Uwazi

Since October 8, authorities in Jammu and Kashmir have detained four journalists, subsequently releasing two of them, and questioned one other, according to various news reports and other people familiar with the incidents, who spoke to CPJ via phone.

The five journalists are:

Salman Shah, editor of Kashmir First, the online weekly magazine of the privately owned news website The Kashmiriyat
Suhail Dar, a freelance journalist contributing to the privately own news website The Kashmiriyat and the privately owned Urdu-language newspaper Sach News
Mukhtar Zahoor, a freelance journalist contributing to the BBC
Majid Hyderi, a freelance journalist and commentator
Sajad Gul, a freelance journalist contributing to privately owned news websites The Kashmir Walla, Maktoob Media, and Mountain Ink

Authorities formally arrested Dar and Shah yesterday, and both remain detained at Anantnag district jail, according to news reports and family members of the two journalists, who spoke to CPJ via phone. Yesterday, a local magistrate ordered Shah and Dar to remain detained for two days, according to The Kashmir Walla.

“India needs to move quickly to improve its shameful record of harassing and detaining critical journalists in Jammu and Kashmir in a complete abandonment of India’s once-proud tradition of press freedom,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator, in Washington, D.C. “Police must immediately release Salman Shah and Suhail Dar and allow journalists to do their jobs without fear of reprisal.”

On the evening of October 8, authorities summoned Dar to the Sadder police station in Kashmir’s Anantnag district for questioning before detaining him, according to news reports and Dar’s brother, Tariq Dar, who spoke to CPJ via phone. Tariq Dar told CPJ that the police had not informed the family of any reasons for his brother’s detention.

Separately, at approximately 7:00 p.m. on October 12, officers with the Sherbagh police station in Anantnag district detained Shah from his home in the Sheerpora area of Anantnag district for questioning, according to The Kashmir Walla and his brother Imran Shah, who spoke to CPJ via phone. Imran Shah said that his family had not been informed of any police investigation into Shah until his formal arrest yesterday.

Both journalists have been detained under two sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure that allow authorities to hold an individual in preventative custody on an executive magistrate’s order to prevent a “breach of peace,” and to prevent the commission of cognizable offenses, according to The Wire.

Tariq Dar and Imran Shah told CPJ that they have not received a copy of a police report detailing the accusations against Dar and Shah.

Masrat Mir, the station house officer of the Sadder police station, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on Dar’s ongoing detention sent via messaging app. Majid Nadeem, the station house officer of the Sherbagh police station, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on Shah’s ongoing detention sent via messaging app.

Shah was previously detained from April 5, 2020, to May 8, 2020, on accusations of violating a section of the Indian penal code pertaining to “statements conducing to public mischief,” according to The Kashmiriyat, citing Shah and his lawyer.

Separately, at approximately 12:30 a.m. on October 13, officers with the Ram Munshi Bagh police station detained Zahoor from his home in the Dalgate area of Srinagar and confiscated his camera and his sister’s phone, according to various news reports citing Zahoor and his family.

Zahoor told The Kashmir Walla that he was detained overnight and later questioned about his location on September 1, the same day that a 91-year-old Kashmiri separatist leader died in the city of Srinagar, leading authorities to shut down the internet in Kashmir valley and increase security patrolling in the area. Officers also questioned him about the photos on his phone before releasing him at 2:00 p.m. later that day, Zahoor told The Kashmir Walla.

Tauseef Meer, the station house officer of the Ram Munshi Bagh police station, told The Kashmir Walla that authorities were questioning Zahoor on the basis of an unnamed “suspicion.” Meer did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on Zahoor’s detention and questioning sent via messaging app.

Separately, on October 13, the Special Operations Group, the anti-insurgency unit of the Jammu and Kashmir police, summoned Majid Hyderi for questioning at its headquarters in Srinagar, according to The Kashmir Walla and Hyderi, who spoke to CPJ via phone.

Upon arriving at the headquarters, Hydrei was asked to relinquish his phone, but refused to do so, and subsequently switched off his phone upon request, according to the journalist. Hyderi told CPJ that three men in civilian clothing questioned him about his source of income and choice of profession before demanding explanation for three of his Facebook posts. Officers specifically questioned Hyderi for approximately one hour about a post in which he criticized the police’s use of force against participants of Muharram processions earlier this year, he said.

After the questioning finished at around 1:00 p.m., Hyderi was kept in lockup until his release around 5:30 p.m., he said, adding that he was not allowed to offer two Muslim prayers during the questioning and during his detention.

Iftikhar Talib, the superintendent of the Special Operations Group, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on Hyderi’s questioning and detention sent via messaging app.

Separately, October 13, officers with the Hajin police station in Kashmir’s northern Bandipora district summoned Gul for questioning in relation to his news report in Mountain Ink and a video he posted on Twitter regarding a Kashmiri man who was killed in a police encounter on October 11, according to The Kashmir Walla and the journalist, who spoke to CPJ via phone. Gul told CPJ that he was questioned for approximately one hour about his journalistic activities.

Zahid Malik, senior superintendent of police of Bandipora district, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on Gul’s questioning sent via WhatsApp.

In February, Jammu and Kashmir police opened an investigation into Gul on accusations of taking part in an illegal demonstration against home demolitions, as CPJ documented. Gul told CPJ at the time that he denied participating in such a demonstration.

Dilbag Singh, the director general of the Jammu and Kashmir police, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment on all five cases sent via messaging app.

The Adivasis and Dalit farmers of Odisha have been resisting bauxite mining at their sacred shrine of Mali Parbat for more than two decades. Spanning across 270 acres, the Mali Parbat mine is in Koraput district, in south Odisha.

The 2007 mining lease of Hindalco Industries expired after it operations were halted due to the tribe’s stiff resistance. In April, the company’s lease was extended by 50 years and it applied for fresh environmental clearance.

When the tribal activists protested the September 22 public hearing of the company, some of them received alleged death threats. Activist Sharanya Nayak, who participated in the hearing, told Newsclick that “325 objections had been raised against the EIA [environmental impact assessment] reports that gave the go-ahead to mining”.

Explaining how officials ensured that there was no opposition during the hearing, Nayak said, “The villagers of Doliamaba had geared were all set to participate in the hearing. There were more than 700 written physical objections against the proposed mining. However, the police, company officials and hired goons had blocked the three roads leading up to the venue. The officials started the meeting before the scheduled time of 11 am to ensure there was no opposition.”

Alleging that “company officials or people hired by them are threatening and singling out the activists who had opposed the public hearing and mining”, Nayak said, “One such activist, Abhi Sadepelli who is secretary of the Mali Parbat Surakhya Samiti, and his wife were threatened that they would be killed if he does not support mining in the region. The activists have registered police complaints against the ongoing death threats.”

When the lease was awarded to Hindalco in 2007, the EIA report mentioned that there was no water body in Mali Parbat.

According to The Hindu, Hindalco failed to mine bauxite till 2011and its environmental clearance expired. However, it started illegal mining in 2012-2014 without an environmental clearance, which was resisted by the tribe.

Locals allege that neither the company nor the state government have clearly explained the adverse impact mining to the villagers. The villagers contend that the EIA report, prepared by VIMTA Laboratory Private Limited of Hyderabad, disregarded the impact of mining on the water sources and subsequent effects on agriculture and horticulture.

The villagers said mining will affect more than 44 villages directly and 200 villages indirectly. While the EIA report shows that there are no water bodies, the villagers said that there are 32 perennial streams and four canals emerging from this hill. Nearly 2,500 families inhabiting 44 villages relying on this water for irrigation will be adversely affect as mining will impact the streams and soil moisture, they added. Other likely hazards are water and soil pollution due to dumping of oil, lubricants and other waste material by the company.

Besides, significant land degradation caused by mining has not been mentioned in the EIA report. Odisha is among the states with the highest soil erosion caused by mining and deforestation. Koraput already has other bauxite mines, including Deomali. Serious soil erosion and land degradation have adversely impacted the region.

Rajan, an anti-mining activist and supporter of Adivasi movements, said, “The Naveen Patnaik government is acting as a stooge for Hindalco and all the other extractive industries; it is against Adivasis and Dalit farmers. The leaders of the Mali Parbat Surakhya Samiti are being harassed and threatened for opposing the proposed Hindalco mining at Mali Parbat.”

Alleging that the public relations officer and the company’s staff are instigating fights at villages, Rajan told Newsclick, “The Koraput local administration and the police, who are hand in glove with the company, are trying to book villagers and tribal leaders who opposed mining under false charges.”

Besides the environmental concerns, the villagers have religious and cultural sentiments attached to the hill. There Adivasis have a place of worship in the Mali Parbat known as Pakuli Pahar Gumpha (sacred cave). The deity is worshiped by the natives of the surrounding villages of Aligon, Kachiguda, Daleiguda, Rajaniguda, Pakijhola and Mania. This old religious place will be destroyed if mining resumes. Attempts by Newsclick to contact Hindalco didn’t get any response.

On September 22, 2021, the public hearing commenced in the presence of Mr. Deben Kr Pradhan, ADM of Koraput and other officials at 9 AM, around two hours prior to the scheduled start at 11 AM. Angered by this breach of due procedure, residents of 44 villagers from four panchayats – Kanti, Sorisha Padar, Daleiguda and Pakujhola – who arrived for the hearing shouted slogans and demanded the hearing be cancelled. The authorities postponed the public hearing. On September 22, 2021, an FIR (91/2021) was registered in Semiliguda Police Station by Assistant Sub Inspector Padma Charana Nayak against the 36 Mali Parbat Surakhya Samiti activists, including the organisation’s president Mr. Bijaya Khila were named in the FIR. They were charged under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 294 (obscene words in public place), 307 (murder), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 326 (causing grievous hurt), 332 (causing grievous hurt to a public servant), 379 (theft), 427 (mischief causing damage up to Rs 50), and 506 of the Indian Penal Code; Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act; Section 3 of the PDPP Act; and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act. On September 24, 2021, police arrested seven HRDs including Mr. G Hemant Kumar (42), Mr. Rabi Khora (43), Mr. Mahanta Khosla (35), Mr. Samba Pangi (45), Mr. Bhikari Guntha (43), Mr. Dambaru Guntha (38) and Mr. Ratan Kadia (28). On October 5, five more HRDS were arrested in connection with the incident, including Mr. Khila, ex-sarpanch Mr. Dasi Nandibali, Mr. Giridhar Khila, Mr. Gobardhan and Mr. Mangudu.

On October 1, at 8.30 PM, police arrested 16-year-old Mr. Bikram Khara – a student of class 9 whose father Mr. Dasa Khara is named in the FIR; although he was a minor and Section 10 of the Juvenile Justice Act mandates that an apprehended juvenile be placed under the charge of the special juvenile police unit and produced before the Board within 24 hours, these provisions were not extended to him. None of the arrested HRDs were shown any arrest memo, or allowed access to a lawyer, in flagrant violation of DK Basu guidelines. They were all produced in court and are currently lodged in jail. Whereas other HRDs named in the FIR fear being arrested in violation of due procedure and are extremely concerned about their physical safety.

About the Human Rights Defenders: Mr. Ba Singh Hassa is a resident of Dadgama village in Khunti block of Khunti district. An activist with Adivasi Adhikar Manch – a civil society group that protects the land, water and forest rights of indigenous groups, Mr. Hassa has organised and participated in numerous peaceful movements, demonstrations and meetings in Khunti and other places in the past decade, including in the Pathalgadi movement in 2018-19, and ongoing protests against the new farm laws. He is well-educated and offers advice and support to innocent villagers falsely accused of being Maoists.

