Ayen News

Author: news.ayen.in

  • High Court Reserves Order on AAP MLA Mehraj Malik’s PSA Detention Challenge

    JAMMU (February 23, 2026) — The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh on Monday reserved its verdict on a habeas corpus petition challenging the detention of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Mehraj Malik under the Public Safety Act (PSA). A bench presided over by Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani concluded hearing final arguments from both the petitioner’s counsel and the Union Territory administration. Malik, the first sitting legislator in the region to be booked under the stringent law, has been in custody since September 2025.

    Grounds of Detention and Petitioner’s Arguments

    Mehraj Malik, who represents the Doda East constituency and serves as the AAP’s Jammu and Kashmir unit president, was detained on 8 September 2025. The official dossier prepared by the Doda district administration accused him of “habitual confrontation” with government officials and using social media to “incite unrest” and “provoke the public.” These activities were deemed prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

    During the proceedings, Malik’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate Rahul Pant, argued that the detention was “punitive rather than preventive” and motivated by political vendetta. The counsel contended that the grounds provided in the 33-page dossier were legally flimsy and lacked a “solid foundation” for curtailing the personal liberty of an elected representative. The petition also seeks 5 crore rupees in compensation for the alleged violation of Malik’s fundamental rights.

    Government’s Stance and Legal Thresholds

    The Jammu and Kashmir administration, represented by Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli, maintained that Malik’s actions posed a “grave threat to peace and tranquillity” in the Doda district. The government argued that the MLA’s repeated use of derogatory language against public functionaries and his mobilisation of villagers during administrative tasks necessitated preventive action under the PSA.

    Under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, individuals can be detained without a formal charge or trial for up to two years. However, the High Court has historically quashed numerous PSA orders where the grounds of detention were found to be vague or where the procedural safeguards were not strictly followed.

    Significant Timeline of the Case

    • 8 September 2025: Malik is detained at a government guest house in Doda and subsequently moved to Kathua jail.
    • 24 September 2025: A habeas corpus petition is filed in the High Court challenging the detention order.
    • 18 December 2025: The petitioner’s side concludes over six hours of arguments over multiple sessions.
    • 5 February 2026: The High Court directs the government to continue advancing its response.
    • 23 February 2026: The court reserves its order after hearing the concluding submissions from the Union Territory administration.

    The court’s decision is expected to set a critical precedent regarding the intersection of administrative authority and the civil liberties of elected officials in the Union Territory.

    Sources

    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “HC reserves order on MLA Mehraj Malik’s PSA case” (February 23, 2026)
    • Greater Kashmir: “Detention under PSA: J&K Govt to respond to AAP MLA’s petition” (December 18, 2025)
    • Article 14: “First J&K Legislator Held Under Draconian Detention Law” (October 30, 2025)
    • Law Trend: “J&K High Court to Continue Hearing on AAP MLA Mehraj Malik’s PSA Detention” (February 5, 2026)

    Legal Battle for AAP MLA Mehraj Malik This video provides a concise update on the High Court proceedings, featuring insights from the legal team and a summary of the arguments presented during the final hearings in February 2026.

  • Supreme Court Directs Investigation into Exclusion of 91 Displaced Residents from Voter List

    NEW DELHI (February 23, 2026) — The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Lucknow District Election Officer to investigate the grievances of 91 residents of Akbar Nagar who were allegedly excluded from the Uttar Pradesh electoral rolls. The petitioners, represented by Sana Parveen and others, claim they were disenfranchised during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) following the demolition of their homes in September 2023. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ruled that the local administration must verify the claims and take remedial measures to protect the residents’ democratic rights.

    Displacement and Loss of “Identifiable Abode”

    The 91 petitioners were long-term residents of Akbar Nagar, a locality in Lucknow that saw large-scale demolitions in late 2023 as part of a riverfront development project. According to the petition, many of the affected individuals have been on the voter list since 2002, with younger family members appearing in subsequent revisions.

