| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
From the trial court up to the High Court, courts stated clearly that the Constitution gives every citizen the right to be informed of proper, concrete grounds at the time of arrest.
arrest rights ruling
|
crime |
accurate |
85.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Because of the police's casual and sloppy approach, Sonam got bail after only 10 months.
Sonam Raghuvanshi bail
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Instead of applying the correct murder section, police repeatedly cited 'Section 4031' throughout the documents — a section that does not exist in the law books.
wrong legal section
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
The Meghalaya police simply copy-pasted the form from some old case without thinking and issued a new warrant.
copy-paste police warrant
|
crime |
not checked |
— |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Police documents also stated that Sonam was suspected of having committed a crime outside India.
arrest document errors
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Police documents described Sonam as a released convict who had failed to inform police of her new address after leaving jail.
arrest document errors
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
In their official arrest documents, police wrote that Sonam Raghuvanshi was suspected of being an army deserter.
arrest document errors
|
crime |
accurate |
95.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Justice W. Diengdoh of the Meghalaya High Court was astonished when he examined the police's documents in the case.
police documentation errors
|
crime |
accurate |
80.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
The Meghalaya High Court dismissed the state government's appeal with sharp criticism.
High Court appeal dismissal
|
crime |
accurate |
92.0% |
| Anjana Om Kashyap |
2026-07-02 |
Due to the police's extraordinary negligence, the murder accused (Sonam Raghuvanshi) was granted bail.
Sonam Raghuvanshi bail
|
crime |
accurate |
85.0% |
| Chitra Tripathi |
2026-07-02 |
According to sources, the SIT will very soon question the remaining trust members as well.
SIT questioning
|
crime |
not checked |
— |
| Chitra Tripathi |
2026-07-02 |
The SIT team has returned to Ayodhya, must submit its final report by July 10, and this time its investigation will focus most on the Ram Mandir Trust's role.
SIT investigation
|
crime |
misleading |
80.0% |
| Chitra Tripathi |
2026-07-02 |
The Ayodhya Development Authority has become active, has prepared to run a bulldozer on accused Lavkush Mishra's house, and a notice has been delivered to his home seeking property documents and building plans.
bulldozer action
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Chitra Tripathi |
2026-07-02 |
The complaint alleges that theft was carried out for a long time by placing close associates in donation counting, and that the SIT was used to suppress the case and shield the real accused.
SIT misuse allegation
|
crime |
accurate |
80.0% |
| Chitra Tripathi |
2026-07-02 |
The Faizabad Bar Association has filed a written complaint at the Ram Janmabhoomi police station in the donation theft case, demanding an FIR against Champat Rai, Gopal Rao, and Anil Mishra.
FIR demand
|
crime |
accurate |
93.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
When asked about main accused Ramashankar Yadav, Champat Rai said he had given Ramashankar a job considering him needy, but was later betrayed by him.
accused's betrayal of Rai
|
crime |
accurate |
72.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
Lavkush Mishra's wife claims she has not received any notice from the Ayodhya Development Authority.
wife denies notice
|
crime |
accurate |
85.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
There are a total of eight accused in this case.
number of accused
|
crime |
accurate |
85.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
The authority has also inspected the houses of the remaining seven accused, and preparations are underway to bulldoze those houses where construction violated regulations.
other accused inspections
|
crime |
misleading |
76.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
The land's value was shown as approximately ₹8,80,000 in the registry, but its current market value is approximately ₹25 lakh.
undervalued land registry
|
crime |
accurate |
82.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
According to the UP Police investigation, Lavkush Mishra bought this land while he was working at the Ram Mandir.
land purchase by accused
|
crime |
accurate |
82.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
If the authority is not satisfied with the reply to the notice, the house may be demolished with a bulldozer.
possible demolition
|
crime |
not checked |
— |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
The investigation found that the house's construction violated regulations and the required approval was not obtained from the authority.
construction rule violations
|
crime |
accurate |
90.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
The house is registered in the name of accused Lavkush Mishra's wife, and the Ayodhya Development Authority has issued a notice over illegal construction demanding a reply within 7 days.
illegal construction notice
|
crime |
accurate |
95.0% |
| Sudhir Chaudhary |
2026-07-02 |
A person earning such a meagre monthly salary (figure garbled in transcript) could not plausibly afford to build such a lavish house.
disproportionate assets
|
crime |
not checked |
— |