“The court also sentenced two associates of Andrabi, Sofi Fehmeeda and Nahida Nasreen, who were also convicted for 30 years in prison in the same case,”

On March 24, 2026, a Delhi court sentenced Asiya Andrabi, the controversial leader of the banned organization Dukhtaran-e-Millat, to life imprisonment under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court found her guilty of promoting a secessionist ideology and inciting hatred against India, a ruling that underscores the Indian government’s ongoing crackdown on separatist movements.

Andrabi’s associates, Sofi Fehmeeda and Nahida Nasreen, were also convicted and received 30-year prison sentences each. The trio was found to be active members of the proscribed terrorist organization, which has been linked to various acts of violence in Kashmir.

The case against Andrabi and her associates was initiated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) following directives from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs. The NIA’s investigation revealed that the accused were involved in activities that threatened the sovereignty of India, leading to their arrests.

Dukhtaran-e-Millat, founded in 1987 and banned in 2004, is known for its all-women membership and has been a vocal proponent of separatist sentiments in Kashmir. The organization has faced scrutiny for its alleged connections to terrorism and violence in the region.

The court’s ruling reflects a broader strategy by Indian authorities to combat terrorism and separatism, particularly in Kashmir, where tensions have been high for decades. The NIA successfully demonstrated that the accused were not only members but also active participants in promoting the organization’s agenda.

As the legal proceedings continue, the implications of this ruling may resonate beyond the courtroom, potentially influencing public sentiment and policy regarding separatist movements in India.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding any potential appeals from Andrabi or her associates, but the case is expected to remain a focal point in discussions about national security and terrorism in India.

The post Asiya Andrabi Sentenced to Life Imprisonment in Terrorism Case appeared first on The Business News.

Before the recent judgement, the Sathankulam case had been a symbol of the deep-rooted issues of police brutality in India. The tragic deaths of Jayaraj and Bennix in June 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown, sparked nationwide outrage and protests against custodial violence. The public expectation was for a fair trial that would hold the responsible parties accountable, yet skepticism lingered about the outcome.

On March 23, 2026, a decisive moment arrived when the First Additional District and Sessions Court in Madurai found all nine police officers involved in the case guilty. This ruling came after nearly six years of legal proceedings, during which more than 100 witnesses were examined. The court’s conclusion that the deaths were a result of murder, rather than self-inflicted injuries as argued by the defense, marked a significant turning point in the pursuit of justice.

The immediate effects of this judgement are profound. Families of Jayaraj and Bennix, who had endured a long and painful wait for justice, now see a glimmer of hope. The sentencing for the guilty officers is set for March 30, 2026, raising anticipation about the potential penalties they may face. This case has not only highlighted the tragic consequences of custodial violence but has also reignited discussions about police accountability across the nation.

Judge G Muthukumaran’s statement, “The injuries inflicted on Jayaraj and Bennix were unnatural, which ultimately caused their death,” underscores the severity of the police’s actions. The case has drawn attention to the broader implications of custodial violence, with experts emphasizing that such incidents reflect systemic issues within law enforcement.

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court had previously taken suo motu cognizance of the case, directing a judicial inquiry that ultimately led to the investigation being transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation. This move was crucial in ensuring a thorough examination of the facts, as the initial response from local authorities had been met with skepticism.

As the nation reflects on this landmark ruling, the words of the High Court resonate: “Justice delayed is justice denied and justice hurried is justice buried.” This sentiment captures the essence of the struggle faced by victims of police brutality and their families, who often find themselves battling against a system that seems indifferent to their plight.

The Sathankulam case judgement not only serves as a reminder of the need for accountability in law enforcement but also as a call to action for reforms that can prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future. As the sentencing date approaches, the eyes of the nation remain fixed on Madurai, hopeful for a resolution that honors the memory of Jayaraj and Bennix.

The post Sathankulam Case Judgement: A Landmark Ruling on Police Accountability appeared first on The Business News.

In a significant legal development, renowned filmmaker Gautham Vasudev Menon has been ordered by the Madras High Court to repay Rs 4.25 crores to R.S. Infotainment. This ruling, issued on March 23, 2026, stems from an unmade film project dating back to 2008, which has now culminated in a decade-long legal battle.

The court’s decision mandates that Menon return the funds he received from R.S. Infotainment for a film that was never completed. The original agreement was signed on November 27, 2008, with expectations for completion by April 5, 2009. However, the project failed to materialize, leading to a civil suit filed by R.S. Infotainment in 2013.

Menon contended that the project evolved into another film titled ‘Neethaane En Ponvasantham’, which he argued justified the non-completion of the original agreement. Despite this defense, the court upheld the repayment order, which includes an interest rate of 12 percent per annum from May 2010, further complicating Menon’s financial obligations.

In addition to the repayment, Menon and his firm have been ordered to pay Rs. 12 lakh for legal costs incurred during the proceedings. This ruling underscores the serious implications of contractual obligations within the film industry, particularly when projects do not come to fruition.

The ongoing legal saga highlights the complexities and risks associated with film financing and production in India. As the industry continues to evolve, such disputes serve as a reminder of the importance of clear agreements and accountability.

Reactions to the court’s decision have yet to surface, but it is expected that Menon will assess his options moving forward. The case serves as a pivotal moment in his career, potentially impacting future projects and collaborations.

As the dust settles on this ruling, the film community watches closely, aware that the ramifications of this case extend beyond Menon himself, touching on broader themes of trust and financial integrity in the cinematic landscape.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding Menon’s next steps or any potential appeals against the court’s decision. The outcome of this case may well set a precedent for similar disputes in the future.

The post Gautham Vasudev Menon Ordered to Repay Rs 4.25 Crores by Madras High Court appeared first on The Business News.

The Allahabad High Court has mandated 24/7 armed security for Haseen Khan following a religious dispute in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. This decision comes in light of allegations that Khan was prevented from offering Namaz inside his private residence.

In a significant ruling, the court directed that two armed guards accompany Haseen Khan wherever he goes until further orders. Justice Atul Sreedharan emphasized, “Any incident of violence that afflicts him or his property shall be prima facie understood to have occurred at the instance of the State.” This statement underscores the court’s commitment to safeguarding the constitutional rights of individuals to practice their religion freely.

The controversy traces back to an incident on January 16, 2026, when a group allegedly attempted to offer Namaz inside Khan’s home. Following this, a petition was filed by Tarik Khan seeking permission for religious gatherings during Ramadan. The court ruled that no prior state permission is necessary for such gatherings within private property, provided they do not extend onto public roads or spaces.

Haseen Khan has alleged that he was detained by police while praying at home with family members and was coerced into signing a document he could not read due to illiteracy. This situation has raised serious concerns about the treatment of individuals exercising their religious rights.

In a previous ruling, the court had issued contempt notices to Bareilly District Magistrate Avinash Singh and Senior Superintendent of Police Anurag Arya for their interference in prayer activities. The court has summoned both officials to appear in person on March 23, 2026, and indicated that failure to comply could lead to the issuance of non-bailable warrants.

The matter has been listed for final orders on March 23, 2026, at 2:00 PM, as the court continues to address the implications of this case on religious freedoms in the region. Observers are keenly awaiting the court’s final decision and the potential ramifications for local authorities.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding the broader implications of this ruling on similar cases in the future, as the court balances the enforcement of law with the protection of individual rights.

The post Allahabad High Court Orders Security for Haseen Khan Amid Religious Controversy appeared first on The Business News.