india news MP truck accident: Five migrant workers killed, 11 injured after truck overturns in Narsinghpur By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 09:06:16 +0530 The accident took place when the labourers were travelling from Telangana's Hyderabad city to Agra in Uttar Pradesh. Full Article
india news Karnataka farmer's cry for help falls on right ears: Activist plays crucial role By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 09:24:00 +0530 A Karnataka farmer had posted a video about 100 tonnes of cabbage ready to be harvested and needed buyers. An activist and agri-tech entrepreneur came to immediate rescue of the farmer in dire need. Full Article
india news Mother's Day 2020: From Kareena Kapoor to Malaika Arora - 5 hottest moms of Bollywood By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 10:10:00 +0530 On Mother's Day 2020, we take a look at actresses like Malaika, Kareena, Shilpa who are among the most gorgeous mothers of the film fraternity. Full Article
india news Pawan Kalyan to his Jana Sena members: Kindly, focus on helping victims (Vizag gas leak) families By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 10:21:29 +0530 Pawan Kalyan has urged political parties and Jan Sainiks not to protest over the Vizag gas leak when the country is battling COVID-19. Full Article
india news Happy Mother's Day: Everything you need to know about mother's nutrition through the decades By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 10:36:47 +0530 Mothers, are you looking after yourself? Is your health your priority? A mother's nutrition at any given age whether in the '20s, '30s or '50s, her nutrition plays a vital role. A woman's health is unique in many ways. Scroll down to know more. Full Article
india news Happy Mother's Day 2020: Bollywood moms then vs Bollywood moms now By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 10:45:00 +0530 Happy Mother's Day: A look back at how our mothers in the Hindi film industry have become relatable, flesh-and-blood characters. Full Article
india news Lakshay Kapoor's life has been inspiring for many Entrepreneurs By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 10:59:39 +0530 Lakshay Kapoor started working young at the age of 18 leaving his graduation aside for a small factory and soon with his dedication and hard work was able to make it a profit-making unit Full Article
india news Scaler Academy Review:The career accelerator offers engineers better access to employment opportunities with top companies By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 11:05:38 +0530 Scaler Academy is an ed-tech platform that has been helping working professionals and college graduates navigate the changing software technology landscape by training them on skills that are sought after by top tech employers Full Article
india news Coronavirus deaths in India cross 2,000-mark; total tally hits 62,939 By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 11:12:25 +0530 With 3277 new cases and 128 new fatalities, total case count of novel Coronavirus rose to 62,939 and total deaths getting past the 2000 mark, the health ministry said on Sunday, May 10. Full Article
india news Gokul Anandayuvaraj is the Unique Entrepreneur with a Progressive Mindset and Mission By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 11:13:57 +0530 Gokul Anandayuvaraj, the founder and CEO of VINVELI, is one such entrepreneur and tech innovator. From his consistent hard work and contribution, he has been inspiring millions of engineers and budding entrepreneurs all over the world, especially in the field of aerospace. Full Article
india news Confused about what to watch during lockdown? LetsOTT might be your destination [Exclusive] By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 11:18:03 +0530 During an exclusive conversation with International Business Times, India, founder of LetsOTT, Sunita Kumar shared her ideas about the co-existing nature of theatrical releases and OTT releases. Full Article
india news Four Indian Army & seven Chinese PLA soldiers injured as blows exchanged in North Sikkim By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 11:28:09 +0530 The Indian and Chinese Army were also engaged in 73-day Doklam stand-off along the Sikkim border between June and August 2017. Full Article
india news Chennai bakery owner arrested over controversial advertisement: 'Made by Jains, no Muslim staff' By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 12:16:48 +0530 Bakery owner of 'Jain bakeries and confectionaries' in Chennai's Mahalakshmi Street in T Nagar, has been arrested for an advertisement of his store which read "Made by Jains on orders, No Muslim staffs". Full Article
india news Tere Bina teaser Out: Salman Khan shares a glimpse of his sizzling chemistry with Jacqueline | Watch By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 12:42:48 +0530 After the success of song 'Pyar Karona', Salman Khan has shared the teaser of his new song 'Tera Bina' with Jacqueline Fernandez. Full Article
india news Massive dust storm sweeps across Delhi-NCR in a sudden change of weather | Watch By Published On :: Sun, 10 May 2020 12:58:28 +0530 Delhi-NCR witnessed a sudden change of weather when the region was hit by a dust storm followed by rain after a sunny morning on Sunday, May 10. Full Article