Details of the incident: On July 14, 2021, Khunti Sub Divisional Officer (SDO) Mr. Sayyed Riyaj Ahemed issued a notice under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (which allows an Executive Magistrate to show cause any person likely to disturb peace or disturb the public tranquillity). It mentioned the names of 25 people, including Mr. Ba Singh Hassa and his brothers/ cousins Mr. Bahadur Hassa, Mr. Kinu Hassa and Mr. Jugal Munda, who were likely to disturb peace and security in the area according to information with the SDO. All 25 persons were asked to report to the SDO court in Khunti on July 22, 2021 and show cause why they should not be asked to furnish a bond of Rs 50,000 and two supporting witnesses. Mr. Bahadur Hassa received a call from the Khunti Police Station on July 17, 2021, when he was informed about the notice. He collected the notice from the police station the next day, and reported to the SDO court with Mr. Ba Singh Hassa and other brothers/ cousins on July 22, 2021, and two more subsequent hearings. On September 24, 2021, the day of the fourth hearing, Mr. Ba Singh Hassa, Mr. Kinu Hassa, Mr. Jugal Munda and Mr. Bahadur Hassa reached the court at around 10 AM, whereas their turn came up at 2.30 PM. When they presented themselves before SDO Mr. Ahemed, he asked them not to leave the court premises without his permission. He then called someone from his phone and said that three absconding accused in the murder case (FIR no 88/2018) were sitting in front of him. At around 4.30 PM, Khunti PS Officer in Charge Mr. B Thakur reached the court in civil clothes with three other policemen in uniform. They arrested Mr. Ba Singh Hassa, Mr. Kinu Hassa and Mr. Jugal Munda from inside the court premises. The HRD and his relatives were not informed about why they were arrested, nor shown any arrest warrant or allowed access to a lawyer. All provisions of the DK Basu guidelines were violated. Mr. Hassa and others were taken to the Khunti Police Station in a police vehicle and detained there overnight. They were taken for medical examination at 2 PM, produced in court at around 4.30 PM on September 25, 2021, and remanded to Khunti jail. We firmly believe that the HRD and his relatives were ensnared by the SDO and arrested by police in a case that was over three years old in violation of due procedures. The SDO referred to them as absconding even though Mr. Ba Singh Hassa had communicated and met several police and government officials in his capacity as an activist and participated in many public programmes in Khunti and Ranchi in the intervening period. He was also detained and interrogated by police in Khunti in April 2019. Whereas, the notice against the HRD and his arrest coincided with his active involvement in peaceful meetings and protests against the new farm laws in Khunti. This indicates that the action against Mr. Hassa and others is an act of political vendetta, and aimed at muzzling the freedom of speech, expression and assembly, which are guaranteed under national and international legal frameworks.

After disappearing while covering a farmer protest in Lakhimpur Kheri, a reporter for Sadhna Prime News was found dead on October 4. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its Indian affiliates, the Indian Journalists Union (IJU) and National Union of Journalists- India (NUJ-I) condemn the tragic incident and urge for a judicial inquiry into the case.

Local journalist Raman Kashyap’s body was found in a mortuary a day after his reported disappearance while covering the violent demonstrations in Lakhimpur Kheri, where local farmers and political supporters collided. Kashyap was among eight others allegedly killed in the demonstration involving hundreds of farmers.

The farmers gathered to protest the visit of Uttar Pradesh’s deputy chief minister, Keshav M to the village of the union minister of state for home affairs, Ajay Kumar Mishra, in Tikunia. The incident marks a lethal intensification of the unrest in India since the introduction of controversial agricultural laws.

There are conflicting accounts of the circumstances in which Kashyap died. The editor of the Sadhna Prime news channel, Brij Mohan Singh, alleged that while covering the protest Kashyap was ‘wounded by miscreants’. A complaint filed by Kashyap’s father, Ram Dulare Kashyap, claims that Kashyap was “shot at” for filming a VIP convoy that killed farmers.

Another journalist said that in addition to being shot in the hand, Kashyap was hit by a car that was allegedly carrying Mishra’s son, Ashsih Misra. Samyukta Kisan Morcha, a coalition of Indian farmers' unions protesting against the agricultural laws, also claimed that a vehicle carrying Ashish Misra ran over the protesting farmers, killing at least eight people. An FIR has been lodged against Ashish Mishra and 15 others for murder and inciting violence with Lakhimpur Kheri police.

The Indian journalist fraternity has strongly condemned the killing of the journalist. The Editors Guild of India called for a “court-led special investigation team” to investigate the case. The Lucknow Journalists’ Association wrote a letter to the Additional Chief Secretary seeking justice. Local journalists are demanding compensation and the immediate arrest of the accused in the case.

About the Human Rights Defenders: Mr. Gigraj Verma is a resident of the village Joharli in Sikar district of Rajasthan. He is a human rights defender and has worked with Dalit communities in the region for several years and has been active in getting legal help and representation for Dalit victims of atrocities. He has also worked with several organisations such as CORO India and Action Aid in programmes and projects aimed at empowering Dalit and marginalized communities. Background of the Incident: Mr. Verma helped victims of Dalit atrocities register cases against the perpetrators with relevant sections of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In this year, for instance, he has helped with the registration of three such FIRs: No 375/2021 with the Neem Ka Thana police station, FIR 391/2021 with the Ajitgadh police station and FIR 228/2021 with the Neem Ka Thana police station. The persons against whom the FIRs were registered belong to the dominant caste group in the region. Details of the Incident: Around 8 PM on August 20, 2021, Mr. Verma was at his residence along with his family when a group of approximately 8-10 persons comprising members of the Gurjar caste surrounded his residence. They were armed with sticks, axes and other weapons and had arrived with the intent to kill the HRD. The crowd initially hurled casteist abused on the HRD and his family. Hearing the abuses, the HRD called the police station multiple times during this period. Inspector Mr. Kastoor Verma was present at the police station and attended the call. Despite informing him of the crowd outside his home and the gravity of the situation, no help was sent immediately. The HRD and his sisters went outside and saw the group, who were armed. The group then beat up the HRD and his sisters. They even snatched the HRD’s gold chain and took it away with them while leaving. They also threatened to kill the HRD, if he were to leave his home. Hearing the commotion, neighbours of the HRD came out of their homes, and the group left the HRD. The HRD and his family went back to their home. A larger group, of around 18-20 persons of the Gurjar caste, returned around 8.30 PM and tried to break the HRD’s door. The HRD and his family then shouted for help. Hearing their plea, residents of his village came to help. Seeing the villagers come out of their homes, the assailants stopped their attempt to break in but openly threatened the family with death if they left their home. Around 8.45 PM, the HRD called the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Mr. Girdhari Lal Sharma and the Superintendent of Police Mr. Kuwar Rastradeep. The police finally arrived after 10 PM. According to the HRD, the police even went to the homes of the persons whom he had identified but did not arrest them. The police returned. The HRD then went to the Neem Ka Thana police station along with others around 11.30 PM and stayed there. They found the Inspector Mr. Verma to be in an inebriated state and the HRD even posted about this on Twitter tagging the Sikar Police’s Twitter handle. The HRD’s complaint was filed at the Neem Ka Thana police station the same night, which was then registered as an FIR (No. 0411/2021) at 2.36 AM on August 21, 2021. In his statement, the HRD was able to identify 18 people in the group that attacked him and his family and stated there were 7-8 people he did not know. The police applied sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 341 (wrongful restraint), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 379 (theft), 504 (intentional insult to prove breach of peace) of the Indian Penal Code and sections of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: Section 3(1)(r) – Intentionally insults or humiliates in any place within public view, Section 3(1)(s) – Deliberately insults or humiliates by caste name in public view and Section 3(2)(va). No arrests have made in the case yet. On August 21, 2021, an FIR was registered (FIR No. 0375/2021) against the HRD and two others (Vinod Saini and Sarjeet Mahrania) by the police at the Neem Ka Thana police station. The FIR has been registered by Mukesh Kumar, a constable at the police station. The HRD and others were charged under sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to a public servant), 353 (assaults or use of criminal force on a public servant), 342 (wrongfully confining a person), 341 (wrongful restraint), 188 (disobedience to order by public servant), 269 (Negligent act known to be likely to spread infection of any disease dangerous to life), 270 (malignant act which may spread disease), 186 (obstructing public servant), 189 (threat of injury to public servant). The FIR states that the HRD along with 50-60 people sat outside the police station and blocked the gate stating that they would not leave the premises until the perpetrators were arrested and they resorted to crowding, pushing, and shoving as well as told the police officials that they would not be allowed to leave until the perpetrators were arrested. The HRD and along with others were protesting outside the police station due to the inaction of the police in registering a complaint and arresting the members identified by Mr. Verma in the group that assaulted him and his family. The FIR registered by the police states that the HRD and others started their protest started at 10 AM on August 21, 2021. Police officials had nearly eight hours to initiate immediate action against members of the group, which prompted a protest from the HRD and others. The HRD and the others were only demanding that the police take swift action against the crime. The quantum of punishment that the sections in the FIR against the HRD is as much if not more than the punishment laid down in the sections that the perpetrators of the caste atrocity have been charged with.

On September 7, the Uttar Pradesh police filed an FIR against journalist Rana Ayyub at the Indirapuram police station. It was based on a complaint by Vikas Sankrityayan, co-founder of Hindu IT Cell, a Hindu supremacist group with a talent for targeted harassment.

Sankrityayan accused Ayyub of “illegally acquiring money from the general public in the name of charity” on Ketto, a crowdfunding website. He added that the Washington Post opinion writer violated the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 2010, or FCRA, because she was a “journalist by profession” and was “receiving foreign money without any approval certificate or registration from the government”.

Ayyub was booked under four sections of the Indian Penal Code dealing with dishonest misappropriation of property, criminal breach of trust and cheating. She was also booked under section 66D of the IT Act, which criminalises cheating by personation, section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

The journalist has raised money for three relief campaigns on Ketto since early 2020 for those affected by Covid, floods and the migrant crisis caused by last year’s lockdown. In an email on August 27, 2021, Ketto told donors of Ayyub’s campaigns that she had raised Rs 2.69 crore, of which she spent Rs 1.25 crore and would pay Rs 90 lakh in taxes.

“The balance funds, after these debts, are still retained by the campaigner,” the platform said, adding that the collection was being investigated by “Indian law enforcement” agencies which suspected that the funds "were not utilised for the purpose for which they were raised”.

Ketto did not disclose if the law enforcement agencies had given the platform any evidence to support the allegations. A questionnaire sent to Varun Sheth, the founder and CEO of Ketto, did not elicit a response.

This is not the first FIR filed against Ayyub this year. In June, the Ghaziabad police booked her for tweeting out a Muslim man’s allegations of assault by a Hindu mob. She had moved the Bombay High Court and obtained protection from arrest for four weeks.

In a Twitter statement on Sunday, Ayyub called the latest FIR “baseless” and “malicious” and maintained that the “entire donation received through Ketto is accounted for and not a single paisa has been misused”.

She implied that the money from the fundraisers had gone into her personal account. “The receipt of donations did not violate any law,” the journalist added. “My accounts and the donations have both been scrutinised by the IT department, and a fair investigation will bring out the truth for all.”

Locus standi?

In his complaint to the Ghaziabad police, Sankrityayan didn’t claim to be an aggrieved party, that is, he did not say he had donated money to Ayyub’s fundraisers and, so, had stakes in the alleged FCRA violation.

We contacted Sankrityayan for clarification, but he wouldn’t comment. “Newslaundry is a biased, anti-Hindu news portal,” he declared. “I’m not going to talk to you.”

He, however, told the Print that he had found “proof” for his police complaint.

We put the same question to Abhay Kumar Mishra, the circle officer at the Indirapuram police station. “You should pose this query to the complainant,” he replied. “I can’t comment on whether he is an affected party. We are investigating the case.”

‘There are two violations’

According to lawyer Vikas Pahwa, Ayyub’s fundraisers violated the FCRA on two counts. “First, she did not have a registration certificate from the government,” Pahwa said. “And she seems to have accepted the funds in her personal account.”

Section 11 of the FCRA states that no person can accept foreign contributions unless they “obtain a certificate of registration or prior permission of the central government”.

Pooja Madhan, a chartered accountant at the Delhi firm Pooja Jagdish and Associates, told Newslaundry that FCRA applies to individuals . “As per section 2(1)(m) of the FCRA, “person” includes “an individual”, so the provisions of the FCRA also apply to an individual”, she said, adding that Ayyub was not eligible to receive foreign contributions if she wasn’t registered under the FCRA.

