Author Archives: vinayak

About vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist

File 498a, 506 collect money & suddenly there is a VOLUNTARY compromise. “Voluntary” I say!. P&H HC

* modus operandi of VOLUNTARY compromises explained
* filing criminal cases on husband and in laws, threatening them with arrest etc NOT elaborated !!

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
*******************************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
*******************************************************************************

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-13878 of 2015
Date of Decision: August 21, 2015

*************************

Naveen ….Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another …..Respondents

*************************

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

*************************
Present: Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Vishal Kashyap, AAG, Haryana.
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
*************************

Rajan Gupta, J (Oral)

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of F.I.R No. 101 dated 5.4.2013 registered under Sections 498-A/506/323 IPC at Police Station, Bhawanikhera, District Bhiwani and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that during the pendency of this petition a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and dispute has been amicably settled. Relying upon the judgment reported as Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, learned counsel submit that in view of compromise, the impugned F.I.R deserves to be quashed.

Learned State counsel does not dispute the ratio of judgment in Kulwinder Singh’s case supra and submit that in case a compromise is arrived at between the parties the State shall not stand in the way of quashing of F.I.R.

Heard It appears that on 30.4.2015, a direction was issued by this court to record the statements of the parties with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise. A report has been received from the trial court. Operative part thereof reads thus:-

“Consequently, both the parties i.e accused as well as the
complainant have appeared and accordingly, their separate statements
along with a joint statement on oath have been recorded, wherein,
complainant and accused namely, Sunita and Naveen have submitted that
a compromise has been effected with the accused. Complainant Sunita
has stated that she has received all alimony regarding her
maintenance and they both have filed a mutual divorce petition and
now she does not want any action against the accused and she has no
objection in cancellation of FIR Similarly the statement of mother of
complainant Ishwanti has also been recorded. Statement of accused
Naveen has also been recorded wherein he has stated that a compromise
has been effected and he has paid all alimony regarding maintenance
allowance of complainant Sunita and the compromise has been effected
out of their free will, consent and without any coercion or undue
influence. The aforesaid compromise effected between the parties is
for the welfare of both the parties and they have compromised the
matter with their own sweet will and without any pressure or
influence and thus they have no objection if the FIR is quashed.

In view of aforesaid circumstances a compromise has been voluntarily
effected between the parties to my belief and the aforesaid
compromise is genuine and outcome of free consent of both the parties.”

The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served by continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in light of Full Bench judgment of this court in Kulwinder Singh’s case supra. http://evinayak.tumblr.com https://vinayak.wordpress.com http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

Resultantly, the present petition is allowed. The F.I.R in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

(Rajan Gupta) Judge

August 21, 2015

BB

ablaa takes 7.5lakhs & refuses mutual consent. Husband runs 2 HC who tells him 2 go file fresh case !

Lots of ppl ask us what is the format for mutual consent AFTER PAYMENT !! we safely tell them we have NO such format ! Here is a Taza case, decreed just 1 week ago, showing a harassed husband who has lost 7.5lakhs and is now running pillar to post ..sorry court to court after wife took the money and showed him the door

Again ladies and gentlemen, I am NOT making this up !!. This is all from reported Judgements of honourable courts !!

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
*******************************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
*******************************************************************************

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

F.A. No. 156 of 2014

*****************

Rajeev Ranjan Singh, S/o Sudarshan Singh, Qr. No.3062, Sector 12/B P.O & P.S. -Sector-12, B.S.City, District. Bokaro, Thro’ his father Sri Sudarshan Singh, Power of Attorney Holder ……….. ………..Appellant

Versus-

Shweta Kumari, W/o Rajeev Ranjan Singh, D/o Suresh Prasad Singh, Qr. No.- 1212, Sector 12F, PO&PS-Sector 12, B.S.City, Dist.Bokaro……….Respondent

*****************

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT

*****************

For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Ashray Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent : none

*****************

05/ Dated: 24th August, 2015

Per Virender Singh, C.J.:

1. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the appellant sub- mits that in fact the respondent-wife has deceived the appellant and took a clever turn by withdrawing from according consent to the mutual divorce after once agreeing to it, and setting the dispute for good after receiving a sum of Rs.7,50,000/-, vide two different drafts as one time permanent alimony and maintenance. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that those all settlements arrived at between the parties have been reduced into writing and both the sides had agreed to go ahead with a petition under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

3. Be that as it may, they all can be said to be a good ground for the appellant to move the court concerned once again seeking decree of divorce but not for the purposes of disturbing the impugned order.

4. Faced with this situation, counsel for the appellant states that he may be allowed to withdraw the instant appeal enabling the appellant-husband to file a fresh petition in the court concerned seeking decree of divorce on all the pleas available to him including the grounds taken herein.

5. Prayer acceded to.

6. Resultantly, the appeal, on hand, stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

(Virender Singh, C.J.) (P.P. Bhatt, J.) Anu/SI/LAK

It’s just coincidental that we shared a path… ! should that make me a criminal ?

* I was on my way, just like everyday in my life.

* It’s coincidental / just fate that we took the same path.

* Now she has a photo of me & charged me with crimes

* half the world looks at me like a criminal

* I’m innocent

* What have I done to get this ?

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

Please read those lines once again. This is NOT the Jasleen Kaur, Sarvjeet Singh story. This is the story of millions of husbands and their families. They are charged JUST on the words of a woman, many times no photos even !! It’s just their fate they got into marriage, they got into a gamble. This is BEYOND politics.

This is the story of male servitude and misery in India

SPEEDY JUSTICE for innocents ! a.k.a. inquiry commissions for retired judges !!

SPEEDY JUSTICE and SAFETY of the innocents ! a.k.a. inquiry commissions for retired judges !!

****************************************************************

Violence, Gundagiri @ Hon Egmore MM court (Chennai) has been on news for quite some time.

Attacks, and even one murder has happened within court premises.

Groups of lawyers have clashed against each other, litigants terrorized etc all in broad daylight !!

Criminal cases against such attacks is pending before Hon Madras HC for FOUR years !!

We understand that in this case, "…The then Commissioner of Police Mr. Tripathy filed a detailed counter, with a list of 23 cases against 75 lawyers, most of them practising in Egmore court. Mr. Tripathy said police on court duty were harassed by advocates…" !!

Now (in Aug ’15) the court is planning to appoint AN inquiry commission to look into the matter !!!

Not just mother in laws, even spiritual gurus can be arrested on wife’s complaint !! “.She has taken my Jewels ..” song

From 498A to 406

As everyone knows more and more dowry cases are being filed every year !! Ever increasing people, particularly women and elders are being arrested without impunity based on the ‘ablaa naari’ the so called innocent wife’s complaint

While all along this was affecting elderly mothers in law, un married and married sisters in law and 10s of 1000s of children, now this has started affecting spiritual gurus. Since IPC 498A can be filed only against husband or relative of the husband, now 406 and “recovery of dowry articles” cases are being filed even on third parties

While 100s of such cases are proven false, (some two dozen such cases openly condemned by courts blogged here), the trend continues unabated. While I am NO supporter of this shadhu or that sadhvi, I can only pity the targets of false, frivolous and vexatious 406 cases

Radhe maa is ONE AMOUNG SEVEN named in this complaint !!

====== news from Indian express =======

Before HC granted pre-arrest bail, lower court had rejected Radhe Maa’s plea

The court had also observed that custodial interrogation of Kaur was necessary, but she was allowed to leave Kandivali police station last Friday after being questioned for five and a half hours.

Written by Srinath Rao | Mumbai | Published:August 23, 2015 12:45 am

Kaur (50), who has listed her occupation as a religious and spiritual adviser, had argued through her lawyers in the Dindoshi court on August 13.

Before the Bombay High Court eventually granted her protection, the anticipatory bail plea filed by self-styled godwoman Sukhvinder Kaur, who is known as Radhe Maa, had been rejected by a sessions court, which noted that a large amount of cash and jewellery, allegedly gifted to her by the complainant in a dowry demand and harassment case, was to be recovered.

The court had also observed that custodial interrogation of Kaur was necessary, but she was allowed to leave Kandivali police station last Friday after being questioned for five and a half hours.

Kaur (50), who has listed her occupation as a religious and spiritual adviser, had argued through her lawyers in the Dindoshi court on August 13 that she had nothing to do with a matrimonial dispute between the Kandivali resident, Niki Gupta, and her estranged husband Nakul Gupta, whose family is one of Kaur’s foremost followers and who often host her at their Borivali home.

