Latest news with #People'sUnionforCivilLiberties
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Telephone tapping constitutes a violation of right to privacy: Madras HC
The Madras High Court declared telephone tapping a privacy violation. Justice Venkatesh cited Article 21 of the Constitution. He referenced the Telegraph Act's Section 5(2). The court quashed a Union government order authorizing the tapping of P Kishore's phone. This case involved bribery allegations. The judge noted violations of Telegraph Rules. Intercepted conversations cannot be used as evidence. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Madras High Court on Wednesday held that telephone tapping constitutes a violation of the right to privacy unless justified by a procedure established by law. Justice N Anand Venkatesh also observed that the right to privacy is now an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the judge said section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act authorises interception of telephones on the occurrence of a public emergency or in the interests of public safety. Both these contingencies were not secretive conditions or situations. Either of the situations would be apparent to a reasonable laid down in paragraph 28 of the decision of the Apex court in People's Union for Civil Liberties, it was only when the above two situations exist that the authority may pass an order directing interception of messages after recording its satisfaction that it was necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence, he a petition filed by P Kishore, Managing Director of Everonn Education Limited, the judge quashed an order of the union government, which authorised tapping of the mobile phone of the petitioner, in connection with a case relating to bribery and corruption, probed by the CBI, involving an Assistant Commissioner of Income judge said in the instant case, the impugned order dated August 12, 2011 does not fall either within the rubric of "public emergency" or "in the interests of public safety" as explained by the Supreme Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties. The facts disclose that it was a covert operation/secretive situation for detection of crime, which would not be apparent to any reasonable the law presently stands, a situation of this nature does not fall within the four corners of Section 5(2) of the Act as expounded by the Supreme Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties, which has been approved by the Constitution Bench of the SC in K S Puttaswamy case, the judge judge said the authorities have also contravened Rule 419-A(17) of the Telegraph Rules by failing to place the intercepted material before the Review Committee within the stipulated time to examine as to whether the interception was made in compliance with Section 5(2) of the a consequence, the impugned order must necessarily be set aside as unconstitutional and one without jurisdiction. Besides violating Article 21, it was also ultra vires Section 5(2) of the Act besides being in violation of the mandatory provisions of Rule 419-A of the Rules, the judge judge said it follows that the intercepted conversations collected pursuant to the impugned order in violation of Section 5(2) of the Act and Rule 419-A(17) of the Rules shall not be used for any purposes judge said it was, however, made clear that the above direction shall have no bearing on the other material that has been collected by the CBI subsequent to and independent of the intercepted call records, which shall be considered by the trial court on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘At least 30 witnesses and 30 assailants': civil society groups release report on Mangaluru mob lynching
Civil society groups have released a 'fact-finding report' on an incident in which a mob beat a Kerala man to death in Mangaluru on April 27 claiming that he raised a pro-Pakistan slogan near a cricket field. The civil society groups, including the People's Union for Civil Liberties, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, and the All India Lawyers Association for Justice, released the report in Bengaluru on June 28. Alongside its findings, the 164-page report explains the background of the situation in Dakshina Kannada and includes a detailed timeline of the incident as well as testimonies from locals, those who knew the victim, and police officers. The report stated, 'This mob lynching did not happen in the wee hours of the night in stealth. Based on the testimonies, it is starkly clear that the mob lynching of Mohammed Ashraf took place in broad daylight with at least 30 witnesses and 30 people beating him to death. Those who undertook this lynching had no fear of consequences. They acted with absolute impunity as self-appointed vigilantes who are not held accountable either by law or the people.' Pointing out that it was not certain that Ashraf had actually raised slogans mentioning Pakistan as it might have been misinformation spread by the accused, the report went on to question whether this could at all be a justification for murder. Mavalli Sankar, convener of the Dr Ambedkar Dalitha Sangharsha Samiti (Ambedkarvaada), stated that in such cases officials must at least visit families of the affected to ensure trust in the rule of law. He also highlighted a demand of the brother of Mohammed Ashraf, the victim, that this ought to be the last such lynching incident. According to Maitreyi Krishnan of the All India Lawyers Association for Justice, the incident was not a mere murder but a hate crime. She noted that in the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment, the Supreme Court had described hate crimes as a 'product of ideological dominance and prejudice which ought not to be tolerated, lest it result in a reign of terror'. The report said the local law enforcement agencies were not aware of the mandates of the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘At least 30 witnesses and 30 assailants': civil society groups release report on Manguluru mob lynching
