Daily Archives: April 5, 2017

My experience in mediation centre today in morning in court premises : 

My experience in mediation centre today in morning in court premises :

 

originally posted by @Deepika Narayan Bharadwaj on Facebook
Sitting at the mediation centre. Mediator is asking husbands family to take a loan to pay the amount wife is demanding for settlement (huge as per their standards, meagre as per mediators assessment.) She has filed a 498A and case has come for mediation during bail hearing.
Husbands father says he can not afford the amount at all as they are very poor and they want their daughter in law to live with them. They say the girls sister is married to Elder brother and she’s absolutely fine in the family. Mediator says Theek hai fir mat do paisa aur jail Jao saare.
Mediator Now talking to girl. Girl says I have asked him(husband) several times to work in Gurgaon and stay here (husband is right now studying in Rajasthan.) I don’t want to live where they live. He can live with my family. Mediator tells her he would convince him to shift here.
Mediator talks to boy again. Boy says he can’t leave his studies. He will finish and then shift for work, but not right now. Also he doesn’t want to be a ghar jamai which his in laws basically want. Mediator tells him she won’t come if he doesn’t shift. He refuses.
Girl called. Told how she should live happily with husband. He will shift in sometime. She’s adamant. Says ask them to give money and take divorce. They are rich. They have a house. Some fields too.
Husbands family back again. Mediator tells uncle – Bhaisahab court ke chakkar katoge saalon saal. Lawyer ko paise doge. Aane jaane ka kharcha karoge. Jail bhi jaoge. I am telling you arrange for money from anywhere and settle the matter. She isn’t asking for too much.
Uncle interrupts – mere paas nahi hain. Ek paisa nahi liya humne ladki vaalon se. Shaadi par kharcha hua hoga. Vo hamara bhi hua tha.
Mediator is slightly angry now. “To matlab Kuch nahi doge kya?” he asks uncle. A petrified uncle barely speaks – nahi de denge, he whispers.
“Loan le lo mil jaayega” mediator advises again.
I am called for my meeting. I leave thinking…… What’s dowry…
Source

He was financially well off but was troubled due to marital disputes. “Forgive Me…” Telangana Techie Madhukar Reddy Gudur Texted Mother Before Seattle Suicide: Report – NDTV

Forgive Me, Telangana Techie Madhukar Reddy Gudur Texted Mother Before Seattle Suicide: Report

NDTV News Desk | Updated: Apr 05, 2017 14:09 IST

Forgive Me, Telangana Techie Madhukar Reddy Gudur Texted Mother Before Seattle Suicide: Report
Telangana Techie Madhukar Reddy was found dead at his house in Seattle, US

Story Highlights

Madhukar Reddy lived with wife and daughter in Seattle

Some relatives in Telangana refer to marital problems

Arrangements being made to bring body home

Hyderabad: A techie from Telangana working in Seattle for seven years has been found dead in his house. Madhukar Reddy Gudur, 37, was married and has a young daughter.

His parents, who live in Bhongir, 50 kms from the capital of Hyderabad, were informed of his death yesterday and are waiting for his body to be brought home, reported the New Indian Express.

One report said that his mother yesterday saw a text message, sent hours earlier, by Mr Gudur, which said “Dear mother, kindly forgive me.”

“He was financially well off and had bought a house four months back. He was troubled by marital disputes. But we cannot confirm what the exact reason for the suicide was,” said his relative Durga Reddy to The Deccan Chronicle. The techie had reportedly been keen to move back to India.

Mr Gudur had graduated from BITS Pilani; his wife is also a software engineer. He was found hanging from a fan in his house

http://m.ndtv.com/telangana-news/forgive-me-telangana-techie-madhukar-reddy-gudur-texted-mother-before-seattle-suicide-report-1677530

#Wife alleges she was #forced to #sleep with #DOG !! Sensational complaint at Belgavi

மனைவியை, நாயுடன் உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்ள வற்புறுத்திய கணவன் கைது.. ஆபாச வீடியோக்களை பார்த்து அட்டூழியம் | Husband forced his wife to have sex with a dog | மனைவியை, நாயுடன் உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்ள வற்புறுத்திய கணவன் கைது.. ஆபாச வீடியோக்களை பார்த்து அட்டூழியம் – Tamil Oneindia

கர்நாடக மாநிலம் பெலகாவி (முன்பு பெல்காம்), மாவட்டத்தின் கட்டகோல் காவல் நிலைய சரகத்திற்கு உட்பட்ட பகுதியில் இந்த திடுக்கிடும் சம்பவம் நடைபெற்றுள்ளது.
மனைவியை இப்படிப்படிப்பட்ட ஒரு நிலைக்கு தள்ளி அதைப்பார்த்து ஆனந்தம் அடையும் மனநிலையில் இருந்தவர் சந்தீப் (பெயர் மாற்றப்பட்டுள்ளது) என்ற லாரி உரிமையாளராகும். இவருக்கு சொந்தமான லாரியை இவரே ஓட்டி வருகிறார்.

சந்தீப்பின் மனைவி கீர்த்தி (25, பெயர் மாற்றப்பட்டுள்ளது), கட்டகோல் காவல் நிலையத்தில் அளித்த பரபரப்பு புகாரில் இதுகுறித்து கூறியிருப்பதாவது: எங்களது இல்லற வாழ்க்கை 4 மாதங்கள் முன்புவரை சந்தோஷமாகத்தான் சென்றது. எங்களுக்கு 3 பிள்ளைகள் உள்ளனர். நான்கு மாதங்களுக்கு முன்பிருந்து திடீரென கணவரின் பழக்க வழக்கம் மாறிவிட்டது. தாம்பத்திய உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்ளும் நேரங்களில் அவர் வெறியுடன் நடந்துகொள்வார். அவரது அதிவேக உடலுறவு நடைமுறையால் நான் உடலளவில் மிகவும் கஷ்டப்பட்டேன்.

செல்போனில் நிர்வாண படங்களை எனக்கு காண்பிப்பார். பிற ஆடவர்களை அந்த கோலத்தில் பார்க்க மாட்டேன் என நான் கதறியபடி கூறினாலும் வற்புறுத்தி தலையை பிடித்து போன் அருகே கொண்டு சென்று, அதில் வரும் உடலுறவு காட்சிகளை காண்பிப்பார். அதில் வரும் காட்சிகளை போலவே என்னை நடந்து கொள்ள சொல்வார். பழக்கமில்லாத அந்த செயல்களை செய்ய எனக்கு மிகவும் சங்கோஜமாக இருக்கும். இதை அவரிடம் கூறினாலும் வற்புறுத்தி வீடியோக்களில் வரும் காட்சிகளை போல என்னிடம் உறவு கொள்வார்.

இந்த கொடுமைகளுக்கு உச்சம் வைத்தாற்போல, நான்கு நாட்களுக்கு முன்பு ஒரு நாயை வீட்டுக்கு அழைத்து வந்தார். ஏன் என்று கேட்டதற்கு அந்த நாயுடன் நான் உடலுறவு வைத்துக்கொள்ள வேண்டும் என்றும் அதைப்பார்த்து அவர் ரசிக்க வேண்டும் என்றும் கூறினார். அதிர்ச்சியடைந்த நான், அவரை திட்டிவிட்டேன். ஆனாலும் பிடிவாதம் பிடித்த அவர் என்னை கட்டிலில் தள்ளி நாயை மேலே படுக்க வைத்தார். நான் தட்டிவிட்டு ஓடிவிட்டேன்.

நாயுடன் உடலுறவு வைக்காவிட்டால், என்னையும் எனது குழந்தைகளையும், வீட்டை விட்டே வெளியே விரட்டிவிடுவேன் என மிரட்ட ஆரம்பித்தார். பணியாத என்னை அடித்து, உதைக்க ஆரம்பித்தார். இப்படியே பொறுத்துக்கொண்டிருந்தால், நாயுடன் என்னை உறவுகொள்ள வைத்துவிடுவார் என்பதால் பயந்துபோய் புகார் கொடுக்கிறேன். இவ்வாறு அந்த மனுவில் கூறப்பட்டிருந்தது. இந்த புகாரை பார்த்த போலீசார் திடுக்கிட்டனர். இதையடுத்து சந்தீப்பை கைது செய்து விசாரணை நடத்தி வருகிறார்கள். வக்கிர எண்ணத்தால் அவர் பாதிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளதால், உளவியல் நிபுணர்களின் கவுன்சலிங் அவருக்கு தேவை என காவல்துறை வட்டாரங்கள் கூறுகின்றன.

முகப்பு | செய்திகள் | சினிமா | ஆப்ஸ் | Weather | Sitemap | Contact Us
© 2016 Greynium Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Tamil

https://www.google.ae/amp/tamil.oneindia.com/amphtml/news/india/husband-forced-his-wife-have-sex-with-dog-278420.html

A #criminal #case, an #abuse of #process of #law 2 implicate accused after 12 years, quashed by SC !

Husbands often seek good quash cases. While it is nice to have 498a quash cases, it is also necessary to understand how various courts approach a quash and how sometimes one has to go up to Apex court to get results

Here is a good case that discusses the facts of the complaint and also various cornerstone cases, before quashing a criminal case, an abuse of the process of law
////////////////17. In view of the above discussion and facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that none of the offences for which the appellants are summoned, is made out from the complaint and material on record. We further find that it is nothing but abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant to implicate the appellants in a criminal case after a period of twelve years of execution of registered sale deeds in question, who is neither party to the sale deeds nor a member of the Society. Therefore, we allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the High Court and that of the courts below. Accordingly, the order passed by the Magistrate summoning the appellants in the criminal complaint filed by respondent No. 1, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 IPC, also stands quashed.//////////

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.953 OF 2015

(@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 330 of 2015)

Mr. Robert John D’Souza and others… Appellants

Versus

Mr. Stephen V. Gomes and another… Respondents

J U D G M E N T

Prafulla C. Pant, J.

  1. This appeal is directed against order dated 9.10.2014, passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Petition No. 658 of 2014 whereby said court has dismissed the petition, and declined to quash the Criminal Complaint case No. 357 of 2012, filed by respondent No. 1, against the appellants.
  2. Brief facts of the case are that a Society named – Mukka Welfare Society was constituted on 28.3.1970 for charitable work and social service, registered under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1970. Appellant No. 1, appellant No. 2 and appellant No. 3 were President, Secretary and Treasurer respectively, while appellant Nos. 4 to 7 were Directors of the Society. Other appellants are their relatives. A piece of land bearing S. No. 239/10 measuring 0.50 acres in Village Suratkal, Taluk Mangalore, was purchased by the Society vide registered sale deed dated 28.1.1978 from one Smt. Kaveri Hengsu. It is alleged by the complainant (respondent No. 1) that appellant Nos. 1 to 7, being members of the Executive and Directors of Mukka Welfare Society, misusing the position, held Board Meetings on 22.9.1995 and 13.10.1995 facilitating the sale of the above mentioned land in favour of their relatives (appellant Nos. 7 to 12). The sale deeds were executed on 16.2.1996. It is further stated that the purchasers (appellant Nos. 7 to 12), executed sale deeds in the same year in favour of the Directors of the Society. It is alleged by the complainant/respondent No.1 that the appellants have fraudulently usurped the property through the sale deeds mentioned above, and thereby committed cheating.

  3. The criminal complaint filed by respondent No. 1 was registered by the 1 st Additional Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangalore, DK, who, after recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), summoned the appellants vide order dated 13.4.2012 in respect of offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellants filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 58 of 2012 before the Principal Sessions & District Judge of D.K. District at Mangalore, which was dismissed vide order dated 6.2.2013. Thereafter, the appellants filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court and the same was also dismissed. Hence this appeal through special leave.

  4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record.

