The Telegraph
 
  This website is ACAP-enabled
IN TODAY'S PAPER
WEEKLY FEATURES
CITIES AND REGIONS
ARCHIVES
Since 1st March, 1999
 
THE TELEGRAPH
 
Calcutta Weather
WeatherTemperature
Min : 17.30°C (+3)
Max : 26.20°C (-1)
Rainfall : 0.00 mm
Relative Humidity:
Max : 99.00% Min : 52.00%
Sunrise : 6:19 AM
Sunset : 5:15 PM
Today
Morning mist, later, mainly clear sky. Minimum temperature likely to be around 14°C.
 
CIMA Gallary
Email This Page
Sushma Badaik lands in cop net

Ranchi, Jan. 16: Barely six days after she knocked on the doors of Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar for justice, Sushma Badaik was arrested today on charges of running a criminal organisation known as Jharkhand Army.

Sushma hit the headlines on July 31, 2005, when a television channel telecast footage of her in a compromising position with then zonal IG P.S. Natarajan as part of a sting operation. She told the Bihar chief minister that she feared for her life and that she was being falsely accused of being a Maoist by the Jharkhand police. She requested Kumar to ask his Jharkhand counterpart to provide her protection.

However, Gumla superintendent of police Narendra Kumar Singh said the police had evidence that showed Sushma as the chief of Jharkhand Army, a gang of criminals who operated as Maoists.

Today, the Gumla police with the help of their Kotwali counterparts arrested Sushma from Radium Road in Ranchi around 9am as she made her way to the residence of the senior superintendent of police. As many as nine police personnel were present at the time of arrest.

A cellphone was recovered from Sushma, who was taken away by the Gumla police a few hours after her arrest.

“The FIR was registered about six months ago. She is charged with extorting money from businessmen and contractors besides keeping illegal arms to run the Jharkhand Army,” the Gumla SP said, while confirming the arrest.

Significantly, Sushma had also approached the NHRC in August last year. But, NHRC, after inquiry, closed her case in November. In its report, the NHRC observed that “the allegation of false implication of the complainant in a case relating to extremist activities was not substantiated”.

Sushma had alleged in an FIR that Natarajan exploited her when she went to him for help in getting custody of her only child. In 2003, Sushma had been forcibly married to a man who was later declared a Maoist. Natarajan was suspended following the FIR.

Top
Email This Page