NIA chargesheets key accused in case relating to sharing of IS content online
The accused, A. Alfasith, hailing from Mayiladuthurai district, has been chargesheeted under Sections 153A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 13 and 39 of UAPA Act before the NIA Special Court in Poonamallee.
Alfasith was closely associated with radicalised Islamists and die-hard supporters of IS, including Mohemmed Ashik and Sathik Batcha, who were involved in several terror-related cases in Tamil Nadu, the NIA alleged.
In a press release, NIA said during investigation, it found sufficient evidence establishing that Alfasith and his associates circulated incriminating IS-related videos, documents, and images through social media platforms, targeting hundreds of young Muslim boys. They had created several WhatsApp and Telegram groups, such as 'Islamic State' and 'Black Flag Soldiers,' to promote unlawful activities threatening the unity, security, and communal harmony of the country.
Their agenda was to spread IS ideology and radicalise the vulnerable youth. Investigations further revealed that Alfasith followed the activities of the global terrorist group IS and had downloaded incriminating videos and documents from an IS-operated Telegram Channel 'nashida33' (Al Wala Val Baro).
NIA is continuing with its investigation to uncover the larger conspiracy behind the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Nivin Pauly files case against producer Shamnas for allegedly forging his signature while registering Action Hero Biju 2
Police have registered a case against Malayalam film producer PA Shamnas for allegedly forging actor-producer Nivin Pauly's signature to obtain the title of the upcoming film Action Hero Biju 2. (Also Read: Case filed against Nivin Pauly, director Abrid Shine for 'financial fraud' in Action Hero Biju 2 deal) Nivin Pauly was accused of financial fraud by producer PA Shamnas, the actor filed a counter complaint. Nivin Pauly files case on producer Shamnas Police sources said that based on a complaint from Nivin, an FIR was registered against Shamnas under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 465 (forgery) and 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record). In the agreement signed in 2023 by Nivin, director Abrid Shine, and Shamnas to make the film Action Hero Biju 2, all the rights to the film were given to Nivin's production company, Pauly Junior. In his complaint, Nivin said Shamnas acquired the rights to the film's name from the Kerala Film Chamber by hiding the agreement. A document with Nivin's forged signature was presented for this. When these matters came to light during the police investigation, the Palarivattom police registered a case against Shamnas. The case against Nivin Pauly by Shamnas The police had earlier registered a case against Nivin on a complaint filed by Shamnas, who claimed that he owned the rights to the film and that Pauly Junior Company had given the overseas rights to another company without his knowledge. The complainant has alleged that, as Mahaveeryar (2022) was not a commercial success, Nivin offered to pay him ₹95 lakh. Subsequently, the actor also promised to make him a partner in his upcoming film Action Hero Biju 2, directed by Abrid Shine, and made him spend around ₹1.9 crore for the movie's shooting, Shamnas has alleged in his complaint. The actor's counter complaint states that Shamnas conspired to humiliate Nivin in public and get his way by threatening him while the dispute over the contract was still pending. The upcoming movie's first part, Action Hero Biju (2016), starring Nivin Pauly and directed by Abrid, was a mega hit in Malayalam.