    The primary obstacle to their inclusion in the current SIR process is the lack of a permanent residential address. Senior Advocate M. R. Shamshad, appearing for the residents, argued that the demolition of “unauthorised” structures—a move previously upheld by the judiciary—should not result in the loss of voting rights. The petitioners sought a directive allowing them to submit enumeration forms to Booth Level Officers (BLOs) despite their temporary lack of an “identifiable abode.”

    Judicial Directive and High Court Liberty

    Initially, the Supreme Court expressed reluctance to intervene, noting that a writ petition under Article 32 was not the ideal vehicle for resolving disputed factual matters regarding residence. However, recognizing the potential for mass disenfranchisement, the bench opted to refer the matter back to the district authorities for a factual inquiry.

    The court’s order outlined several key points:

    • Factual Enquiry: The District Collector (acting as the District Election Officer) must ascertain whether the petitioners were previously included in the voter lists and evaluate their current eligibility.
    • Remedial Action: If the grievances are found to be valid, the officer is directed to take immediate steps to include the displaced residents in the supplementary electoral rolls.
    • Legal Recourse: The bench granted the petitioners the liberty to approach the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court should they fail to receive effective relief from the district administration.

    Context of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)

    The order comes amid a broader national effort by the Election Commission of India to refine voter lists through the Special Intensive Revision process. The court has recently been involved in similar disputes elsewhere, including directing the deployment of judicial officers in West Bengal to oversee the adjudication of claims and objections.

    In the case of Akbar Nagar, the bench emphasised that administrative inquiries into voter eligibility should not be hampered by the ongoing transition of residents into rehabilitation housing provided under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY).

    Sources

    • The Hindu: “Bulldozer demolition drive: Supreme Court asks district election officer to address issue of people lacking ‘identifiable abode’” (February 23, 2026)
    • LawBeat: “Supreme Court rejects plea by Akbarnagar demolition-hit residents over UP SIR” (February 23, 2026)
    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “SC directs Lucknow election officer to probe exclusion of 91 displaced residents from voter list” (February 23, 2026)
    • Land Conflict Watch: “1,800 structures razed in Lucknow’s Akbar Nagar for riverfront project” (Updated June 2024)

  • Supreme Court Directs Delhi High Court to Decide Leena Paulose’s Bail Plea Within Three Weeks

    NEW DELHI (February 23, 2026) — The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Delhi High Court to pass an order on the bail application of Leena Paulose, the wife of alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar, within a three-week period. Paulose is a co-accused in the 200 crore rupee extortion case involving the wives of former Ranbaxy promoters. A bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh issued the directive after noting that her bail petition has remained pending before the High Court for over a year.

    Judicial Intervention Over Prolonged Delay

    The apex court’s order follows a petition filed by Paulose seeking the “expeditious hearing” of her bail application. During the proceedings, counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite regular listings, the matter had not reached a conclusion in the High Court.

    While the Supreme Court had previously expressed reservations about litigants approaching the top court to “arrange the board” of High Courts, the bench acknowledged the significant duration of the pendency in this instance. The directive aims to ensure a timely judicial decision on Paulose’s custody status, which has continued since her arrest in September 2021.

    Background of the Extortion Case

    The case originates from an investigation by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police. Authorities allege that Sukesh Chandrasekhar, while lodged in Rohini Jail, operated an organised crime syndicate to extort 200 crore rupees from Aditi Singh and Japna Singh, the spouses of Malvinder and Shivinder Singh.

    Key allegations against Leena Paulose include:

    • Syndicate Facilitation: The prosecution contends that Paulose was not merely an abettor but an active member of the syndicate, helping to manage and park the proceeds of crime.
    • Financial Irregularities: Investigators allege the couple utilised hawala routes and shell companies to move funds. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) previously seized 16 luxury vehicles from Paulose’s Chennai residence, which were prima facie linked to the extortion money.
    • MCOCA Charges: Due to the organised nature of the alleged crimes, the police invoked the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), which carries a higher threshold for the granting of bail.

