Siraj and Sameer sent to central jail in Visakhapatnam
The two accused persons had been arrested and later remanded in police custody for one week by the court.
Top officials of the National Investigation Agency (NIA), Counter Intelligence, Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS) and other agencies grilled the accused in the Police Training College.
Their arrest assumed significance after the Pahlagam terror attack and Operation Sindoor, India's counter attack on Pakistan.
The police had seized the bank accounts of Siraj and tried to know about his funding sources. They also questioned him on his links with Syed and other persons who were reportedly based in the Middle East nations.
The investigating officials were expected to seek police custody of the accused again to gather more clues in the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Indian drone shield
Times of India's Edit Page team comprises senior journalists with wide-ranging interests who debate and opine on the news and issues of the day. Pak-origin UAVs must be countered through huge tech investments across the board In what should worry the security establishment, there's been an uptick in Pakistani smugglers pushing drones laden with drugs, arms and ammunition deeper into India. After a brief lull during Operation Sindoor, drone-borne smuggling has resumed with greater precision, reportedly using Chinese drones that can fly higher to evade detection. This is hardly petty smuggling but part of a well-planned Pakistani ICAD (illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive) strategy to undermine India's security. The goal is to get drugs, guns and money to criminal elements on this side of the border. It's part of Pakistan's old doctrine of bleeding India with a thousand cuts. Consider this: last Sept, a police team in Punjab discovered a haul of Nato-grade guns – most likely originating in Afghanistan – from smugglers linked to Pakistani drone drops. With such weapons being also found with terrorists in Kashmir, the modus operandi is clear. Drone drops from Pakistan started after the nullification of Article 370 in 2019. To counter this BSF adopted anti-drone systems like Dronaam that neutralise Pak-origin UAVs using laser. Even specialised anti-drone teams have been set up. But the versatility of drone tech means that it is constantly evolving. Drones can be modified and adapted to evade detection, they can change modus operandi and alter application. The Ukraine war exemplifies this. Drone tech is changing every fortnight. This also means counter-drone tech has to constantly innovate in real time. That in turn means creating a large pool of expertise throughout the security establishment and linking this with R&D institutes. Drones are rapidly transforming from FPV to fibre optic to the oncoming AI versions. The only way to stay ahead of the curve is to heavily invest in drone tech in both industry and academia. India must create its own drone shield. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
United News of India
5 hours ago
- United News of India
SC asks SIT to focus only on Mahmudabad's ‘Op Sindoor' posts; bars further summons
New Delhi, July 16 (UNI) The Supreme Court today questioned the Haryana Police Special Investigation Team (SIT) for allegedly misdirecting itself in the probe against Ashoka University Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad over his two social media posts on 'Operation Sindoor'. A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that the SIT was formed specifically to investigate the contents of the two posts and asked why it was expanding the scope of inquiry. The observation came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mahmudabad, submitted that the SIT had seized his devices and was asking about his foreign trips over the last ten years, despite the court's May 28 order limiting the probe to the posts. 'We just want to know from SIT for what purpose they have seized devices. We will call them (officers),' Justice Kant said, adding, 'we are asking why SIT is, on the face of it, misdirecting itself. They were supposed to examine contents of the posts.' ASG SV Raju, appearing for Haryana, submitted that the manner of investigation was the prerogative of the investigating officer and all incriminating aspects had to be examined. Sibal countered that there could not be a 'roving inquiry' and added that Mahmudabad had already been summoned four times. Taking note of the SIT's interim report acknowledging the seizure of devices and their forensic examination, the court recorded that Mahmudabad had cooperated with the investigation and surrendered his devices. Directing that he should not be summoned again, Justice Kant remarked, 'You don't require him, you require a dictionary.' The bench dictated its order stating, 'Though it may not be expedient or desirable for us to comment on the manner in which SIT has proceeded, we deem it necessary to remind it of the mandate contained in our order dated May 28 and consequently direct the SIT to conclude its investigation with reference to the contents of the two social media posts as early as possible but not later than four weeks.' The court also clarified that Mahmudabad, while restrained from commenting on sub judice issues, was free to write or express opinions on other topics. On May 21, the court had granted interim bail to Mahmudabad and directed the Haryana DGP to constitute an SIT comprising senior IPS officers not belonging to Haryana or Delhi to examine his two posts. It had clarified that the SIT probe would remain confined to these two FIRs and could not be expanded. During the hearing today, the court also asked the Haryana government about its response to the National Human Rights Commission taking cognizance of the registration of FIRs in the case. 'You tell us about that also,' Justice Kant told the Haryana AAG. Mahmudabad was arrested on May 18 over his posts on 'Operation Sindoor' and remained in custody until May 21. He faces charges under Section 196, 152, and other provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to acts prejudicial to communal harmony, making assertions likely to cause disharmony, acts endangering national sovereignty, and words or gestures intended to insult a woman's modesty. UNI SNG PRS
Economic Times
5 hours ago
- Economic Times
SC asks SIT to confine itself to probe related to professor's Facebook post
The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the special investigation team (SIT), set up to examine Facebook posts of Ashoka University assistant professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad on Operation Sindoor, on "misdirecting itself".A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymala Bagchi verbally observed that SIT was "unnecessarily expanding the scope" of its probe. The bench reiterated that the SIT must confine its investigation to the two first information reports already filed against Mahmudabad for his two "objectionable" Facebook posts. "Why is SIT on the face of it misdirecting itself? They can say that the article (by Mahmudabad) is an opinion and does not constitute an offence or otherwise!" Justice Kant verbally remarked. SC also turned down a request made by the counsel for SIT for giving it two months to complete its probe. "SIT can always say that there is nothing in this FIR. But we are examining other issues. Why take two months for this? Then this case can be closed," the bench orally remarked. The bench directed the SIT to not summon Mahmudabad again for questioning, after noting that he had already joined the investigation earlier and that certain electronic devices owned by him were also examined. The SC also ordered the SIT to finish its probe in four weeks, making it clear that its investigation must be strictly limited to the language and content of the two Facebook posts uploaded by Mahmudabad on the Pahalgam terror attack. Interim protection from arrest that was granted to Mahmudabad will also continue, the SC added.