In her statement, Ayyub did not state whether she had prior permission to accept funds from foreign donors, or whether she was registered under the law. Newslaundry reached out to Ayyub as well as her lawyer Vrinda Grover for comment. Ayyub did not respond, and Grover declined to comment.

The FCRA, Pahwa said, was designed to give the government control over foreign contributions. “It crystallises a couple of things,” the lawyer explained, “that if you receive a foreign contribution you have to put it in a special account that the state can monitor. You can’t put it in your personal account. You also cannot transfer that contribution to anyone else.”

On the other point of the controversy – of funds remaining unused in the journalist’s account – Pahwa said the FCRA was silent. “If a person accepts foreign contributions for a particular purpose and a part of it is achieved, it does not mean that the person is under an obligation to return the contribution,” he noted. “He or she can still continue to work on the same lines, especially if the objective is public service.”

As for likely punishment for a violation, section 35 of the FCRA prescribes an “imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both”. “‘Or’ is an important word here,” Pahwa explained. “It is not an ‘and’. The court will not necessarily imprison a violator. It has the option of only imposing a fine.”

‘Enough to initiate proceedings’

Anshu Bhanot, a commercial litigator, told Newslaundry that the way Ayyub raised the money would enable the Indian law enforcement agencies to initiate legal proceedings against her. “The moment money from foreign donors comes into a personal account, only the account holder has control over it,” Bhanot explained. “Ayyub will have to explain what she did with the money. Whether the agencies are able to establish an FCRA violation would depend on the material presented in court.”

The onus to prove the money wasn’t misused, however, would be on Ayyub. “That is the sad part in the judicial system,” he said. “In criminal law the onus is on the prosecution. But the moment a proceeding is initiated, this becomes a theoretical aspect. Even if the case is ultimately quashed, there are no repercussions for bodies like the Enforcement Directorate, the Crime Branch, and there are few precedents for it.”

Sarwar Raza, an advocate who specialises in taxation law and FCRA, said Ayyub could not be charged with violating the law if the donors were Indian citizens living abroad. It would count as a violation only if they were foreign citizens.

“If she accepted the money in personal capacity and was not associated with an NGO with an FCRA licence or did not have prior permission from the government, then there is probably some kind of violation,” he said. “It would help her case if she doesn’t utilise a single rupee from the collections anymore. It would be seen as a bonafide step.”

‘FCRA violations are compoundable’

In May this year, Ayyub announced on Ketto that she had tried to tie up with an Indian NGO that had FCRA permissions. “But owing to restrictions on physical movement during the pandemic and the lockdowns,” she wrote, “we have not been able to find a suitable donor to trust to channelize the benevolence.”

She also declared that her team would be returning the money from foreign donors because of the “hit jobs by propaganda websites targeting our relief work”. “To make sure we do not cause inconvenience to the donors and us,” she added, “I have decided to refund all contributions from foreign donors back to those who donated.”

Raza said Ayyub’s pledge to return money to foreign donors was a sensible decision. “FCRA violations are compoundable,” he explained. “If she has violated any provision, the fact that she claims to have returned the money makes a case for compounding the matter. If your action has violated a law and you undo the act, it can be condoned if you pay a penalty. But the discretion will rest with the government.”

For Bhanot, returning funds to foreign donors would not absolve Ayyub of alleged wrongdoing. “It could be a tricky stand as the courts might interpret this as an admission of guilt or a desperate measure to wriggle out from the criminal liability.”

Anand Mangnale, the former director of Our Democracy, an online crowdfunding platform, said if Ayyub transferred the collections to her own account, she would have to pay taxes. “Even if you’re a journalist, if you pay taxes on the money you raised and explain how you spent it, then it is not a violation of FCRA,” Mangnale said. “The email Ketto sent to her donors, however, claimed she had unspent money in her bank account – and that is a triggering point.”

In her statement, Ayyub said she had paid a “heavy amount of tax on the donations”, directed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, or CBDT.

Madhan, however, told Newslaundry paying tax on the money would not make a difference. “Since FCRA and Income Tax Act are different laws, paying income tax on foreign contributions will not suo moto lead to complying with FCRA provisions,” she said.

‘Ignorance of law’

According to Raza, FCRA violations were commonplace and often went unnoticed. “But with big amounts or big names, like Rana Ayyub, they won’t,” he said.

Section 3 of the FCRA specifically bars “correspondents”, “columnists”, “editors” of registered newspapers from accepting any foreign contribution. This also applies to “correspondents”, “columnists” and “editors” of a company “engaged in the production or broadcast of audio news or audio visual news or current affairs programmes through any electronic mode, or any other electronic form” as defined in the IT Act, 2000 or “any other mode of mass communication”.

Though this seemingly covers Ayyub, Raza said the journalist could still defend herself by arguing that she didn’t raise the money for any “journalistic activity”.

Raza pointed out that Vikas Sankrityayan, the complainant, wasn’t a donor in Ayyub’s campaign and so did not have a locus standi. “Ideally, it should have been the ministry of home affairs that initiated the proceeding, not an individual with no stakes in the matter,” the advocate said. “This can be an argument in court.”

But Bhanot disagreed. “Anybody can lodge a complaint and highlight an alleged wrongdoing,” he said. “The complainant in such matters would be more of an informant of the alleged offence, and not a complainant who would be allowed to intervene in the trial. In such FIRs, the state steps into the shoes of the complainant and takes over as prosecution.”

Pahwa, on the other hand, argued that Ayyub could defend herself on two counts. “One is the ignorance of law – a plea people make in such cases,” he said. “Rana Ayyub is a renowned journalist, so I don’t know if that plea would work for her. But she can also claim that she raised the money during Covid, when many were suffering and needed help. In those circumstances, she was out to provide aid rather than thinking about compliance with law.”

The Enforcement Directorate Thursday conducted searches at offices and residential premises associated with social activist Harsh Mander, in connection with a case of alleged money laundering.

The ED’s case is based on another case registered by Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing against the Centre for Equity Studies (CES), where Mander is a director.

An ED official confirmed the agency was conducting searches at premises associated with Mander, but did not give details of the probe against him. The searches, sources said, were conducted at Adchini, Mehrauli and Vasant Kunj in South Delhi.

“Searches are going on. Our case is based on the Delhi Police FIR in the matter,” an ED official said.

Mander had left for Germany around 3.30 am on Thursday on a fellowship at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. The board of the CES, in a statement, said they were committed to cooperating with the ongoing searches, and would provide all necessary information to the ED.

Delhi Police had registered two cases against CES — one under the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act and another over alleged financial irregularities — following a raid conducted by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) last October at two children’s homes run by the centre. NCPCR had alleged various irregularities, including financial, in the running of the two homes at the time.

In July this year, in response to a petition in the Delhi High Court by CES, the NCPCR had said it had recommended action against the two children’s homes linked to Mander only after finding various violations and discrepancies on the part of the management. Among the alleged violations, NCPCR mentioned that it had been informed by the children that they were taken to protest sites, including Jantar Mantar.

“During the inspection, prima facie many violations of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and its Model Rules, 2016, and various other irregularities came to the notice of NCPCR, including financial irregularities as the institution was reluctant in disclosing their sources of funding and other relevant document to the inspection team,” NCPCR said in the reply.

With regard to the boys’ home, the NCPCR told the court that an employee had “informed” it about cases of child sexual abuse being reported there, and inaction by the management.

“The Commission observed this to be a gross violation of the provisions of the POCSO Act, 2012, and had immediately reported this to Delhi Police for further investigation as well,” it said.

In a statement, the CES board said the ED search was “a continuation of harassment and coercion of CES and Harsh Mander for being an outspoken and passionate defender of human rights”.

It said, “As you are aware, the Enforcement Directorate has been conducting raids at the office of the Centre for Equity Studies (CES), Umeed Ghar (Children’s Home), and Harsh Mander’s residence from 9.30 am… Over the last several months, the organisation has been subjected to raids, investigations, and inquiries by different government agencies including Delhi Police, and NCPCR. CES has cooperated with every government agency by providing all organisational details requested…including balance sheets and other financial and programmatic documents…

“It is deeply distressing for the entire team of CES and this continued harassment has created hurdles in the path of our organisational vision of working for the poorest of the poor and most marginalised sections of society.”

On Thursday morning, employees who reached the CES office in Adchini after the searches started, were not allowed inside. They said most of their work involved research pertaining to human rights.

A statement signed by 565 signatories, including several activists and public intellectuals, condemned the ED action and said the searches were part of a “continuing chain of abuse of state institutions” to silence its critics.

The signatories include Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, former Planning Commission member Syeda Hameed, economist Jean Dreze, senior advocate Indira Jaising, DU professor Apoorvanand, women’s activists Kavita Krishnan and Annie Raja, social and environmental activist Medha Patkar, and former IPS officer Julio Ribeiro.

The home ministry has suspended the foreign funding licence of a prominent Kerala-based NGO linked to influential Sunni leader from the state, Sheikh Aboobacker Ahmed, after detecting violation of provisions of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 2010 (FCRA). The suspension of FCRA registration bars Markazul Ighasathil Kairiyathil Hindiyya – the top foreign-funded entity in Kozhikode, with over Rs 146-crore receipts from abroad in the last three years – from receiving funding from international donors without prior permission or till revocation of the suspension order. The association, funded mostly by charities based in the Gulf, can make a representation against the suspension order, following which the home ministry may either review the suspension or go ahead with permanent cancellation of its FCRA registration after a 180-day period, extendable by another 180 days. The prime violations cited by MHA in its suspension order issued on August 27, 2021 include misutilisation and diversion of foreign contributions by Markazul, which also operates under the brand ‘Relief and Charitable Foundation of India (RCFI)’; misrepresentation of facts; and failure to submit annual FCRA returns for the year 2019-20. A senior functionary of the NGO confirmed to TOI that the association had received the suspension order. “Some clerical errors are cited as reasons for suspension. We will clarify everything after a careful reading of the order,” he said. The suspension of Markazul’s FCRA licence followed a due inquiry process, with an MHA questionnaire sent to it on 05.04.2018. A government official told TOI that the reply to the questionnaire revealed that the association had violated Section 12(4)(a)(vi), Section 18 and Section 19 of the FCRA. According to sources, a foreign contribution amount of Rs 50 lakh withdrawn by the NGO for purchase of land was received back on 13.01.2015 upon cancellation of the land deal. This amount was however not deposited in the foreign contribution-designated bank account, but retained in cash in the NGO’s office. Markazul claimed Rs 50-lakh cash was distributed for its orphan care programme. However enquiry and NGO’s records showed that Rs 50 lakh cash was distributed between July 2014 and December 2014, before the amount was received back on 13.01.2015. “Hence the amount of Rs 50 lakh received on account of cancelled land deed is not accounted for and appears to have been diverted/misutilized,” the order said adding this was a violation of Section 12(4)(a)(vi), 18 and 19 of the FCRA, 2010. The order also points to purchase of a vehicle in name of an individual and not the association, citing it as another violation of Section 12(4)(a)(vi) of FCRA. It further stated that the NGO had utilised foreign funds for construction of a building on land taken on lease by Islamic Education Board of India from Waqf Board of India. The MHA cited utilisation of foreign contribution for creation of assets on land on which the association has no claim, as a “violation of Section 12(4)(a)(vi) of the Act”. Markazul also failed to file its annual returns for the year 2019-20, a violation of Section 18 of FCRA. A Markazul official told TOI that the “online window” for filing annual returns was closed just before they could upload the returns. Markazul was founded in 2000 as a vision of Kanthapuram A P Aboobacker Musliyar, a popular figure with politicians in Kerala and referred to as ‘Grand Mufti of India’ by supporters. The organisation, which has Aboobacker's son Muhammed Abdul Hakkim as its general secretary, works in fields like education, cultural restoration, disaster management, health and sanitation, etc. It claims presence in 24 states and runs 233 schools.

