top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 8:56:24 pm

Accused trio get 10-day remand

Mumbai: A Mumbai Court has given 10 days police custody to three arrested accused in the firing on Bollywood action star Tiger Shroff in a crowded public place as the investigators attempt to unravel the conspiracy, motives, involvement of other players and related aspects of the sensational case, on Wednesday. The accused trio Rehan alias Sukka, and Phool Singh both from Sonipat in Haryana and Rhitik Kurmi alias Roshan, originally from Begusarai in Bihar but currently residing in Mumbai,...

Accused trio get 10-day remand

Mumbai: A Mumbai Court has given 10 days police custody to three arrested accused in the firing on Bollywood action star Tiger Shroff in a crowded public place as the investigators attempt to unravel the conspiracy, motives, involvement of other players and related aspects of the sensational case, on Wednesday. The accused trio Rehan alias Sukka, and Phool Singh both from Sonipat in Haryana and Rhitik Kurmi alias Roshan, originally from Begusarai in Bihar but currently residing in Mumbai, were brought here from Kota in separate vehicles early today. They were produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Esplanade Court where the police sought 14 days’ custody for the accused who are allegedly acting at the behest of the jailed mafia chief Lawrence Bishnoi’s gang. Pleading for the remand, the police lawyers argued that sustained custodial interrogation was necessary to recover the weapons used in the shooting – which the accused had thrown away while fleeing, retrieve two mobile phones which were reportedly destroyed by the accused, besides digging out the entire conspiracy, pinpoint the exact motives and identify other persons involved in the brazen attack. Opposing the plea, the accused’s lawyers Ajinkya Mirgal and Satyabrat Joshi argued that police custody was unnecessary, particularly for recovering the weapons. Mirgal and Joshi later told mediapersons that the accused had already been interrogated at a railway colony during their transit-remand period and were produced before the CMM Court just minutes before the transit remand expired this afternoon. After hearing both sides, the CMM remanded them to police custody for 10 days till October 31. It may be recalled that Shroff, 36, was targeted on the evening of October 18 near Pushpa Narsee Park in Juhu. Despite being a heavily crowded area, the assailants were seen firing at least 5-6 rounds at the actor’s car before fleeing on a motorcycle. A shaken Shroff escaped relatively unhurt, sustaining minor bruises, but his driver and a bystander suffered injuries. Following the incident, the Mumbai Police registered a case of attempted murder and offences under the Arms Act, and launched an interstate investigation involving Maharashtra, Haryana, Rajasthan, and later Gujarat and Delhi. The Mumbai Police formed 20 teams to hunt down the attackers, recovered the second-hand motorcycle outside Andheri station where it was abandoned and tracked their journey through different modes of transport from Mumbai to Surat and Kota. Acting on a tech-intel alert from Mumbai Police, the Kota Police lay in wait for them and apprehended them from the general coach of the Pune-Jaipur Superfast Express on Monday morning. Initial probe revealed that the assailants were planning to flee the country after travelling to the borders via Jaipur and Delhi. They were lured by the promise of sneaking them out of India to a foreign country, possibly Canada and rehabilitating them. Three key accused brought to Mumbai from Kota Three key accused apprehended in connection with the firing at actor Tiger Shroff’s car were brought to Mumbai from Kota in Rajasthan early on Wednesday, police said. Police brought them by road from Kota to Mumbai and, upon arrival, immediately took them to GT Hospital for a mandatory medical examination, an official said. Following the medical check-up, the accused were escorted to the Mumbai Crime Branch’s Anti-Extortion Cell (AEC) office for interrogation. The accused have been identified as Rehan alias Sukka, from Sonipat in Haryana; Ritik Kurmi alias Roshan, originally from Begusarai in Bihar and living in Mumbai; and Phool Singh from Haryana, the official said. The Kota city police had handed them over to Mumbai Police, which formally arrested them and produced them before a magistrate there. The court granted transit remand to take them to Mumbai. Meanwhile, advocate Ajinkya Mirgal arrived at the AEC office in Mumbai on Wednesday morning, informing officials that he would represent the accused as their defence counsel in the case. At least two men fired gunshots at Shroff’s car in Mumbai’s Juhu area on Sunday evening before speeding away on a motorcycle. The actor escaped relatively unhurt, while his driver and a bystander were injured. According to Mumbai Police, five to six rounds were fired at the car. A motorcycle, allegedly used by the shooters, was found abandoned in Andheri. The accused fled to Surat and once there, boarded a Jaipur-bound train. The three were supposed to go to Delhi on a bus and then flee to Nepal. The Mumbai Police have registered a case under the provisions of attempt to murder and the Arms Act. According to the police, Rehan was in touch with Anil Pandit, an alleged associate of the Lawrence Bishnoi gang, which claimed responsibility for the attack in an unverified social media post. On Tuesday, the Delhi Police Special Cell arrested four more persons, including two women, in connection with the firing case. Police suspect they were acting on the directions of Anil Pandit, a gangster operating from abroad, an official earlier said. The four accused, identified as Kunal (21), Sumit (19), Radha (23), and Babita (23), were apprehended from Delhi and Haryana. According to police, Kunal allegedly collected a pistol and 20 rounds from Amritsar on the instructions of Anil Pandit, with Sumit accompanying him. Radha and Babita allegedly travelled to Mumbai with the weapon. Following the arrest, the police said the motive of the shooting was being ascertained, while the way Shroff was attacked, the assailants planned to kill him.

