New Delhi, April 29: (Press release) Our country has witnessed in recent times a well-planned anti-Muslim hate campaign by the Hindutva fascist forces. The objective of this hate campaign was to demonize the Muslim community. Social media was flooded with hate posts alleging that the Corona virus was a planned conspiracy of Muslims. Unfortunately, the mainstream which was supposed to expose the hate news factory also joined this campaign and ran prime time news debates directly targetting the Muslim community.
India witnessed numerous incidents of attacks on Muslims across the country as a direct result of this hate campaign. In many places there were calls of boycotts on Muslim traders. There were also reports of attacks on Muslim vegetable/fruits vendors.
Popular Front has responded to this hate campaign though its cadre network and legal volunteers. The organisation has initiated legal action by identifying the hate mongers on social media and also the offensive news that were published or aired on mainstream media. Popular Front state and district units have filed 1015 complaints against mainstream media and social media accounts in 8 states. 500 rejoinders and notices were sent to different media houses. Cases were filed in Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Maharashtra. The legal follow up of Popular Front has resulted in the arrest of 19 people. This legal intervention is ongoing and more such cases will be filed in coming days.
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.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
