Nagpur: A judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) on August 23 rejected police custody remand of Ashwin Ingale underlining violation of supreme court guidelines by Rana Pratap Nagar police in a case registered under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) filed by wife for alleged torture at in-laws place. No notice was also served to Ingale before arrest violating the guidelines laid down by the apex court.
The violation, now on record, may lead to departmental action against the investigating officer apart from a proceedings of contempt of court to be instituted by high court having territorial jurisdiction as per the order issued by the apex court. Apart from Section 498-A of IPC, Ingale was booked along with mother, maternal aunt, sisters and a woman friend under additional charges under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 406 of IPC following a complaint from his wife Rasika on July 23 at Rana Pratap Nagar police station for alleged torture at in-law’s place along with charges of assault, threatening and criminal breach of trust. A woman friend of Ingale was also made an accused as they were thought to be having an illicit relationship.
Ingale was arrested on August 22 from a kin’s place by cops from Rana Pratap Nagar police station. Sources claimed Ingale’s arrest was made under pressure from a top politician. He was produced before a JMFC court by the cops who pleaded for two days of custody till August 25. Police wanted to secure remand custody to recover ‘streedhan’ of the complainant that they had recorded as reason in the document of arrest.
The court, finding the cops’ motive for arrest unjustified, observed that there was no reason ‘concrete and meritorious enough so as to justify the arrest made by the investigation officer in this case’. The court further lambasted the police stating ‘the reasons mentioned by investigation officer are mostly vague, general and cryptic in nature’. The magistrate also observed ‘the investigation officer has not recorded satisfactory reasons in this case before arresting the accused, as has been directed by Hon’ble supreme court in authority of Arnesh Kumar (supra).’ In a similar manner, court also observed that police did not make any ‘serious effort’ to serve the accused notice before arresting him.
Ingale was sent to magisterial custody till August 31. Counsel Sameer Sonwane, representing Ingale, said he would soon file a petition against the police for irregularities
The killing of a wild sambar deer in 1998 has had to be buried 15 years on with the death of the veterinary doctor who identified the animal. What this means is that the six of the accused – the seventh one is dead – will get away scot free, thanks to the forest department sleeping for 12 years before filing a chargesheet.
Pawan Chandra Shetty, counsel of Prakash Shetty, the accused
A division bench of the High Court on Monday ruled that two minor children would live with their father and their maternal grandparents would have the rights to only visit them. That should have been the end of the case. However, the two families were involved in an ugly spat outside the court and almost came to blows in the presence of the children. Despite the best efforts of their advocates the warring parties left the court on a bitter note.
He is a senior Supreme Court lawyer who had fought the Indira Gandhi assassination case and the son of former Election Commissioner G V G Krishnamurthy. Yet, it took G Venkatesh Rao 12 long years to get a tenant evicted from his property in Indiranagar. The litigation proved costly, for Rao spent Rs 35 lakh, fought 15 cases and lost Rs 1.5 crore in rents and fell into debt.
SATTUPALLY (KHAMMAM): A junior civil judge from Khammam district was booked for allegedly trying to outrage the modesty of his domestic help here on Wednesday. Following a complaint by the 24-year-old woman, a case under Section 354 ( attempt to rape) of IPC was registered against additional first class judicial magistrate Kuravath Balachander.
Town deputy superintendent of police K Rangan Goud told TOI that the complainant alleged that the magistrate attempted to outrage her modesty while she was working in his house on the morning of February 17.
The DSP said they will investigate the matter from all angles.
The woman, who had been working at the magistrate’s residence for some time, said Balachander called her to his room and asked her to fulfill his carnal desire. When she refused, Balachander allegedly dragged her into his bedroom.
The woman, however, managed to flee from the house.
Mustering courage after her relatives and villagers convinced her to file a complaint, the woman, a resident of Langapally village in Pinabelly mandal, approached the town police on Tuesday.
Sources said some police officials tried to convince the woman and her relatives to take back her complaint but in vain. Meanwhile, Balachander has gone on leave from Wednesday afternoon.
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that relief under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 could be sought against domestic violence that took place before the Act came into force.
Justice S.S. Satheesachandran, while dismissing a revision petition against a magistrate court’s order, observed that the definition of a “shared household,” as covered by Section 2(s) of the Act, clearly spelt out that it meant a “household where a person aggrieved lives, or at any stage has lived, in a domestic relationship with the respondent.” This indicated that even in respect of domestic violence committed before the Act came into force, relief under the Act could be sought.
The petitioner contended that alleged assault on his wife took place before the Act came into force. Therefore, the magistrate court’s order was unsustainable, the husband had contended.
The advocate commissioners appointed by the High Court to study the functioning of plywood manufacturing factories in Perumbavoor, Kothamangalam, and Muvattupuzha have suggested that prime importance be accorded to the welfare of migrant workers in these factories.
In a report submitted to the court, the commissioners, S. Subash Chand and Pinkku Thaliyath, said the waste generated by these factories should be scientifically treated. They recommended employment of staff with technical knowledge in the factories and suggested that periodic monitoring of the noise level at these factories by the Kerala Pollution Control Board was essential. The percolation of contaminated water, arising out of mixing of saw dust and rainwater, into nearby waterbodies should be prevented.
The commissioners were appointed when a writ petition filed by the residents of Vengola in Perumbavoor, seeking to prevent the pollution being caused by a plywood factory, and another one filed by the plywood factory owners, seeking no-objection certificates from the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, came up for hearing.
Attacked by Justice Soumitra Sen for wrongly recommending his impeachment, former Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan today said there is no doubt about the Calcutta High Court Judge’s guilt.
“There was ample proof against him. Many committees found him guilty. Though the impeachment is a sad chapter in our judicial history, he left us with no alternative. He was throughout trying to mislead everybody,” Justice Balakrishnan told The Indian Express.
As CJI, it was Justice Balakrishnan who had recommended Sen’s impeachment in a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on August 4, 2008.
Presenting his defence before the Rajya Sabha on August 18, Sen had accused Balakrishnan of wrongly recommending his impeachment despite lack of proof. On the contrary, he had added, the former CJI had swept serious charges against other Judges under the carpet.
Justice Sen had also alleged that Balakrishnan and two other seniormost Judges of the apex court — Justices B N Agrawal and Ashok Bhan — had asked him to take VRS so that he could be adjusted in some public sector undertaking.
Asked about this, the ex-CJI said: “What VRS? And, how could we offer to get him a job in some PSU? Where is our power to get something like this done? On 16th March, 2008, I called him to my house where Justice Agrawal and Justice Bhan were also present. We reiterated the advice given to him to submit his resignation or seek voluntary retirement. We told him that with the kind of charges against him, while it may not be possible for him to return to active practice, he could always try for a job in the public sector. However, on March 26, 2008, he wrote to me, expressing his inability to tender resignation or take voluntary retirement. It was then that I wrote to Prime Minister.”
Asked for his reaction to Justice Sen’s claim that the “in-house” procedure was unconstitutional, Justice Balakrishnan said the procedure had been adopted by the Supreme Court and high courts.
On whether he agreed with the unanimous opinion of the political class — as was evident from the Rajya Sabha debate on Sen’s impeachment — that the collegium system of appointment of judges had failed, Balakrishnan said: “They can have an opinion. Let them try another system.”
The former CJI also disclosed that in light of the fact that Sen, whose conduct as a lawyer left much to be desired, became a Judge, the collegium changed the performa that lawyers being considered for elevation to the Bench had to fill. “While earlier, lawyers had to give details only about cases, if any, against them or conviction, after Justice Sen’s experience, we changed the performa. Now we ask them to also inform us if they had ever been appointed receiver by any court and if they were keeping any monies with regard to that receivership. Also, if they were in any litigation about the receivership or any loan,” said Balakrishnan.