HC seeks action plan to curb drug abuse among children
The court also directed the District Police Chief (Kochi City) to appear in person or virtually by the next posting date to provide suggestions for an action plan. The Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice C. Jayachandran made the query while considering a batch of petitions, including the one filed by Sumi Joseph of Ernakulam, a mother of schoolgoing children, the Kerala State Legal Services Authority and others, seeking effective government intervention to combat the menace.
The Home department submitted an affidavit and data, which included data from 2015 to 2024, which showed that Kochi city recorded the highest number of such drug cases in Kerala - 53 in total.
Reiterating that the authorities concerned needed to focus their immediate attention on Kochi city, the court said there was a lack of qualitative analysis in the affidavit, such as studies identifying trends or reasons behind the data. Furthermore, it sought the assistance of a senior police officer to focus specifically on the city.
Ms. Joseph, who had collected materials pertaining to the issue, submitted that the situation in the city was more severe than what the data said. These will be handed over to the District Police Chief (Kochi City).
The Home department's affidavit further states that the special drive titled 'Operation D-HUNT' is progressing vigorously across the State to combat the drug menace. The drive resulted in significant seizures and is part of a multi-pronged strategy. So far, Janamaithri Police beat officers have identified 308 drug or substance-addicted children. A total of 341 children and adolescents received counselling services, while 112 have undergone de-addiction treatment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Under BNSS, no bar on anticipatory bail in cases with death, life punishment: HC
1 2 3 Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court has held that with the enforcement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) from July 1, 2024, the restriction on granting anticipatory bail in cases punishable with death or life imprisonment under section 438(6) of the CrPC (as was applicable in the state of UP), no longer applies. The court clarified that since Section 482 of BNSS, which now governs anticipatory bail, does not retain any such prohibition as was contained under section 438 (6) of the CrPC, there is no bar on granting anticipatory bail in cases punishable with death or life imprisonment. With this clarification, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, in its judgment dated July 3, allowed the second anticipatory bail application filed by one Abdul Hameed, who was summoned to face trial in a 2011 murder case but was not charge-sheeted during the investigation. The applicant's first anticipatory bail plea was rejected in Feb 2023 by a coordinate bench of the high court, in view of the bar contained under Section 438(6) CrPC. The bar inter alia on the grant of anticipatory bail for offences punishable with death or life imprisonment was introduced by the UP Amendment Act, 2019. After July 1, 2024, with the BNSS coming into force, the applicant filed a fresh application under Section 482 of the BNSS seeking anticipatory bail. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Scientists: Tinnitus? When tinnitus won't go away, do this (Watch) Hearing Magazine Undo The sessions court rejected it in March 2025, prompting him to move the high court. The applicant argued that the statutory bar under Section 438(6) CrPC no longer existed under BNSS, and the current application was filed under a completely different statutory regime. The state govt's counsel said that the applicant was trying to circumvent this statutory embargo by invoking Section 482 of the newly enacted BNSS, which does not contain a similar bar. It was submitted that since the offence was committed in 2011, and the charge sheet was filed under the CrPC regime, and even the cognizance was taken well prior to the BNSS coming into force, BNSS cannot retrospectively override the bar under Section 438(6) as applicable in UP. Having heard the counsels for both parties, the court said that the omission under Section 482 of BNSS, which governs anticipatory bail, regarding the bar under section 438(6) CrPC was conscious and deliberate, which indicated that the Parliament did not intend to continue the restriction introduced by the UP Amendment Act, 2019. "The absence of such prohibition in the new enactment assumes greater significance when viewed against the backdrop of the specific inclusion of this bar in the state amendment to CrPC," the court said. The court also noted that "the enactment of BNSS has created material changed circumstances, both in law and fact that justify fresh consideration on merits. The removal of the statutory bar contained in Section 438(6) of CrPC represents a fundamental change in the legal framework that obliterates the foundation upon which the first application was rejected". The court said that the first application was dismissed on maintainability and not merits, and since the legislative landscape had changed, the present application was maintainable. In its judgment dated July 3, the court cited a high court order in a case of 2024 to note that the present application filed after July 1, 2024, falls within the ambit of BNSS, and the applicant is entitled to benefit from more liberal provisions thereof.
