Latest news with #ABD
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Allied Blenders and Distillers Q1 Results: Profit up fourfold to Rs 55 crore, revenue at Rs 1,776 crore
Allied Blenders and Distillers on Tuesday reported a four-fold jump in its consolidated net profit to Rs 55.83 crore in the June quarter of FY2025-26. The company, the maker of Officer's Choice Whisky , had posted a profit of Rs 11.19 crore in the April-June quarter a year ago, according to a regulatory filing from Allied Blenders and Distillers (ABD). Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Technology MBA Public Policy Artificial Intelligence Operations Management Data Science Leadership Cybersecurity Digital Marketing others Degree Project Management CXO Product Management healthcare Management Design Thinking Others MCA Finance Data Analytics Healthcare Data Science PGDM Skills you'll gain: Duration: 12 Weeks MIT xPRO CERT-MIT XPRO Building AI Prod India Starts on undefined Get Details Its revenue from operations rose to Rs 1,776.37 crore in the June quarter from Rs 1,766.94 crore in the corresponding quarter of the previous fiscal year . ABD's total expenses were at Rs 1,664.78 crore, down 1.65 per cent in the June quarter. The total income of ABD, which includes other income, was at Rs 1,783.45 crore. Live Events Commenting on the results, ABD Managing Director Alok Gupta said that this is the fourth consecutive quarter of strong performance following the IPO and listing of the company. "As we move forward, our strategic focus positions us strongly to sustain growth and consistently enhance customer value," he said. Allied Blenders and Distillers, makers of Officer's Choice Whisky, Sterling Reserve Premium Whiskies and ICONiQ White Whisky - is the largest domestic Spirits company in India, in terms of annual sales volumes. Shares of Allied Blenders and Distillers Ltd on Tuesday settled at Rs 487.25 on BSE, up 2.07 per cent from the previous close.
News18
10 hours ago
- Entertainment
- News18
Not Kohli Or Tendulkar! AB De Villiers Picks 166-Test Veteran As Greatest Of All Time
AB de Villiers is one of the greatest cricketers of all time. The 41-year-old wicketkeeper-batter, who also served as the captain of the South African men's cricket team, played a total of 114 Tests, 228 ODIs, and 78 T20Is during his 14-year-long international cricket career and scored more than 20,000 runs (20,014). For many fans, greats, and experts of the game, ABD is the Greatest Of All Time (G.O.A.T.), but recently when he was asked to name the first player that comes to his mind when he hears the word G.O.A.T., he mentioned Jacques Kallis' name.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Police officer was wrongly arrested for ‘lightly' smacking misbehaving son
A police officer was wrongly arrested for 'lightly' smacking her misbehaving son, a judge has ruled. The Metropolitan Police officer, who is not named, and her husband, were arrested by Surrey Police officers after she smacked their teenage son in 2019. She gave her son what she described as a 'light smack on the left cheek' after he misbehaved, it was said. The couple, who have three children, sued Surrey Police, claiming their detention was unlawful as it was unnecessary. They had their claims dismissed following a civil trial last year and appealed against the decision at the High Court earlier this month. In a ruling on Monday, Mr Justice Bourne overturned the decision. He said: 'In my judgement, on a proper analysis of the evidence at trial, the police did not show that there was an objective basis for the belief that it was necessary to arrest either claimant.' 'An unfortunate history of challenging behaviour' The judge said in a 30-page ruling that at the time of the incident, the couple's son, referred to as ABD, had 'an unfortunate history of challenging behaviour' and had begun attending a youth centre to access mental health services. The couple cancelled ABD's birthday party in March 2019 after he misbehaved, causing him to go to his room, where he 'kicked things around'. This led his mother to smack her son while his father was asleep, which she said 'was not hard and did not cause any injury or leave any mark'. ABD attended the youth centre the following day and told staff he had been assaulted by his mother and that his father had done nothing to stop it. Despite offering to be interviewed voluntarily, both parents were arrested and detained for more than seven hours. ABD returned to the family home the following day, with police deeming that the children were not at risk of harm and telling the couple that they would face no further action three days after their arrest. Erring judge Following a five-day trial at Guildford county court, a judge dismissed their legal claims, finding that police 'reasonably believed' that their arrests were necessary 'to protect a child or children from the person in question and to enable a prompt and effective investigation'. The judge also ordered the couple to pay 70 per cent of the force's legal costs. At a hearing in London on July 2, barristers for the couple told the High Court that the judge 'erred' by finding that the arrests were 'objectively reasonable' as both parents had offered to give voluntary interviews. In his ruling, Mr Justice Bourne said he was 'unable to agree' with the trial judge's finding that there was a 'rational basis' for officers to conclude that voluntary interviews were not an option. He said: 'In the present case, no reason has been identified which actually explains why voluntary interviews were not a viable alternative. 'None of this means that police officers are entitled to special treatment when they find themselves suspected of an offence. 'But the police must assess the circumstances and make rational decisions as to whether coercive measures are needed or not. Merely referring to the need to protect children and to protect the integrity of the investigation was not and is not enough. It follows that the arrests were unlawful and the claims should have succeeded.'
