26/11: Pakistan dismisses Abu Jindal's charges

June 27, 2012

terror

New Delhi, June 27: Pakistan on Wednesday hit back at India over allegation that Pakistani state institutions were involved in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Coming to the defence of the ISI, Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik dismissed India's charges and claimed that the allegations against the intelligence agency were baseless.

Rubbishing 26/11 Mumbai terror attack plotter Syed Zabiuddin Ansari alias Abu Jindal's claims of ISI's involvement in the 26/11 attacks, Malik said that the intelligence agency protects Pakistan and is not involved in carrying out terror strikes.

Malik blamed Home Minister P Chidambaram of "unnecessarily targeting ISI" and claimed that all the allegations against Pakistan till now have been proven to be false. He pointed out that Jindal was an Indian citizen and there was no involvement of Pakistan in the November 2008 Mumbai carnage. He countered the Indian allegation by saying that Pakistan cannot be blamed for Jindal's action.

He added that Pakistan won't investigate on the basis of the evidences provided by India as they were "not reliable". "On previous occasions when India accused ISI of being behind attacks, they were later proved to be wrong. Blaming someone is very easy, but proving is very, very difficult," said Malik.

Chidambaram had on Wednesday said that that Jindal admitted to the involvement of Pakistani state agencies in the 26/11 attacks. Reacting to Malik's note on Tuesday, Chidambaram said that India was willing to share information about Jindal with Pakistan and reiterated that India had been tracking down the 26/11 plotter for over a year before he was apprehended.

Jindal was arrested from the Indira Gandhi International Airport on June 21 and is in the custody of Delhi Police till July 5. The Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad has now produced a production warrant in Delhi's Tis Hazari court for Jindal's interrogation.

The ATS wants to question him regarding the Aurangabad arms haul case of May 2006 and the German Bakery blast case of February 2010. The ATS also wants to question him regarding the sleeper cells active in Maharashtra and about his alleged connections with the Indian Mujahideen.

The Indian Mujahideen was allegedly behind the 13/7 serial blasts in Mumbai in 2011 and the ATS had filed a chargesheet in the case last month.

Meanwhile, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) will continue questioning him on Wednesday. The Intelligence Bureau and Delhi Police officials also interrogated Jindal on Tuesday.

Sources say Jindal has given inputs about the Lashkar-e-Toiba's sleeper cells in the country to the police, based on which, police teams will be carrying out raids across Maharashtra. Police say Jindal used a different name in each incident he was involved in and has been questioned about all terror attacks that took place in the past six to seven years.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 21,2024

adani.jpg

Shares of Adani Group companies lost about $28 billion in market value in morning trade on Thursday after US prosecutors charged the billionaire chairman of the Indian conglomerate in an alleged bribery and fraud scheme.

Gautam Adani's flagship company Adani Enterprises tumbled 23 per cent, while Adani Ports, Adani Total Gas, Adani Green, Adani Power, Adani Wilmar and Adani Energy Solutions, ACC , Ambuja Cements and NDTV fell between 20 per cent and 90 per cent.

Adani group's 10 listed stocks had a total market capitalisation of about $141 billion at 0534 GMT, compared to $169.08 billion on Tuesday.

US authorities said Adani and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar Adani, agreed to pay about $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials to obtain contracts expected to yield $2 billion of profit over 20 years, and develop India's largest solar power plant project.

Adani Green in a statement on Thursday said the US Justice Department had issued a criminal indictment against board members Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani and the Securities and Exchange Commission had issued a civil complaint against them.

The US Justice Department also included Adani Green board member Vneet Jaain in the criminal indictment, it said.

Adani Green's units had decided not to proceed with the proposed US dollar denominated bond offerings due to developments, it added.

"Investors will shy away from Adani Group stocks ... and that's what this sharp selling is signifying," said Saurabh Jain, assistant vice president of retail equities research at SMC Global Securities.

"This could hurt the credibility of the group and maybe borrowing costs will rise," he said.

The indictment comes nearly two years after US shortseller Hindenburg Research alleged that Adani had improperly used tax havens and was involved in stock manipulation, allegations the conglomerate denied.

Also in early Asian trading on Thursday, Adani dollar bonds slumped, with prices down 3c-5c on bonds for Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone. The falls were the largest since the Adani Group came under a short-seller attack in February 2023.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.