About the Human Rights Defender: Mr. Nitesh Alawa works as a patwari (revenue officer) in the village of Badi Khattal in Jobat tehsil of Alirajpur district in Madhya Pradesh. Mr. Alawa has been active in the advocating for the rights of Adivasis in the region and has in the past raised his voice against atrocities committed against the Adivasi communities. Mr. Alawa is the district president, Alirajpur of the Madhya Pradesh Patwari Union, the Media In-charge of Tribal Employees-Officers Organization and is the district vice president of the Sched- uled Caste-Scheduled Tribe Officer Employee Organization.

Background of the Incident: On May 13, 2021, five members of an Adivasi family, including three minors were murdered in Nemawar village in Madhya Pradesh by members of the dominant caste community. Their bodies were buried on the farm of one of the accused and were discovered on June 29, 2021, 48 days after the crime. The incident triggered several large protests in the region by organisations against the lackadaisical attitude of the police and the administration in investigating the murders.

Details of the Incident: On July 4, 2021, and July 11, 2021, Mr. Alawa attended peaceful citizen protests in Nemawar and Manpur respectively. Both were Sundays. The third protest in Kasarvad was held on July 14, a Wednesday. Mr. Alawa was present as a promoter of Adivasi rights at the protests and expressed peaceful dissent against the administration’s han- dling of the case. On July 15, 2021, Mr. Alawa received an order suspending him from his work under Rule 3(1), 5 (1), 6(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 and Rule 9 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, which authorizes suspensions pending disciplinary actions.

The order stated that it had come to the administration’s notice that he had made incendiary and inflammatory speeches at Adivasi meetings held in the village of Nemawar in Devas district, village Manpur in Indore district and village Kasarvad in Khargone district. The order stated that the speeches made by Mr. Alawa featured in videos that went ‘viral’ on social media.

After a court battle, the workers were getting salaries even after the mill shut down. But on June 29, the company put up an order stating all the workers will have to take VRS and put a deadline of July 13.

The Dadar police Friday detained several unemployed mill workers of Century Yarn & Denim Mills in Madhya Pradesh along with social activist Medha Patkar, while they were protesting against the company at its headquarters in Worli.

The protestors were let off at night.

Over 50 people, including unemployed workers, had come from MP to take part in the protest.

“After a court battle, the workers were getting salaries even after the mill shut down. But on June 29, the company put up an order stating all the workers will have to take VRS and put a deadline of July 13. We want the company to give workers back their employment by reopening the mill,” Jagdish Khairaliya of Shramik Janta Sangh said.

Around 200 policemen from four different districts - Khargone, Khandwa, Burhanpur and Dhar - assembled at the protest site outside the factory premises. The SDM in-charge stated that Section 144 of the CrPC was in force in the area and the protestors had to leave and vacate the protest site immediately. The workers refused to leave the area. Then the police manhandled and roughed up workers, physically picking up each worker and pushing them into vehicles brought by them. When the police ran out of vehicles, private buses were organised to put protestors inside. Nearly 600 protestors were picked and transported out of which around 200 were just left on the road. Many women HRDs were injured, and one was even admitted by the police to the hospital where she was kept in the intensive care unit as she had fainted. The injuries were not only sustained during the police action but also due to the reckless driving of the drivers of the vehicles in which women were transported. In all 331 men were transported to ITI School in Kasrawad, where they were detained and let go at midnight. Around 70 women were transported to Saski Mahavidyalaya, where they were detained till 10 p.m.

The protest site and tents where workers had been camping for years were demolished and their belongings confiscated. The protestors have still not got their belongings despite a detailed list having been sent by the protestors to the SDM. It is crucial to note that the police personnel present at the protest site did not have name tags or badges on while acting against peaceful protestors. The protestors have not been provided a copy of the FIR, however they have learnt Section 151 of the Indian Penal Code has been invoked, carries a sentence for punishment of up to six months imprisonment, if five or more persons knowingly join or continue any assembly likely to cause a disturbance of the public peace, after such assembly has been lawfully commanded to disperse.

Two Right to Information (RTI) activists have been killed in separate incidents within a week in Karnataka.

While T Shridhar (40) was attacked with iron rods and bricks by a group of assailants on Thursday, July 15, in Harapanahalli town in Vijayanagara district, Venkatesh S (43), a resident of Tavarekere, was attacked on the same day in Bengaluru. Shridhar was rushed to the hospital, however, he succumbed to his injuries on on Thursday. Whereas, Venkatesh passed away on Sunday.

Venkatesh was brutally attacked by unknown assailants in Magadi Road of Southwest Bengaluru. According to police, five armed, motorcycle-borne assailants attacked the activist near his farmland and fled.

While the investigation into the case is ongoing, a senior police officer from Tavarekere police station told indianexpress.com, that by preliminary investigation, it looks like “a revenge attack”.

A group of 5 men came in 3 scooters and kept honking near his farm land at Tavarakere where Mr. Venkatesh had his office. When he came out to see the people who were honking, they got down from the scooters, attacked him and chopped his right hand and right leg. While Mr. Venkatesh was shouting in pain, passer-by from the neighbouring Ashram and his brother heard his cries. The assaulters then ran away.

His brother and others called an ambulance and rushed him to hospital. Doctors operated Venkatesh, and he was declared to be out of danger. On July 15, 2021, the police registered a FIR 233/2021, U/s- 307 and 34 against unknown people. In the statement given to the police, Mr. Venkatesh stated that this attack was due to the RTI application filed by him against the following land surveys i.e. Yelachaguppe survey No. 116 land encroachment, survey no. 60, Tavaraekere, Yelachaguppe survey No. 18/1, Yelachaguppe Rampura survey No. 04, Tavaraekere Gangammana lake, survey no. 60 Yelachaguppe. These RTIs related to developmental activities in the locality. His family also corroborated the same.

On July 18, 2021, Mr. Venkatesh was taken to Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru where he underwent extensive surgery to reattach his right arm and leg. He was later admitted to the Bangalore Sagar Hospital. However, he died on Sunday, July 18, 2021. After his death the Article 302 IPC was added and 9 people were arrested. On July 19, 2021, the Bangalore police said in its press statement that it could be a revenge attack but didn’t mention it was because of his RTI activism.

T Shridhar (40) was attacked with iron rods and bricks by a group of assailants on Thursday, July 15, in Harapanahalli town in Vijayanagara district.

Speaking to indianexpress.com, Murthi Rao, Deputy Superintendent of Harapanahalli town police, said, “Shridhar was allegedly attacked by four unidentified persons, armed with lethal weapons, when he was having tea on the backside of a canteen in a college compound in Harapanahalli Thursday night.”

“The investigation is based on a complaint registered by the victim’s wife. An FIR has been registered under Section 302 (murder) and other sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC),” he said. Rao added that Shridhar’s wife, Sheela, has alleged that he was killed because he used to file RTIs, which did not go down well with some people.

The complaint filed by Shridhar’s wife mentions the name of Congress MLA P T Parameshar Naik’s son Bharath. Bharath had posed a death threat to her husband, Sheela has stated.

The Harapanahalli police have arrested four to five suspects in the case, whose identities are yet to be revealed as the investigation is ongoing.

On July 13, 2021. Mr. T. Shridhar called his wife Shilpa and informed her that he feels his life is under threat as he has filed a case against Mr. Bharath, the son of a politician Mr. PT Parameshwara Naik and HK Halees, also a relative of a powerful politician, for land encroachment.

An FIR No. 0108/2021 was filed under IPC U/s – 34, 302 (Murder) at the Harapanahalli Police station and 5 people along with Vagish were arrested for murder. However, no action has been taken against the people against whom, associated with powerful politicians, Mr. Shridhar expressed feared for his life. He had already expressed this fear of his life being at stake due to RTIs filed by him against relatives of powerful politicians.

Police in Indian-administered Kashmir have opened a case against the family members of late resistance leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani under a harsh anti-terror law for allegedly raising anti-India slogans and wrapping his body in the Pakistani flag, officials say.

Geelani, who died on Wednesday at the age of 91, was the emblem of Kashmir’s defiance against New Delhi and had been under house arrest for years. The officials said they opened the case on Sunday.

His son, Naseem, told Al Jazeera the Indian authorities buried Geelani’s body in a local cemetery without any family members present after police snatched his body from the home. Police denied that and called it “baseless rumours” by “some vested interests”.

A video widely shared on social media purportedly showed Geelani’s relatives, mostly women, frantically trying to prevent armed police from forcing their way into the room where his body, wrapped in a Pakistani flag, was being kept.

The video showed women wailing and screaming as police took the body and locked his family and relatives inside the room.

Police said they registered a case against unspecified family members and some others on Saturday and began probing the case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act or UAPA. They have not yet been taken into custody.

In India, booking of a case by the police may not necessarily lead to a formal charge but is an incident that is officially recorded.

Critics say bookings under the vaguely worded UAPA legislation have been used across the country to intimidate or silence opposing voices, calling the law draconian.

The anti-terror law was amended in 2019 to allow the government to designate an individual as a terrorist. Police can detain a person for six months without producing any evidence, and the accused can subsequently be imprisoned for up to seven years.

Geelani’s son Naseem on Sunday said a police officer visited the family on Saturday and informed them a case had been registered. Naseem did not provide further details about the meeting but said there were scuffles as the police removed his father’s body.

“Amid the chaos, we didn’t really know what was happening. We were mourning,” said Naseem.

Kashmir has long been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan, which administer parts of the Himalayan region while claiming it entirely.

Geelani spearheaded Indian-administered Kashmir’s movement for the right to self-determination and was a staunch proponent of merging India’s only Muslim-majority region with Pakistan.

For many in Kashmir and beyond, he was an enduring icon of defiance against India.

In a tweet on Sunday, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan slammed India’s removal and hasty burial of Geelani’s body as well as the case against the family, calling it “shameful”.

“Snatching the body of the 92 year old Syed Ali Geelani, one of the most respected & principled Kashmiri ldrs (sic), & then registering cases against his family is just another shameful example of India’s descent into fascism under the Nazi-inspired RSS-BJP govt,” Khan posted, referring to India’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its far-right ideological mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

India describes the armed rebellion as Islamabad’s proxy war and state-sponsored terrorism. Most Muslim Kashmiris consider it a legitimate freedom struggle and support the rebel goal that the territory be united, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country.

Rebels have been fighting against Indian rule since 1989. The region is one of the most heavily militarised in the world. Tens of thousands of civilians, rebels and government forces have been killed in the raging conflict.

Tensions flared in the region in 2019 after New Delhi stripped Kashmir’s semi-autonomy, scrapped its statehood and removed inherited protections on land and jobs.

Authorities have since brought a slew of new laws, which critics and many Kashmiris fear could change the region’s demographics.

Meanwhile, on Sunday, authorities eased some restrictions that had been imposed since Geelani’s death, allowing private vehicles on roads and vendors to operate in some parts of Srinagar.

However, most shops and businesses stayed closed as government forces patrolled roads and streets in the city.

Mobile phones were restored late on Friday but mobile internet and restrictions on the assembly of people continued in many parts of the Kashmir valley.

Paramilitary soldiers remained stationed outside the graveyard where Geelani was buried.

Ruwa Shah, Geelani’s granddaughter, wrote on Twitter they were horrified by “what followed after our old man passed away.”

His “home was a jail for over a decade and now his graveyard is a jail too,” she wrote.

Four Kashmir-based journalists, including a senior editor, were raided on Wednesday and later detained at a police station in Srinagar in an Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case that was filed by Jammu and Kashmir Police last year.

Rights activists see the detentions as part of a wider crackdown by the Narendra Modi government on the free media in Kashmir after Article 370 was read down in 2019 and the erstwhile state divided into two union territories.

At least four journalists have been booked under the anti-terror law since 2019 by the J&K Police, and several others in Kashmir claim to face obstruction and harassment by officials in their line of work.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF), an international non-profit based in Paris, condemned the latest detentions, saying that journalism was not a crime.

In a tweet, the RSF said it “condemns as crude intimidation this morning’s police raids at the residence of 4 journalists – @KashmirNarrator editor Showkat Matta, @trtworld & @HuffPost’s @mirhilaal, and freelancers @AzharQadri and Abbas Shah. #JournalismIsNotACrime.”