Kaur is one of seven accused named by Niki Gupta in her private complaint filed in the Borivali metropolitan magistrate’s court in 2014. The complaint had charged Kaur, Nakul Gupta and five members of his family, with demanding dowry before and after the marriage and for physically and mentally harassing her between 2012 and 2013.

However, Additional Sessions Judge V A Raut had made note of two transactions between Niki Gupta and Kaur, while rejecting the latter’s bail application. Niki had alleged in her complaint that on February 19, 2012, the day she got engaged to Nakul Gupta, she was asked by the latter’s family to offer gifts — Rs. 51,000 cash and other articles — to Kaur.

The same day, Niki was allegedly forcefully sent to work in Kaur’s living quarters between noon and 6 pm. The complaint alleged that Niki was “forced to massage her (Kaur’s) legs, clean her utensils, wash her clothes”. It also said Kaur used to assault and abuse her.

Another transaction took place on February 18, 2012, a day before the engagement, when Niki and her parents went to Borivali for a ‘darshan’ of Kaur. The complaint said her to-be mother-in-law Lata Gupta advised her to give Kaur unspecified articles valued at Rs 21,000.

In her August 13 bail rejection order, Judge Raut observed, “…huge amount is involved in the crime and gifted articles are yet to be recovered… considering the serious nature of offence, I am of the opinion that custodial interrogation with the applicant (Kaur) is necessary. Hence, she is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.”

Kaur’s pre-arrest relief granted by the HC lasts another week.

– See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/before-hc-granted-pre-arrest-bail-lower-court-had-rejected-radhe-maas-plea/#sthash.ImcTxRVW.dpuf

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist

Not only husband’s, Income & assets of wife ALSO b considered 4 INTERIM maint us 24 HMA. Delhi HC

The Hon HC says :
“………… 5. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act goes a step further inasmuch as it permits maintenance to be claimed by the husband even against the wife.

6. While considering a claim for interim maintenance, the court has to keep in mind the status of the parties, reasonable wants of the applicant, the income and property of the applicant. Conversely, requirements of the non applicant, the income and property of the non applicant and additionally the other family members to be maintained by the non applicant have to be taken into all. Whilst it is important to insure that the maintenance awarded to the applicant is sufficient to enable the applicant to live in somewhat the same degree of comfort as in the matrimonial home, but it should not be so exorbitant that the non applicant is unable to pay…..

7. Maintenance awarded cannot be punitive. It should aid the applicant to live in a similar life style she/he enjoyed in the matrimonial home. It should not expose the non applicant to unjust contempt or other coercive proceedings. On the other hand, maintenance should not be so low so as to make the order meaningless.

8. Unfortunately, in India, parties do not truthfully reveal their income. For self employed persons or persons employed in the unorganized sector, truthful income never surfaces. Tax avoidance is the norm. Tax compliance is the exception in this country. Therefore, in determining interim maintenance, there cannot be mathematical exactitude. The court has to take a general view. ………..”

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
*******************************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
*******************************************************************************

Delhi High Court

Sh. Bharat Hegde vs Smt. Saroj Hegde on 24 April, 2007

Equivalent citations: 140 (2007) DLT 16, I (2007) DMC 815

Author: P Nandrajog

Bench: P Nandrajog

JUDGMENT Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. I do not intend to catalog the various decisions under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. It would be sufficient for me to note the judicial principles required to be applied while deciding an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.

2. Since the Section relates to entitlement of the appellant spouse to receive interim maintenance from the non-applicant spouse, it is obvious that the focus of enquiry has to be the means of the applicant spouse to maintain him/her self as also the financial means of the non-applicant spouse. The issue of conduct or misconduct of either spouse is irrelevant for the reason, in every proceedings for divorce, dissolution or judicial separation, there is bound to be some allegations or the other pertaining to matrimonial misconduct. Thus, if conduct or misconduct were to be considered, no spouse would get any interim maintenance under Section 24.

3. The Section contemplates a summary enquiry and not a trial at length.

4. Right to maintenance is an incident of the status from an estate of matrimony. Interim maintenance has an element of alimony, which expression in its strict sense means allowance due to wife from husband on separation. It has its basis in social conditions in United Kingdoms under which a married woman was economically dependent and almost in a position of tutelage to the husband and was intended to secure justice to her.

5. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act goes a step further inasmuch as it permits maintenance to be claimed by the husband even against the wife.

6. While considering a claim for interim maintenance, the court has to keep in mind the status of the parties, reasonable wants of the applicant, the income and property of the applicant. Conversely, requirements of the non applicant, the income and property of the non applicant and additionally the other family members to be maintained by the non applicant have to be taken into all. Whilst it is important to insure that the maintenance awarded to the applicant is sufficient to enable the applicant to live in somewhat the same degree of comfort as in the matrimonial home, but it should not be so exorbitant that the non applicant is unable to pay.

7. Maintenance awarded cannot be punitive. It should aid the applicant to live in a similar life style she/he enjoyed in the matrimonial home. It should not expose the non applicant to unjust contempt or other coercive proceedings. On the other hand, maintenance should not be so low so as to make the order meaningless.

8. Unfortunately, in India, parties do not truthfully reveal their income. For self employed persons or persons employed in the unorganized sector, truthful income never surfaces. Tax avoidance is the norm. Tax compliance is the exception in this country. Therefore, in determining interim maintenance, there cannot be mathematical exactitude. The court has to take a general view.

From the various judicial precedents, the under noted 11 factors can be culled out, which are to be taken into consideration while deciding an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The same are:

1. Status of the parties.

2. Reasonable wants of the claimant.

3. The independent income and property of the claimant.

4. The number of persons, the non applicant has to maintain.

5. The amount should aid the applicant to live in a similar life
style as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home.

6. Non-applicant’s liabilities, if any.

7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical
attendance and treatment etc. of the applicant.

8. Payment capacity of the non applicant.

9. Some guess work is not ruled out while estimating the income of
the non applicant when all the sources or correct sources are not
disclosed.

10. The non applicant to defray the cost of litigation.

11. The amount awarded Under Section 125 Cr.PC is adjustable against
the amount awarded Under Section 24 of the Act.

9. With the backdrop facts aforesaid validity of the impugned order dated 13.5.2004 has to be decided.

10. The non-applicant Smt. Saroj Hegde sought dissolution of her marriage on grounds of cruelty and desertion. She filed a an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying that she should be awarded a reasonable interim maintenance from her husband. She stated that she was unemployed.

11. In support of her claim, she pleaded that her husband was the son of Shri Rama Krishna Hegde, Ex Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka. She stated that he was an industrialist operating a unit at Peeneya Industrial Estate, Stage-II, Bangalore wherefrom he was earning at least Rs. 10 lacs per month. She further stated that the husband was a co-owner in the following properties:

1. Property No. 229, Raj Mahal Vilas Extension, Bangalore valued Rs.
6 crores.

2. Fionika Building, Walkeshwar Road, 12th Floor, Bombay valued Rs.
4 crores.

3. Ancestral property at Sidapur, Mytri valued Rs. 1 crore.

4. Peeneya Industrial Estate, II Stage, Bangalore valued Rs. 50 lakhs.

5. Flat at Ferozshah Road, New Delhi valued Rs. 2 crores.

6. Coffee Gardens at Coorg, Karnataka valued Rs. 10 crores.

7. 40 acres of agricultural farm land near Jai Nagar valued Rs. 5
crores.

12. Averments in respect of the immovable properties owned by the husband are in para 7 of the application filed by the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The same read as under:

PROPERTIES VALUE

i) Property No. 229, Raj Mahal Vilas Extension, Bangalore-560006 Rs.
6 crores

ii) Fionika Building, Walkeshwar Road, 12th floor, Bombay.Rs.4 crores

iii) Ancestral property at Sidhpur, Mytri (co-owner) Rs. 1 crore

iv) Peeneya Industrial Estate, II Stage, Bangalore Rs. 50 lacs

v) Flat at Ferozshah Road, New Delhi Rs. 2 crores

vi) Coffee Gardens at Coorg. Rs. 10 crores

vii) Agricultural farm land (40 acres) near Jai Nagar Rs. 5 crores

13. Response of the husband to the averments made in para 7 are as under:

7. The respondent respectfully submits that, the respondent is
unemployed and he has no source of income and that he is totally
dependent on his parents.

14. It may be noted at the outset that the husband has not denied the assertion that he is the owner of the properties disclosed in para 7 of the application filed by the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

15. By and under the impugned order, Rs. 25,000/- per month has been awarded to the wife besides litigation expenses in sum of Rs. 25,000/-.

