Two friends, Achal Nane and Pawan, are currently on the run after allegedly staging a robbery against their acquaintance, Chandan Puttaswamy, a 23-year-old businessman. The incident occurred on April 30 when Chandan was invited by Achal and Pawan for a long drive and dinner. During the outing, Achal made an unusual suggestion that Chandan should not report any robbery to the police if it occurred.

While returning home from a hotel in Gantiganahalli circle after consuming food and alcohol, Achal slowed down their vehicle under the pretense of being hit from behind. At that moment, two men on a scooter blocked their path, forcibly opened the car door, assaulted Chandan, and robbed him of his gold chain, ring, and bracelet valued at approximately ₹3 lakh at knife point. Despite Chandan's attempts to resist and request help from his friends in the car, Achal and Pawan did not intervene.

After the robbery, they convinced Chandan not to file a police complaint by suggesting he should be grateful for his safety. However, upon discussing the incident with family members later on, suspicions arose regarding Achal's and Pawan's involvement. Following this discussion, Chandan approached law enforcement to report the crime.

The Chikkajala police conducted an investigation which included analyzing mobile call records that revealed regular communication between Achal and Pawan with the robbers. Authorities are actively pursuing leads to apprehend both suspects who remain at large as of now.

Original article

The provided text is a news article detailing the alleged robbery of a 23-year-old businessman, Chandan Puttaswamy, by his friends Achal Nane and Pawan. Upon close examination, several forms of bias and language manipulation become apparent.

One of the most striking biases in the text is cultural and ideological bias rooted in nationalism. The article portrays India as a country where crime can occur even among acquaintances, implying that the country has a high crime rate. This framing creates a sense of unease and insecurity among readers, which can be seen as an attempt to reinforce nationalist sentiments that emphasize the need for stricter law enforcement and social control. The text does not provide any context about the overall crime rate in India or compare it to other countries, which allows for an implicit assumption that India is particularly prone to crime.

The language used in the article also exhibits linguistic and semantic bias through emotionally charged words like "robbery," "assault," and "knife point." These words create a vivid image of violence and danger in the reader's mind, which serves to heighten their emotional response to the story. The use of such language can be seen as an attempt to manipulate public opinion by creating an emotional connection between readers and the victim.

Furthermore, selection and omission bias are evident in the article's focus on Chandan's age (23) while omitting any information about Achal's or Pawan's ages. This selective inclusion of demographic information creates an implicit assumption that young people are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. Additionally, there is no mention of any potential motives or circumstances that might have led Achal and Pawan to commit this crime, which could be seen as an attempt to obscure agency or justify their actions.

Structural and institutional bias are also present in the article's portrayal of law enforcement agencies as actively pursuing leads against Achal and Pawan. While this might seem like a neutral description, it reinforces a narrative that law enforcement agencies are effective in combating crime without questioning their methods or accountability mechanisms. This framing can be seen as an attempt to legitimize existing power structures within society.

Confirmation bias is evident when the article presents Chandan's family members' suspicions about Achal's involvement without providing any evidence from independent sources. This one-sided presentation creates an impression that Chandan's family members are credible witnesses without allowing for alternative perspectives or counter-evidence.

Framing and narrative bias are also present throughout the article. The story structure begins with Achal inviting Chandan for dinner before describing how he was robbed by two men on a scooter who were allegedly aided by Achal himself. This ordering creates an impression that Achal was responsible for orchestrating the robbery from start to finish without providing sufficient evidence for such claims.

The sources cited by the article do not appear explicitly; however, based on general knowledge about Indian media outlets' ideological slant towards nationalism, it can be inferred that they may have reinforced this narrative direction.

Lastly, temporal bias manifests itself through historical erasure – there is no mention of similar incidents involving friends turning against each other or whether these types of crimes have increased over time due to changing societal factors such as economic inequality or social pressures