india news Hotel Vani vs Assistant Commissioner Of State ... on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader. WP(C).8416/19 4 3. The singular contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the first respondent had committed a fundamental error in adopting the revised assessed tax of the year 2007-08 as the basis for revising the assessment and refixing the compounded tax liability for the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. In support of this contention, attention is drawn to Section 7(b) of the KGST Act and reliance is placed on the decisions in Sicilia Hotel Pvt. Ltd (Supra), and Kalyan Tourist Home v. State of Kerala (2017 (2) KLT 761). 4. Opposing the contentions, the learned Government Pleader would submit that, the power for revising the assessment after payment of compounded tax under Section 7(b) cannot be limited to be based only on the tax payable as conceded in the return or accounts or the turnover tax paid for any of the previous consecutive three years. It is contended that there is no inhibition in Section 7 that revision of assessment cannot be on the basis of assessed tax. It is submitted that this position has been succinctly laid down by the Division Bench in Kalika Hotel and Bar, Amballur(M/s) v. State of Kerala (2012 (3) KHC 85) and The Commercial Tax Officer v. M/s Hotel Breezeland Ltd. (2019 (2) KLT 432). Full Article
india news C.V.Rajappan vs State Of Kerala on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 While PW1 was doing patrol duty on 3.6.1999, he got reliable information that one Rajappan (the petitioner) was CRL.R.P.NO.5/07 3 indulging in sale of arrack from his house. Thereupon, the patrol party proceeded to the petitioner's house and on searching the house found 13 bottles hidden inside the kitchen, of which 11 bottles were of 1.5 ltrs and 2 bottles of 750 ml capacity. The contents of the bottle were examined by smelling and tasting and was identified to be arrack. The petitioner, who was present in the house was arrested and the contraband seized. From among the 13 bottles, sample was drawn from one bottle of 750 ML capacity. Thereafter the sample bottle as well as the 13 bottles containing the contraband were sealed in the presence of the petitioner and two independent witnesses. The requisite formalities like, filing of occurrence report, production of accused and seized articles along with sample before the jurisdictional Magistrate were complied without delay. Further investigation of the case was conducted by PW 5, who after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the petitioner for commission of the offence under Section 8(1) of the Abkari Act. Full Article
india news Balan vs State Of Kerala on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. According to the prosecution case, on 22.09.2004, the Excise Party attached to the Thirurangadi Excise Division had found the accused at a place called Nagaram near the Chiramangalam Thirichilangady Road by about 8.30 p.m, carrying a white jerry can having capacity of 25 litres. The accused was accosted and the contents of the jerry can examined, upon which it was found to contain 'wash' used for manufacturing arrack. Thereupon Crl.A.No.1750 of 2007 3 the accused was arrested, 500 ml of wash drawn as sample and the sample bottle sealed. Thereafter, the balance wash in the jerry can was destroyed by pouring it out. On chemical analysis, the sample was found to contain 2.27% by volume of ethyl alcohol. Full Article
india news Gracy vs State Of Kerala on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. The prosecution allegations, which led to the conviction of the appellant, are as follows:- On 29.08.2005, PW3; the Sub Inspector of Kanjar Police Station, while on patrol duty, got information that the accused was selling liquor from her house. Thereupon, PW3 proceeded to the spot along with police party, including women police constables. On reaching near the house of Crl.A.No.474 of 2008 3 the accused, the police party found the accused pouring some liquid from a bottle into a glass, adding water to it and handing over the glass to a person who was standing outside the veranda of the house. That person drank the contents of the glass and give it back to the accused along with some money, which she kept inside her purse. By the time, the police party reached the house of the accused, the person who drank from the glass ran away. On examination of the bottle in the possession of the accused, it was found to be a bottle of 1.5 litres capacity containing 1.350 litres of Indian Made Foreign liquor. An amount of Rs.50/- was found inside the purse. From out of the bottle, sample was drawn and sealed. The bottle containing the liquor, the glass, the bottle containing water and the purse containing five ten rupee notes were seized and the accused Crl.A.No.474 of 2008 4 arrested. The sample, when subjected to chemical analysis, was found to contain 42.17% by volume of ethyl alcohol. Full Article
india news Suo Motu vs Sri.Saji K.Ittan on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 On 28-02-2019, Sri. K.P. Mathaikunju and 3 others filed a contempt of court case before this court against the respondents herein, alleging that the respondents have committed civil contempt by publishing a face book post in a face book page to which the respondents are the admins and also published a similar news in the website www.ovsonline.in on 27-02-2019, to the effect that the cases, O.P (C) No.65/2019 & Tr.P (C) No.76/2019, which pertains to the dispute regarding the 'Vadavukod Church' were dismissed by the High Court on 27-02- 2019, which in fact were only reserved for judgment on that day. It is alleged that the act of the respondents in this regard would amount to interference with the administration of justice and therefore they have committed contempt of court punishable under provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Registry of this court expressed doubt with respect to maintainability of CON.Case (Crl. ) No.1/2019 (Suo motu) -4- the above said contempt of court petition. Therefore the case was posted before the learned Single Judge who as dealing with OP (C) No.65/2019 and Tr.P (C) No.76/2019, as unnumbered contempt petition. Initially, the learned Judge appointed an 'amicus curiae' in the matter, through order dated 01-03-2019. But subsequently, on 31-05-2019, the Single Judge directed the Registry of this court to place the petition before Hon'ble Chief justice for appropriate further action on the administrative side, in the light of the decision of the Full Bench in Rehim P. V. M.V. Jayarajan and others (2010 (4) KLT 286). When the matter was placed for consideration before the Hon'ble Chief Justice on 25-06-2019, it was ordered to place the matter as a suo motu criminal contempt case, for preliminary hearing, before the appropriate Bench. When the matter came on the judicial side, this court ordered notice to the respondents. Personal appearance of the respondents were dispensed with for the time being. The respondents appeared and each of them had filed separate affidavits. Now the case is coming up for consideration as to whether there exists prima facie contempt and to decide whether further proceedings need to be pursued in the case by framing charge against the respondents. CON.Case (Crl. ) No.1/2019 (Suo motu) -5- Full Article
india news Lakshmi vs Santha on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 The above appeal was originally filed as a 'Motor Accident Claim Appeal', ('MACA'). The appeal memorandum reflected that the appeal was filed under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(Cr.P.C.), read with Section 169(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. When the Registry of this court noted defect, the appeal was sought to be be filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Registry has not yet accepted the same for the reason that the order impugned is not an Award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, as required under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Unnumbered Crl. Appeal 16 of 2020 -:4:- Registry noted that, probably an original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India alone may lie against the order impugned. However, the matter was posted before the Bench for hearing on the question of maintainability. On 05.09.2016, learned counsel appearing for the appellants conceded that the Registry is correct in holding that an appeal will not lie under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He sought time for curing the defect, which was allowed. Thereafter the case was re-presented with correction made in the 'Docket Sheet' in the cause title portion, styling it as an 'appeal', instead of "MACA". But the memorandum of appeal in all other respects remained as such. On the request of the counsel for the appellants, the matter was posted before this Bench, for hearing on the question of maintainability. Senior Advocate Sri. P. Vijayabhanu has consented to assist the court as Amicus Curiae. Hence the question of maintainability was heard in detail. Full Article
india news State Of Sikkim vs State Of Kerala on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 The petitioners in the writ petition, W.P (C) No.12189/2007, are the appellants herein, challenging judgment of the Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. The 1 st appellant is the State of Sikkim and the 2nd appellant is the Distributor of the paper lotteries organized by the 1st appellant in the State of Kerala. Constitutional validity of the Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Act, 2005 ('the Act' for short) is under challenge in the writ petition. The respondents herein are the respondents in the writ petition, the State of Kerala and its officials. 2. Brief history of the impugned legislation may be worthfull to mention. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2001, introduced with effect from 23-07-2001, the State of Kerala has introduced Section 5BA to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('KGST Act' for short) imposing licence fee on the draw of W A No.648/2008 -4- lotteries, in lieu of tax payable under Section 5 (1) of the KGST Act. Validity of Section 5BA was under challenge before this court. In the decision in Commercial Corporation of India Ltd. V. Additional Sales Tax Officer and others (2007 (2) KLT 397) = (2007 (2) KHC 427) this court held that Section 5BA of the KGST Act is ultra vires and unconstitutional. Eventhough the State of Kerala filed appeal before the Division Bench, it was dismissed by relying on the dictum laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunrise Associates V. Govt. of NCT of New Delhi and others (AIR 2006 SC 1908), in which earlier ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in H. Anraj V. Govt. of Tamil Nadu (AIR 1986 SC 63) was reversed and it was held that no tax can be levied, collected or demanded in connection with sale of lottery tickets. A Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Kerala against the Division Bench decision was also dismissed by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the ruling reported in State of Kerala V. Prabhavathy Thankamma and others ((2009) 3 SCC 511). Full Article
