Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Mother-in-law kills man for daughter’s property

Mother-in-law kills man for daughter’s property

August 3rd, 2010

Aug. 2: Upset with her daughter for getting married to a man of her own choice, a woman allegedly got her son-in-law murdered and later burned the body. The man was killed on July 17, a police officer said. The police on Sunday arrested the woman and her three associates in Vellore and brought them to the city on Monday.

The woman had feared that she would lose her share in her daughter’s property. The prime accused has been identified as S. Bharathi, a resident of Srirampura, and her associates as Michael, P. Selvam and Saravan, all from Vellore in Tamil Nadu.

The murder was discovered after Bharathi’s daughter V. Pravina filed a missing complaint with the police. Pravina got married to Vimal Kumar, alias Manja, a few months ago despite strong opposition from her mother. After the wedding, the couple shifted to Laggere while Bharathi vacated her house in Srirampura and returned to Vellore.

Their Srirampura house has been registered in Pravina’s name. “Bharati wanted Pravina to marry a man of her choice so that the three could live in the same house. But Bharathi feared that Pravina would sell the property and she would not get any share,” the officer said. After returning to Vellore, Bharathi and the three accused, hatched a plot to murder Vimal Kumar. According to sources, Michael, one of the accused, is Bharathi’s paramour.

As per plan, the accused hired a car and after reaching the city, they stopped near ESI hospital in Rajajinagar around 8 pm on July 17. “Bharathi then called up Pravina and asked her to send Vimal to take her home as she did not know the way. When Vimal reached the spot, he was pushed into the car and strangled to death,” the officer said.

Meanwhile, when Pravina failed to reach her husband on phone, she filed a missing complaint. “During the investigation, we found that the accused has murdered Vimal and burned his body near Krishnagiri,” the officer said.


Can’t use ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ to fault spouse

Can’t use ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ to fault spouse

Published: Wednesday, Jul 7, 2010, 0:39 IST
By Rakesh Bhatnagar | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

Even as the government is anxious to make “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” a ground for divorce, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that if a spouse, by his or her conduct, brings marriage to a point of breakdown, s/he can’t be allowed to seek divorce on this ground.

“That would simply mean giving someone benefit of his or her own misdeeds,” justices B Sudershan Reddy and Aftab Alam said while rejecting a husband’s appeal against a Madhya Pradesh high court order rejecting his claim for divorce.

SC found that Neelam Kumar couldn’t prove his case against wife Dayarani for divorce under section 13(1) (IA) of the Hindu Marriage Act and set aside the family court’s decree granting him divorce.

The issueless couple married on December 7, 1986, and lived together first at Ankleshwar and later in Vadodara. Kumar alleged that after 8-9 months of their marriage, Dayarani became aggressive and started treating him and his family in a cruel manner.

He tried to make adjustments in the hope that she would correct herself, but when it became impossible to carry on, he filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty. Kumar listed many other allegations against Dayarani, including making a suicide attempt, throwing tantrums and refusing to live with his family.

Dayarani refuted the charges and said she was in a job before marriage and had a clear understanding with Kumar that she would be allowed to continue. But he changed his mind and demanded she quit the job. Her refusal seemed to hurt his pride and he finally filed for divorce.


Petition filed by woman SI over sexual harassment dismissed

Petition filed by woman SI over sexual harassment dismissed


Madurai, Aug 2 (PTI) The Madras High Court bench today dismissed a petition filed by a policewoman, seeking action against three of her colleagues for alleged sexual harassment. Justice M Jeyapaul, before whom the petition by the lady sub-inspector came up today, noted that the SP had ordered an enquiry, based on a complaint by her father against a constable, whom she had accused of behaving indecently with her.

During the enquiry she had admitted that no sexual favours were demanded from her. Despite this, she had chosen to give another complaint to the Home Secretary, involving the SP, which showed she was not sexually harassed by police officials, the judge said. If such a "desperate complaint" was taken congnisance of, no police officer could safely serve in a district and top police officials would not even venture to take action against a member of the uniformed force.

He agreed with counsel for the Inspector that entertaining such a complaint would tarnish the image of not only the respondents, but the entire police force. The woman SI submitted that her allegations were serious in nature and therefore would have to be thoroughly enquired into by the Home secretary. She also sought time to engage a senior counsel.

But Counsel for the head constable objected, saying she had "conducted the trial through the media" even before filing a complaint and that a petition was filed before the court. He also referred to her admission during enquiry and said the report was sent to the IG and the complaint dropped.

The woman SI had filed the petition on July 31, alleging that the SP of the Sivaganga district, where she is posted, an inspector and Special Branch CID constable had sexually harassed her over a period of time.


Lawyers protest against woman judge, strike work

Lawyers protest against woman judge, strike work

NEW DELHI: Lawyers at the Dwarka district court complex on Monday abstained from work to mark their protest against the alleged "misbehaviour'' of a female judge. While the judge only refused to give the copy of order immediately despite the insistence of the lawyer, the bar association dubbed the incident as insulting and called the strike.

Announcing strike, a circular issued by the Dwarka Bar Association read, "Today, the lawyers will abstain from work because of the misbehaviour of the judge.'' According to sources, lawyer Ajender Singh and judge got into heated argument after the metropolitan magistrate refused to provide the copy of the order sought by the counsel.

When the counsel asked the steno for the order, the judge allegedly got furious which resulted in a quarrel. The lawyer, who witnessed the incident and did not wished to be named, said it was only after the situation got out of hand, that the bar association decided to hold a strike.

The bar association also approached the district and sessions judge of Dwarka court I S Mehta to hear the matter. D&S I S Mehta later called for a meeting and the matter was resolved amicably.