    Concurrent Legal Proceedings

    In July 2023, the Delhi High Court had previously rejected a bail plea from Paulose, citing the “sensitive nature” of the case and the rigorous requirements of Section 21(4) of MCOCA. The current proceedings relate to a fresh application for bail. Both Paulose and Chandrasekhar remain in judicial custody as they face multiple trials across various jurisdictions, including money laundering charges brought by the Enforcement Directorate.

    Sources

    • Verdictum News Desk: “Supreme Court Asks Delhi HC To Decide Bail Plea Of Sukesh Chandrashekhar’s Wife Within Three Weeks” (February 23, 2026)
    • The Times of India: “Rs 200 crore extortion case: SC asks Delhi HC to decide bail plea of conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar’s wife” (February 23, 2026)
    • The Hindu: “Supreme Court raps Sukesh Chandrasekhar’s wife plea seeking expeditious hearing” (September 3, 2025)
    • SCC Online: “Delhi High Court refuses bail to Leena Paulose in 214 crore extortion case” (July 13, 2023)

  • Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Reopening Land Acquisition Compensation Claims

    NEW DELHI (February 23, 2026) — The Supreme Court on Monday orally observed that land acquisition cases finalised prior to 2018 cannot be reopened for the purpose of granting interest on compensation to farmers. A special bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, clarified that whilst solatium remains a right under the principle of parity, the payment of interest cannot be applied to cases where proceedings reached finality years before recent judicial shifts. The observation came during the commencement of an open-court hearing regarding a review petition filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).

    Judicial Balancing of Parity and Finality

    The hearing focused on the NHAI’s challenge to a 2019 Supreme Court verdict in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which had struck down Section 3J of the National Highways Act. That section had previously denied farmers solatium and interest, a distinction the court had found discriminatory under Article 14 of the Constitution.

    Chief Justice Surya Kant noted that while the court previously rejected the NHAI’s plea to apply the Tarsem Singh ruling strictly prospectively, there must be a cut-off to prevent judicial chaos. “Pre-2018 matters cannot be reopened. Those matters which were pending in 2008 continue. If someone in the early 2020s filed an application saying they are entitled to parity on the basis of 2008, we can say yes as to solatium but not interest,” the Chief Justice remarked.

    Financial Implications and the 32,000 Crore Rupee Burden

    The NHAI, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, argued that a blanket retrospective application of the 2019 judgment would impose an insurmountable financial burden on the public exchequer. According to reports from Business Standard and The Hindustan Times, the Solicitor General stated the potential liability is estimated at approximately 32,000 crore rupees.

    The Solicitor General argued that earlier judicial impressions—which suggested a smaller impact of around 100 crore rupees—had been surpassed by a flood of new claims. He emphasized that reopening long-disposed cases would contravene the doctrine of immutability, which ensures that once a judgment attains finality, it remains unalterable.

    Background and Statutory Context

    The legal dispute centers on the period between 1997 and 2015, during which the National Highways Act operated without the provision for solatium (an additional 30 percent compensation) or interest on delayed payments.

    • The 2019 Ruling: The Supreme Court declared the exclusion of these benefits unconstitutional, ruling that landowners under the NHAI Act should receive parity with those covered by the Land Acquisition Act of 1894.
    • The NHAI Review: The authority is now seeking to limit the scope of this retrospective relief, specifically to prevent the revival of claims where land acquisition was completed and compensation was accepted without protest before 2018.

    The bench has directed the parties to file written submissions and has listed the review plea for a detailed hearing in two weeks.

    Sources

    • The Hindustan Times: “Pre-2018 land acquisition cases can’t be reopened for grant of compensation with interest: SC” (February 23, 2026)
    • Business Standard: “Pre-2018 Nhai land cases can’t be reopened for interest claims: SC” (February 23, 2026)
    • Lawtext: “Solatium and Interest Entitlement – Retrospective or Prospective Application of Law” (February 15, 2026)
    • Supreme Court of India: Union of India v. Tarsem Singh [(2019) 9 SCC 304]

  • Supreme Court Declines Subramanian Swamy’s Plea Over Tirumala Laddu Inquiry

    NEW DELHI (February 23, 2026) — The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy challenging the Andhra Pradesh government’s decision to appoint a one-member committee to review administrative lapses in the Tirumala laddu controversy. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi ruled that the state-appointed administrative inquiry does not conflict with the ongoing criminal proceedings, allowing both processes to continue independently and in accordance with the law.

    Judicial Observations on “Overlapping” Probes

    The petitioner had argued that the appointment of a separate committee, led by retired IAS officer Dinesh Kumar, undermined the authority of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) previously constituted by the Supreme Court. However, the bench found these apprehensions to be without “solid foundation.”

    CJI Surya Kant stated, “Such an administrative enquiry cannot be called as overlapping with the criminal proceedings which led to the chargesheet and supplementary chargesheet.” The court noted that the scope of the two investigations is well-demarcated: the SIT handles the criminal aspect, whilst the state committee is tasked with fixing responsibility for administrative failures.

    Arguments and State Cabinet Decision

    The controversy, which first emerged in late 2024, involves allegations of adulterated ghee being used in the preparation of ‘prasadam’ laddus at the Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple. During the hearing, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing the Andhra Pradesh government, submitted that the petition was intended to derail departmental proceedings.

    The state cabinet, chaired by Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, had decided on February 3 to form the committee to identify individuals responsible for the alleged quality lapses. Swamy’s plea had also assailed public statements made by the Chief Minister regarding the row, but the court declined to interfere with the executive’s right to conduct internal reviews.

    Background on the Investigation

    Recent developments in the broader case include a chargesheet filed by the CBI-led SIT in the Nellore ACB court. According to reports from The Times of India, the forensic analysis indicated that the ghee samples drawn from certain tankers were “synthetic” and blended with vegetable oils, rather than containing animal fats as initially alleged. The court’s decision today ensures that the departmental inquiry into how such supplies were procured can proceed alongside these judicial findings.

    Sources

    • The New Indian Express: “SC refuses to entertain plea challenging committee’s review of SIT report on Tirumala laddu row” (February 23, 2026)
    • Bar and Bench: “Tirupati laddu case: Supreme Court rejects Subramanian Swamy’s plea against State probe panel” (February 23, 2026)
    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “SC rejects plea against panel reviewing SIT report on Tirumala laddu row” (February 23, 2026)
    • The Times of India: “CBI chargesheet rules out mixing of animal fats in Tirupati laddu ghee” (January 31, 2026)

  • Police Investigate Toddler’s Death Following Allegations of Medical Negligence in Kattakada

    THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (February 23, 2026) — The Kerala Police have launched an investigation into the death of a two-and-a-half-year-old girl after her family alleged medical negligence at a private hospital in Kattakada. The child, Aisha Fathima, passed away early Monday morning at a tertiary care facility where she had been rushed following a sudden deterioration in her condition. The Aryanad police have registered a First Information Report (FIR) and are currently awaiting forensic results to determine the exact cause of death.

    Timeline of Medical Consultations

    Aisha Fathima, the daughter of Sidique and Fasilath from Punlal, Perumkulam, first exhibited signs of physical discomfort on February 18. According to reports from Manorama Online and Deshabhimani, the child initially suffered from breathing difficulties and swelling near her eyelid.