16. Shri K.N.Bhatt, learned senior counsel for the petitioner urged that while awarding maintenance to the respondent, learned Judge had to consider only the revenue income of the husband. Consideration of capital assets may be relevant in a claim for permanent alimony, urged the counsel. It is wholly irrelevant for purposes of deciding a claim under Section 24, submitted the learned senior counsel.

17. I do not agree.

18. If the capital asset is an industrial property, a coffee plantation, an orchard or any other agricultural holding, there would be a presumption that the said capital asset is yielding some income. It is not presumed to be a dead asset.

19. As noted herein above, unfortunately, nobody pays proper taxes to the Government. Self employed persons seldom disclose their true income. Prudence and worldly wisdom gained by a judge before whom citizens of all stratas of society litigate it can always be used by a Judge to broadly ascertain as to what is going on in the society. By no means, said knowledge can be used where law requires a fact to be conclusively proved. But where the law requires a Judge to form an opinion based on a host of primary data, a Judge can formulate an opinion pertaining to the likely income from the capital assets of the husband.

20. The matter can be viewed differently.

21. It is not the case of the husband that he has abandoned his capital assets. It is not his case that he is not residing in Raj Mahal Vilas Extension, Bangalore.

22. How is he maintaining the said properties?

23. The husband has disclosed nothing about the salaries paid to the various employees, servants and others employed at the various capital assets owned/co-owned by the husband.

24. It is a well recognized principle of law that where a person withholds vital information, a presumption arises against him that had he disclosed the information, the same would have been adverse to him.

25. Keeping in view the capital assets owned/co-owned by the husband, his social status, his place of residence, it is difficult to believe that the husband does not have the requisite means to support his wife a monthly maintenance of Rs. 25,000/-.

26. As regards the wife, there is no proof of she having any income.

27. Order sheets of the present case show numerous attempts made to effect a reconciliation or separation on amicable terms. Unfortunately, the attempts have failed.

28. I find no merit in the petition.

29. Dismissed.

30. The husband is directed to pay costs of the present litigation before this Court to the wife quantified at Rs. 25,000/-.

31. No costs.

Woman kills husband, hides body in septic tank for a week, claims domestic abuse !

Woman kills husband, hides body in septic tank for a week, claims domestic abuse !

Saturday, 22 August 2015 – 6:35am IST | Agency: dna | From the print edition

Fed up with domestic abuse, a 34-year-old woman in South-West Delhi allegedly murdered her husband and hid the body in a septic tank for nearly a week. Identified by police as Seema Bhardwaj, a housemaker, strangulated her husband and hid the body after which she went to stay with her relatives. She kept the secret to herself till Thursday evening before finally breaking the news to her brother-in-law’s wife. A team searched the premises and found the decomposed body of Seema’s husband in the said location.

Seema was arrested when her brother-in-law and her own brother approached the Delhi police and told them about the location of the body. Seema’s husband, was identified by authorities as Shri Om Bhardwaj (40), who was a driver by profession. The couple had been living at their current residence in Surat Viahar village of Najafgarh alongwith their two children, a 10-year-old son and a daughter (7).

Seema during her questioning told police, that she married Bhardwaj nearly 12 years ago and the marriage did not run into trouble until the couple had their first child. "She told the investigators that the deceased used to drink every night and would routinely fight with her over petty issues. The family had been living in the area for nearly three years and we are questioning the neighbours to get a clearer picture as to what might have led to the murder," said a senior police officer. The officer added that Seema after confessing to the murder told investigators that she had gotten sick by the bickering with her husband but had not thought of taking the extreme step.

On August 15, however, Bhardwaj came more drunk as usual and allegedly got into a fight with her. "The accused then strangulated her husband. She hid the body in the empty storage space in the bed. The next morning she sent the children to the school and like every other day but once she was alone, she shifted the body to a septic tank.

She also covered the tank with cloth so that smell would not emanate from the container," said R A Sanjeev, Deputy Commissioner of Police, South-West district.

According to police, Seema broke the news to her family after she started to get uneasy about the repercussions of what she done. The family decided to approach the police following which she was arrested. The children are currently staying with her relatives. The body meanwhile was sent for an autopsy and Seema produced in court.

source DNA India

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist