Naval Jawan Of Palamu Burnt Alive In Palghar: Jharkhand

Naval jawan of Palamu burnt alive in Palghar, recently engaged; Quandary in the family: Jharkhand.

There has again been a terrible incident in Maharashtra. Here in Palghar, an Indian Navy soldier has been burnt alive. A ransom of Rs 10 lakh was demanded from Navy Jawan Suraj Kumar Dubey.

He was abducted from Chennai. On not fulfilling the ransom demand, naval Suraj Kumar Dubey was burnt alive by criminals in Vivaji’s jungles of Palghar, Maharashtra.

He was badly injured after his body was set on fire. He was kidnapped near the Chennai airport. Palghar SP Dattatreya Shinde has confirmed the incident. Nine army personnel were from Palamu, Jharkhand.

Mithilesh Dubey, the father of the deceased naval Suraj Kumar Dubey, said that I want justice for my son. This is the message I want to convey through the media.

My son made a statement before he died that he had been kidnapped for 3 days, demanding a ransom. The criminals kidnapped my son from Chennai and brought him to Palghar in Maharashtra and then he was burnt alive.

Naval jawan: Palamu’s Navy soldier burnt alive in Palghar

26-year-old Suraj Kumar Dubey, a resident of Palamu, going on duty while away from home, was burnt alive by criminals in Palghar, Maharashtra.

Navy trooper Suraj, a resident of Kolhua village in Chandpur block of Palamu district, was abducted by criminals on January 30 from Chennai Airport.

It is being told that due to non-payment of ransom, criminals sprinkled petrol and set fire to their bodies.

Locals in Palghar late Friday reported to the police after seeing them in a severely burnt condition. He died on the way to the hospital. Maharashtra Police is looking for the kidnappers.

Supreme court angry on NCB in a narcotics case sought clarification

The Supreme Court has resented the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) over the delay in filing a petition against the order of the Rajasthan High Court in a narcotics case.

The apex court has also sought an explanation from the NCB in this case. The Supreme Court has said that the manner in which an appeal was made to prosecute in this ‘sensitive case’ is highly reprehensible.