    The family sought medical attention across several institutions over the following days:

    • February 18: The child was treated for shortness of breath and eyelid swelling at the Aryanad Government Hospital.
    • February 19: Seeking a paediatric specialist, the family visited Mamal Hospital, a private facility in Kattakada. Reports indicate the attending doctor suggested the symptoms might be related to a clothing allergy.
    • February 20: Following further medical advice, the child was taken to a private eye hospital for specialised consultation.
    • February 22: At approximately 11:00 am, the toddler’s condition worsened significantly, manifesting as extreme fatigue and acute respiratory distress.

    Allegations of Treatment Mismanagement

    The family returned to Mamal Hospital on Sunday, where they discovered the paediatrician was on leave. According to the parents’ complaint, the child was examined by another doctor who ordered blood and urine tests.

    The situation reportedly escalated after the child was administered oxygen and two injections. The family alleged that Aisha’s condition deteriorated immediately following the second injection, noting that she became visibly weaker and “her face contorted” as she struggled to breathe. The family also claimed that hospital staff initially prevented them from entering the ambulance when the decision was made to transfer the child to Neyyar Medicity. Aisha was declared dead at the second hospital at 12:55 am on Monday.

    Official Response and Legal Action

    The Aryanad police have seized the medical records from the private hospital as part of their inquiry. Authorities have confirmed that a case of unnatural death has been registered, and the body has been shifted for a post-mortem examination.

    As noted in regional reports, the private hospital is owned by L. V. Ajayakumar, President of the Kerala Pradesh Pravasi Congress State Committee. Whilst the hospital management has not yet issued a formal statement regarding the specific clinical decisions made, the police stated that the investigation will focus on whether the administered medication was appropriate for the child’s symptoms.

    Sources

    • Manorama Online: “Two-and-a-half-year-old girl dies; complaint alleges medical negligence” (February 23, 2026)
    • Deshabhimani: “Child Dies; Complaint of Treatment Negligence at Private Hospital” (February 23, 2026)
    • Asianet News Malayalam: “Toddler suffers from breathing issue; dies after injection” (February 22, 2026)
    • Kerala Police Departmental Briefing: Saheednagar / Aryanad Station Records (February 23, 2026)

  • Five Arrested Following Murder of Ranchi Man Over Domestic Dispute

    RANCHI (February 23, 2026) — Police in Ranchi have arrested five individuals, including a married couple, in connection with the murder of a 30-year-old man whose body was recovered from a well last week. The victim, identified as Asif Ansari, a resident of Raja Colony in Kantatoli, was found on Thursday in the Gadigaon area. Subsequent investigations have revealed a pre-planned conspiracy allegedly motivated by a long-standing personal dispute.

    Autopsy Revisions and Cause of Death

    Initial physical examinations of the body suggested that Ansari had been killed by being crushed with stones. However, a formal autopsy report has since clarified that the victim was first shot dead before the attackers attempted to obscure the cause of death by using heavy stones.

    DSP Sadar Sanjeev Besra stated on Monday, “Initial investigation revealed that the victim was killed by crushing him with stones, but the autopsy report revealed that Ansari was first shot dead with a bullet before being crushed with stones.”

    Alleged Conspiracy and Financial Details

    The police investigation has linked the murder to a relationship Ansari allegedly maintained with a woman for approximately 15 years. According to the authorities, the woman’s husband, identified as 35-year-old Johnson Minj, orchestrated the killing alongside his associate, 36-year-old Deepak Agarwal.

    The DSP noted that Minj allegedly paid a total of 8 lakh rupees to various parties to carry out the crime:

    • Deepak Agarwal: Received 4 lakh rupees to coordinate the plot.
    • Prince Kumar (22): Paid 1.60 lakh rupees for his involvement.
    • Prem Lakra (44): Paid 2.40 lakh rupees for his role in the execution.

    Arrests and Seizures

    Following the interrogation and subsequent confessions, all five suspects, including the couple, were sent to judicial custody on Sunday. During the operation, the Ranchi police seized several items of evidence, including:

    • A country-made pistol.
    • Two motorcycles used in the commission of the crime.
    • Blood-stained clothing and mobile handsets.