Five more family courts to come up in Delhi

Five more family courts to come up in Delhi

2010-08-02 23:10:00

In a bid to ensure speedy disposal of justice, the Delhi cabinet Monday gave its nod for creating 99 posts in the Saket district court and decided that five more family courts will be set up in the capital.

At a meeting chaired by Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, it was decided that the five courts will start functioning at Janakpuri, Dhirpur, Saket, Viswas Nagar and Rouse Avenue by the year-end, an official said.

Delhi at present has five family courts.

The official said the cabinet also decided to sanction 29 posts for family courts in different scales.

Dikshit said the city government has been strengthening various district courts in a bid to ensure speedy disposal of justice.

The official said the decision was taken to create 99 posts at Saket district court as it is a full-fledged court consisting of various branches.


Harassed Husband kills wife, sons, mother-in-law

Man kills wife, sons, mother-in-law

2010-08-02 11:20:00

A 38-year-old man killed his wife, two sons and mother-in-law before attempting suicide in Uttar Pradesh's Bulandshahr district, police said Monday.

Gurcharan Singh attacked Mamta, 35, sons Lavi, 8, Lovely, 12, and mother-in-law Natthi, 68, with a sword at his residence in Gulawathi area, about 400 km from here, and killed them late Sunday.

He attempted to kill himself with the same sword. Gurcharan is being treated at a hospital for his multiple injuries.

'Gurcharan has been referred to a hospital in Meerut district as his condition deteriorated while being treated in a hospital in Bulandshahr. His condition is still critical,' Deputy Superintendent of Police Rakesh Kumar told reporters in Bulandshahr.

'We are yet to establish the reason behind the killings. Gurcharan is a truck driver,' police inspector Sanjay Pandey told reporters.

'Locals have told us that there were heated arguments between Gurcharan and his wife yesterday (Sunday) night. He had directed his wife to leave his home,' Pandey said.


Man, 3 others acquitted of charges of beheading wife

Man, 3 others acquitted of charges of beheading wife

PTI, Aug 2, 2010, 07.15pm IST

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Monday acquitted a man, his parents and elder brother of charges of beheading and stabbing to death his wife after she had 'failed' to bring sufficient dowry.

"The accused persons are acquitted of the charges as the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt," additional sessions judge S K Sarvaria said.

The court absolved Ashok, husband of the victim, his elder brother Vinod and parents Bigha Ram and Vidya of charges of murder, dowry harassment, destruction of evidence and group liability under the IPC.
The victim Rekha was beheaded and stabbed several times allegedly by Ashok in active connivance of other co-accused on the night January 20, 2005, at her matrimonial home at Sangam Vihar here.

The probe in the sensational killing took many twists and turns as Ashok, who was the complainant in the case, was later arrayed as an accused after the investigation was taken over by the crime branch of Delhi Police following a public outrage over the issue.
Initially, Rajender, a relative of Ashok, was made an accused and police also recorded his statement in which he allegedly confessed his complicity in the offence.

Later, the parents of the victim told the police it was the complainant (Ashok) who along with others killed their daughter as she did not bring sufficient dowry. Consequently, the husband of the victim and others were arrested.

During the arguments, defence counsel M S Khan told the court that the parents of the victim did not apprise the police at the first given opportunity about the allegation that their daughter was being harassed for bringing less dowry.

Moreover, the postmortem report did not support the time of offence as alleged in the chargesheet, he said adding that the accused Rajender, who later became a prosecution witness, also did not support the case.

The statement of Rajender was recorded by police soon after the offence and then he was also produced before a court. However, he later testified that he was unconscious for over two months after being hit by Ashok, the defence counsel said.

The court said though the offence was committed, the prosecution failed to prove that it was Ashok and his relatives who had committed the crime.



Bow down before your wife's 'diktat', SC tells husbands

Bow down before your wife's 'diktat', SC tells husbands

PTI, May 19, 2009, 06.48pm IST

NEW DELHI: If you want to buy matrimonial peace just do whatever your wife says! This is not some piece of advice from a marriage counsellor, rather it is from the country's apex court.

A vacation bench of justices Markandeya Katju and Deepak Verma observed, "Bibi joh boltee hai woh sunno (listen to whatever your wife says), as otherwise it could land you in trouble. Because if you do not listen to her, you will suffer the consequences."
"Hum sab bhogi hai (we are all sufferers)," the bench said in a lighter vein.
The bench further said that a husband has to accept the suggestion of a wife irrespective of the fact whether it is sensible or not.
"If your wife asks you to put your face that side, put it that side. If she says, put it this side, then put it this side. Otherwise you will face trouble. Hum sub bhogi hai," the bench remarked again.

The interesting suggestions from the apex court evolved on Tuesday during a matrimonial case involving an Air Force official Deepak Kumar who complained that his estranged wife Manisha had ruined him and his family by implicating them in false criminal cases including sodomy.

The couple got married 17 years ago but matrimonial disputes surfaced between the two soon after marriage.
A district court in Chandigarh dismissed Deepak's plea for divorce as Manisha opposed it, but a single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted decree of judicial separation.

On an appeal from Manisha, a division bench granted the decree of divorce as the marriage "had irretrievably broken down" besides directing Rs 10 lakh maintenance amount from Deepak to her.

Aggrieved by the high court's order Manisha filed the appeal in the apex court challenging the decree of divorce.
Deepak's counsel argued that Manisha even though had implicated her husband and his family in a host of criminal cases was yet opposing the divorce despite the marriage breaking down irretrievably.

The vacation bench however, posted the matter for further hearing to July last week as there was no urgency in dealing with the matter. "You have waited for 17 years, so wait for a few more days," the bench said while switching over to the next item on the agenda.