india news Anilkumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 By around 7:30 PM on 3-8- 2002, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chandera Police Station (PW1) received secret information that a person by name Anil Kumar (appellant) would be reaching the bus waiting shed situated at Matlayi by around 8:30 PM for the purpose of selling the opium in his possession. Immediately, PW1 recorded the information in the General Diary, intimated his Superior Officer, the Circle Inspector of Police, Nileshwaram and proceeded to the spot. The police party lay in wait near the bus waiting shed and by around 8:45 PM, the appellant reached the spot in an autorikshaw and entered the bus waiting shed. Immediately, the Police party rushed to the waiting shed and on the Crl.A.244/06 3 appellant attempting to flee, apprehended him. PW1 thereupon, asked the appellant whether he required the presence of a Gazetted Officer while his body was searched and on the appellant answering in the negative, his body was searched and a plastic packet recovered from the pocket of his pants. On examination, the packet was found to contain opium, for the possession of which the appellant had no licence. The opium was weighed and found to be 350 gms in weight. Two samples of 25 gms each, were collected from the contraband and were packed and sealed separately. The remaining opium was also packed and sealed in the same manner. Ext.P3 seizure mahazar was prepared and the accused was arrested. Exhibit P4 FIR was registered thereafter. Later, Exhibit P8 chemical analysis report was received finding the sample to be opium. Full Article
india news Kerala State ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 30 April, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Income Tax Appeal Nos. 135/2019 & 146/2019 are filed challenging a common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA Nos.536/Coch/2018 and 537/Coch/2018, dated 12-03-2019. Income Tax Appeal No.313/2019 is filed against the revised order passed by the same Tribunal ITA No.537/Coch/2018, dated 11-10-2019. The assessee was the appellant before the Tribunal, who is the appellant herein. The revenue is the respondent. 2. Appellant is a company registered under the Companies Act, engaged in wholesale and retail trade of beaverages within the State of Kerala, and is a 'State Government Undertaking' falling within the 'Explanation' provided under Section 40 (a) (iib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). With respect to I.T. Appeal Nos. 135, 146 & 313/2019 -5- the assessment year 2014-2015, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Thiruvananthapuram finalized the assessment of income tax against the appellant, under Section 143 (3) of the Act, through the order of assessment dated 14- 12-2016. But, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram initiated proceedings under Section 263 of the Act and set aside the order of assessment, on holding that the same is erroneous and is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, to the extent it failed to disallow the debits made in the Profit and Loss Account of the assessee with respect to the amount of surcharge on sales tax and turn over tax paid to the State Government, which ought to have been disallowed under Section 40 (a) (iib) of the Act. Against order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, issued under Section 263 of the Act, dated 25-09-2018, the appellant approached the Tribunal in ITA No.536/Coch/2018. Full Article
india news Santhosh vs The State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. The registration of the first information report is the process in terms of which the criminal law is set in a cognizable case. True, the first information report and all further proceedings thereto can be quashed by this court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise, to secure the ends of justice where the allegations made in the first information report, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not, prima facie, constitute any cognizable offence, or where the criminal proceedings is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceedings is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to Crl.M.C.No.4440 of 2018 5 private and personal grudge. It is, however, settled that the power to quash the first information report is a power that must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection in rarest of rare cases. It is also settled that the court would not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry in such cases as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the first information report. The court cannot also enquire whether the allegations in the first information report are likely to be established [See M.Narayandas v. State of Karnataka, (2003)11 SCC 251]. Full Article
india news Jobin Joseph vs Jobin Joseph on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Petitioner is the first respondent in M.C. No.11 of 2016. Respondents 1 and 2 herein are the wife and son of the petitioner respectively. The respondents instituted the said proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking, among others, an order restraining the petitioner and his parents from committing any act of domestic violence. The respondents have also sought in the proceedings orders for their maintenance and for the return O.P.(Crl) No.727 of 2017 3 of money, gold ornaments, documents etc. In the course of the proceedings, the parties were referred for mediation. After the mediation, the mediator reported to the court that mediation was successful and forwarded Exhibit P2 mediation agreement entered into between the parties and signed by their respective counsel to the court. As per Exhibit P2 mediation agreement, the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- to the first respondent and Rs.20,000/- per year to the second respondent. Provision was also made in the mediation agreement for the custody of the second respondent during his minority. In terms of the mediation agreement, the petitioner and the first respondent have also agreed to prefer an application for divorce on mutual consent. The Jurisdictional Magistrate disposed of the proceedings in terms of the mediation agreement. Exhibit R1(a) is the order passed by the Jurisdictional Magistrate in this connection. The case set out by the petitioner in the original petition is that Exhibit P2 mediation agreement is one obtained from him by the mediator under the threat that he would, otherwise, be put behind bars O.P.(Crl) No.727 of 2017 4 along with his parents. It is also the case of the petitioner that Exhibit P2 mediation agreement was the result of a conspiracy between the first respondent, the mediator as also the counsel for both the petitioner and the first respondent. It is pleaded by the petitioner in the original petition that he never wanted to live separately from the respondents. Full Article
india news Vinoy T. A vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. The petitioner is the sole accused in the crime which is registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(l) and 5(n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The victim involved in the case is a girl aged 16 years. The accused is the husband of the younger sister of the mother of the victim. The accusation in the case is that on 08.08.2016, and on several days thereafter, the accused has raped and committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. The final report in the case is sought to be quashed on the Crl.M.C.No.463 of 2020 3 ground that the grievance of the victim has been redressed, and she does not intend any more to pursue this matter. An affidavit to that effect by the victim is also part of the records. Full Article
india news Cherian Varkey Construction ... vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Pursuant to the decision of the Government of Kerala to apply part of the proceeds of the financial aid received from the World Bank through the Government of India for execution of the work, namely "KSTP-II -Upgrading Punalur to Ponkunnam Road (SH 8) Package 8A: Km 0+000 (Punalur) to KM 29+840 (Konni)"(the Work), the Kerala State Transport Project (KSTP), the Consultant Engineer of the Government of Kerala for the World Bank aided projects, invited bids for construction and completion of the Work. Ext.P1 is the procurement notice issued by KSTP in this connection. It is specified in Ext.P1 notice that the bidding will be conducted in accordance with the Wpc nos.26853 & 31556 of 2019 6 procedures prescribed in the Guidelines issued by the World Bank for procurement under IBRD loans and IDA credits (current edition) and it will be open to all eligible bidders as defined in the said Guidelines to participate in the bidding process. In terms of the Invitation to Bid (ITB) published in this regard by KSTP, the prospective bidders could be individuals or joint ventures and they were to submit technical as also financial bids. Full Article
india news Rajan @ Ramu vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. The petitioner, his elder brother Mohanan and his elder sister Sarasamma were residing in adjoining houses. Mohanan had a daughter named Arya, aged 13 years. She committed suicide on 2.2.2015 by hanging herself in a tree near W.P.(C) No.30976 of 2018 4 her house. The deceased was studying in 8 th standard at the relevant time. It was Sarasamma who first found Arya hanging in the three. The petitioner went to the spot hearing the hue and cry of Sarasamma. The matter was informed to the Police thereupon by the petitioner. In the autopsy, it was revealed that the deceased was subjected to both vaginal as also anal intercourse. The case which was registered earlier under Section 174 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (the Code) was consequently amended as one under Sections 305 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC) and also under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (the POCSO Act). In the investigation conducted thereupon, the Police came to the conclusion that it was the petitioner who has abused the deceased sexually and she committed suicide on account of the said reason. Consequently, final report was filed in the case under Sections 305 and 376 (2) (f) of the IPC and Section 3 read with Section 4 and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO W.P.(C) No.30976 of 2018 5 Act. Exhibit P2 is the final report in the case. The accusation in the case is that the petitioner who was residing alone in the neighbourhood of the house of the deceased has raped and committed penetrative sexual assault on the deceased on 10.1.2015 and on several occasions thereafter at her house and thereby abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Full Article
india news Geetha vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Crl.M.C.No.1343 of 2020 is one instituted by the State invoking the power of this Court under Sections 439(2) and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code), seeking orders setting aside Annexure-B order in terms of which the Court of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur granted bail to the respondent who is the sole accused in Crime No.47 of 2020 of Chelakkara Police Station. The crime aforesaid is one registered for offences punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code(the IPC), Sections 9(f), 9(k) and 9(m) read Crl.M.C.Nos.1237 & 1343 of 2020 4 with Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the POCSO Act) and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The accused is a teacher and NCC instructor in the school where the victim girl aged 11 years who is intellectually disabled is pursuing her studies. The accusation is that on 23.01.2020, during lunch break, the accused took the victim girl to the NCC room, locked the room from inside and touched her breast and private parts with sexual intent. As stated, Crl.M.C.No.1237 of 2020 is also one instituted for the same relief by the mother of the victim girl. Full Article
india news C.M.Ance vs W.P.(C) No.14087/2019 2 on 5 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Before venturing to decide on the questions raised, it would be profitable to state the relevant facts. The 1st respondent is the K.M.J Public School, represented by its Manager. The 2nd respondent is the Principal of the said school. The petitioners 1 and 2 have been working as drivers for the past 14 and 9 years respectively in the said school whereas the petitioners 3 and 4 have been working as sweepers in the same institution for the past 8 years. They contended that they have been receiving wages at less than the minimum wages prescribed by the State Government by various notifications and also as per the directions issued by this Court in State of Kerala vs Mythri Vidya Bhavan English Medium School and another1. They contended that a person junior to them, 1 [2013 (1) K.L.T short note 36] W.P.(C) No.14087/2019 4 who was a Class-IV grade employee, was drawing a much higher wage as compared to the petitioners. According to them, they are entitled to higher amounts toward salary from 1.7.2013 onwards. Full Article
india news Western India Cashew Company vs The Branch Secretary on 5 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding this petition are that in the above dispute raised under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Labour court was called upon to adjudicate a reference wherein the issue was "whether the denial of employment of Smt.Ramani Amma, Smt.Geetha.G. and Geetha.R, who were employees of Western India Cashew Company, was justifiable and if it was found otherwise, the relief for which they were entitled to." 3. The case of the Union, which espoused the cause of the workers, was that the delinquent workers were employed by the management in their packing centre at Puthentheruvu, Karunagappally. Since 26.10.2012 was a public holiday owing to Bakrid, the factory was closed. On 27.10.2012, when the workers reached the factory, they were denied employment by the Management. The Union raised an industrial dispute and the matter reached the District Labour Officer, who convened a conference. In the meantime, a WP(C) No.12490/2018 3 show cause notice was issued to the workers and consequently on 2.11.2012, the workers were suspended from service pending enquiry. An enquiry officer was appointed who proceeded with the enquiry and submitted a report with the finding that the workers were guilty of all charges. Banking on the said report, the workers were dismissed from service with retrospective effect. According to the Union, the enquiry which was conducted was a farce and is therefore vitiated. The principles of natural justice were violated and the management failed to bring home the charge. They also contended that the punishment imposed was grossly disproportionate to the nature of charges levelled against the workers. Full Article
india news Bhanumathy Usha vs The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. on 5 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 "(i) to issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction to the respondents 1 and 2 not to proceed against the properties of the petitioners which is not a secured asset of the 1st respondent bank for the debts due from the third respondent. (ii) to issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ, order or direction quashing all proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P1 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thriruvananthapuram, finding that the property sought to be taken possession is not a secured asset of the 1st respondent. Full Article
india news K. Lakshmanan vs Union Of India on 5 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 "That CISF No.902292498 Constable K. Lakshmanan of CISF Unit, NMPT Mangalore was W.P.(C) No. 28322 of 2015 4 detailed for B' Shift duty on 29.05.2009 from 1300 hrs to 2100 hrs along with No.721370091 HC/GD K. Sreedharan at K.K. Gate-Out. Shri K. Korappan, AC, CISF Unit NMPT Mangalore, while carrying out surprise checking at 2055 hours on 29.05.2009 along with SI/Exe R.R. Singh, In-charge(CIW), Shri K. Korappan directed to SI/Exe R.R. Singh to conduct pocket checking of B' shift duty personnel deployed at K.K. Gate. Accordingly SI/Exe R.R. Singh conducted pocket checking of Constable K.Lakshmanan in presence of No. 753460102 ASI/Exe P.K. Thampy, In-charge, KK Gate and No.773430028 HC/GD Kuttan Pillai K.K., Main Gate-In and found an illegal money of Rs.1573/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred seventy three only) in possession of Constable K. Lakshmanan in various denominations and the amount was seized which was kept hidden between his belt and waist. When asked by Shri K. Korappan as to where the money came from and why he kept such huge amount with him, Constable K. Lakshmanan did not give any satisfactory reply. Immediately a seizure list was prepared wherein signature of witnesses were obtained. In this regard, a GD has been made at Sl. No.1324 at 2117 hours on 29- 05-09 at KK Gate. As per Unit standing instructions, duty personnel are not allowed to keep more than Rs.10/- for refreshment purpose during duty hours. Full Article
