Latest news with #CriminalProcedureCode
Indian Express
15 hours ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Ex-ADM recalls Emergency: The night Delhi fell silent, fearing ‘something far-reaching'
THE only woman Additional District Magistrate (ADM) of Delhi, the youngest of the five posted in the Capital, Meenakshi Datta Ghosh never expected to find herself where she did — a part of the night when Independent India witnessed one of its biggest political upheavals. By the time the Emergency was imposed, the 27-year-old, who was only in her second posting on June 25, 1975, had been witness to the Ramlila Maidan rally that preceded, and maybe even hastened the Indira Gandhi government's crackdown, and seen how the levers of powers were oiled and wills were bent. 'The issue was do I comply with the law, or follow the political cum bureaucratic commands? Do I preserve process and procedure, or do I enable power?… I feel that the Emergency prepared me to overcome everything that came my way,' she says, looking back at that time. It began with a massive Opposition rally at the Ramlila Maidan on June 25 against Mrs Gandhi, where Jayaprakash Narayan reiterated his call for peaceful resistance and non-violent civil disobedience. He urged government servants, police and armed forces to 'follow their conscience', 'rather than blindly obeying authoritarian orders, that went against democracy'. Already nervous, the Indira Gandhi government was rattled by this protest right at its doorstep, Ghosh says. A meeting was held at Raj Niwas that very evening, where Lt Governor Krishan Chand was present, along with Delhi District Magistrate (DM) Sushil Kumar and the IGP, DIG, Range, and SP, CID. A direction was given that leaders of non-CPI Opposition parties be detained under MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act) that very night. Some officers voiced their objections, given the procedural necessity under MISA that requires inclusion of specific grounds for detention in each case. The matter also went to the PMO, where a suggestion was made that Opposition leaders be held under preventive sections of the Criminal Procedure Code instead. 'But it was made clear that that route could land the government in difficulties as the courts would quickly release the detainees,' Ghosh says. The government 'desired that all arrests be carried out strictly and only under MISA'. At 10 pm, all the five ADMs gathered at the office of DM Kumar. He was not yet back from the PMO, Ghosh recalls. 'There was immense speculation… definitely a sense that something far-reaching was underway.' When Kumar finally returned around 11 pm, his face was ashen and he looked deeply disturbed, Ghosh says. 'There have been some critical developments… I have been directed by the authorities that several VIPs from political parties are to be detained, in accordance with the names under finalisation,' she recalls Kumar saying. In New Delhi that night, the silence on the streets was heavy, laced with fear and dread. 'With the PMO, Rashtrapati Bhavan, the highest seats of Executive power, top ministers' residences, and critical government infrastructure, the New Delhi district is the nerve centre of national governance… On the night of June 25, 1975, it became the epicentre of a constitutional rupture.' On that first night alone, 67 MISA warrants were issued by the DM, to be executed across Delhi. The Shah Commission that probed the Emergency's excesses recorded that over the 21-month period, 1,012 persons were detained under MISA in the Capital. This included 146 members of banned organisations, 180 members of political parties and 538 individuals classified as 'criminal elements', including economic offenders. The actual numbers detained in Delhi could have been much higher, Ghosh says. One detention, in particular, still haunts her. It was of Mamchand, a newspaper and magazine hawker and the sole bread earner in a family of 10. He was detained for over 12 months merely because 'a single copy of the magazine 'March of the Nation' allegedly containing material prejudicial to the State was found in his possession'. Mamchand's name was nowhere cited in police records of the Special Branch. Ghosh says that when the first four-monthly review of MISA arrests came about, she sought revocation of Mamchand's detention. But he was not released. Instead, his detention was extended. Ghosh would eventually be the only ADM to serve in Delhi district all through the Emergency, and remained in the post till a year later. So it was that, on October 3, 1977, seven months after the Emergency was lifted, when Mrs Gandhi, now out of power, and some of her former Cabinet members were arrested by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Ghosh was part of the team that went to execute the order. Mrs Gandhi was accused of misusing vehicles during her election campaign. 'She took a long time emerging from her room. The IG, Police, requested me to help ascertain that all was well with the former PM,' recalls Ghosh. Mrs Gandhi's lawyer B R Handa got into a heated argument with CBI officials, saying she could not be taken out of Delhi as she had been arrested without a magistrate's order, Ghosh adds. 'The next day, October 4, 1977, Indira Gandhi appeared before a magistrate. With scant evidence provided, the court released her unconditionally. The case against her did not hold.' Her detention lasted all of 16 hours, but Ghosh sensed that the air had shifted again. 'The arrest by the Janata Party government was widely seen as politically motivated, and created a wave of sympathy for Indira Gandhi.' On the streets of Delhi, as life returned to normal, including for her as ADM, Mrs Gandhi started her climb back. 'She started holding carefully staged and managed public rallies across the New Delhi district… helping her revive and re-energize her support base,' says Ghosh. In the Lok Sabha elections held three years later, in 1980, the Congress bounced back with 353 seats, and Mrs Gandhi was back in power.
