Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version
Google



Front Page
News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |

Front Page Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Custody for Sadhvi Pragnya, others extended

Rahi Gaikwad

Suspects file a slew of petitions

Nashik: A Nashik court on Monday extended the judicial custody for eight Malegaon blast suspects — Pragnya Singh Thakur, Shiv Narayan Kalsanghra, Shyam Bhawarlal Sahu, Ajay Rahirkar, Jagdish Mhatre, Rakesh Dhawde, Sameer Kulkarni and Ramesh Upadhyay — till November 29.

A host of applications from the suspects asking for meetings with relatives and right to liberty, copies of remand statements alleging custodial torture and two pertaining to narco tests were filed in the court. They will be heard on November 29.

Ramesh Upadhyay alleged that three postcards he sent to his friends seeking legal representation were not despatched by the Anti-Terrorism Squad. This restricted his right to liberty. He said basic necessities such as soap were also not allowed.

The court allowed the presence of a lawyer during the interrogation of blast suspect Sudhakar Dwivedi alias Dayanand Pandey.

An application moved by lawyer Kishore Vig said that Dwivedi was being tortured in custody and he faced a threat to his life. Mr. Vig argued for the rights of the accused and protection against police pressure. He cited the D.K. Basu judgment of 1997 in the Supreme Court, which laid down certain guidelines for custodial treatment of the accused — Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) pertaining to examination of witnesses and Article 20 (3) of the Constitution which states that “no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.”

Mr. Vig, therefore, asked for either a lawyer or a relative to be present.

Chief Judicial Magistrate H.K. Ganatra ruled that a lawyer be allowed to be present “whenever it is asked by the accused and whenever necessary.” This also covered narco tests as they were part of interrogation, Mr. Vig later told the media.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



Front Page

News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |

Novemberfest 2008 Chandraayan I


News Update



The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Ergo | Home |

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu