Skip to main content

Special NIA Court convicts Chennai-based engineer in ISIS Conspiracy Case

 A special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Delhi has sentenced the accused Mohamed Naser to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine Rs 40,000 in the ISIS conspiracy case.

The case which was registered in 2015, pertains to a criminal conspiracy hatched by ISIS to establish its base in India by recruiting Muslim youth for ISIS through different social media platforms, the NIA stated.


"After completion of the investigation and subsequent trial, NIA Special Court has convicted accused Mohamed Naser of the various offences committed by him and sentenced him with rigorous imprisonment (RI) for seven years and fine Rs. 40,000/- on 16.12.2020," NIA said in a press release.


The agency said that after completion of the investigation, NIA had filed charge-sheets against 16 accused including Mohd. Naser on June 3.


"In this case, 15 (fifteen) accused persons have already been convicted up to 10 years RI by NIA Special Court on 16.10.2020 for the conspiracy hatched by ISIS handlers based in Syria and subsequent formation of group namely 'Junood-ul-Khilafa-fil-Hind' owing to its allegiance to ISIS," the agency said.


Mohamed Naser, who is a BTech (IT) and Certified Ethical Hacker from Chennai, was working as a Web Developer and Graphic Designer in Dubai in 2014. He had got radicalised and motivated to join ISIS through the lectures delivered on YouTube by Islamic scholars namely Anjem Choudary and Abu Barra.Convict Mohamed Naser was fully convinced that ISIS was following the true edicts of Islam and is struggling to create a Caliphate, which will be governed on the basis of Sharia.


"Hence, he had made frantic efforts to find persons who could facilitate his travel to Syria/Libya for joining ISIS. On persistent efforts, he came across some online handlers and left Dubai to join ISIS/ISIL for Libya via Sudan. But, he was interdicted by the Sudanese authorities and deported to India on 10.12.2015," NIA said.

.ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS"






We are India’s Leading Law Firm






“The firm has always strives to create and implement innovative and effective methods of providing cost-effective, quality representation and services for our clients and will continue to meet and exceed the expectations of our valued clients.








–    DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA (ADVOCATE, FOUNDER-LEXIS AND COMPANY).






Get in Touch




LEXIS AND COMPANY.




C/O: DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA.






OFFICE: A1B/26, JANAKPURI, GROUND FLOOR,






NEW DELHI,, DELHI, 110058.




INDIA.






lexisandcompany@gmail.com




CALL: +91-9830333388.








































































































































































































Labels:

Comments

  1. narinder23 February 2021 at 21:34

    Thanks for sharing such a Valueable info.I hope you will share more information like this. please keep on sharing!
    if you are required any TAX and GST related information to visit our website click on below link :

    Foreign Company Incorporation Consultants in delhi
    Consultants Export License in delhi
    Import Export Code Numbe in delhi
    GST Compliance Consultants in delhi

    ReplyDelete
  2. narinder2 March 2021 at 04:38

    Thanks For Valuable Information posted in the Post;
    if u need any TAX and GSTR related info plz Visit our website :
    ca firms bangalore
    tax return services bangalore
    list of audit firms bangalore

    ReplyDelete
  3. narinder10 April 2021 at 06:51

    Amazing Article,Really useful information to all So, I hope you will share more information to be check and share here.
    If you require any information regarding new business registration bangalore
     then plz click on it .

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more