  5. The impugned orders passed by the High Court and the other authorities below are challenged before us mainly on the following grounds: – (i) Respondent No. 1/complainant is not a member of the “Mukka Welfare Society” nor is he in any manner connected with the affairs of the Society, as such he has no locus to file the criminal complaint. (ii) The sale deeds in question were executed in the year 1996, and the criminal complaint is filed malafide by respondent No. 1 after a period of fourteen years, in the year 2010, as such the courts below have erred in law in not taking note of said fact. (iii) The courts below have erred in law in not appreciating that the complaint in question was filed to get personal vendetta by respondent No. 1 against the Directors of the Society. (iv) The courts below further erred in not considering the fact that the complainant/respondent No. 1 had earlier filed a complaint, with same set of facts, before the Deputy Commissioner, Dakshin Kannada, Mangalore, and the same was sent to Police Station Suratkal for investigation, and the Circle Inspector, after investigation, did not find any offence to have been committed by the appellants, as the dispute was purely of civil in nature. (v) Ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 IPC are not made out. (vi) None of the transactions of sale in question is against any bye-law or clause of Memorandum of Association of the Society.

  6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.1, it has been stated that the complainant came to know of the transactions of sale, only in the year 2009, whereafter he complained before the Deputy Commissioner, D.K., as such the issue raised as to delay in filing the complaint is unfounded. It is further stated that the Mukka Welfare Society receives donations from various institutions and general public. The allegation of personal vendetta, pleaded in the appeal by the appellants, has been denied in the counter affidavit. Lastly, defending the orders passed by the courts below, it is stated that the courts below have committed no error of law.

  7. Arguments were advanced by learned counsel for the parties on the above lines pleaded before us. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties what is apparent in the present case is that the complainant is not the member of Mukka Welfare Society. It is also not disputed that the sale deeds in question were executed way back in the year 1996 and the complainant, who is not even member of the Society, raises the issue that the sale deeds were executed for the benefit of the Directors of the Society, after a long gap of more than twelve years. Sale deeds in question are registered, and not declared null and void by any court of law. It is also relevant to mention here that admittedly earlier a complaint was made by the complainant to the Deputy Commissioner in the year 2009, which was got investigated by the police and the result of the investigation was that no offence was found committed by the appellants on the ground that the dispute is of civil in nature.

  8. In view of the above facts, apparent on the record, we are of the view that the High Court and the courts below have committed grave error of law in ignoring the same. Needless to say that to constitute an offence punishable under Section 406 IPC, the essential ingredient is the “entrustment” of the property. The complaint filed by the complainant nowhere discloses that the land in question purchased in the year 1978 was entrusted to the Society for the benefit of others. It is only after entrustment is shown, it can be said that there was criminal breach of trust.

  9. In Ram Narayan Popli v. Central Bureau of Investigation 1, this Court, per majority, has explained “entrustment” in paragraph 363 as under: –“ The term “entrustment” is not necessarily a term of law. It may have different implications in different contexts. In its most general signification all it imports is the handing over possession for some purpose which may not imply the conferring of any proprietary right at all.”

  10. In State of Gujarat v. Jaswantlal Nathalal 2, this Court in paragraph 8 has observed that a mere transaction of sale cannot amount to an entrustment.

  11. At this stage we also think it proper to observe that in the present case, even if the allegations made in the complaint are taken to be true, the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 409 IPC for which appellants are summoned, are also not made out. To constitute an offence punishable under Section 409 IPC, apart from entrustment, it is also essential requirement that it should be shown that the accused has acted in the capacity of a public servant, banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent. It is nowhere shown in the complaint that the appellants have acted in any of the above capacities.

  12. As far as offence of cheating is concerned, the same is defined in Section 415 IPC, for which the punishment is provided under Section 420 IPC. Section 415 reads as under:-“ 415. Cheating. – Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”. Explanation. – A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section. Illustrations……………”

  13. From the above language of the Section, one of the essential ingredients for the offence of cheating is deception, but in the present case, from the contents of the complaint it nowhere reflects that the complainant was deceived or he or anyone else was induced to deliver the property by deception. What was done, was so reflected in the resolutions, and sale deeds.

