A storm has erupted around the Parappana Agrahara Central Prison in Bengaluru following the circulation of videos showing inmates apparently using mobile phones, watching television and enjoying other unauthorised privileges inside the facility. The controversy has struck at the heart of the prison system’s integrity and raised serious questions about oversight, discipline and preferential treatment of high‑profile prisoners.

The trouble began when short video clips began circulating on social media in which two particularly notorious inmates can be clearly seen. In one clip, Zuhaib Hameed Shakeel Manna—an accused operative of the banned militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)—is shown reclining in a prison cell, sipping tea and scrolling through what appears to be a mobile phone while speaking to the person filming. In another clip, Umesh Reddy—a convicted serial rapist and killer—appears to handle three mobile phones inside the jail premises, with prison staff reportedly aware of the activity. These visuals have triggered immediate uproar and a promise of action from the state government.

According to media reports, Manna is a Bengaluru resident and a former computer‑application specialist who was booked by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for his alleged work with ISIS, raising funds and recruiting young Muslim men to join terrorist operations in Syria. The footage showing him “relaxed” behind bars, using a phone, has therefore caused serious consternation. The Reddy case is equally disturbing: once accused in close to 18 cases of rape and murder across Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat, he was eventually convicted in nine cases. He had been sentenced to death by a sessions court in Bengaluru for the rape‑murder of a 37‑year‑old woman in 2006 (in Peenya), but the death penalty was commuted by the Supreme Court of India to life imprisonment of 30 years, three years ago.

Television news and digital‑media coverage of the videos emphasise not only the presence of mobile phones, but also the access to other amenities such as television sets, and the seeming absence of proper monitoring of incarcerated persons who should technically to

Here’s a full long-form rewrite of your article, expanded to approximately 1,000 words:

---

Bengaluru’s Parappana Agrahara Central Jail has come under intense scrutiny after videos surfaced on social media showing high-profile inmates using mobile phones and watching television inside the prison. The clips, which quickly went viral, have raised serious concerns over security lapses and allegations of preferential treatment within one of Karnataka’s most prominent correctional facilities.

The controversy centers around two inmates: Zuhaib Hameed Shakeel Manna, an accused operative of the banned terrorist organization ISIS, and Umesh Reddy, a convicted serial rapist and murderer. In the minute-long videos, Manna is seen casually sipping tea while scrolling through a phone and interacting with the person recording. Reddy is shown using multiple phones simultaneously, while other inmates can be seen moving freely within the facility. The videos suggest that the jail staff were aware of this unauthorized usage of mobile devices and access to amenities like television.

Zuhaib Manna, a Bengaluru resident and former computer application specialist, has been accused of involvement with ISIS, specifically raising funds and recruiting young men to join terrorist activities in Syria. According to reports, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) had booked him for his alleged role in recruiting “gullible” individuals to support the extremist organization. His presence in the video, appearing relaxed and unmonitored, has prompted questions about how high-risk inmates are managed and whether proper protocols are in place to prevent communication with the outside world.

Umesh Reddy’s criminal history makes the situation equally alarming. Reddy was once accused in 18 cases of rape and murder across Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat, though he was eventually convicted in nine cases. He was sentenced to death by a sessions court in Bengaluru in 2006 for the rape and murder of a 37-year-old woman in Peenya. Three years ago, his death sentence was commuted to a 30-year life imprisonment term by the Supreme Court. Reddy’s previous criminal activities include serving briefly in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) in 1996, during which he was posted as a guard at the residence of a commandant in Jammu and Kashmir and allegedly attempted to commit rape. After being arrested, he managed to escape and return to Chitradurga, continuing his criminal activities.

The footage sparked immediate outrage online and in the media, prompting Karnataka authorities to respond swiftly. Prison authorities confirmed that they had launched an internal probe following the circulation of the videos. Sources cited by the Press Trust of India (PTI) stated that the inquiry would focus on how mobile phones and other prohibited items made their way into the prison, the level of awareness among staff, and whether any rules or regulations had been breached.

