Monthly Archives: May 2017

Parents can deny family property to negligent children: Supreme Court

Parents can deny family property to negligent children: Supreme Court
Removing any misgiving about the claim of a share in the joint family property, the Supreme Court has held that the parents have every right to deny the share to the negligent children who simply do not take care of them in old age when they need their help the most, but are virtually left in the lurch.
The apex court gave the ruling in dispute among three brothers over the property of their father Harishankar from Madhya Pradesh inherited by him as his share form joint Hindu family property in two partitions held earlier in 1965 and 1985.
Harishankar’s two sons —Vinod Kumar and Anand Kumar — did not bother to take care of their old parents. The parents lived with their third son Mahesh Kumar, who along with his wife, looked after them. A bench of Justices G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadyaya said: “There was nothing unnatural or unusual in the decision of Harishankar to give his share in the joint family property to appellant.”
Pointing out that Mr Vinod Kumar and Mr Anand Kumar even did not spend any money on the funeral and other last rites of their mother when she died in 1992, the Supreme Court said, “Any person of ordinary prudence would have adopted the same course and would not have given anything to the ungrateful children from his or her share in the property.”
“Neither of them bothered to look after the parents in their old age. The attitude of the two left Harishankar and his wife with no choice but to live with Mahesh, who along with his wife and children took care of the old parents and looked after them during their illness,” the top court said while declaring the Will executed by Harishankar in favour of Mahesh as valid in law even in respect of the joint family property.
The judgement is being seen as “innovative” by legal experts, especially in the context of the accepted principle of succession in the joint Hindu family property that makes every member entitled of his or her share as per the family tree. The principle so far established in several judgements of the top court was that the parents can give their self-acquired property to any one but cannot “bequeath” their share in joint family property in a Will contrary to the legitimate hereditary share of each person in the family tree.
The judges said that they were not required to go so deep into the evidence about the manner Harishankar signed the Will in favour of Mahesh, which was challenged by Vinod and Anand. Their main focus was rather on the “unmistakably” clear evidence, which showed that the two sons had separated from the family and even had taken certain properties as their share, but after that they simply did not “bother to take care of the old parents.”
The apex court also criticised the MP High Court for overlooking the vital fact that the parents needed the care by all the children. The HC had overturned the lower court verdict declaring Harishankar’s Will in favour of Mahesh as valid. “We hold that the HC was clearly in error in reversing the well-reasoned finding recorded by the trial court,” the top court judges in their verdict recorded.

evidence procured by improper or illegal means,IS admissible if it is relevant & its genuineness is proved

SC: Illegally obtained evidence is admissible!
(A) Constitution of India, Art.21- Complaint – Evidence Procured by illegal means – Tape Recordings or Photographs – If the evidence is admissible, it does not matter how it has been obtained – It is a settled legal proposition that even if any evidence is procured by improper or illegal means, there is no bar to its admissibility if it is relevant and its genuineness is proved.

Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh.

AIR 2014 SC 1106

Swami ji NEVER harassed my daughter !!! She was mentally disturbed & CUT his penis !! Kerala woman !!

Bobbitised godman didn’t harass my daughter, she is mentally unfit: Kerala woman | kerala | Hindustan Times

According to the mother, her daughter has twice in the past attempted suicide by slashing her wrist.

Ten days after a 54-year-old godman was bobbitised by a young woman, her mother in a letter to Kerala Police on Monday said her daughter was not keeping in the best of mental health and the Swami had never harassed her as claimed.

In the letter to state police chief TP Senkumar, the girl’s mother said the Swami never harassed the 23-year-old woman, but chided her for an affair with a friend of hers when he was bobbitised on May 18.

According to the mother, her daughter has twice in the past attempted suicide by slashing her wrist.

She said the Swami had good relations with her family and on that morning he advised her daughter to end the relation with her male friend.

Read: Woman who cut off man’s genitals in Kerala gets support, police to drop charges

Senkumar has forwarded the letter to the officials probing the case.

Meanwhile, the Swami is recovering at the Thiruvananthapuram Medical College hospital where he has been remanded to custody.
He will be produced before a court if discharged before June 3.

The police are yet to decide on the course of action, if any, against the woman.

Banker demands Rs 1 crore for illegal detainment in dowry case

Banker demands Rs 1 crore for illegal detainment
Banker demands Rs 1 crore for illegal detainment

The Mumbai and Kota police face a legal battle after they allegedly wrongfully detained a 29-year-old Mumbai-based Chartered Accountant at Cuffe Parade police station pertaining to an alleged dowry harassment case. The victim has now approached the Bombay High Court with a writ petition demanding Rs 1 Crore as compensation and a contempt of court case be filed against the police teams.

