Caught on camera: Gurugram woman seriously injured in dog attack during morning walk in posh complex
The incident took place around 7 am, when the woman, who lives in a nearby society, was walking with two others on the footpath. As a woman with a Husky passed by, the dog suddenly lunged at the victim, biting her arm and knocking her to the ground.
Despite the dog owner's attempts to restrain the animal, the dog continued to attack until other morning walkers stepped in to help. After a struggle, the dog was finally pulled away and chained.
The victim sustained deep scratches on her hand and other injuries. She was rushed to a nearby hospital for treatment and later discharged.
CCTV footage of the attack has surfaced on social media, prompting widespread concern. Based on the viral clip, Gurugram Police have launched an investigation.
The case has once again raised alarm among residents in the Delhi-NCR region, where dog attack incidents are reportedly on the rise.
Taking serious note of the growing threat, the Supreme Court on Monday initiated suo motu proceedings, calling the situation 'alarming and disturbing'.
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan acted upon a media report that highlighted the death of a six-year-old in Delhi due to rabies caused by a dog bite.
'This is a highly disturbing news report titled 'City hounded by strays and kids pay price',' the court observed. 'It contains extremely troubling details. There are reports of hundreds of dog bite incidents from both cities and peripheral areas, many of which have led to rabies infections. Ultimately, it is infants and senior citizens who are falling prey to this deadly disease.'
The court has now taken up the issue for further examination.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
19 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Allahabad HC judge has made a mockery of justice, says Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has passed a scathing order reprimanding an Allahabad High Court judge, choosing to name him while saying that he not only 'cut a sorry figure for himself but has made a mockery of justice'. The order brought to fore the Supreme Court's apprehensions about the High Court judiciary's performance. 'We are at our wits' end to understand what is wrong with the Indian judiciary at the level of the High Court. At times we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is something unpardonable,' a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan wrote in a 19-page order dictated in open court on August 4 and published on Tuesday. The apex court recorded that the High Court judge in question, Justice Prashant Kumar, found nothing wrong in a litigant filing a criminal case against a buyer in a purely civil dispute over an unpaid balance of money in a sale transaction. In fact, the Bench said the High Court judge had found that registering a criminal case for 'criminal breach of trust' would be a quicker way to get the unpaid balance. A civil suit would be too laborious and time-consuming. 'The judge has gone to the extent of saying that asking the complainant to pursue civil remedy for the purpose of recovery of the balance amount will be very unreasonable as civil suit may take a long time… It was expected of the High Court to know the well-settled position of law that in cases of civil dispute a complainant cannot be permitted to resort to criminal proceedings as the same would amount to abuse of process', the Supreme Court noted. Justice Pardiwala, the lead judge on the apex court Bench, asked how the ingredients of the offence of 'criminal breach of trust' would apply to a sale transaction. The offence would only arise if there was a fraudulent misappropriation of an 'entrusted' property. 'Mere transaction of sale cannot amount to an entrustment,' the apex court explained. Interestingly, even the local police had refused to lodge a criminal case, saying the nature of the dispute was purely civil. However, the Magistrate had gone ahead to register a criminal case, oblivious of the point that the dispute concerned only a sale transaction and payment of a balance amount. Justice Kumar had seconded the Magistrate's point of view, refusing to quash the criminal case. 'We are not taken by surprise with the Magistrate exhibiting complete ignorance of law as to what constitutes cheating and criminal breach of trust … However, we expected at least the High Court to understand the fine distinction between the two offences and the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust,' the apex court rued. It further asked the Allahabad High Court Chief Justice to remove Justice Kumar from the criminal roster and not assign any criminal case to the latter till he demitted office. 'The Chief Justice shall make the judge concerned sit in a Division Bench with a seasoned senior judge of the High Court,' the Supreme Court noted.
NDTV
38 minutes ago
- NDTV
Top Court Grants Divorce, Orders Man To Give Rs 4 Crore Mumbai Flat To Ex-Wife
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted divorce to an estranged couple while directing the man to hand over his Rs 4 crore Mumbai flat to the estranged wife. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria also quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the man under Sections 498-A (subjecting woman to cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust) read with Section 34 of IPC observing they were banal and vague without any specific instances. The supreme court said the acrimonious relation between the parties for the last eight years without any let-up and the multiple legal proceedings pending, clearly indicated their partnership had "irretrievably broken down". "We also allow the application filed under Article 142 of the Constitution of India dissolving the marriage between the appellant and the second respondent finding the marriage to have irretrievably broken down, in the best interest of both the parties and for doing complete justice," the bench said. It said further claim of alimony is not justified, especially looking at the appellant's unemployed status. The top court directed the man, a former banker, to deposit the arrears to the housing society up to September 1, 2025, towards maintenance charges for the apartment. "Appellant shall execute a gift deed on or before August 30, 2025 on any date informed by written notice; by the appellant to the respondent, with due acknowledgment taken. We have seen from the records that the draft of the deed was exchanged between the parties and both the appellant and the respondent 2 shall be present before the jurisdictional Registrar for execution and registration on the date notified," the bench said. In case the estranged wife did not turn up, the jurisdictional registrar was directed to acknowledge and record the presence of the man following which they should appear before the registrar on September 15, 2025 for the deed's execution. "If the appellant does not comply with the above, then the order of divorce shall not come into effect. However, if the respondent does not present herself on the date notified by the appellant and on such failure even on the date specified by us, the divorce shall come into effect," the bench cautioned. The top court held all proceedings, civil and criminal, initiated by the parties to the marriage, which was now dissolved, to stand closed. "There shall also be no further proceedings, both civil and criminal instituted, by the respective parties, on any aspect arising out of in relation to the marriage," the bench said. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Supreme Court cancels DHFL's Dheeraj Wadhawan's bail, orders surrender in 2 weeks
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cancelled the bail granted to former Dewan Housing Finance Limited (DHFL) promoter Dheeraj Wadhawan in a multi-crore loan scam case. The bail, initially granted by the Delhi High Court on medical grounds, was revoked after the Supreme Court reviewed a report from the medical September 9, 2024, Wadhawan was granted bail by the Delhi High Court, which ruled that he qualified as a 'sick person,' warranting his release on medical grounds. However, a recent assessment by the Supreme Court led to a reversal of this decision. Wadhawan has been directed to surrender within two weeks, with assurances that jail authorities will provide the necessary medical Wadhawan, alongside his brother Kapil, was arrested in connection with a significant financial fraud case. The two were accused of defrauding a consortium of 17 banks, amounting to Rs 34,000 crore, marking it as one of the largest bank loan scams in India. The Wadhawan brothers were charged with engaging in a criminal conspiracy, misappropriation of public funds, and breach of trust. Allegations include manipulating records and diverting funds through circular transactions to generate personal media reports about fund diversion in January 2019, DHFL came under scrutiny. A consortium of banks appointed KPMG to conduct an audit, revealing fund diversions disguised as loans to DHFL-linked entities. The audit unveiled that Rs 29,100 crore was disbursed to 66 entities associated with DHFL promoters, with a significant portion of these funds invested in land and being arrested in 2022, Dheeraj Wadhawan was presented before a special court in Mumbai, leading to his judicial custody. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had filed charges citing financial irregularities and fund diversions within DHFL, leading to the eventual judicial proceedings against the Wadhawan brothers.- EndsMust Watch