    The Khelgaon police, who led the recovery of the body from the well on Thursday, are continuing their inquiries to ensure all aspects of the conspiracy are documented for the upcoming trial.

  • Police Head Constable Among Four Arrested in Arunachal Pradesh Drug Bust

    ITANAGAR (February 23, 2026) — Authorities in Arunachal Pradesh have arrested four individuals, including a serving police head constable, following the seizure of heroin in the Banderdewa region. The arrests, made on Sunday afternoon, are part of a broader crackdown on cross-border narcotics trafficking between Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. According to official statements, the seized contraband is estimated to have a market value exceeding 50,000 rupees.

    Interception at Niya Colony

    The operation was launched by the Banderdewa police acting on credible intelligence regarding the transport of narcotics from Assam. A team led by Inspector Kipa Hamak intercepted a motorcycle at Niya Colony, leading to the arrest of two primary suspects, identified as Shivaji Morang and Sarat Kutum, both residents of the Lakhimpur district in Assam.

    Upon searching the suspects, police recovered approximately 11 grams of suspected heroin concealed within a soap case. As noted in reports by India Today NE, both individuals were formally charged under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

    Involvement of Law Enforcement

    The investigation deepened following the initial arrests, leading to the apprehension of two additional suspects. Amongst those taken into custody is a head constable of the Arunachal Pradesh Police. Officials stated that the involvement of a uniformed officer in the trafficking network is being treated with “utmost seriousness.”

    The Naharlagun Sub-Divisional Police Officer (SDPO), Rishi Longdo, confirmed that a case has been registered at the Banderdewa Police Station. This incident marks the second time this month that state police personnel have been implicated in drug-related offences, following a similar arrest of an India Reserve Battalion (IRBn) official earlier in February.

    Sources

    • India Today NE: “Arunachal police bust cross-border narcotic supply route, two arrested” (February 23, 2026)
    • The Arunachal Times: “Four arrested in drug bust near Banderdewa” (February 23, 2026)
    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “Police head constable among four held with heroin in Arunachal” (February 23, 2026)

  • Senior Revenue Official Booked Following Rape and Blackmail Allegations in Bhubaneswar

    BHUBANESWAR (February 22, 2026) — A Joint Commissioner-ranked officer of the Indian Revenue Service (IRS) has been booked by the Bhubaneswar police for the alleged rape and blackmail of a 38-year-old woman. The case, registered at the Saheed Nagar police station on Friday, follows a preliminary inquiry that established prima facie evidence against the official. According to senior police officials, the alleged assault occurred at the officer’s government residence in the Satsang Vihar area, where the complainant had reportedly been invited under the pretext of watching a film.

    Allegations of Assault and Digital Blackmail

    The complainant, a married woman, stated in her First Information Report (FIR) that she visited the officer’s quarters on 15 January 2026, accompanied by a woman who is reportedly a relative of the accused. The victim alleged that while the officer’s wife and the other woman were away from the residence, the official played obscene content on his laptop and subsequently raped her.

    According to reports from The Hindustan Times and The Indian Express, the victim further alleged that the officer threatened to circulate intimate footage of her if she disclosed the incident. The complainant approached the authorities after learning on 18 February that a video had reportedly been shared on social media, following which the accused allegedly attempted to coerce her into meeting him at a hotel in Puri.

    Police Investigation and Legal Proceedings

    Commissioner of Police S. Dev Datta Singh confirmed that an investigation is currently underway and that the officer has been summoned for interrogation. The case has been registered under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which pertains to the punishment for rape.