Officials said the residences of Motta, Hilal, Abbas and Azhar in Srinagar were raided simultaneously by teams of police and paramilitary forces on Wednesday. They have been asked to reappear for questioning on Thursday.

Motta is the editor of Kashmir Narrator magazine whose journalist, Aasif Sultan, has been jailed since 2018. Hilal is a freelancer who was previously working with Hindustan Times at its Delhi office. His work appears in Turkey-based TRT World and Anadolu agency.

Abbas is associated with a Srinagar-based daily and Qadri is a freelancer whose work has appeared in The Tribune and The Guardian. All four live in Srinagar and the raids took place simultaneously in the early morning hours.

“They seized a hard drive which contained my work, a desktop, hardcopies of the magazine’s archives and phones. I was later taken to the police station and set free in the evening,” Motta, 52, said, adding that he has been asked to return for questioning on Thursday.

Police claimed to have seized several documents and electronic devices belonging to the journalists and their spouses during the raids, which lasted for several hours. The journalists were detained for the whole day at Kothi Bagh police station.

“They showed me the warrant but they were very polite. At the police station, a cop noted my basic details and then asked to wait. No one spoke with me the whole day. I was not informed about the charges against me,” another detained journalist, who didn’t want to be named, told The Wire.

According to the police, the detentions were made in connection with a case filed last year against unknown persons at Srinagar’s Kothi Bagh police station (FIR No. 82/2020) under Section 13 of the UAPA and 506 IPC.

Section 13 of UAPA deals with suspects who “advocate, abet, advise or incite the commission of any unlawful activity” while 506 IPC is filed in the cases of “criminal intimidation”.

The case was filed against the unknown handlers of a blog (kashmirfight.wordpress.com) which has been issuing death threats against Kashmir-based journalists and political activists, accusing them of acting as the “collaborators” of New Delhi.

The names of senior editor Shujaat Bukhari and human rights lawyer Babar Qadri had also figured in the articles posted on the blog before their assassination in 2018 and 2020. The two killings were linked by investigators to Pakistan-based militant outfits.

“These posts uploaded on the said URL are prejudicial to the integrity, the sovereignty of country and maintenance of peace and tranquillity as the handler of the above-said URL is propagating secessionist and terror-related ideology with the intention to achieve the goal of separating UT of J&K from Union of India,” a police spokesperson said in a statement last year.

In May this year, the Kothi Bagh police station filed another case (FIR No. 41/2021) under similar sections of UAPA after another post on the blog issued threats to social activists, government officers, political leaders and journalists.

The J&K Police claimed to have made a breakthrough in the case in July by arresting Mohammad Akbar Sofi, a top officer in the Srinagar Municipal Corporation, his son Nazish Yasrab Rehman, daughter Tabish Akbar Rehman, fiancé of Sofi’s daughter Javed Khalid, and Rafiq Mukhdoomi, a law student in Srinagar.

The latest detentions in the case took place barely a day after the blog, which has been banned by the Government of India, issued fresh threats against the owners of four English newspapers and an Urdu daily published from Srinagar.

After the reading down of Article 370, local print media in Kashmir have stopped critical coverage of the government, fearing reprisal in the form of harassment, intimidation and curtailment of advertisements.

According to the RSF, which ranked India at 142 out of 180 countries in terms of media freedom, press freedom has significantly shrunk in the country following Modi’s re-election in 2019.

“India is one of the world’s most dangerous countries for journalists trying to do their job properly. They are exposed to every kind of attack, including police violence against reporters, ambushes by political activists, and reprisals instigated by criminal groups or corrupt local officials,” the RSF said in its latest report.

Since the last two years, the UN special rapporteur for protection of right to freedom of expression has written on at least three occasions to the Government of India over the reports of “arbitrary detentions and intimidation of journalists” in Kashmir .

In its latest communication sent to the Indian government on June 3 which was made public on August 25, the UN Rapporteur flagged the alleged incidents of harassment of Kashmir-based journalists Fahad Shah, Qazi Shibli, Sajad Gul and Auqib Javeed.

The letter also mentioned the closure of the office of the Kashmir Times newspaper.

“We express serious concern at the reported acts of harassment and seemingly arbitrary detention and criminal proceedings and detentions levied or imposed against the aforementioned journalists, which is reportedly related to their journalistic activities on the situation in Jammu and Kashmir,” the letter reads.

Senior BKU leader Gurnam Singh Chaduni said Sunday that a farmer who had been injured in the police lathicharge in Karnal on Saturday has died of a heart attack.

“Sushil Kajal, who owned one and a half acres of land, had been participating in the farmers’ agitation for the past nine months. He had suffered serious injuries in the police lathi charge at Karnal Toll Plaza yesterday and at night he succumbed to a heart attack… The farming community will always remember his sacrifice,” Chaduni said in a tweet on Sunday.

The Haryana Police had Saturday cracked down on farmers protesting in Karnal, leaving several injured in a lathi charge at the Bastara Toll Plaza on the national highway.

The farmers had been protesting against a BJP meeting chaired by Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar on the upcoming panchayat polls. Police detained several people using force to disperse a crowd that was blocking the highway in Karnal in the afternoon.

Condemning the police action, farm union leaders urged farmers across Haryana to protest on the roads. By evening, farmers blocked several stretches on the highway and toll plazas across the state, resulting in traffic snarls.

With farmers threatening to create more blockades in neighbouring states as well, vehicles were diverted via alternative routes. Later, however, the highways were reopened after police released the activists detained in Karnal.

Background of the Incident:

A lab technician named Uma Maheswar at Gandhi Hospital at Mahbubnagar Telangana, allegedly raped two sisters, aged 38 and 40, from Mahabubnagar district and confined one of them to a room for four days. The victims had accompanied the patient. While the patient was admitted to the hospital on August 5, 2021, and discharged on August 11, 2021, the two women who accompanied him went missing. After the patient was discharged, his son returned to the Gandhi Hospital in search of his mother and aunt (victims). On August 15, 2021, the son received communication that his aunt was found in a secluded place in the hospital premises in an unconscious state lying naked with visible abuse marks on her body. When she regained her consciousness, she shared her ordeal of sexual abuse and rape with her family members. The aunt told the family that while she was at the hospital, she lost her way and asked Uma Maheswar, a lab technician, for help. Taking advantage of this, he directed her into a room, where he drugged her and raped her repeatedly on multiple occasions and raped her elder sister who is still missing. On August 15, 2021, the victims approached the Mahabubnagar police station, but the police didn’t register the complaint because they said it was not within their jurisdiction. They were then to a different police station for registering the complaint and registered the complaint at Chilakaluguda police station.

Details of the Incident:

On August 17, 2021, an all-women activist’s fact-finding team with members belonging to various women rights organisations like All India Democratic Womens Association (AIDWA)- Ms. Mallu Lakshmi, WT-JAC V (Ms. V. Sandhya), POW, Ms. B. Jyoti (CMS), Ms. Krishnakumari (NFIW) and Ms. Vijaya Bhandaru (Progressive Writers Association) went to enquire about the report regarding the rape of two sisters at the Gandhi Hospital. However, they were not allowed inside the hospital and one of the HRDs on Facebook Live was stopped by the police. They were arbitrarily detained at the Lalguda Police station by the police which was already present there. Later in the evening they were released and were allowed to meet the hospital superintendent and were allowed to do the fact finding. We believe that this is an example of the misuse of power by police officials. Complete ignorance of law was displayed by the police officials in turning away the woman victim in registering the FIR from the Mahabubnagar police station. According to law, a Zero FIR can be filed in any police station regardless of the place of incident or jurisdiction. The provision of Zero FIR came up as recommendation in Justice Verma Committee Report in the new Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. The concept of Zero FIR is a free jurisdiction FIR, brought up in order to avoid the delay in filing the crime and to avoid wastage of time that adversely impacts the victim. According to Clause (e) of Section 460 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), if at the time of initiation of FIR, it looks evident that the crime was committed outside the jurisdiction of the concerned police station, then the police must be appropriately ordered to register a Zero FIR, and ensure that the FIR is transferred to the jurisdictional police station. If there is a failure in compiling with the instruction of FIR registration on acknowledgement of information about the offence, it will invite prosecution of the police officer under section 166A which provides a rigorous imprisonment of six months be extended to two years. This evasion of responsibility may invite the departmental action for the police officer. Furthermore, the detention and harassment of women activists who were undertaking a fact-finding was completely unwarranted. In violation of the DK Basu guidelines, the WHRDs were not given any reason for their detention, nor were they given any detention memo as per the guidelines.

Police in Indian occupied Kashmir (IoK) fired tear gas and warning shots on Tuesday to disperse members of the Shia Muslims community who attempted to participate in processions marking the month of Muharram. Dozens of people were detained.

Hundreds of Muslims chanting religious and pro-freedom slogans took to the streets in the main city of Srinagar despite security restrictions banning the traditional procession.

Government forces used batons to beat journalists covering the procession, according to a local reporter. Authorities erected steel barricades and barbed wire to block the crowds.

“We respect the religious sentiments and practices of all, but at the same time, it is also our joint responsibility to defeat the ill designs of vested interests who try to disturb the peaceful atmosphere,” Inspector General of Polce Vijay Kumar said on Twitter.

Muharram is among the holiest months for Shia Muslims across the world and includes large processions in which people recite elegies to mourn the death of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) grandson. The mourning reaches its peak on Ashura, the 10th day of the month in the Islamic lunar calendar. Tuesday’s procession marked the eighth day on the calendar.

The traditional religious procession turned violent last year as Indian forces fired shotgun pellets to disperse crowds, injuring dozens.

Some main Muharram processions have been banned in Indian occupied Kashmir since 1989 when the locals demanded the region’s independence from India or its merger with Pakistan.

Kashmiri Muslims have long complained that the government is curbing their religious freedom on the pretext of maintaining law and order while promoting an annual Hindu pilgrimage to the Himalayan Amarnath Shrine in Kashmir that draws hundreds of thousands of visitors. The pilgrimage has been cancelled for the last two years because of the coronavirus.

A group of journalists were chased and assaulted with batons by police in full public glare to prevent them from covering the Muharram procession in the nerve centre of Srinagar on Tuesday.

The police action resulted in injuries and damage to equipment of journalists when they were merely doing their professional duties. Videos and photos splashed on social media platforms Facebook and Twitter showed policemen including their officer holding sticks chasing away and beating journalists on the road with utter disregard.

Some of the journalists who were present at the spot and received the thrashing told Kashmir Reader that the attack came when a police officer named ‘Aftab Ahmad’ abused and pushed some photojournalists who were capturing police lathi charge on Shia mourners. The mourners carrying black flags had taken out a procession in Lal Chowk to commemorate Muharram. Early in the morning, government forces including police and CRPF were deployed in strength in several Srinagar areas to prevent the mourners from taking out procession.

Amid this, many people carrying flags were able to reach Jehangir Chowk. A photojournalist Sajad Hameed who was at the spot covering the Muharram procession that he received a few baton thrashing on his legs and his camera was broken too. “It resulted in damage worth over Rs 20,000,” he added.

“Police officer Aftab Ahmad abused another journalist. We asked him not to do so. In response he attacked us, charged on us, in which many were minorly injured,” Sajad added.

According to him, the police officer Aftab Ahmad also pushed photo journalist of Hindustan Times Wasim Andrabi for nothing. He said the journalists were spread in groups capturing the procession from various angles when they were beaten.

“It was when another police officer joined in and asked them not to beat us that the beating stopped,” he added.

Andrabi told KNO that the policemen “from Shergarhi Police Station led by SHO Aftab Ahmad, beat them to the pulp for no reasons”. “We were even told that (an) FIR will be registered against us,” he added.

A video in social media showed that Aftab went berserk on a group of journalists on Tuesday morning.

“We were Covering the protest. When I saw a policeman attacking a fellow journalist l, I rushed to the spot to check what was happening. In between there was a lathi charge. We moved to a secure place, ” said photojournalist Faisal Khan.