Hindustan Times
19 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC terms Pune man's arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) has declared the arrest of a 58-year-old Pune resident illegal after finding that he was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of being apprehended — a violation of both constitutional and statutory safeguards. HC terms Pune man's arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production A division bench of justice Mahesh Sonak and justice Valmiki Menezes ruled on Friday that Hanumant Nazirkar's arrest, though formally recorded much later, effectively began at 1pm on October 25, 2024, when Baramati police picked him up from Pune's Shivajinagar metro station. Nazirkar and his wife had been booked by the Baramati Taluka police in connection with a March 3, 2023 complaint accusing them and others of cheating the complainant of ₹ 3.37 crore. His plea for anticipatory bail had been earlier rejected. While police formally recorded his arrest only at 9pm on October 26, he was produced before a magistrate around 12.20pm on October 27 — nearly 48 hours after being apprehended. Nazirkar moved the high court challenging the legality of this delay, citing Article 22 of the Constitution and Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code, both of which require a person taken into custody to be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours. The government's counsel argued that Nazirkar was not under arrest during this period, claiming he was being medically evaluated — first referred from Baramati to Sassoon Hospital in Pune, but ultimately admitted to a private hospital in Baramati shortly after midnight and discharged only on the evening of October 27. They pointed out that Nazirkar's son was with him and that he had remained in touch with his family over the phone. The court, however, rejected this line of defence. 'The arrest commences with the restraint placed on the liberty of the person and not with the time of arrest recorded by the arresting officer,' the bench said. 'The test is whether a person has been deprived of their liberty to go where they please.' The judges observed that once Nazirkar was apprehended by police, his liberty was curtailed — making it an arrest in the eyes of the law. They held that relying on the 'pre-arrest medical examination' argument to bypass the 24-hour rule would defeat the purpose of constitutional protection and could encourage abuse of power. 'There is no legal provision that allows exclusion of time for medical examinations prior to arrest. Such police conduct could lead to unscrupulous tendencies,' the court noted, terming the arrest illegal. Nazirkar was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹ 1 lakh and one or more sureties in the same amount.
Indian Express
a day ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
The night Delhi fell silent, fearing ‘something far-reaching'
THE only woman Additional District Magistrate (ADM) of Delhi, the youngest of the five posted in the Capital, Meenakshi Datta Ghosh never expected to find herself where she did — a part of the night when Independent India witnessed one of its biggest political upheavals. By the time the Emergency was imposed, the 27-year-old, who was only in her second posting on June 25, 1975, had been witness to the Ramlila Maidan rally that preceded, and maybe even hastened the Indira Gandhi government's crackdown, and seen how the levers of powers were oiled and wills were bent. 'The issue was do I comply with the law, or follow the political cum bureaucratic commands? Do I preserve process and procedure, or do I enable power?… I feel that the Emergency prepared me to overcome everything that came my way,' she says, looking back at that time. It began with a massive Opposition rally at the Ramlila Maidan on June 25 against Mrs Gandhi, where Jayaprakash Narayan reiterated his call for peaceful resistance and non-violent civil disobedience. He urged government servants, police and armed forces to 'follow their conscience', 'rather than blindly obeying authoritarian orders, that went against democracy'. Already nervous, the Indira Gandhi government was rattled by this protest right at its doorstep, Ghosh says. A meeting was held at Raj Niwas that very evening, where Lt Governor Krishan Chand was present, along with Delhi District Magistrate (DM) Sushil Kumar and the IGP, DIG, Range, and SP, CID. A direction was given that leaders of non-CPI Opposition parties be detained under MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act) that very night. Some officers voiced their objections, given the procedural necessity under MISA that requires inclusion of specific grounds for detention in each case. The matter also went to the PMO, where a suggestion was made that Opposition leaders be held under preventive sections of the Criminal Procedure Code instead. 'But it was made clear that that route could land the government in difficulties as the courts would quickly release the detainees,' Ghosh says. The government 'desired that all arrests be carried out strictly and only under MISA'. At 10 pm, all the five ADMs gathered at the office of DM Kumar. He was not yet back from the PMO, Ghosh recalls. 'There was immense speculation… definitely a sense that something far-reaching was underway.' When Kumar finally returned around 11 pm, his face was ashen and he looked deeply disturbed, Ghosh says. 'There have been some critical developments… I have been directed by the authorities that several VIPs from political parties are to be detained, in accordance with the names under finalisation,' she recalls Kumar saying. In New Delhi that night, the silence on the streets was heavy, laced with fear and dread. 'With the PMO, Rashtrapati Bhavan, the highest seats of Executive power, top ministers' residences, and critical government infrastructure, the New Delhi district is the nerve centre of national governance… On the night of June 25, 1975, it became the epicentre of a constitutional rupture.' On that first night alone, 67 MISA warrants were issued by the DM, to be executed across Delhi. The Shah Commission that probed the Emergency's excesses recorded that over the 21-month period, 1,012 persons were detained under MISA in the Capital. This included 146 members of banned organisations, 180 members of political parties and 538 individuals classified as 'criminal elements', including economic offenders. The actual numbers detained in Delhi could have been much higher, Ghosh says. One detention, in particular, still haunts her. It was of Mamchand, a newspaper and magazine hawker and the sole bread earner in a family of 10. He was detained for over 12 months merely because 'a single copy of the magazine 'March of the Nation' allegedly containing material prejudicial to the State was found in his possession'. Mamchand's name was nowhere cited in police records of the Special Branch. Ghosh says that when the first four-monthly review of MISA arrests came about, she sought revocation of Mamchand's detention. But he was not released. Instead, his detention was extended. Ghosh would eventually be the only ADM to serve in Delhi district all through the Emergency, and remained in the post till a year later. So it was that, on October 3, 1977, seven months after the Emergency was lifted, when Mrs Gandhi, now out of power, and some of her former Cabinet members were arrested by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Ghosh was part of the team that went to execute the order. Mrs Gandhi was accused of misusing vehicles during her election campaign. 'She took a long time emerging from her room. The IG, Police, requested me to help ascertain that all was well with the former PM,' recalls Ghosh. Mrs Gandhi's lawyer B R Handa got into a heated argument with CBI officials, saying she could not be taken out of Delhi as she had been arrested without a magistrate's order, Ghosh adds. 'The next day, October 4, 1977, Indira Gandhi appeared before a magistrate. With scant evidence provided, the court released her unconditionally. The case against her did not hold.' Her detention lasted all of 16 hours, but Ghosh sensed that the air had shifted again. 'The arrest by the Janata Party government was widely seen as politically motivated, and created a wave of sympathy for Indira Gandhi.' On the streets of Delhi, as life returned to normal, including for her as ADM, Mrs Gandhi started her climb back. 'She started holding carefully staged and managed public rallies across the New Delhi district… helping her revive and re-energize her support base,' says Ghosh. In the Lok Sabha elections held three years later, in 1980, the Congress bounced back with 353 seats, and Mrs Gandhi was back in power.