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Gurugram: 13 get life term for killing liquor trader in '16 gang war
A sessions court in Gurugram on Tuesday sentenced 13 individuals—including the brother of deceased gangster Sandeep Gadoli—to rigorous life imprisonment in the 2016 murder of liquor trader Manish Gujjar, alias Pappu, in what police said was a fallout of gang rivalry and a bid to capture a lucrative liquor business in the region. Police said the motive for the murder was linked to the ongoing gang rivalry between Sandeep Gadoli and Binder Gujjar, as well as the accused's alleged attempt to take over Gujjar's liquor distribution business. (File photo) According to police, the murder took place on the night of October 18, 2016, when 42-year-old Manish Gujjar, elder brother of gangster Binder Gujjar, was shot dead at his liquor shop on Old Railway Road, New Colony. Gujjar had gone to the shop to collect money when a group of armed men opened fire indiscriminately, killing him on the spot. His friend Liyakat Ali and driver Sukhbir also sustained multiple bullet injuries during the shootout. The court of additional district and sessions judge Sunil Chauhan found all 13 accused guilty under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Arms Act. 'The court sentenced rigorous life imprisonment and a ₹50,000 fine to all the convicts, including Brahm Prakash, brother of gangster Sandeep Gadoli, under Section 302 (murder) of the IPC,' said Sandeep Kumar, public relations officer of the Gurugram police. He added, 'The court also held them guilty under Section 307 (attempt to murder) of IPC and sentenced them to an additional 10 years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹25,000 each. Further, three convicts—Dinesh, Kuldeep, and Pawan Kumar—were sentenced to three years' imprisonment and fined ₹10,000 each under Section 25(1) of the Arms Act. All sentences will run concurrently. Police said the motive for the murder was linked to the ongoing gang rivalry between Sandeep Gadoli and Binder Gujjar, as well as the accused's alleged attempt to take over Gujjar's liquor distribution business, Shiv Shakti Wines, which operated in Gurugram and other districts. Sandeep Gadoli, a key rival of Binder, was killed in an alleged fake encounter by a Gurugram police team in a Mumbai hotel on February 7, 2016. Binder Gujjar is currently lodged in a jail in Mumbai in connection with that case. Binder allegedly colluded with members of the Gurugram police, providing them with information about rival Sandeep's whereabouts in order to orchestrate his elimination through a staged encounter, officers aware of the case added.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
34 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Malegaon blast verdict likely on July 31, 17 years after deadly attack
Almost 17 years after a blast killed six persons and left more than 100 injured in Maharashtra's communally sensitive Malegaon town, a special NIA court is likely to deliver its verdict in the case on Thursday. Seven accused, including BJP leader and former MP Pragya Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit, faced trial in the case for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code. Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Sameer Kulkarni are the other accused in the case. The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which conducted the probe into the case, has sought "commensurate punishment" for the accused. The trial, which started in 2018, got over on April 19, 2025, and the case was reserved for judgement. Six persons were killed and more than 100 injured when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle went off near a mosque in the town, located about 200 km from Mumbai, on September 29, 2008. In its final argument, the NIA submitted that the blast in Malegaon - a town with a sizable Muslim population - was orchestrated by the conspirators to terrorise a section of Muslim community, disrupt essential services, create communal tensions, and threaten the state's internal security. The NIA has said that based on "relevant, admissible, cogent, trustworthy, wholly reliable and proved evidence" it "conclusively and cogently" established the crucial circumstances to form a complete chain of events. It was established that the accused were "directly involved in the part of larger conspiracy hatched amongst themselves and (were) instrumental in causing a bomb explosion," the prosecution contended. The blast took place during the holy month of Ramzan, just before the Navratri festival, the NIA pointed out, claiming the intention of the accused was to strike terror in a section of the Muslim community. The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being transferred to the NIA in 2011. The trial in the case began in 2018 after the court framed charges against the seven accused. The charges comprised UAPA sections 16 (committing terrorist act) and 18 (conspiring to commit terrorist act) and various IPC sections, including 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 153 (a) (promoting enmity between two religious groups). During the trial, the prosecution presented 323 witnesses, of whom 37 turned hostile. Thakur, in her final statement, submitted that her implication in the case is "totally illegal, bad in law and contrary to the law of the land and with malafide intention and ulterior motive". Citing the testimony of Mohan Kulkarni, an ATS officer who was part of the probe, Thakur claimed his statement "clearly shows she is an innocent person". Further referring to the officer's testimony, the BJP leader alleged she has been "implicated in this case by manipulating evidence with a prejudiced mind as it was pre-decided to implicate her". Purohit has submitted that "there is no material evidence" linking him to the alleged offence. "The prosecution's case rests on fabricated and contradictory witness statements that are devoid of any independent corroboration and fail to meet the evidentiary threshold required in law," his final arguments claimed. He alleged the investigation was "tainted by serious procedural irregularities and a complete disregard for standard legal protocols". "These lapses not only vitiate the fairness of the proceedings but also render the prosecution's case wholly speculative and unreliable," he added. The other accused, too, have made similar submissions. The intervenor, representing the victims' side, contended the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case "is a classic example where the defense lacks a reasoned argument". "Some of the accused claim the bombing never happened, while others blame it on SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India). Each of the seven accused has advanced different and often conflicting defenses which are contrary to each other's claim which itself strengthens the case of prosecution," the victims said in their final submission. The present prosecuting agency, NIA, has established beyond reasonable doubt the involvement of all the accused in the bomb blast, they submitted.