india news The Manager vs The Regional Provident Fund ... on 5 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Alleging non compliance of the award, the 2nd respondent filed a claim petition before the Labour Court, Ernakulam as C.P. No.9 of 2016 WP(C).No.40468/2018 3 claiming a total sum of Rs.12,39,802.02/- which includes interest of Rs.4,84,600/-. The said claim petition was partly allowed by the Labour Court and the 2nd respondent was awarded a sum of Rs.7,55,202.02/- by excluding the interest which was claimed. Being aggrieved by the quantum of amount awarded and the denial of interest, the 2 nd respondent filed W.P.(C) No.33527 of 2017 which is pending before this Court. The petitioner is stated to have remitted a sum of Rs.7,55,202/- as ordered by the Labour Court. Full Article
india news Reena W/O Shri Ramsingh B/C Kanjar vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan. For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.44/2020 was registered at Police Station Khairthal, (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:47:14 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2343/2020] District Alwar, Police District Bhiwadi for offence under Sections 8/21 of NDPS Act. Full Article
india news Ramniwas@Ramu S/O Kajodi vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Petitioners have filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.307/2019 was registered at Police Station New (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:47:12 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2314/2020] Mandi, Hindauncity, District Karauli for offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 427, 382 of I.P.C. Full Article
india news Bahadur@Bahaduriya S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.242/2014 was registered at Police Station Thanagazi Alwar for offence under Sections 457, 380 of I.P.C. 4. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that similarly situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail. Petitioner is in custody for last one and a half years. Criminal antecedents pointed out against the petitioner are prior to the year 2014. Full Article
india news Ramkaran Fagediya S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Counsel for the complainant has not given his detail, hence, could not be connected. 3. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 4. F.I.R. No.343/2019 was registered at Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu for offence under Sections 323, 365, 201, 302/34 of I.P.C. (FIR has been lodged for offence under Section 302 of IPC.) 5. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that eye witnesses have turned hostile. As per the FSL report, cause of death is inconclusive. There was only a bruise on the person of the prosecutrix. Full Article
india news Mukarram Hussain S/O Late Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Jain (through jitsi meet) Mr. Parth Sharma (through jitsi meet) Mr. Rinesh Gupta (through jitsi meet) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, SPP(CBN) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS Order 08/05/2020 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners through Jitsi Meet. Full Article
india news Saleem S/O Ishak vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 1. Due to outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19), the lawyers are not appearing in the Court. 2. Heard Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuriya, learned counsel for the petitioner, through whatsapp video calling as well as learned Public Prosecutor, who is present in the Court. 3. Despite video whatsapp calling, Mr. Ishwar Lal Jain, learned counsel for the complainant has failed to respond. 4. The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.61/2018 Registered at Police Station Tapukda, District Alwar (Rajasthan) for the offences under Sections 376-D & 506 of IPC. 5. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this matter and the petitioners are the real brothers of the husband of the prosecutrix. Counsel further submits that one month prior to lodging of the present FIR, the (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:47:06 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2033/2020] prosecutrix also lodged the FIR No.0031/2018 on 15.01.2018 at Police Station Tapukara, District Alwar, in which, the petitioners were also made accused under Sections 143, 341 & 323 of IPC, in which, charge-sheet has been filed only against the husband of the prosecutrix and not against the accused-petitioners. Counsel further submits that when the Investigating Agency submitted the negative final report against the accused-petitioners in the earlier FIR lodged by the prosecutrix, the present FIR has been lodged against the accused-petitioners. Counsel further submits that according to the FSL report dated 03.12.2019, semen could not be detected on the clothes and vaginal swab of the victim. Counsel further submits that the petitioners are in custody since February, 2018. Full Article
india news Sudeep Gupta S/O Shri Ram Gupta vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP. For Complainant : Mr. Brahm Singh Gurjar. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 3. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 4. F.I.R. No.355/2019 was registered at Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur for offence under Sections 302, 436, 34, 120-B of I.P.C. Full Article