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
Conclusive DNA proof to show mother's blood swapped with accused minor's: Prosecution to court
As the prosecution in the Porsche crash opened its case and presented its argument towards framing of charges before a court, Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray submitted to the court that there was technical and scientific evidence to probe the conspiracy involving all 10 accused, including the DNA evidence that conclusively establishes that the blood sample of the accused minor driver's mother was collected in his place at Sassoon General Hospital. On May 19 last year, two young IT engineers — Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta — were killed after a speeding Porsche car, allegedly driven by an inebriated 17-and-a-half-year-old from a Pune realtor's family, rammed into their motorcycle at Kalyani Nagar junction. Special Prosecutor Hiray said, 'Today we opened the prosecution case under CrPC section 226. We submitted to the court what evidence we have against the 10 accused and based on that, what charges can be framed. I submitted that this was a major conspiracy in which all the 10 accused are involved. The conspiracy was to shield the inebriated CCL (Child in Conflict with the Law) and his co-passenger friends from any action by the court. And for this, the evidence was destroyed and fake evidence was fabricated. In this manner, a fraud was committed with the judiciary, which has been our argument from the beginning.' Section 226 of the Criminal Procedure Code pertains to the prosecutor opening the case by describing the charges brought against the accused and stating by what evidence prosecution proposes to prove the guilt of the accused. Hiray added, 'We explained to the court what evidence we have to prove this conspiracy. We have witness statements, technical evidence, scientific evidence, we have also recovered the money exchanged in the offence as part of the conspiracy and how the evidence established the role of each of the accused. For example we have established how money exchanged hands and how Sassoon doctors tampered with sample collection. We have DNA evidence conclusively proving that in the place of the CCL, his mother's blood sample was taken. Also, how the blood sample of one co-passenger's friend was swapped with that of his father, and another co-passenger's sample was exchanged with that of a third person. We have also established the money trail for the swapping of blood samples of the co-passengers.' He further said, We have submitted reports of the Test Identification Parade establishing the identities of the accused. We have submitted CCTV footages that place the accused at various locations during the conspiracy. We have also submitted reports of the handwriting experts. We have said that all 10 accused who were part of the conspiracy had the same intention. We have said that all 10 accused need not be at one place to hatch the conspiracy. We thus presented the entire landscape of the conspiracy to the court and requested that the charges be framed against these accused.' Following the incident on May 19, police investigation unravelled alleged cover-ups, bribery, abuse of power, and tampering with blood samples at the government-run Sassoon General Hospital. The fatal accident had taken place after the minor and his friends had celebrated their Class 12 exam results at a pub. The minor was allegedly driving a Porsche Taycan luxury car which did not have number plates. Other than the minor driver, the police have till now arraigned and chargesheeted a total of 10 accused. The 51-year-old realtor father and 50-year-old mother of the minor have been charged with criminal conspiracy for allegedly orchestrating a swap of the minor driver's blood sample—collected at Sassoon Hospital—with the mother's. Dr Ajay Taware, then head of the forensic medicine of Sassoon hospital, Dr Shrihari Halnor, then casualty medical officer; Atul Ghatkamble, a staffer at the hospital's morgue; and Ashpak Makandar and Amar Gaikwad, who acted as middlemen between the minor's father and the doctors, have all been arraigned. Pune police have also arrested and charged a 37-year-old man who had given his blood to be swapped with that of a minor co-passenger and along with the father of that co-passenger. The 52-year-old father of another minor co-passenger, was also arrested earlier for giving his own blood sample to be swapped with his son. Sushant Kulkarni is a Special Correspondent with The Indian Express in Pune with 12+ years of experience covering issues related to Crime, Defence, Internal Security and Courts. He has been associated with the Indian Express since July 2010. Sushant has extensively reported on law and order issues of Pune and surrounding area, Cyber crime, narcotics trade and terrorism. His coverage in the Defence beat includes operational aspects of the three services, the defence research and development and issues related to key defence establishments. He has covered several sensitive cases in the courts at Pune. Sushant is an avid photographer, plays harmonica and loves cooking. ... Read More
