Majithia to remain in shared barrack as court defers plea for separate jail cell
Majithia, currently in judicial custody in connection with a disproportionate assets case allegedly involving the laundering of ₹540 crore in drug money, had filed an application on July 12 requesting to be shifted to a personal cell. Citing his Z-plus security cover and high-profile political background, Majithia argued that housing him with general inmates poses serious threats to his safety.
With the prosecution absent, the court could not proceed with the scheduled hearing, and Majithia will continue to stay in shared barracks until the next hearing.
In a related development, Majithia has also filed a regular bail application, which is set for hearing on July 22. The court has issued notice to the state government, seeking its formal reply before the hearing.
Majithia was arrested on June 25 from his Amritsar residence by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau in connection with an investigation into assets allegedly disproportionate to his known sources of income. After spending 12 days in police remand, he was sent to judicial custody on July 6, as the Vigilance Bureau did not seek an extension of the remand.
In his application, Majithia emphasised the need for special lodging arrangements, highlighting the security risks associated with his status as a senior political figure and a former cabinet minister.
Meanwhile, SAD leaders have slammed the AAP-led Punjab government, calling the treatment of Majithia an 'act of political vendetta'.
The current case is part of an ongoing probe by a Punjab Police Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the 2021 drug case, in which Majithia was booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, based on a 2018 report by the anti-drug Special Task Force (STF). He had earlier spent over five months in Patiala jail, before being granted bail by the Punjab and Haryana high court in August 2022.
Ganieve meets Majithia
Patiala SAD MLA Ganieve Kaur Majithia met her husbnd Bikram Singh Majithia in Nabha jail of Patiala district on Monday. After the meeting that lasted around one hour and 25 minutes, Ganieve said while addressing mediapersons that her husband was in high spirits and undeterred. 'He will not be intimidated,' she asserted.
A Mohali court had on July 6 sent Majithia to 14 days of judicial custody in a disproportionate assets (DA) case, linked to alleged laundering of ₹540 crore in drug money. Majithia was arrested by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau from his residence in Green Avenue, Amritsar, on June 25 this year. HTC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Compromising cases by sharing comunidade land illegal, says SC
Margao: In a major blow to the practice of comunidades to settle court cases with tenants through the sharing of disputed land, the Supreme Court has held that such arrangements violate both the Tenancy Act and the Land Use Act, effectively circumventing statutory protections for agricultural land. The SC, in its judgment delivered on Monday, dismissed an appeal by the comunidade of Tivim, upholding a lower court's decision to deny permission for a proposed 60:40 land-sharing compromise with agricultural tenants. The verdict of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said that the proposed compromise terms 'fall foul of both the statutes' — the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964, and the Goa Land Use (Regulation) Act, 1991. The court said that such arrangements create 'freehold ownership rights over tenanted land, without resorting to the procedure contemplated for the purchase of such land by the tenant'. The arrangements, the SC said, allow parties to use agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes, which is 'expressly barred by the Land Use Act'. The dispute arose over two properties, Oiteil-De-Madel and Levelechy Aradi, belonging to the comunidade of Tivim, which were leased to tenants in 1978. After the tenants' predecessor was declared an agricultural tenant by a trial court in 2017, the comunidade appealed against the decision. During the pendency of the appeal, the comunidade's general body meeting in March 2021 resolved to compromise by offering a 60:40 land division — 60% to the tenants and 40% to be retained by the comunidade. However, the administrative tribunal denied permission for this compromise under Article 154(3) of the Code of Comunidades, which requires the tribunal's approval for any compromise involving comunidades. The high court upheld this decision, which was subsequently challenged in the SC. The apex court observed that the proposed compromise constituted an 'abuse of the process of law'. The court said that the consent terms effectively granted 'full ownership rights' to both parties and allowed them to use the land 'for any purpose whatsoever', directly violating statutory restrictions. Justice Dhulia, writing for the bench, observed that the compromise would 'wipe out tenancy rights' that were legally declared by the trial court and bypass the specific procedures laid down in the Tenancy Act for the termination of tenancy and purchase of land by tenants.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘Fake marriage party' busted, teens caught drinking alcohol