Fee Signal

Correspondent
Aug 9
2 min read

The government’s decision to create a legal framework for levying charges on UPI transactions has understandably triggered concern, even though it insists that ordinary users and small merchants will continue to enjoy free payments. The proposed amendment does not impose a fee on UPI today. But it removes the statutory barrier to one being imposed in the future, making the government’s reassurance less than the final word.


The government argues that this is a measure for UPI’s long-term sustainability. The world’s largest real-time payments system, which processed 2,366 crore transactions worth Rs. 29.9 lakh crore in July alone, cannot indefinitely depend on subsidies as transaction volumes, cybersecurity requirements and infrastructure costs rise. A nominal Merchant Discount Rate on larger merchant transactions, it says, would help create a more sustainable ecosystem without burdening ordinary users.


That argument has merit. But so does the concern that a payment system which became a national habit precisely because it was cheap and frictionless should not slowly acquire a price tag. Once the legal machinery for charging exists, there is no guarantee that the boundary between large merchants and small ones, or between merchants and consumers, will remain permanently fixed.


The Finance Minister has clarified that any Merchant Discount Rate will apply only to a limited set of merchant transactions above a threshold and will be nominal, well below card-payment rates. The details will eventually be decided by the UPI and Services Steering Committee headed by the National Payments Corporation of India. In other words, there is no charge on the table for the ordinary UPI user today. But there is now a legal mechanism for charges to be introduced tomorrow.


That is precisely why any alarm, though exaggerated, cannot simply be dismissed. The government, through its clarification, has reassured that UPI’s free-to-consumer model remains intact. The important issue is whether its financing model can evolve without undermining the habits that made it revolutionary. UPI succeeded partly because it made digital payments cheaper and simpler than alternatives.


There is also a larger principle at stake. UPI is not merely another commercial payments platform. It is the product of public investment, regulatory architecture and private innovation. The state should therefore be wary of treating its sustainability as an ordinary market problem.


The sensible answer lies between free-for-all subsidies and indiscriminate fees: transparent thresholds, genuinely low MDRs, strong protection for small merchants and an absolute firewall around ordinary consumers. The government should publish the economic case for any future charge, including its effect on merchants and consumers.


UPI was built on trust as much as technology. The government is right to protect its remarkable achievement. It should remember that keeping UPI free is not merely a political promise. It is part of the product.

Comments

bottom of page