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
Conclusive DNA proof to show mother's blood taken instead of minor's: Prosecution to court
As the prosecution in the Porsche crash opened its case and presented its argument towards framing of charges before a court, Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray submitted to the court that there was technical and scientific evidence to probe the conspiracy involving all 10 accused, including the DNA evidence that conclusively establishes that the blood sample of the accused minor driver's mother was collected in his place at Sassoon General Hospital. On May 19 last year, two young IT engineers — Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta — were killed after a speeding Porsche car, allegedly driven by an inebriated 17-and-a-half-year-old from a Pune realtor's family, rammed into their motorcycle at Kalyani Nagar junction. Special Prosecutor Hiray said, 'Today we opened the prosecution case under CrPC section 226. We submitted to the court what evidence we have against the 10 accused and based on that, what charges can be framed. I submitted that this was a major conspiracy in which all the 10 accused are involved. The conspiracy was to shield the inebriated CCL (Child in Conflict with the Law) and his co-passenger friends from any action by the court. And for this, the evidence was destroyed and fake evidence was fabricated. In this manner, a fraud was committed with the judiciary, which has been our argument from the beginning.' Section 226 of the Criminal Procedure Code pertains to the prosecutor opening the case by describing the charges brought against the accused and stating by what evidence prosecution proposes to prove the guilt of the accused. Hiray added, 'We explained to the court what evidence we have to prove this conspiracy. We have witness statements, technical evidence, scientific evidence, we have also recovered the money exchanged in the offence as part of the conspiracy and how the evidence established the role of each of the accused. For example we have established how money exchanged hands and how Sassoon doctors tampered with sample collection. We have DNA evidence conclusively proving that in the place of the CCL, his mother's blood sample was taken. Also, how the blood sample of one co-passenger's friend was swapped with that of his father, and another co-passenger's sample was exchanged with that of a third person. We have also established the money trail for the swapping of blood samples of the co-passengers.' He further said, We have submitted reports of the Test Identification Parade establishing the identities of the accused. We have submitted CCTV footages that place the accused at various locations during the conspiracy. We have also submitted reports of the handwriting experts. We have said that all 10 accused who were part of the conspiracy had the same intention. We have said that all 10 accused need not be at one place to hatch the conspiracy. We thus presented the entire landscape of the conspiracy to the court and requested that the charges be framed against these accused.' Following the incident on May 19, police investigation unravelled alleged cover-ups, bribery, abuse of power, and tampering with blood samples at the government-run Sassoon General Hospital. The fatal accident had taken place after the minor and his friends had celebrated their Class 12 exam results at a pub. The minor was allegedly driving a Porsche Taycan luxury car which did not have number plates. Other than the minor driver, the police have till now arraigned and chargesheeted a total of 10 accused. The 51-year-old realtor father and 50-year-old mother of the minor have been charged with criminal conspiracy for allegedly orchestrating a swap of the minor driver's blood sample—collected at Sassoon Hospital—with the mother's. Dr Ajay Taware, then head of the forensic medicine of Sassoon hospital, Dr Shrihari Halnor, then casualty medical officer; Atul Ghatkamble, a staffer at the hospital's morgue; and Ashpak Makandar and Amar Gaikwad, who acted as middlemen between the minor's father and the doctors, have all been arraigned. Pune police have also arrested and charged a 37-year-old man who had given his blood to be swapped with that of a minor co-passenger and along with the father of that co-passenger. The 52-year-old father of another minor co-passenger, was also arrested earlier for giving his own blood sample to be swapped with his son. Sushant Kulkarni is a Special Correspondent with The Indian Express in Pune with 12+ years of experience covering issues related to Crime, Defence, Internal Security and Courts. He has been associated with the Indian Express since July 2010. Sushant has extensively reported on law and order issues of Pune and surrounding area, Cyber crime, narcotics trade and terrorism. His coverage in the Defence beat includes operational aspects of the three services, the defence research and development and issues related to key defence establishments. He has covered several sensitive cases in the courts at Pune. Sushant is an avid photographer, plays harmonica and loves cooking. ... Read More