Amravati: A so-called 'Fake Marriage Party' organised late Sunday night at a high-end restaurant and bar in posh Shankar Nagar area of Amravati was raided by cops. Amravati crime branch said approximately 80 minors (boys and girls) were part of the gathering, and many were found consuming alcohol. Police said a fake marriage party is a themed celebration that mimics a traditional wedding with music, dancing, and multi-day festivities but without an actual marriage. The event on Sunday was allegedly the first day of what was supposed to be a three to four-day celebration. When the police raided the bar, acting on a tip off, they found several youths in an inebriated state, with some even asleep on the stairways due to excessive intoxication. The police detained 40 underage boys and conducted medical tests on them. Tests were not conducted on the around 40 underage girls present. The party, organised by five young men, included between 175 and 180 participants. Police have booked bar owner Anand Raju Bhele (33) of Samarth High School area, Amravati, and main organiser Sam Hemant Bajaj (19), a resident of Anup Nagar, Amravati, and four of his accomplices. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Đây có thể là thời điểm tốt nhất để giao dịch vàng trong 5 năm qua IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Charges have been filed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Maharashtra Police Act. Police also seized five liquor bottles worth Rs3,700 from the spot. The raid was led by police inspector Sandeep Chavan and assistant police inspector Mahesh Ingole. The organisers had charged Rs500 per male participant, while entry for girls was free, supposedly as a promotional tactic. Most attendees were between 18 and 23 years of age. Police observed widespread consumption of alcohol and smoking, with many teenagers unfit to stand or speak coherently. A senior police officer expressed concern that so many minors were out late at night. "We urge parents to be more vigilant," he said. The case is under further investigation, and strict action is expected against both organisers and venue owners. Authorities have reiterated that no bar or club is legally allowed to serve alcohol to minors under any circumstances.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Porsche crash: Juvenile Justice Board rejects Pune police's plea to try teenage driver as adult
Pune: The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) in the city on Tuesday rejected Pune police's application seeking the 17-year-old's trial as an adult in the Porsche Taycan car crash that claimed the lives of two techies on May 19 last year. The JJB relied on a Supreme Court ruling of Jan 9, 2020, while observing that the offence attributed to the minor in this instance cannot be considered "heinous" within the meaning of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection) Act, to merit his trial as an adult. Pune police commissioner Amitesh Kumar, who was pushing for the teenager's trial as an adult, told TOI: "We will take a call on filing an appeal before a sessions court after we go through the JJB's order in detail." You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune Investigating officer ACP (crime) Ganesh Ingale said, "We expect to get a full text of the JJB's order in due course of time." The teenager, who was released from an observation home after the Bombay high court on June 25, 2024, said that his continuation there was illegal, will face trial relating to the crash before the JJB and not before a sessions court. Two young software engineers were killed when the 17-year-old son of a prominent city builder rammed their bike from behind at Kalyaninagar junction around 2.30am on May 19, 2024, while driving the high-end car back to his bungalow at Wadgaon Sheri after late-night partying with friends at a couple of pubs in Mundhwa. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Đây có thể là thời điểm tốt nhất để giao dịch vàng trong 5 năm qua IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo The teenager's father and mother, along with eight others, including two senior Sassoon General Hospital doctors (both now suspended), are being tried in a sessions court relating to the manipulation of blood alcohol tests of the teenage driver and two minors who accompanied him in the car. The JJB's order rejecting the police plea comes more than a year after the accident that created a country-wide sensation over its decision to release the teenager on bail against conditions, including writing a 300-word essay on traffic discipline. The state and the defence lawyers concluded on June 22 their respective arguments over the police plea, and the JJB reserved its final order. Special public prosecutor Shishir Hiray told TOI: "We will consult senior officials from Pune police and the state law and judiciary department in Mumbai regarding the observations made by the JJB before we take a call on filing an appeal." Lawyer Prashant Patil, who represented the teenager, said, "We argued, among other things, that the offences attributed to the minor could not be termed 'heinous' in nature considering the SC ruling in the case of xxx (minor's name withheld) vs state of NCT of Delhi. The apex court held in that case that offences prescribing a maximum sentence of more than seven years but not providing any minimum sentence or providing a minimum sentence of less than seven years, cannot be considered to be 'heinous offence' within the meaning of section 2 (33) of the JJ Act. The JJB accepted our argument." In this case, the teenage driver was charged under sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 467 (forgery) of the Indian Penal Code. Patil argued that neither of these sections provide for a minimum sentence like the one defined by the SC, to qualify as a "heinous" offence and trial as an adult in the context of the JJ Act. Patil said, "We also brought to the JJB's notice that criminal intention and knowledge, which are key ingredients to attract culpable homicide and forgery charges, were missing in this case. The child has no prior criminal record, and the fatal crash, though unfortunate, arose out of a moment of poor judgment." On its part, the prosecution argued that the teenage driver be tried as an adult as he was driving the car under the influence of alcohol and was well aware of the consequences of serious crimes like culpable homicide.