Indian Express
11 hours ago
- Indian Express
Gujarat HC initiates contempt proceedings against man who ‘sat on toilet' during virtual hearing
Days after a video of a man attending a virtual proceeding of the Gujarat High Court while sitting on a toilet was widely shared on social media, the HC directed the Registry to register a suo motu contempt proceeding against the resident of Surat. A Division Bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice RT Vachhani passed an oral order on June 30, which was uploaded Thursday, directing the Registry to register suo motu contempt proceedings against Abdul Samad 'upon verification', and to produce a 'necessary report' before the next date of hearing. 'After the registration of contempt proceedings, the Registry shall issue the notice to the contempt or as to why he should not be prosecuted and punished for committing Contempt of Court as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. A suo motu proceedings shall be listed after a period of two weeks,' the court said in the oral order. Stating that the Presiding Judge of a court may direct to stop live streaming in such situations, the court also directed the Registrar, Information Technology to 'apprise this court about the mechanism to stop contumacious litigants in participating in livestreaming proceedings'. The court said that 'such disorderly and uncontrolled behaviour has become frequent'. The incident took place on June 20, when Samad, a complainant in an FIR lodged at the Kim police station in Surat district, had joined the virtual proceedings of the court of Justice Nirzar Desai and was seen sitting on a toilet while awaiting his turn to consent to quashing a petition. 'The infamous video tarnishing the image of this Court is widely circulated in social media and is required to be immediately banned and deleted,' the Court said. In the now-viral video clip of the live streaming of the High Court proceedings, Samad was initially seen in a close up with headphones. However, as he set his phone aside moments later, the video shows him on a toilet. He is then seen washing, and walking out of the bathroom to a different surrounding while awaiting his turn. Earlier in March this year, the Gujarat High Court had imposed a fine of Rs 2 lakh on a litigant who had joined a virtual hearing from a lavatory and sentenced him to community service on an eight hour shift daily for two weeks — cleaning and watering the garden of the HC in Sola in Ahmedabad. The court had rejected the defence of the man that he had joined the HC proceeding virtually for the first time and therefore committed a mistake.
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Rights panel orders inquiry into alleged overpricing of food items at Kalabhavan Theatre
Thiruvananthapuram: State human rights commission (SHRC) ordered an inquiry into the alleged overpricing of food items at Kalabhavan Theatre, owned and operated by Kerala State Film Development Corporation. Commission chairperson Justice Alexander Thomas issued the directive following a complaint that food was being sold at rates nearly double to the rates displayed there. The complaint was lodged by Waheed, a Kottur resident, who claimed that customers were being charged Rs 100 for popcorn, while the displayed price was only Rs 60. He noted that the discrepancy was not limited to Kalabhavan but was also reportedly prevalent in other theatres across the city. Justice Thomas instructed secretaries of local self-govt department, civil supplies department and corporation to examine the complaint and submit a detailed report within a month. SHRC emphasised that consumers have the right to be charged transparently and fairly, especially at public or govt-affiliated venues. If the allegations were found to be true, it could amount to unfair trade practices and exploitation of cinemagoers, SHRC observed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Gold Is Surging in 2025 — Smart Traders Are Already In IC Markets Learn More Undo This incident also reignited broader concerns about unchecked food pricing in cinema halls, which remain outside the purview of standard consumer protection norms in many cases. Consumer rights activists have welcomed the SHRC move, urging authorities to implement price regulation more strictly across all theatres. The outcome of the investigation could lead to regulatory changes or fines for violators, particularly in govt-affiliated venues like Kalabhavan, which is expected to follow public accountability norms. Further action will be based on the findings submitted by the departments concerned.