“The cop did not listen to us for a moment and we found wisdom in escape” he added.

In the past police have said that police will act professionally while handling journalists on the ground and will make efforts to prevent the attacks.

Senior Superintendent of Police Srinagar Sandeep Choudhary was not available for the comments when reached by Kashmir Reader.

Chennakeshavalu, who was working with a local news channel, was reportedly stabbed by a police constable.

A journalist of a local news channel EV5 was done to death allegedly by a Two Town Police Constable and his brother in Nandyal town, Kurnool district late on Sunday night for allegedly exposing the illegal activities of the cop identified as Venkatasubbaiah.

Superintendent of Police, Sudheer Kumar Reddy, said that Venkatasubbaiah and Nani called the reporter Chennakeshavalu, 35, to a place in NGO Colony to discuss the news telecast by him regarding the alleged sale of gutkha and matka activities being carried on by the police constable. When Chennakeshavalu. arrived at the spot, the constable and his brother allegedly stabbed him to death with a screwdriver and fled the scene.

“The eyewitnesses immediately took him to the hospital at about 11 p.m., but he did not survive. We have formed teams to nab the accused brothers,” the SP added. The Two Town Circle Inspector said that the search was still on and cases under section 302 of IPC were registered against both of them. The Superintendent of Police reached Nandyal after midnight and is supervising the investigation into the case.

Meanwhile, the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists and the APWJ Federation have expressed dismay at the turn of events and have demanded immediate arrest of the constable and his brother.

At approximately 1:00 a.m. on August 5, police raided the home of Shibli, editor of the news website The Kashmiriyat, in Anantnag city in central Jammu and Kashmir, for approximately two hours while he was not there, according to Shibli, who spoke with CPJ via phone.

Shibli’s mother, two sisters, sister-in-law, two brothers, nephew, and niece were present during the raid at his home, according to Shibli, who said that police confiscated the adults’ phones and computers. Shibli said his own laptop and phone were with him at the time of the raid.

At approximately 1:30 a.m. the same day, Kashmir police also searched the homes of Shibli’s cousin and grandmother for roughly 20 and 30 minutes respectively, he said.

“The raids on the homes of Qazi Shibli and his family members add to the ongoing pattern of targeted harassment against journalists in Jammu and Kashmir, which must come to an end immediately,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “Police should cease harassing Shibli and allow him and other members of the press in Jammu and Kashmir to report freely.”

Police broke the lock of Shibli’s home and forcibly entered the premises without demonstrating a warrant or providing a justification for the raid, according to Shibli. Police also broke several glasses, window panes, and a security camera outside Shibli’s home, and confiscated a CCTV intercom monitor, according to Shibli and photos of his home following the raid, which CPJ reviewed.

Police asked Shibli’s family members for his location, which they refused to provide, he said. Police also called Shibli’s mother and sister, who were at his home at the time of the raid, “prostitutes,” Shibli said.

Shibli said he did not know what, if any, of The Kashmiriyat’s reporting may have triggered the raids. Hours before the raids, The Kashmiriyat reposted a 2017 article on its Facebook page about Kashmiri militant Yawar Nisar, who was allegedly killed by Indian forces.

The Kashmiriyat covers general news about Kashmir, including politics and current affairs, according to CPJ’s review.

Kashmir Police Inspector-General Vijay Kumar did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment via email.

Authorities detained Shibli from July 2019 to April 2020 under the Public Safety Act without trial, according to CPJ research and news reports. In July 2020, Shibli was detained again for 18 days after he was summoned for questioning by the cybercrime division of the Jammu and Kashmir police, as CPJ documented and news reports said.

Day 2 of the demolition drive in Faridabad’s Khori village was marked by confrontation between residents and police, with nine people being taken into preventive custody for allegedly making “provocative speeches” during a protest Thursday.

According to police, the incident took place around 8.30 am. An FIR has been registered based on a complaint submitted by a police officer who was at the spot. “Around 100-125 men and women gathered there and started staging a demonstration and shouting slogans against the administration. Three-four men and four-five women also started provoking the crowd by making provocative speeches,” alleges the complainant.

The complaint said additional police force was called and those making “provocative” speeches were taken into custody. Speaking to The Indian Express, DCP (NIT) Anshu Singla said, “We took nine people into preventive custody from Khori village this morning.”

Residents in the village, however, alleged police lathi-charged them before the demolition began. In a statement, National Alliance of People’s Movements reiterated these allegations: “Today morning, on July 15, police resorted to violence against Khori residents who protested peacefully on the streets of Khori Gaon.”

In a video purportedly from Khori village that has been circulating online, a person in plainclothes can be seen slapping and pushing a man, believed to be a resident of the village, until the latter hits a brick wall and falls. The person can then be seen helping the man get up, joined by two other persons — one wearing riot gear — and leading him away from the spot.

DCP Singla said: “There is a video that is circulating but it is impossible to comment on the nature of the video, when it is, who are the people, whether it is doctored, not doctored. However, if we receive any formal complaint, we will certainly enquire into it and deal with the matter according to law.”

On allegations of lathicharge, Singla said: “The demolition took place peacefully to my knowledge, I don’t know what is being alleged but there was no lathi charge done by Faridabad Police.”

Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Faridabad, Garima Mittal, also said: “The demolition proceeded smoothly and peacefully today. There was no violence.”

The demolition comes after the Supreme Court on June 7 had directed the MCF to clear all encroachments on “subject forest land” in Khori village in six weeks. The civic body had finally started the work on Wednesday morning.

Although a rehabilitation policy was released by the MCF earlier this week for relocation of residents, wherein they will be allotted flats in Dabua Colony and Bapu Nagar, only those people are eligible for it who have an annual income up to Rs 3 lakh and meet one of three conditions – the name of the head of the family is on the voter list of the Badkhal assembly constituency as of January 1, 2021; the head of the family has an identity card issued by the Government of Haryana as of January 1, 2021; or any family member has an electricity connection issued by the Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitaran Nigam (DHBVN).

“We have set up a camp near Khori village where residents can sign up for the rehabilitation scheme. However, it has only been a day, we are still waiting for applications,” said the MCF Commissioner.

Residents said the rehabilitation policy is unfair since it will not cover several people who have documentation from Delhi and not Haryana. Those eligible like Shipali Das (35), who works as a domestic help and is a single mother to a teenage daughter, are not aware of the policy at all.

“I have a Parivar Pehchan Patra from Haryana, but I have not heard of any rehabilitation scheme, nobody has told me anything about it,” said Das.

The demolition of her home, she said, will undo all the progress she has made since her husband abandoned the family several years ago: “I paid Rs 1 lakh just to purchase this land; I did the labour myself and built a house on it at a cost of Rs 2.5 lakh. Now all of that is going to be taken from me in a single day… I have nobody else to depend on… I do not know where we will go if our home is demolished. I am still hoping for a miracle.”

On July 15, police again repeatedly told Pal to stop filming at a protest site in the village, she told CPJ. A police officer attempted to block her camera as she filmed, as seen in a video she posted to Twitter that day.

Also that day, police forced Mohit Kumar, a Newsclick camera operator, to leave a crowd of protesters and move to another location, placed a baton between his feet to stop him from moving, and threatened him, saying, “we can do anything to you,” according to Kumar, who also spoke to CPJ. Police then told him to leave the area, and he complied, Kumar said.

Multiple police officers also threatened to break and confiscate Kumar’s camera and delete its footage on July 15, according to Pal and Kumar, who both said that they carried their press identification cards and repeatedly identified themselves as members of the press to police.

Also that day, two police officers armed with batons approached Hrishikesh Sharma, a reporter at the YouTube-based news channel Mojo Story, while he was filming a home that was about to be demolished, and threatened to break his phone if he did not stop filming and leave the area, he told CPJ. Sharma continued to discretely film in another area, he said.

Multiple police officers threatened to break the camera of Prabhat Kumar, a freelance journalist who filmed demolitions in the area, Kumar told CPJ, adding that an officer threatened to arrest him if he did not stop filming. Police also locked Kumar in a building after he had ascended to a terrace to film a protest, he said, adding that local residents opened the door and allowed him to leave about 15 minutes later.

On July 16, police officers armed with guns and batons threatened to arrest Naomi Barton, an audience editor with the news website The Wire who was reporting on the demolitions, if she did not stop filming at a demolition site, she told CPJ. Barton showed officers her press identification card but they insisted she leave the area, and she complied, she said.

Also that day, an unidentified individual in plain clothes approached Nikita Jain, a freelance journalist, and told her not to take pictures at a demolition site, and threatened to inform the police if she did not stop, she said.

A group of about 10 police officers surrounded Jain as she attempted to leave the village, and a senior officer told her that press coverage was prohibited in the area, she said. When Jain asked that officer to show her an official order prohibiting coverage, he refused and instructed Jain to show him her phone and delete its footage, she said, adding that she refused to comply.

That officer then instructed a group of female officers to escort Jain to another area, and told them to beat her if she resisted; the officers pushed Jain to another area, where a police officer threatened to break her phone and others ordered her to enter their car, she said. Jain told CPJ that she refused to comply and left the village on her own.

On 17 July Aakash Hassan, an independent journalist and human rights defender based in Indian administered Kashmir, was assaulted by Jammu and Kashmir Police in the Anantnag District. The defender was stopped by police while travelling home on Saturday evening, slapped and beaten with poles. The police deliberately targetted the defender while clearing routine traffic congestion, when they identified him through the press pass on his vehicle. Aakash Hassan is an independent journalist based in Srinagar in Indian administered Kashmir. He has contributed to reports in the Guardian, Al Jazeera, Intercept and other international publications. His reporting is focused on the impact of the conflict and militarisation on the lives of ordinary citizens in Kashmir, especially women. Recently he has written on increasing surveillance by State police and military on ordinary civilians, and human rights violations including torture by the Jammu and Kashmir police and military. Hassan has been targetted in the past, by local police, through summons and interrogation, based on his reporting on human rights issues. On 17 July at around 9 pm, Aakash Hassan was travelling home, when he was caught up in traffic congestion near Sangam Bridge in Anantnag town. He was driving slowly, when the police officer directing traffic, saw the press sticker on his vehicle, and shouted ‘press press’. Immediately at least two police officers surrounded his vehicle and reportedly beat him including with batons. Aakash Hassan told Front Line Defenders that one officer grabbed him by the collar and beat him on his face and tried to drag him out of the vehicle. The journalist was able to drive away from the scene and seek immediate medical treatment for his injuries. Images shared with Front Line Defenders and also on the journalist’s twitter handle show the defender with visible injuries to his face and hands. Hassan believes that he was targetted due to his identity as a journalist. In response to widespread condemnation of the attack, the district police in Anantnag stated that “Cognisance taken. Circumstances that led to this being looked into...”. A local superintendent had also contacted the journalist and informed him that action would be taken. Despite these assurances, at the time of this appeal, the journalist is not aware of any action taken against those responsible. The attack on Hassan, is emblematic of the violence and impunity for threats, harassment against human rights defenders in the region. Journalists and human rights defenders in Kasmir have been under severe pressure from State authorities especially the police and military, due to their human rights work. Documenting and reporting on violations from inside the region, has always carried significant risk. The dangers include false arrest, prosecution, and violence, increased since the unilateral abrogation of Statehood and lockdown imposed post 5 August 2019. Front Line Defenders has documented cases of journalists and human rights defenders targeted through legal and police action including preventive detention under the draconian National Security Act, which is applied in Kashmir. Surveillance of communications and movement, and intimidation is routine.

On June 30, officials from the national Income Tax Department visited the offices of Newsclick in New Delhi and questioned its editor-in-chief, Prabir Purkayastha, and another editor, Pranjal, who uses one name, for five hours each, according to a report by the local newspaper The Telegraph and an editor with the outlet, who spoke to CPJ on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of official reprisal.

The tax officials questioned both editors in relation to a money laundering investigation, according to those sources. Delhi police previously opened a separate money laundering investigation into the outlet in August 2020, according to a police document reviewed by CPJ, and the Finance Ministry’s Enforcement Directorate is pursuing a third investigation into the outlet, also for alleged money laundering, according to that editor and The Indian Express.

