Flight to nowhere: Mid-air drama and politician son's failed 'business trip' to Bangkok
Pune (PTI): When pilots of a flight carrying ex-Maharashtra minister Tanaji Sawant's son to Bangkok were asked mid-way to return to Pune, they thought it was a "hoax" message, but complied after verification from aviation authorities, an airline executive has said.
The chartered flight, operated by a private firm, carrying Rishiraj Sawant (32) and his two friends returned to Pune airport between 8 pm and 8.30 pm on Monday, abruptly cutting short a trip to the Thailand capital which was not disclosed to the former minister, who is leader of the ruling Shiv Sena, and his family.
The decision to divert the airborne plane to Pune was made only after due verification, the executive of the company operating the airline insisted on Wednesday.
In a dramatic turn of events, Rishiraj Sawant and his two friends, heading to Bangkok on what they later claimed was a "business trip", were hurriedly brought back to Pune after police registered a kidnapping case following an anonymous call and intervention of his father Tanaji Sawant.
"When we received the first call (from family members) asking us to turnaround the flight, we did not believe it. We cannot believe these kinds of calls as they could be hoax," the executive from the airline operator said.
"But after due verification from the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and knowing it pertained to a kidnapping case being probed by police, the decision to turnaround the flight was taken and it returned to Pune," he said.
He said the civil aviation regulator DGCA appreciated his company for the decision to recall the flight mid-way.
The executive maintained it was perhaps the first-of-its-kind instance in which a flight was recalled mid-way, citing registration of a criminal case against a passenger.
"Such things happen only in case of some sort of emergency, such as medical or technical emergency," he said.
When the flight was asked to return to the Pune airport, it was flying over Port Blair (Sri Vijaya Puram) in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and the three persons onboard was not informed about the diversion to avoid ruckus or arguments with the pilots and crew members, explained the executive.
"The screen in front of the passengers showing maps and navigation were already switched off, and they had no inkling their plane was returning to Pune without their knowledge. They were relaxing after having food," he said.
"After touching down at the Pune International Airport, the passenger (Rushiraj) and the two others were surprised and angrily questioned the pilots. The pilot-in-command told them they were just following instructions," he said.
Once the flight touched down at the Pune airport, the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) personnel quickly went inside and escorted them out of the plane, according to the executive.
The flight operator received a few calls from the DGCA and provided all necessary information, he said, adding, "We explained everything to them and presented the SOPs that were followed."
It all began after the Pune police received an anonymous call at around 4 pm on Monday that Rishiraj Sawant was taken away by some unidentified persons.
Police swiftly registered a kidnapping case as panicked Tanaji Sawant rushed to the police commissioner's office for help.
Investigations suggested Rishiraj Sawant, along with his two friends, had booked a chartered plane for Bangkok without informing his family, according to the police.
Rishiraj Sawant later told the police he kept his "business trip" to the Thailand capital secret to avoid his family's wrath.
Meanwhile, local leaders of the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) approached the Sinhgad Road police station, where the kidnapping offence was registered, and alleged former minister Tanaji Sawant misused the police machinery to bring his son back.
They questioned the police's urgency in filing a kidnapping case after receiving a call from an anonymous person.
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.
SC quashes proceedings against woman's in-laws, says no specific act attributed to them
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday quashed criminal proceedings against three in-laws of a woman who had got a police complaint lodged alleging dowry-related harassment, saying the FIR does not attribute any specific act of threat or cruelty to the accused.
The court said the prosecution has also failed to provide any cogent evidence to establish an overt act or intention on the part of the accused in-laws in the alleged second marriage of the husband.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the woman, challenging a November 2024 order of the Kerala High Court.
The high court had refused to quash the proceedings arising out of an FIR lodged in 2016 in the southern state on a complaint from the woman against her husband and the three in-laws.
The woman, who got married in 2007, had alleged that she was subjected to dowry-related harassment from the inception of her marriage and her husband married another woman in May 2013 by suppressing the fact that he was already married.
"At the outset, it is to be noted that the gravamen of the complaint lies against the accused-husband. Specific allegations regarding physical assault, demand of dowry and mental torture have been made against him pertaining to specific dates and incidents," the top court said.
It noted that the allegations against the three in-laws were less serious than active involvement and were mostly about them being present or encouraging the harassment meted out by the husband.
The bench observed that the FIR does not attribute any specific act of demand, threat or physical assault on any identifiable occasion to the complainant's father-in-law and mother-in-law.
It said the sister-in-law was alleged to have received money to buy a flat from the proceeds of the sale of gold, but "no specific act of cruelty or coercion on her part has been alleged".
"In all three instances, the allegations consist of general statements of presence and encouragement rather than specific acts that individually constitute the offence of cruelty under section 498A (husband or his relative subjecting a married woman to cruelty) of the IPC," the bench said.
Regarding the allegations under section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the bench referred to an earlier verdict of the top court and said it was held that in order to bring home the charge, the complainant was required to prima facie prove an overt act or omission of the accused in the second marriage ceremony.
Section 494 of the IPC deals with the offence of marrying again during the lifetime of a husband or a wife.
"While it has been alleged that the accused-appellants were aware of the second marriage, mere knowledge that an act is being or has been committed by another person does not, by itself, establish the requisite common intention," the bench said.
It said there was no allegation to suggest that the three in-laws actively participated in, facilitated or encouraged the solemnisation of the second marriage of the complainant's husband.
While allowing the appeal, the bench set aside the high court order and quashed the proceedings against the three.