    Significant investigative steps taken by the Saheed Nagar police include:

    • Evidence Collection: Mobile phones and other digital devices have been seized from the officer’s residence for forensic analysis.
    • Medical Examination: A formal medical examination of the complainant has been conducted.
    • Judicial Statements: The victim’s statement is scheduled to be recorded before a judicial magistrate under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

    Broadening Scope of the Inquiry

    DCP Jagmohan Meena noted that the case is being treated as highly sensitive. A separate case has been filed at the Infocity police station against the woman who introduced the victim to the officer, as investigators suspect a wider link between the two incidents. Authorities are currently verifying the origins of the video and the extent of its circulation to establish a comprehensive timeline of the alleged crime and subsequent blackmail.

    Sources

    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “IRS officer booked in rape case in Odisha” (February 22, 2026)
    • The Hindustan Times: “Odisha: IRS officer booked for rape, threatened to blackmail survivor with video” (February 22, 2026)
    • The Indian Express: “IRS officer booked on charges of rape in Odisha” (February 23, 2026)
    • Times of India: “City cops launch probe into rape complaint against IRS officer” (February 23, 2026)

  • Four Arrested Following Infant’s Death After Alleged Caste-Based Assault in Telangana

    HYDERABAD (February 22, 2026) — Police in Nagarkurnool district have arrested four individuals in connection with the death of a two-month-old infant following an alleged assault on a family at a local temple fair. The incident, which took place on February 18 in Kummera village, reportedly began with a dispute over entry fees and escalated into a violent altercation involving caste-based slurs. Whilst the infant succumbed to injuries on February 21, authorities have registered a case of suspicious death and are awaiting post-mortem results to confirm the exact cause of the tragedy.

    Allegations of Caste-Based Violence

    According to a complaint filed by the infant’s mother, Chilikeshwaram Mounika, and grandmother, Chandrakala, the family was targeted by a group of villagers during the Kummera Jathara (temple fair). The family, belonging to the backward Chakali community, alleged they were refused entry to the temple unless they paid a 100-rupee fee, which is usually free for devotees.

    The family claimed that upon their refusal, they were verbally abused with caste-based slurs and physically assaulted. Chandrakala stated that women were dragged by their hair and struck with metal rods. The family alleged the infant was harmed when Mounika placed the child at the feet of the attackers to plead for mercy.

    Police Action and Counter-Claims

    The Nagarkurnool police have arrested four suspects, identified in reports as being part of the group involved in the scuffle. Initially, the case was booked under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for voluntarily causing hurt and intentional insult. However, following the infant’s death and the revelation that Mounika belongs to a Scheduled Caste (SC) community, the police have added sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and charges of attempted murder.

    Conversely, a villager from the opposing group filed a counter-complaint on the day of the incident. He alleged that he sustained a head injury after being attacked with stones by the family during the scuffle. A separate FIR has been registered against members of the family based on this report.

    Investigative Status and Public Reaction

    The Sub-Divisional Police Officer of Nagarkurnool stated that there were no visible external injuries on the infant’s body at the time of the report. A post-mortem examination has been conducted, and further legal steps will depend on the forensic findings.

    The incident has sparked significant political and social concern. Former MP Kalvakuntla Kavitha and members of the Dharma Samaj Party (DSP) have expressed support for the family, with the latter staging protests outside the Nagarkurnool Government Hospital. The family has reportedly taken refuge in Nagarkurnool town, citing fears of further retaliation if they return to their village.

    Sources

    • Press Trust of India (PTI): “Telangana: Four arrested after family alleges infant died following assault by villagers” (February 22, 2026)
    • Times of India: “‘Caste’ attack at Telangana temple fair leaves 2-month-old dead” (February 23, 2026)
    • ANI News: “K Kavitha expresses shock over infant’s death in alleged caste clash” (February 22, 2026)
    • The Hindu: “NHRC registers case after infant’s death in ‘caste assault’ at Nagarkurnool” (February 23, 2026)

    Protest for Justice in Nagarkurnool This video captures the public demonstration and sit-in protest led by local leaders and family members in front of the Nagarkurnool police station, demanding immediate action against those responsible for the infant’s death.