told the court that he was “an authority on Ambedkar” and a person of his “stature and intellect” had “not created any enmity” or “called for violence” adding that he had in fact been respectful to the Hindu god Shiva, and submitted, “Shiva is not the property of a certain section of society. Would he incite his own people? He is a Shiv devotee himself.”

The court said that Lal was a person of “good repute with no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of the accused fleeing” . The court did agree that Lal’s action “was avoidable”, and has in its bail condition ordered that he “strictly refrain from posting any social media posts” on the subject that resulted in this FIR.

Delhi University students, teachers, and activists had gathered at midnight at the Maurice Nagar police station to protest the late night arrest of Prof Rattan Lal. Even after he was granted bail, student groups are likely to hold more public meetings to condemn the targeting of the popular professor, who is a known face on social media as well.

According to news reports, the prosecutor had “addressed the circumstances surrounding Lal’s arrest and cited a Delhi High Court order dealing with the case of a smuggler and said that if there was an apprehension that a person was going to commit a similar offence then it empowered the police to proceed with the arrest without serving a notice.”

The post Delhi: Hindu College associate professor Rattan Lal granted bail appeared first on SabrangIndia.

BREAKING: Jignesh Mevani gets bail in assault case in Assam

Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:58:25 +0000

Image Courtesy:indianexpress.com

In a huge relief for Jignesh Mevani, a court in Barpeta has granted him bail in connection with the case involving assaulting a woman police officer in Assam. Sources have told SabrangIndia that he has been granted bail on a personal bond of Rs 1,000/-.

This was the second case filed against him. Mevani was arrested by the Barpeta police in this case shortly after receiving bail in the Twitter case. In this case, he has been booked under IPC sections 294 (obscene acts and songs), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging duty) and 354 (outraging the modesty of a woman).

Previously a lower court in Barpeta had denied him bail and remanded him to five days police custody for allegedly assaulting a woman police officer and preventing her from doing her duty. On Thursday, Mevani’s legal team moved a higher court and though the hearing was concluded on the same day, the court reserved its order. The court granted him bail today.

Mevani, an independent Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) from Vadgam in Gujarat, was first arrested by the Assam Police on April 20, 2022, from the Palanpur circuit house in Banaskantha district in Gujarat at around 11:30 P.M on the complaint of a BJP member from Kokrajhar about his allegedly offensive tweets. He was taken to Ahmedabad where he was kept overnight before being flown to Assam the following day.

Here, he was first denied bail by a Kokrajhar court and remanded to police custody for three days Then he was granted bail on April 25, shortly before being arrested again by the Barpeta Police.

The Congress party has been rallying strongly behind Mevani ever since he was arrested, offering legal assistance, checking in on him to ensure he was not tortured or ill treated in custody, and organising multiple protests and demonstartions across two states – Guajarat and Assam. This is because Mevani, who would not join the Congress party alongside fellow activist-turned-politician Kanhaiya Kumar in September 2021 due to a technicality, is all set to join the party formally at the end of his term as MLA. Assembly elections are due in Gujarat later this year.

The post BREAKING: Jignesh Mevani gets bail in assault case in Assam appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bajrang Muni Das granted bail within 10 days of being arrested!

Mon, 25 Apr 2022 10:23:36 +0000

Image Courtesy:economictimes.indiatimes.com

On April 23, 2022, the District Court Judge Sanjai Kumar, Sitapur, granted bail to Bajrang Muni Das, ‘Mahant’ of the Maharshi Shri Lakshman Das Udasin Ashram. Das had been accused of openly threatening Muslim women with rape as he spoke from his vehicle parked outside a mosque in Khairabad, Uttar Pradesh.

As he stepped out of prison this Sunday, he was quoted by The Telegraph saying, “I don’t regret my statement. I shall continue to protect my Hindu religion and women. I’m ready to go to jail and face such attacks a thousand times.”

Das was arrested by the police on April 13, 2022 from Sitapur, 100 km from state capital Lucknow, six days after the incident, and was charged under sections 298 (utterance or gesture in the sight of that person or places with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person), 354 (sexual harassment, making sexually-coloured remarks) and 509 (using word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). UP ADG (Law and Order) Prashant Kumar had reportedly stated that stringent action would be taken against Das.

But Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) was apprehensive that adequate legal action would not be taken against Das, as the charges against him were just a mild rap on the wrist. Pointing out that the criminal complaint lodged against Das was limited, and should actually contain more serious and comprehensive sections of the law, CJP had urged in a separate complaint with the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, that this be expanded and the investigation be non-partisan. Key sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) like Sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 354A, 503, 504 and 505 were not applied to the hate offender. Besides Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 were missing in the police registered FIR.

A viral video on Twitter, showed Bajrang Muni Das openly threatening Muslim women with sexual assault while addressing supporters from his vehicle parked outside a mosque in Sitapur. Das’s audience comprised people who were part of a procession on the occasion of Hindu New Year. Much like many such processions being taken out recently, they made it a point to halt outside a mosque where Das spoke into a microphone connected to loudspeaker and said, “If you tease a single [Hindu] girl, I will abduct your daughters and daughters-in-law from your house, and rape them in public.” The vile rape threat was filmed on video and went viral online shortly thereafter.

There are several hate instigating videos by Bajrang Muni Das made in the recent past:

“Har mulle ko ghar se aur uske masjid se kheench ke maarunga jo bhi Hindu ki taraf dekha toh”– one more video of Bajrang Muni threatening violence against Muslims. But @sitapurpolice has still not arrested him.

Video by TV9. pic.twitter.com/42N94t0EIp

— Kaushik Raj (@kaushikrj6) April 13, 2022

Here is another video of ‘Mahant’ Bajrang Muni abusing and threatening Muslims. @sitapurpolice @Uppolice https://t.co/BndaJh4QdG pic.twitter.com/FlsM5HBerZ

— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) April 8, 2022

The post Bajrang Muni Das granted bail within 10 days of being arrested! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

BREAKING: Assam court grants Jignesh Mevani bail

Mon, 25 Apr 2022 10:10:43 +0000

Image Courtesy:indiatvnews.com

In a huge relief for Jignesh Mevani, an Assam court has granted him bail in connection with a case involving two allegedly offensive tweets against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The independent Member of Legislative Assembly from Gujarat was arrested on Wednesday night from the Palanpur circuit house in Gujarat’s Banaskantha district and was flown to Assam the next day as the complaint against him had been filed in Kokrajhar. Mevani was arrested based on a complaint by BJP member Arup Kumar Dey of Bhabanipur village in Kokrajhar, for posting two tweets that have since been blocked in India. The tweets reportedly said:

“Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who considers Godse his worshipping deity, is on a tour of Gujarat from April 20. I request him to make an appeal for peace in Himmatnagar, Khambat and Veraval which suffered communal clashes. This is the minimum one expects from the builder of Mahatma Mandir.”

“The traitors of Nagpur who didn’t accept the tricolor for decades, the same RSS people were dancing at a mosque with saffron flag in Veraval. Traitors, have some shame. Maintain peace and harmony in the country of Ram Prasad Bismil and Ashfaqullah Khan.”

Mevani was picked up from the Palanpur guest house around 11 P.M on Wednesday night and first taken to Ahmedabad. The next morning, he was flown to Assam and taken to Kokrajhar. Mevani was booked under IPC sections 120 B (criminal conspiracy), 153 A (promoting enmity between groups), 295 A (outraging and insulting religious beliefs), 504 (insult with intent to provoke) and 505 (public mischief).

On Thursday, the court of the Kokrajhar Chief Judicial Magistrate had remanded Jignesh Mevani to three days police custody and also said that he cannot be taken out of Kokrajhar by the police. He was denied bail. The court while denying Mevani bail observed, “There is incriminating material in the case diary against the accused person.” The court accepted the Investigating Officers submission that there was “credible evidence” against Mevani, and concluded that there were “reasonable grounds for the arrest of the accused person and police remand”.

The court however, directed the police “not to cause any torture to the accused during the period of police custody.” The court specifically said, “I.O is directed to strictly follow the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in D.K Basu’s case during police custody.”

On Sunday, the court reserved order in connection with Mevani’s bail plea and remanded him to judicial custody, and the order was expected to be pronounced earlier today. However, a member of Mevani’s legal team told SabrangIndia that the Chief Judicial Magistrate had taken over the case in an unprecedented move earlier today when the bail order was expected to be pronounced at 10:30 A.M before the original magistrate’s court. The CJM court has now granted him bail.

Meanwhile, a source told SabrangIndia that personnel from Barpeta Police are already waiting to take Mevani into custody in connection with another case, however, details of that case are not yet known.

The post BREAKING: Assam court grants Jignesh Mevani bail appeared first on SabrangIndia.

B**lli Bai case: Three accused granted Bail by Mumbai Court

Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:57:34 +0000

Image Courtesy:bengali.abplive.com

A Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Bandra, granted bail to three of the six accused in the B**li Bai case. The Court observed that the three had minimal role to play and they were at a tender and immature age, which were misused by the other older accused.

On April 12, 2022, Magistrate Komal Singh Rajput granted bail to Vishal Kumar Jha, Shweta Singh and Mayank Agarwal and refused bail to Omkareshwar Thakur and Neeraj Singh. The third accused Neeraj Bishnoi has been asked to file a fresh application as the application submitted to the Court was neither signed by him nor his advocate.

The Magistrate granting bail observed that they are students of very tender age and they are expecting to appear for exams, and if they are allowed to remain in jail, it will adversely affect their future prospects.

The Court also requested the parents or guardians of the accused, who were granted bail, to provide them with counseling on norms of social conduct, including conduct on social media.

As reported by Live Law, the three accused were granted bail of Rs. 25,000 each along with a personal bond and surety bond. They have been directed to furnish detailed addresses of themselves, their parents and sureties and relevant proofs, along with all their mobile numbers.

The court also added that the record of the investigation reflected that even if the trial commenced within a short span of time, its immediate conclusion was not possible “as the evidence of technical nature, which is spread across the country, is going to come on record.” The court said the trial will “take substantial time,” reported Live Law.

Background of the case

In July 2021, nearly 80 Muslim women were targeted and put up “for auction” on the S**li Deals app, and in January 2022, over 100 Muslim women were targeted using the B**li Bai app. Both B**li and S**li are sexually derogatory words used to target Muslim women. In both cases, there was no real sale of any kind – the purpose was to degrade and humiliate Muslim women by sharing their personal images, and also to harass them by sharing their personal information.

While Delhi police arrested Neeraj Bishnoi from Jorhat, Assam on January 6, 2022, Omkareshwar Thakur was arrested from Indore, Madhya Pradesh on January 9, 2022. Arrests were also made by Mumbai Police around the same time wherein Vishal Kumar aka Vishal Jha a 21-year-old from Bengaluru, Karnataka, 21-year-old Mayank Rawal and 18-year-old Shweta Singh, both from Uttarakhand. The FIR in the case was registered under sections 153A, 153 B, 295A, 354D, 509, 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) along with Section 67 Information Technology Act.

As reported by SabrangIndia, the UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, Dr Fernand de Varennes, has taken note of the vile anti Muslim ‘S**li Deals’ as hate speech. Varennes said such harassment of Muslim women in India must be condemned and the law should act against it “as soon as they occur”. He added that “all Human Rights of minorities need to be fully & equally protected.”

What’s also important to note here is that in January 2022, an ecosystem of TRADs had come to light when the Delhi police revealed that both Omkareshwar Thakur and Niraj Bishnoi were members of TRAD groups online. According to the police, Thakur had joined a TRAD group named Tradmahasabha using the @gangescion Twitter handle. He reportedly told the police that the idea to target and defame Muslim women came from discussions among members of this group. However, he had eventually deleted his online footprint.

In January 2022, fifty organisations including Citizens for Justice and Peace had written to the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, urging him to ensure that the real masterminds behind both the Su**I Deals and Bu**I Bai Apps are investigated and prosecuted. Other organisations included: Forum Against Oppression of Women (FAOW), Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (Mumbai), Justice Coalition of Religious (West India), People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) – Maharashtra, Bebaak Collective, Haq Hai, Parcham Collective, and many others. The Mumbai police have since filed a chargesheet in the case.

Masterminds behind ‘S**li Deals’ and ‘B**li Bai’ apps granted bail
Has inaction prompted another Muslim women’s auction on the internet?
‘S**li Deals’ a form of Hate Speech: UN Special Rapporteur
Apps auctioning women fuelled by a TRADition of Hate
Three arrested in Bulli Bai case

The post B**lli Bai case: Three accused granted Bail by Mumbai Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.