US-based Indian couple, scientist killed in California boat fire
Los Angles, Sep 7: A US-based Indian couple and an Indian-origin scientist were among those who died from smoke inhalation when they were trapped on a boat packed with scuba divers that caught fire and sank off the California coast, according to media reports.
On Monday, a massive fire broke out on the 75-foot charter boat called 'Conception' when the passengers were sleeping below the deck. The fire engulfed the deck, killing 34 people, including one crew member. Five crew members who were above the deck escaped by jumping overboard.
The couple, Kaustubh Nirmal and Sanjeeri Deopujari, lived in Connecticut and were among the people who died aboard the vessel, during a three-day diving excursion.
Deopujari, 31, was a dentist in Norwalk while her husband, Nirmal, 44, worked as a senior adviser at Ernst & Young, the New York Post reported.
The were married two and a half years ago and were "the perfect couple," said Nirmal's cousin, Rajul Sharma, told the Los Angeles Times.
"He found a soulmate in Sanjeeri," Sharma said, recalling their endearing and infectious smiles.
"God took them away from us untimely and unfairly, but even he did not have the heart to separate them in death," he said.
Neighbours at the couple's apartment building remembered them.
"They were very nice, kind. So we're in shock. Our hearts go out to them. It's incredibly sad," a neighbour said.
Indian-origin scientist Sunil Singh Sandhu, 46, was also there on a dive vessel that sank off Santa Barbara in California.
Sandhu lived and worked in the US for more than two decades, took up scuba diving only recently, his family in Singapore was quoted as saying by Singapore-based The New Paper.
Sandhu earned his master's and doctoral degrees from the Stanford University and worked as a scientist at a Palo Alto research company.
He was a newcomer to scuba diving, picking up the sport two months before his death. "I didn't know that he was going for another trip," his father, Soji Singh said.
"I had been trying to persuade him to come back to Singapore."
The massive fire was reported to be one of California's worst maritime disasters in decades.
More than half of the victims have been positively identified a process hampered by how badly burned some were, the report said.
The ship carried 33 passengers and 6 crew members, and only five of the crew sleeping on the top deck were able to escape by jumping off and taking a small boat to safety, the US officials had said.
Multiple investigations into the disaster are focused on determining what happened and have not become a criminal probe, Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown said.
Families of those killed have been notified.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Supreme Court declines fresh curbs on hate speech, says existing laws are enough
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday refused to issue additional directions to curb hate speech across the country, holding that the existing legal framework is sufficient and that the real issue lies in implementation rather than absence of law.
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta said creation of criminal offences falls within the legislative domain and courts cannot legislate or compel Parliament and state legislatures to enact laws.
The Bench observed that constitutional courts can interpret the law and issue directions for enforcement of fundamental rights, but cannot step into the law-making role.
“At the highest, the court may draw attention to the need for reform. The decision whether and in what manner to legislate remains within the exclusive domain of Parliament and the state legislatures,” the court said.
The court held that the field of hate speech is not legally vacant and said concerns arise mainly from poor enforcement of existing provisions.
It also noted that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, provides a comprehensive mechanism to set criminal law in motion, meaning there is no legislative vacuum.
Referring to remedies already available under the earlier Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the BNSS, the court said police are duty-bound to register an FIR when a cognisable offence is disclosed, as laid down in the Lalita Kumari judgment.
It said if police fail to register an FIR, an aggrieved person can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) of CrPC or Section 173(4) of BNSS, and thereafter move the magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC or Section 175 BNSS, or file a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC or Section 223 BNSS.
The Bench further held that an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC does not amount to taking cognisance under Section 190 CrPC or the corresponding Section 210 of BNSS.
Even while declining fresh directions, the court acknowledged the seriousness of the issue.
It observed that hate speech and rumour-mongering directly affect fraternity, dignity and constitutional order.
The Bench urged legislative authorities to consider whether further policy or legal measures are needed in view of changing social challenges, including suggestions made in the 267th Report of the Law Commission in 2017.
The judgment came in a batch of petitions arising from events dating back to 2020, when multiple pleas were filed over alleged communal narratives spread through television channels and social media.
Among the earliest cases were challenges relating to content described as the “Corona Jihad” campaign and a programme aired by Sudarshan TV titled “UPSC Jihad”. During those proceedings, the court had restrained further telecast of the programme.
Later, more petitions were filed over speeches made at religious gatherings described as “Dharam Sansad” events.
These included pleas moved by journalist Qurban Ali and Major General S.G. Vombatkere seeking action against alleged hate speeches made at such forums.
During the pendency of the matter, the Supreme Court in 2023 had issued major directions asking all states and Union Territories to act proactively in cases involving communal hate speeches or remarks hurting religious sentiments.
It had directed police to register FIRs suo motu, without waiting for formal complaints.
Later, contempt petitions were also filed alleging poor implementation of those earlier directions.