  14. In Mathavrao Jiwajirao Scindia and others v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and others 3, a three-Judge Bench of this Court has laid down the law as to quashment of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC as follows:-“ 7. The legal position is well settled that when a prosecution at the initial stage is asked to be quashed, the test to be applied by the court is as to whether the uncontroverted allegations as made prima facie establish the offence. It is also for the court to take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to continue. This is so on the basis that the court cannot be utilised for any oblique purpose and where in the opinion of the court chances of an ultimate conviction is bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, the court may while taking into consideration the special facts of a case also quash the proceeding even though it may be at a preliminary stage.”

  15. In Suresh v. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava and another 4, criminal prosecution was quashed by the Court in respect offence of cheating noticing that the complaint was filed after a lapse of ten years.

  16. In Inder Mohan Goswami and another v. State of Uttaranchal and others 5, this Court in paragraphs 25 and 46 has observed as under: –“ 25. Reference to the following cases would reveal that the courts have consistently taken the view that they must use this extraordinary power to prevent injustice and secure the ends of justice. The English courts have also used inherent power to achieve the same objective. It is generally agreed that the Crown Court has inherent power to protect its process from abuse. In Connelly v. DPP (1964 AC 1254) Lord Devlin stated that where particular criminal proceedings constitute an abuse of process, the court is empowered to refuse to allow the indictment to proceed to trial. Lord Salmon in DPP v. Humphrys (1977 AC 1) stressed the importance of the inherent power when he observed that it is only if the prosecution amounts to an abuse of the process of the court and is oppressive and vexatious that the judge has the power to intervene. He further mentioned that the court’s power to prevent such abuse is of great constitutional importance and should be jealously preserved. xxx xxx xxx 46. The court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as an instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with an ulterior motive to pressurise the accused. On analysis of the aforementioned cases, we are of the opinion that it is neither possible nor desirable to lay down an inflexible rule that would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Inherent jurisdiction of the High Courts under Section 482 CrPC though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when it is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the statute itself and in the aforementioned cases. In view of the settled legal position, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained.”

  17. In view of the above discussion and facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that none of the offences for which the appellants are summoned, is made out from the complaint and material on record. We further find that it is nothing but abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant to implicate the appellants in a criminal case after a period of twelve years of execution of registered sale deeds in question, who is neither party to the sale deeds nor a member of the Society. Therefore, we allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the High Court and that of the courts below. Accordingly, the order passed by the Magistrate summoning the appellants in the criminal complaint filed by respondent No. 1, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 IPC, also stands quashed.

………………

……………..J. [Dipak Misra]

……………………………..J. [Prafulla C. Pant]

New Delhi;

July 21, 2015.

1 (2003) 3 SCC 641

2 AIR 1968 SC 700

3 (1988) 1 SCC 692

4 (2005) 3 SCC 670

5 (2007) 12 SCC 1

Hyderabad Woman #drowns, #suffocates & #kills #baby minutes after birth, as she was unmarried!!

 

Hyderabad Woman Allegedly Kills Baby Boy Minutes After Birth

Darpan News Desk IANS, 04 Apr, 2017

  • Hyderabad Woman Allegedly Kills Baby Boy Minutes After Birth
A 22-year-old woman in Hyderabad allegedly drowned her newborn son in a bucket of water minutes after the delivery at a private hospital here, police said.
A preliminary inquiry by police has revealed that the woman, who belongs to Khammam district in Telangana, is unmarried. She joined the private hospital as a lab technician last week and was around six months’ pregnant, they said.
“The hospital was not aware that she was pregnant,” Inspector, Raidurgam police station, D Durga Prasad said.
On Sunday, she was on evening shift. At around 1.30 AM yesterday, some hospital workers heard the cries of a baby from a washroom in the premises.
A senior manager of the hospital and two other nurses reached the spot and through a gap in the washroom’s door they saw the woman allegedly drowning the baby in the bucket of water, a police officer said.
They immediately open the door by force and found the baby dead in the bucket, he said.
The woman also had heavy bleeding following the delivery and was admitted in the same hospital for treatment, he said.
A case under of murder has been registered against the woman, he said, adding that she will be questioned.
Police said they suspect that the woman did not want to have the baby as she is unmarried.
source : http:/ /www .darpanmagazine .com/news/international / hyderabad-woman-allegedly-kills- baby-boy-minutes -after-birth/