Chandra Prakash,29 a senior bank manager in Punjab National Bank was allegedly picked up by Kota police with Cuffe Parade police in tow from his workplace at Cuffe Parade and was kept detained illegally for several hours without conducting a panchanama nor any legal procedure was followed. After frantic calls were made to senior police officers in Mumbai police department, the Kota police realized their mistake and he was let off.

“It is a clear case of contempt of Supreme Court order that accused in the case of harassment to women by husband or in-laws should be first served with a notice and arrest can be made if he fails to co-operate during the investigations”, said Nilesh Ojha, counsel for Chandra Prakash and the writ petitioner.

A copy of writ petition submitted in the Bombay High Court on 23 May prays, that Mahila Police Thane in Kota and Senior Inspector of Cuffe Parade should compensate the petitioner Rs 1 Crore for illegal detainment and a case against both respondents should be filed for contempt of court order.

“We demand that a case under sections 220(Commitment for trial or confinement by person having authority who knows that he is acting contrary to law) and 341(wrongful confinement) of the Indian Penal code should be registered for harassing my client and detaining him illegally which is against the rights provided by our Constitution”, said Ojha.

Chandra Prakash while revisiting the events on that day revealed, “Despite me co-operating with the police investigations they reached my workplace where they defamed me and were treating me as a hardened criminal. They themselves as the law enforcers were breaking the law by keeping me illegally detained. But now I want justice and want the police officers to be punished.”

Meanwhile, Mumbai police from their twitter handle tweeted to a query which reads, “We have told Kota police to follow legal procedure. You can ask your lawyer to discuss the case with them.”

Suresh Kumar Jogi, one of the respondent in the case, denied the allegations and said, “We had asked him to accompany us for investigation purpose. We have not detained anybody illegally and follow every procedure.”

Ghanshyam Meena, Senior Police Inspector, Mahila Police Thana, “We have asked him to co-operate with the investigations which he failed and we will reply to the Bombay High Court regarding the issue.”

Rashmi Jadhav, Senior Police Inspector, “We have just shown them the address after the Kota police approached us for help. The case is with Kota police and we are not involved in this incident.

Wife listens over phone unfazed even as her lover kills husband – The Times of India

Wife listens over phone unfazed even as her lover kills husband – The Times of India on Mobile
KOLKATA: A missing engagement ring helped the police crack the mystery behind the murder of a travel agency owner, Anupam Singha (32), around two weeks ago. The vic tim’s wife Ma nua and her lover, Ajit Roy alias Bubai, were arrested from Barasat in North 24Parganas on Wednesday and sent to 10-day police custody .
Calling it a “pre-planned and a rare, cold-blooded murder”, police said Roy called up Manua and made her listen to her husband scream while being murdered. Manua apparently remained unfazed even as Roy kept hitting her husband with a blunt weapon and he was screaming for life !!!!

Singha was found killed at his home at Taltala in Hridaypur on May 3, when no one else was around.

A resident of Barasat’s Hridaypur and an employee of a money exchange firm, Singha, also owned a tour agency . He got married to Manua around one-and-a-half years ago, after a five-year relationship. But soon after their wedding, Manua reportedly began having an affair with Roy , who lived in the same ne ighbourhood as her parents’ place at Barasat’s Nabapally.

Cops suspect Manua got involved with Roy in absence of her husband, who would often have to travel to conduct tours for his agency . “Trouble broke out when Singha came to know about Manua’s affair. He threatened Roy with dire consequences if he dared to get in touch with his wife again. After this, the duo conspired to kill him,” a police officer sa id. Singha was found murde red at his home on May 3.

During investigation, the police found that all the valu ables in the house were in tact; only the engagemen ring that Singha never par ted with since the day he go married was missing.

“Singha’s family mem bers pointed out that the ring that he always wore was mis sing. Later, we found it in his wife’s custody and that trig gered our suspicion. We also got to know about her extra marital affair. Her paramour took the ring off the victim’s finger after murder him and returned it to Manua,” the of ficer added.

“Manua initially tried to misguide us but we nailed her role, given the inconsis tencies in her statements. We will take the duo to the spot to reconstruct the murder,” sa id Abhijit Banerjee, ASP North 24-Parganas.