india news Ahmad S/O Mauj Khan B/C Mev vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Petitioners has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.139/2019 was registered at Police Station Kaithwada, District Bharatpur for offence under Sections 3, 4 & 8 of Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act. 4. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioner is in custody since September, 2019. There was neither any marks on the body of the petitioner, nor any material things are (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:47:01 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-1474/2020] recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners. Conclusion of trial will take time. Full Article
india news Mohammad Salman S/O Liyakat Ali ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 1. Bundu Khan S/o Shri Abdul Gani R/o Meer Colony Kekri Road Near Idhgah Malpura Thana Dist. Tonk At Present Tenant House No 24 Chmnawadi Sanjay Nagar Jhotwara Jaipur (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) 2. Mohammad Kalim S/o Shri Mohammad Aladdin Khan R/o Bada Mohalla Lalsot Dist. Full Article
india news Asharam Swami S/O Shri Begdas ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 For State : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.1055/2019 was registered at Police Station Jhotwara, District Jaipur for offence under Sections 343, 366, 376 of I.P.C. 4. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that there is an inordinate delay of lodging in FIR. As per the medical report, prosecutrix is aged 20 years. There are no marks of injury on her person and private parts. Full Article
india news Ajay@Dinesh S/O Shri Kalu @ ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 2. Heard learned counsel for the accused petitioner through video conferencing and perused the record. 3. It has been argued on behalf of the accused petitioner that accused petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case, he is behind the bars since 30.09.2018, charge-sheet has already been filed on 05.12.2018, co-accused Kana @ Vijay has been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this court on 21.11.2019, case of present accused petitioner is not different from that of co- accused Kana. Till date evidence of only nine witnesses have been (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:46:56 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-18079/2019] recorded while prosecution has listed thirty witnesses, hence completion of trial will take time. It has also been submitted that only one eye witness, PW.5, Ajay has been named in the case by the prosecution, whose statement has been recorded and his evidence is not reliable against the present accused petitioner. Full Article
india news Dharamraj S/O Ramphool vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 ----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 489/2020 Ramdayal@r.d. S/o Ramkaran ----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan Full Article
india news Mohan Singh S/O Shri Shriram B/C ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 1. This Criminal Misc. Bail Application has been brought under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No. 663/2019 registered with Police Station Nadbai (Bharatpur), for the offence/s punishable under Section/s 377, 429 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the accused petitioner through video conferencing and perused the record. 3. It has been submitted that material prosecution witnesses in this case have turned hostile during trial, copies of statements of those witnesses have been filed and it has been contended that the main witnesses PW.1 Jadveer, PW.4 Satish and other material witnesses have turned hostile, they have not supported the prosecution version, hence the accused petitioner may be granted bail. Full Article
india news Anand Singh S/O Shri Mahipal Singh ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore, Adv. for the complainant. (on Video Conferencing) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR Order 08/05/2020 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor as also learned counsel for the complainant. This Court finds that D.B. Criminal Appeal is pending against the judgment dated 19.12.2019. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the application for suspension of sentence of the appellant is required to be heard by the appropriate Bench. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that there is an order dated 09.04.2018 issued by the Registrar General whereby it has been directed that if an appeal is pending before the Division Bench and the accused who has awarded lesser sentence, then the appeal before the Single Bench is required to be tagged with the D.B. Criminal Appeal and the same is required to be listed before the Division Bench. (Downloaded on 08/05/2020 at 08:46:27 PM) Full Article
india news Dinesh Srivastava S/O Shri Jay ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 May, 2020 By indiankanoon.org Published On :: Fri, 08 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 08/05/2020 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. Learned Public Prosecutor is present in person in the Court. 2. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. F.I.R. No.300/2019 was registered at Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur Metropolitan for offence under Sections 323, 341, 504, 427, 302, 34 of I.P.C. 4. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that there is inordinate delay of seven days in lodging of FIR. Co-accused has been enlarged on bail. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Full Article