Civil society groups have released a 'fact-finding report' on an incident in which a mob beat a Kerala man to death in Mangaluru on April 27 claiming that he raised a pro-Pakistan slogan near a cricket field. The civil society groups, including the People's Union for Civil Liberties, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, and the All India Lawyers Association for Justice, released the report in Bengaluru on June 28. Alongside its findings, the 164-page report explains the background of the situation in Dakshina Kannada and includes a detailed timeline of the incident as well as testimonies from locals, those who knew the victim, and police officers. The report stated, 'This mob lynching did not happen in the wee hours of the night in stealth. Based on the testimonies, it is starkly clear that the mob lynching of Mohammed Ashraf took place in broad daylight with at least 30 witnesses and 30 people beating him to death. Those who undertook this lynching had no fear of consequences. They acted with absolute impunity as self-appointed vigilantes who are not held accountable either by law or the people.' Pointing out that it was not certain that Ashraf had actually raised slogans mentioning Pakistan as it might have been misinformation spread by the accused, the report went on to question whether this could at all be a justification for murder. Mavalli Sankar, convener of the Dr Ambedkar Dalitha Sangharsha Samiti (Ambedkarvaada), stated that in such cases officials must at least visit families of the affected to ensure trust in the rule of law. He also highlighted a demand of the brother of Mohammed Ashraf, the victim, that this ought to be the last such lynching incident. According to Maitreyi Krishnan of the All India Lawyers Association for Justice, the incident was not a mere murder but a hate crime. She noted that in the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment, the Supreme Court had described hate crimes as a 'product of ideological dominance and prejudice which ought not to be tolerated, lest it result in a reign of terror'. The report said the local law enforcement agencies were not aware of the mandates of the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Mangaluru lynching result of hate crime: Report
Five days after terrorists killed 26 tourists in Pahalgam, a 39-year-old Muslim ragpicker from Kerala was beaten to death near a cricket ground near Mangaluru. According to an independent fact-finding report, the lynching was not a spontaneous act of violence but a direct consequence of the 'hate-filled atmosphere that followed the April 22 attack'. According to an independent fact-finding report, the lynching was not a spontaneous act of violence but a direct consequence of the 'hate-filled atmosphere that followed the April 22 attack'. (File photo) On April 27, Mohammed Ashraf, who collected discarded plastic to sell, was lynched in Kudupu, a village on the outskirts of Mangaluru, after allegedly picking up an empty water bottle near a local cricket match. The report — published by the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), and All India Lawyers Association for Justice (AILAJ) — called his murder a 'hate crime' shaped by communal mobilisation and police apathy. The 164-page report, Lost Fraternity: A Mob Lynching in Broad Daylight — A Betrayal of the Promise of the Constitution, was released on Saturday. 'As a consequence of this hate propaganda, many people have internalised this hate. Acting out of this hate a mob lynched a Muslim ragpicker – Mohammed Ashraf — next to a cricket ground,' the report stated. As per the report, the incident took place in a village with no Muslim residents. It cited CCTV footage as showing that Ashraf was walking slowly along a dirt road, carrying a gunny bag. The fact-finding team quoted his brother Jabbar as saying: 'Sachin, one of the accused, started beating him up. All the others in the cricket ground joined him and beat my brother to death.' The family learnt of the incident only after the police tracked a call Ashraf made from a scrap dealer's phone. The post-mortem examination was conducted without informing them. 'After reaching here, I realised that something is wrong. That something else had happened and he said nothing about Pakistan,' he said. Meanwhile, home minister G Parameshwara made a public claim: 'I was told that he shouted 'Pakistan Zindabad' when a local cricket match was going on… Few people got together and beat him… Later on, he died.' According to the report, this statement was not based on any police finding or complaint and surfaced only after arrests were made: 'Until this time, neither the police nor any media outlet had reported any claims that the deceased person had shouted the slogan 'Pakistan Zindabad' as justification for his murder.' The next day, the minister appeared to walk back his comment. 'It was not my statement. It was an expression made by those who were involved in that lynching… They have said that he said it during the investigation… But even that, a witness who would second that no? We don't even know if he said it.' 'By modifying and stating this unevidenced claim of the accused without verification, the home minister facilitated a travesty of justice, and gave fodder to the media to ask questions not about the man's killing, but about his alleged speech of 'Pakistan Zindabad',' the report said. The fact-finding team said the police failed at every step. The body was discovered at 1.30 pm, but the FIR was filed the next day at 11.25 pm. Until then, only an Unnatural Death Report (UDR) was registered, despite visible injuries. 'The version that there were no visible injuries was not only misleading but dangerously delayed justice.' Police also did not apply Supreme Court guidelines on lynching cases. When asked about the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment, the assistant investigating officer told the team: 'We don't know much about the Tehseen Poonawalla guidelines, you talk to the higher officials about the same.' Ashraf's identification was eventually made possible by a scrap dealer named Syed Ali. Kudupu, where the lynching occurred, has witnessed growing communal segregation. In 2023, Muslim vendors were excluded from the local temple fair. 'Such pressures by groups to exclude Muslim vendors speak to the presence of right-wing groups in the region and the anti-Muslim sentiments they have succeeded in normalising, which are often precursors to violent acts like mob lynchings,' the report noted. Home minister G Parameshwara did not respond to queries regarding the investigation at the time of publishing.
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Fact-finding report released on Mangaluru mob lynching
BENGALURU: A fact-finding report on the mob-lynching of Mohammed Ashraf at Kudupu, Mangaluru, titled 'Lost Fraternity: A mob lynching in broad daylight, A betrayal of the promise of the Constitution' was released. It was done by People's Union for Civil Liberties, Karnataka, All India Lawyers Association for Justice, Karnataka, and Association for Protection of Civil Rights, Karnataka. Mavalli Shankar, State Convenor, DSS (Ambedkarvada) pointed to the larger failure on part of the state administration in ensuring impartial investigations into incidents in the oppressed communities. He also added that in such cases, it is important that officials and elected representatives make a visit, at least to the family, to inspire public trust in the rule of law which has not happened in the case of Ashraf and killing of a Dalit. Advocate Vinay Sreenivasa said how bails have been granted to the accused on technical grounds which are indicative of the laxity displayed by the police. He also called on the state administration to organise a meeting with various civil society groups on how best to uphold law and order. He expressed his concerns over the governments' action of bringing new laws to counter hate and fake news.