Karnataka Home Minister G. Parameshwara reacted strongly to the reports of VIP treatment of inmates. He emphasized that such behavior would not be tolerated under his watch, signaling that disciplinary action against responsible staff could be imminent. The state government’s firm response comes amid increasing public scrutiny of prison management in India, where reports of lax security and inmate privileges have occasionally surfaced in high-profile cases.

Chief Minister Siddaramaiah also weighed in on the matter, assuring the public that the incident would be thoroughly investigated and necessary action taken against those found negligent. The assurance from the top leadership underscores the seriousness with which the state views breaches of prison discipline, especially when they involve inmates with histories of terrorism and violent crime.

Experts note that the incidents highlight systemic issues within correctional facilities across the country. While Parappana Agrahara Central Jail is among the largest and most well-equipped prisons in Karnataka, reports of contraband, mobile phone usage, and other violations are not uncommon. Prisons are meant to maintain strict surveillance and control over high-risk inmates to prevent criminal activities from continuing from within the facility. When such incidents come to light, they reflect not only on the jail’s operational efficiency but also on the broader law enforcement and judicial systems responsible for overseeing correctional institutions.

Security lapses of this nature are particularly concerning when they involve individuals associated with terrorism or serious violent crime. The potential for these inmates to communicate with criminal networks outside the prison poses a serious threat to public safety. Mobile phones, in particular, can be used to coordinate illegal activities, spread extremist propaganda, or even orchestrate escape attempts. The presence of multiple devices, as in Reddy’s case, points to organized smuggling of contraband within the prison system.

Beyond the security implications, the incident raises ethical and administrative questions regarding the treatment of inmates. While prisoners have certain rights, these do not extend to unrestricted access to technology that could facilitate criminal activity. Allegations of preferential treatment, if substantiated, could indicate corruption or favoritism within the prison staff. Investigating these claims is crucial not only to hold responsible parties accountable but also to restore public confidence in the criminal justice system.

The Karnataka government’s response is likely to involve multiple steps, including a detailed inquiry, administrative action against implicated staff, and stricter enforcement of jail rules. Experts suggest that prisons should adopt more rigorous monitoring systems, including enhanced surveillance, periodic inspections, and stricter screening of visitors and staff. Training programs for jail personnel on the handling of high-profile or high-risk inmates may also be necessary to prevent recurrence of such incidents.

Social media has played a critical role in bringing this issue to light. While viral videos can sometimes be misleading or lack context, the visual evidence in this case has prompted immediate governmental response, showing the power of digital platforms in holding institutions accountable. However, authorities must balance transparency with due process, ensuring that investigations are thorough and conclusions are based on verified facts.

The incident at Parappana Agrahara Central Jail serves as a reminder that prisons are microcosms of broader societal issues. They require constant oversight, clear rules, and rigorous enforcement to function effectively. When lapses occur, they can have consequences far beyond the walls of the facility, affecting public perception of law enforcement, judicial integrity, and the rule of law itself.

As the investigation proceeds, it will be important for the Karnataka government to communicate findings clearly and take decisive action against any lapses in responsibility. Only through accountability and systematic reforms can the state ensure that high-risk inmates are securely managed and that no individual inside a prison enjoys privileges that undermine justice and security.

The viral videos, while shocking, also offer an opportunity for reform. They highlight vulnerabilities in the correctional system that, if addressed, can lead to stronger, more secure, and more transparent management of prisons. For now, the eyes of the public and media remain fixed on Bengaluru, awaiting clarity on how the state will respond to this unprecedented breach of prison discipline.

In conclusion, the videos showing ISIS operative Zuhaib Manna and serial rapist Umesh Reddy using mobile phones inside Parappana Agrahara Central Jail have ignited a debate on prison security, staff accountability, and inmate privileges. The Karnataka government has assured a rigorous investigation, signaling a zero-tolerance approach to breaches of protocol. This episode underscores the critical need for ongoing vigilance, systemic reforms, and strict enforcement of prison regulations to prevent recurrence of such incidents in the future.