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
Police officers detained after smacking son win appeal after ‘unlawful' arrests
Two married police officers who were arrested after one of them smacked their teenage son have won a High Court battle over claims they were unlawfully detained. The officers, who both serve with the Metropolitan Police, were arrested by Surrey Police in March 2019 after the wife gave her son what she described as a 'light smack on the left cheek' after he misbehaved. They sued Surrey Police after being told they would face no further action, claiming their detention was unlawful as it was unnecessary. The couple, who have three children, had their claims dismissed following a trial last year and appealed against the decision at the High Court earlier this month. In a ruling on Monday, Mr Justice Bourne overturned the decision. He said: 'In my judgment, on a proper analysis of the evidence at trial, the police did not show that there was an objective basis for the belief that it was necessary to arrest either claimant.' The judge said in a 30-page ruling that at the time of the incident, the couple's son, referred to as ABD, had 'an unfortunate history of challenging behaviour' and had begun attending a youth centre to access mental health services. The couple cancelled ABD's birthday party in March 2019 after he misbehaved, causing him to go to his room, where he 'kicked things around'. This led his mother to smack her son while his father was asleep, which she said 'was not hard and did not cause any injury or leave any mark'. ABD attended the youth centre the following day and told staff that he had been assaulted by his mother and that his father had done nothing to stop it. Despite offering to be interviewed voluntarily, both parents were arrested and detained for more than seven hours. ABD returned to the family home the following day, with police deeming that the children were not at risk of harm and telling the couple that they would face no further action three days after their arrest. Following a five-day trial at Guildford County Court, a judge dismissed their legal claims, finding that police 'reasonably believed' that their arrests were necessary 'to protect a child or children from the person in question and to enable a prompt and effective investigation'. The judge also ordered the couple to pay 70 per cent of the force's legal costs. At a hearing in London on July 2, barristers for the couple told the High Court that the judge 'erred' by finding that the arrests were 'objectively reasonable' as both parents had offered to give voluntary interviews. In his ruling, Mr Justice Bourne said he was 'unable to agree' with the trial judge's finding that there was a 'rational basis' for officers to conclude that voluntary interviews were not an option. He said: 'In the present case, no reason has been identified which actually explains why voluntary interviews were not a viable alternative.' He continued: 'None of this means that police officers are entitled to special treatment when they find themselves suspected of an offence. 'But the police must assess the circumstances and make rational decisions as to whether coercive measures are needed or not.' He added: 'Merely referring to the need to protect children and to protect the integrity of the investigation was not and is not enough. 'It follows that the arrests were unlawful and the claims should have succeeded.'
BBC News
a day ago
- BBC News
Police officers detained after son smacked win appeal over arrests
Two married police officers who were arrested after one of them smacked their teenage son have won a High Court battle over claims they were unlawfully officers, who both serve with the Metropolitan Police, were arrested by Surrey Police in March 2019 after the wife gave her son what she described as a "light smack on the left cheek" after he sued Surrey Police after being told they would face no further action, claiming their detention was unlawful as it was couple, who have three children, had their claims dismissed following a trial last year and appealed against the decision at the High Court earlier this month. In a ruling on Monday, Mr Justice Bourne overturned the said: "In my judgment, on a proper analysis of the evidence at trial, the police did not show that there was an objective basis for the belief that it was necessary to arrest either claimant."The judge said in a 30-page ruling that at the time of the incident, the couple's son, referred to as ABD, had "an unfortunate history of challenging behaviour" and had begun attending a youth centre to access mental health couple cancelled ABD's birthday party in March 2019 after he misbehaved, causing him to go to his room, where he "kicked things around".This led his mother to smack her son while his father was asleep, which she said "was not hard and did not cause any injury or leave any mark". ABD attended a youth centre the following day and told staff that he had been assaulted by his mother and that his father had done nothing to stop offering to be interviewed voluntarily, both parents were arrested and detained for more than seven returned to the family home the following day, with police deeming that the children were not at risk of harm and telling the couple that they would face no further action three days after their arrest. In his ruling, Mr Justice Bourne said he was "unable to agree" with the trial judge's finding that there was a "rational basis" for officers to conclude that voluntary interviews were not an said: "In the present case, no reason has been identified which actually explains why voluntary interviews were not a viable alternative."It follows that the arrests were unlawful and the claims should have succeeded." Additional reporting by PA Media.