During questioning, both editors were given summons from the Economic Offenses Wing of the Delhi police, ordering Purkayastha to attend questioning tomorrow and Pranjal on July 9, the editor said, adding that both journalists plan to comply.

A second Newsclick editor, who also spoke to CPJ on the condition of anonymity due to fear of reprisal by authorities, said they believed that authorities had opened the investigations in retaliation for the outlet’s coverage of the nationwide farmers’ protests last year.

“The ongoing investigations into Newsclick and its editors by three government agencies are a blatant intimidation tactic aimed at chilling critical reporting,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “Authorities should drop the investigations, cease their harassment of Newsclick and its employees, and allow them to report freely.”

On June 23, the Finance Ministry’s Enforcement Directorate announced that it would provide the defendants with the specific allegations against Purkayastha and PPK Newsclick Studio Private Limited, the website’s parent company, according to The Indian Express. The ministry had not provided that information as of today, the first editor told CPJ.

During the June 30 questioning, officials ordered Newsclick to submit a number of tax documents from the last four years by July 5, that editor told CPJ, adding that the outlet complied and sent some documents yesterday, and received permission from the Income Tax Department to send more by July 8.

Umakant Lakhera, president of the Press Club of India, told CPJ via messaging app that the organization supported Newsclick, which he said had “paid for its critical reporting” with the investigations.

PPK Newsclick Studio Private Limited, Purkayastha, and Pranjal have each filed requests to the Delhi High Court to drop the police investigation, the first editor told CPJ. Purkayastha and Pranjal have also filed for anticipatory bail and interim protection from police action, that editor said.

The Delhi High Court previously granted such protections to Newsclick’s parent company and Purkayastha in relation to the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate, according to The Indian Express, which said that the court yesterday extended those protections until July 29.

Previously, in February, the Enforcement Directorate raided Newsclick’s office in New Delhi, as well as the homes of Purkayastha, one other editor, and two members of its management, as CPJ documented at the time. Authorities seized the outlet’s equipment during those raids, including the communication devices of its directors and senior management, according to news reports.

In a statement issued in February, Newsclick’s editorial team wrote that the outlet had “nothing to hide” and was cooperating with authorities. The statement also accused authorities of attempting to “cow down an independent and progressive voice through a vindictive course of action.”

CPJ emailed the Income Tax Department and Enforcement Directorate for comment but did not receive a response. Chinmoy Biswal, a Delhi police spokesperson, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment via messaging app.

Pateshwari Singh, a journalist associated with Bharat Kanak and Jana Sandesh Times, was hit by a vehicle and beaten up on June 29 after publishing critical news about a politician in Uttar Pradesh. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its Indian affiliates, the Indian Journalists Union (IJU) and the National Union of Journalists – India (NUJ-I) urge for the impartial investigation into the case.

The bureau chief of Bharat Kanak and the Ayodhya correspondent for Jan Sandesh Times was on his way from Tatarganj to JB Nagar Colony on the morning of June 29 when he was hit byblack car while riding his motorcycle in the city of Kotwali. Five to six unidentified assilants who were in the car then beat up Singh with canes and rods, leaving him critically injured. The assailants also snatched his mobile phone. He suffered serious head and skull injuries was rushed to a district hospital before being shifted to a private hospital.

According to a video shared on Twitter by Singh, during the assault the attackers talked of his critical news reports about Indra Pratap Tiwari, a local lawmaker with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and Vikas Singh Deogarh, an associate of the lawmaker. He said the attackers threatened to kill him. “They would have killed me if some locals had not rescued me,” he added in the video testimony.

Singh had published news about the lack of development in Tiwari’s constituency. A few days before the attack, an elderly man had reached out to journalist Singh and advised him not to write critical news stories about the BJP lawmaker. Tiwari denied any involvement in the attack.

Following the incident, a First Information Report (FIR) was filed in Kolwali Police Station, Uttar Pradesh against unidentified persons. The FIR was registered under sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), however doesn’t mention of the BJP lawmaker and his associate. Police say they have started an investigation on the case.

The brazen attack follows the killing of Sulabh Srivastava, a journalist with private television channel ABP News from Uttar Pradesh. He died under mysterious condition on June 13, a day after filing a complaint to Uttar Pradesh police seeking protection.

The Sadar Bazar police in Shahjahanpur have registered an FIR against Newslaundry journalist Nidhi Suresh pursuant to a defamation complaint filed by journalist Deep Srivastava. The FIR was filed at 3.43 pm on July 4.

Srivastava filed his complaint on grounds of defamation. The Uttar Pradesh police accepted it and filed an FIR under Sections 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was filed on the basis of a tweet by Suresh; it does not clarify which tweet.

It should be noted that the Supreme Court of India has held that for criminal defamation, the complainant must file a complaint before a magistrate under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as the said offences under Section 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code are non-cognizable.

At 11.07 am on July 5, Suresh received a phone call from the investigating officer (without any formal notice) asking her to record a statement in Shahjahanpur on the basis of the FIR.

She received a second phone call at 6.05 pm the same day, asking that she “go to the station personally and give a written and oral statement”. When she said she was in Delhi, not Uttar Pradesh, the officer said, “You need to be here in person.”

On July 1, Suresh had reported on a woman named Ayesha Alvi who had petitioned the Delhi High Court on being “harassed” by the media after she converted to Islam. In her petition, Alvi had mentioned receiving a call from a mobile number and the caller “threatened that he will publish the news about my conversion and that I would get arrested and he demanded money from me and when we denied he threatened again. Thereafter he forcefully took 20 thousand rupees from us”.

This information reported by Suresh was in the public domain.

In her report, Suresh said that she called the number and the person “identified himself as Deep Srivastava, reporter at News18”.

The report said that Srivastava “told Newslaundry there was ‘no truth’ in the claim that he had extorted money from Ayesha. When asked if Ayesha had initially refused to give him a video statement, Srivastava said, ‘I can’t talk about this over the phone.’ He then cut the call.”

On July 3, the police headquarters of the Kashmir zone issued a legal notice to Varadarajan, editor-in-chief of the independent news website The Wire, indicating that police were considering legal action against the outlet for allegedly “propagating concocted stories” and “rumor mongering,” and requesting Varadarajan’s response to those allegations within one week, according to a copy of the order, which CPJ reviewed, and Varadarajan, who spoke to CPJ via messaging app.

The police document cites a June 7 article regarding the killing of a Kashmiri resident in police custody, and a June 28 article on the killing of a police officer in the region’s Pulwama district. Varadarajan told CPJ that The Wire stood by both stories.

“Jammu and Kashmir authorities’ notice threatening legal action against journalist Siddarth Varadarajan only adds to the ongoing targeted harassment of The Wire in obvious retaliation for its critical reporting,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator, in Washington, D.C. “Authorities should immediately withdraw the notice and allow The Wire and all media outlets to report freely on issues of public interest.”

Rohit Kansal, a Jammu and Kashmir government spokesperson, did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment sent via messaging app. CPJ also emailed Kashmir Police Inspector-General Vijay Kumar for comment, but did not receive any reply.

Last month, police in the state of Uttar Pradesh opened a criminal investigation into The Wire and three other journalists for allegedly sharing an unverified video that could cause social unrest, as CPJ documented at the time.

Previously, in April 2020, Uttar Pradesh police filed a criminal complaint against Varadarajan for allegedly spreading discord, enmity, and rumors during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Mr. Saddam Khan (26) is a correspondent in a daily newspaper “Jan Sandesh” in Elia, Chandauli, since last five years. He has written articles on various issues of public concern including on illegal mining in the area.

On the evening of June 10, 2021, Mr. Saddam Khan was at the government wheat selling centre in Janakpur-Gandhinagar area, when a stone-loaded tractor-trolley passed by. Being a journalist, Mr. Khan clicked photographs of that tractor-trolley with an intention to further research and publish them in a story in case of illegal transportation of stone. A man riding on a bike along with the tractor stopped him from taking photographs. The man identified himself as Mr. Komal Yadav and had an argument with Mr. Khan. During the argument, Mr. Khan called the SDM Mr. Ajay Mishra to provide information about the tractor transporting stone. Upon hearing the SDM being called on phone, Mr. Yadav rode away hurriedly. On June 12, 2021, news related to this incident was published in 'Jan Sandesh newspaper' with the heading “च"कया म' हो रहा प,थर. का अवैध खनन” (Illegal mining of stones in Chakia). The news article said that despite the administrative vigilance, the illegal mining of stones continued in the hilly area of Chakiya. According to this news article, as soon as dusk settles, tractor-trolleys laden with stones from illegal mining move to different areas of Chakia, Elia and Shahabganj. The entire mafia network is involved in this illegal activity and it is being alleged that the local police is also in collusion. Perhaps that is the reason why the illegal mining mafia are fearless. Villagers alleged that the illegal mining mafia does not fear the local administration. DFO Mr. Dinesh Singh’s statement was also included in the article, who was quoted as saying that two tractor-trolleys had been caught with illegal stones in the past. He

said that the forest department was keeping a close watch on the mining and transportation of illegal stones, however, asked for cooperation from the local police. He also said that the role of the local police was doubtful and questionable but the forest department is making continuous efforts to act strictly against the vehicles involved in such acts, their owners and mafia. On June 15, 2021, at 8 pm, Mr. Khan got a call from an unknown number. The caller identified himself as Mr. Yadav. He used abusive language on the phone, repeating the incident of taking photos, and threatened Mr. Khan with dire consequences. On June 16, 2021, at 10 pm, Mr. Khan filed an FIR No. 0063/2021 in the Elia police station against Mr. Yadav on the above incident in detail, The FIR included IPC Sections 504 Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace and 506 Punishment for criminal intimidation. But no action was taken against the perpetrator by the police. Mr. Khan alleges that he sought information about 3-4 times from Mr. Mithilesh Tiwari, SHO, Elia police station on actions taken on the FIR, however, the SHO had one answer - the police is doing its work and the accused person was not found at home when the police went to arrest him.

Mr. Nitin Verghese is a human right defender associated with the Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan (JADS), a tribal and Dalit Rights Collective which has been working for fourteen years in Madhya Pradesh.

On July 10, 2021, Mr. Nitin Verghese, along with eight other activists, visited the site where houses and fields of adivasis were being demolished. Upon reaching the spot, they saw four members of the affected families. Some of them were Budia wife of Lalu (40), her twelve-year-old daughter Pooja and son Ramlal along with Sheka son of Harsing. They were forcibly picked up and taken away by forest officials. When Mr. Verghese and others complained about this to the Deputy Forest Officer (DFO) Mr. Charan Singh, who was at the spot, they were also picked up and their phones snatched. The actions of the DFO are consistent with abduction, absolute disregard to the laws and rules to be followed in case of arrests. There is no official information confirming the place of detention, condition of detention, calls to relatives or colleagues of the HRDs and any communication with the legal services authorities. Even if Mr. Verghese and the other HRDs are to be placed under arrest, none of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court with regards to the arrest have been followed. These guidelines are also a part of ‘The Wildlife Crime Investigation Handbook’ of the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, which are applicable to forest officials. The Wildlife Crime Investigation Handbook states that the proceedings of the arrest should be recorded on an Arrest cum Personal Search Memo and the reasons for the

arrest should be mentioned in the Memo. All pages of the Arrest cum Personal Search Memo should be signed by the accused, the independent witnesses and the investigating officer or the officer making the arrest. Left hand thumb impression of the accused is also to be obtained on the last page of the Arrest cum Personal Search Memo. Copy of the same should be supplied to the accused under acknowledgment. It states that preferably the arrests should be made “in the presence of a relative or well-wisher of the accused or in the presence of two independent witnesses.” Furthermore, it states that intimation of arrest should be given immediately to a family member/relative/well-wisher of the accused, which has been suggested by the accused and also to the jurisdictional police station. If the intimation is given telephonically, the same should be confirmed in writing at the earliest.

ver 500 residents of Khori village who lined up on the border of Delhi and Haryana in Faridabad on Wednesday were stopped from protesting against the eviction orders of the Supreme Court. The court had ordered the eviction and the demolition of the residential colony in a bid to protect the green cover of Aravalli mountain range. In its judgement on June 7, the court had sought compliance reports from Haryana government officials within six weeks.

Section 144 was imposed in the village prohibiting the gathering of four or more persons following the apex court judgement. On Wednesday, at the congregation, the residents were expecting to show symbolic resistance and send out a message to the Haryana government that they cannot be evicted in the midst of the ongoing pandemic without any arrangements for rehabilitation.

As residents lined up to enter Ambedkar Park in their locality for the protest gathering, they were faced with enormous backlash from the police forces who later resorted to lathi-charge. The police said that they could not let a protest gathering take place in the view of the orders of the Supreme Court and the state government.

Sushil Kumar, a resident of Khori village who had come to participate in the gathering, said, “This is what they do to innocent people like us–we have no space to even raise our voice and share our anxieties. Today was so symbolic to us and we have been treated with lathis. If there is COVID scare associated with our gathering, does the same not apply to the 400 police persons stationed across our village?”

The police were seen dragging out protestors and using force on them. Two student activists from the group BCEM, Ravinder Kaur and Rajveer Singh, were also detained at the Surajkund police station amid the crackdown on protesters. The police while confirming their detention stated that the activists have been called in for questioning as they violated Section 144.

Breaking down during the protests, Sameena Khan, who has lived in the village for over two decades, said, “No one wants to stand in the scorching Delhi heat. All we want is for the roof over our heads to stay. For me, it is death first and then the house–I would rather die. The police are asking us to go back to our homes and not protest but they are taking away our homes too, where do we go?”

The anxieties of the residents continue to rise with their voices being suppressed and no clear means of rehabilitation in sight. While the date for the demolition has not been finalised yet, many fear that demolitions are scheduled to take place as soon as next week.

The residents, who are being labelled as encroachers, reiterated that they had bought the land from builders who worked in connivance with the forest department and the state police. “The BJP has betrayed us, they had promised to protect us, instead we have been used as scapegoats and vote banks. When we do come out to raise our voice this is what happens to us. We are being cornered from every side and asked to leave, but where do we go?” one of the protesters asked.

Post the SC order, electricity and water supply in the village remain snapped causing deep distress amid the rising heat in Delhi. The residents have been going as far as three kilometres away to the Lal Kuan area to get water supply.

The residents of Khori had previously staged a protest on June 11. However, about 100 persons now face charges for participating in the protest while others were detained. The charges against the residents include Sections 109, 114, 147, 149, 186, 188, 269, 283, 341 and 506 of the IPC, and Section 61 of the Disaster Management Act. The residents had gathered on the main road raising slogans against the state government and municipal corporation authorities. The arrests had led to the creation of an atmosphere of fear and anxiety.

Currently, the residents have pledged to keep their movement alive to demand answers from the state administration and refuse to leave their homes.

Kannada actor and anti-caste activist Chetan Kumar said the Basavanagudi police in Bengaluru questioned him on June 14 (Wednesday) for four hours in the case where he was booked for allegedly "hurting religious beliefs through his recent tweets on Brahminism. The actor said that the police summoned him for his posts on social media, where he criticised Brahminism, quoting Dr BR Ambedkar and Periyar.

Following his four-hour interrogation, the actor took to Twitter and said, "I stood by truth and democracy. I am proud to contribute in my own small ways to the global movement for equality, justice and non-violence. Fight goes on!" On June 15, the actor received a notice from the Basavanagudi police station to appear for inquiry about his social media posts against Brahminism.

There are two first information reports (FIRs) registered against Chetan Kumar in two police stations — Ulsoor Gate and Basavanagudi police stations. According to The Hindu, while Brahmin Development Board filed the complaint with Ulsoor police station, a community organisation filed the complaint with Basavanagudi. He has been booked under section 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage reli­gious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or reli­gious beliefs) of the Indian Penal Code.

The Karnataka Brahmin Development Board had submitted a complaint against Chetan to the Bengaluru Police Commissioner Kamal Pant. The Board claimed that the actor's views hurt "religious beliefs." The complaint against him read that Chetan's remarks were “making imputations prejudicial to national integration.” Shivaram Hebbar, the Minister of Labour Department, too, alleged that Chetan hurt the Brahmin community’s sentiments and insulted the Constitution. The Minister also called for action against the Kannada actor.

The actor had written posts against Brahminism two weeks ago, in response to actor Upendra's remarks that talking about caste perpetuates it. On June 6, the actor tweeted a photo of himself and captioned it, "Brahminism is the negation of the spirit of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity... We must uproot Brahminism — Ambedkar. While all are born as equals, to say that Brahmins alone are highest and all others are low as untouchables is sheer nonsense. It is a big hoax — Periyar."

Chetan's stand has earned him support from several Ambedkarites and anti-caste activists. Amid the complaints, Chetan Kumar said that he will continue to talk about caste. The actor said that he has been highlighting and placing the anti-caste ideas of Ambedkar, Periyar, and Kuvempu for a decade in a modern context.

Buxar-based journalist Umesh Pandey is facing threats and a police case for publishing a news report that said Union minister Ashwini Choubey had on May 15 relaunched old ambulances with new posters.

Umesh Pandey said that a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader has threatened his family, warning him against publishing such news reports in the future. The case registered against him invokes charges such as defamation and intimidation, among others.

Pandey, 40, works as a correspondent in Buxar for the news portal ETV Bharat – a division of the multi-dimensional business conglomerate Ramoji Group. He has been associated with ETV Bharat since July 2018.

Pandey had written a series of stories which revealed that Choubey, the BJP MP from Buxar and Union minister of state for health and family welfare, was part of a programme in which old ambulances were relaunched with new posters.

He also reported that the same ambulances were “inaugurated” multiple times at different locations. Choubey even tried to send them to Bhagalpur, his home district, according to the reports. Pandey claimed that Choubey had launched the same ambulances four times.

The latest launch was done virtually on May 15 at the Buxar collectorate by Choubey. This revelation went viral and was shared widely on various social media platforms.

Bihar’s leader of opposition Tejashwi Yadav tweeted a screenshot of the story, commenting in Hindi, “This great man is Central minister Ashwini Choubey. He brings all the ambulances, paying one day’s fare to just inaugurate them. After the inauguration, the owner drives back it. After one year again he brings them and inaugurates them.”

It seems the latest story has irked the BJP. The eight-page complaint letter typed in Hindi by Parshuram Chaturvedi, a BJP leader, and submitted to the Buxar town police station on May 23 detailed nine stories which were done by Umesh Pandey.

In his written complaint, Chaturvedi alleged, “Umesh Pandey through news articles and personally is threatening and mentally harassing us. He is also breaking the social fabric and creating tension among people during the COVID-19 pandemic. He is blackmailing for money and ruining the image of the state government, Central government and minister Ashwini Choubey.”

They revolve around six ambulances which were given by SJVN Limited – a Central public sector enterprise under the administrative control of the Ministry of Power which is establishing a 1,320MW thermal power plant in the Chausa area of Buxar – to the district health society in March, just before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections as part of its corporate social responsibility (CSR) duties. Choubey reportedly directed authorities to redirect these ambulances to SJVN after the Lok Sabha elections.

This caused a lot of outrage, which prevented the company from taking the ambulances out of Buxar for over a year. They were kept in the Sardar Hospital’s premises. These same ambulances were launched with new posters by Choubey, the reports allege.

Police have confirmed to The Wire that a first information report (FIR) has been registered on the basis of the complaint. The FIR has been lodged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including defamation, criminal intimidation, public nuisance and cheating.

It is believed that the FIR was filed at Ashwini Choubey’s behest. The complainant Parshuram Chaturvedi is the son of veteran Congress leader Jagat Lal Chaturvedi and is very close to Ashwini Choubey.

According to sources, Choubey had successfully lobbied to get Chaturvedi the Buxar ticket during the 2020 assembly election. He, however, lost to the Congress. Indeed, Choubey’s pressure forced the Janata Dal (United) [JD(U)] to drop its plans of giving the seat to Gupteswar Pandey, the former DGP who took voluntary retirement and joined the party.

Umesh Pandey was initially unaware of the police complaint against him.

“On May 28, I was sitting at a closed betel shop and chatting with local people when someone said that an FIR had been lodged against me in the town police station. I was surprised,” he told The Wire.

While Chaturvedi alleges that the stories were baseless and targeted the minister’s image, Umesh stands by his reporting. He said, “Whatever I have written is with proof and I am ready to fight.”

Before lodging a police complaint, Parshuram paid a visit to Pandey’s house. Umesh usually leaves around 10 am to report the news. He did so on May 20 too. When he returned in the evening, his family members looked frightened and his father told him about Parshuram’s visit.

Pandey lives with his father, mother, wife and five-year-old child. “My father told me that Parshuram had come here with a gunman, though he is neither an MLA nor holds any government post. My father served him tea. He told my father that I should stop reporting about the ambulances, or things could ‘get out of hand’. He also talked about taking legal action,” Pandey told The Wire.

“My family members are scared. It was an open threat against me. They should send a legal notice to my office if they thought the news was incorrect. He should not have come to my house when I was not there nor should an FIR be lodged against me,” the journalist said.

Chaturvedi confirmed to The Wire that he had visited Pandey’s house but denied making any threats. “I just went there to make him understand that he should not do these things (write such news). I have no personal fight with him.”

“He was continuously publishing news against the party (BJP) and leader (Ashwini Choubey) and misguiding people. I advised him 20 times that if he wants to do journalism, he should remain a journalist. If you become a spokesperson of any party, then leave journalism. But he did not listen. He kept diminishing our party and our leader and Central minister Ashwiniji. So I had no other option except lodging a complaint,” Chaturvedi claimed.

The Wire asked him if Umesh Pandey had called him or any other member of his party to ask them for money, as the complaint alleges. He said, “My simple point is, why he should make baseless comments? He has threatened many times that he will run such news.” The Wire asked him why he had accused Pandey of forgery, to which Chaturvedi said, “He was making wild allegations without any proof and misguiding people. Is it not forgery?”

When asked for more information about Pandey’s alleged blackmailing, Chaturvedi disconnected the phone.

Umesh Pandey dismissed these allegations outright, saying that he repeatedly called Ashwini Choubey between May 16 and 18, but only for his comment on the report. The Union minister did not pick up the call, he said. “Then I contacted Rahul who takes his (Ashwini Choubey) photos but could not talk to Ashwini Choubey. Apart from Choubey and Rahul, I never called any BJP leader. If I have done so, then they must make those calls public,” he told The Wire.

“I believe that the FIR has been filed for reporting the wrongdoings of a public representative. My institution is standing by me.”

Umesh Pandey is yet to be questioned by the police in this case. Ranjit Kumar Sinha, in-charge of the Buxar town police station, told The Wire that the matter is under investigation. He did not offer any other information.

The FIR against Pandey is the latest in a slew of cases registered against journalists in Bihar for doing their job.

On May 25, the superintendent of the Magadh Medical College and Hospital in Gaya had lodged an FIR under the Epidemic Diseases Act against Dainik Bhaskar journalist Ranjan Sinha and his associate, accusing him of entering a COVID-19 ward.

On February 20, rumours had spread about a leak of the English exam paper during the board examinations. The education department had lodged an FIR lodged at the Kotwali Police station in Patna against two journalists who had tweeted the allegations.

Last year, state authorities had lodged a police complaint against many journalists for merely reporting on the government’s mismanagement of COVID-19.

Across the country, around 55 journalists faced arrest, registration of FIRs, summons or show-cause notices, physical assaults, alleged destruction of properties and threats for reportage on COVID-19 or exercising freedom of opinion and expression during the national lockdown from March 25 to May 31, 2020, as per a report prepared by the Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG).

In the last decade, 154 journalists in India were arrested, detained, interrogated or served show-cause notices for their professional work. Sixty-seven of these instances were recorded in 2020 alone, according to a report titled ‘Behind Bars: Arrests and Detentions of Journalists in India 2010-2020’.