Latest news with #HC
Hindustan Times
7 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC terms Pune man's arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) has declared the arrest of a 58-year-old Pune resident illegal after finding that he was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of being apprehended — a violation of both constitutional and statutory safeguards. HC terms Pune man's arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production A division bench of justice Mahesh Sonak and justice Valmiki Menezes ruled on Friday that Hanumant Nazirkar's arrest, though formally recorded much later, effectively began at 1pm on October 25, 2024, when Baramati police picked him up from Pune's Shivajinagar metro station. Nazirkar and his wife had been booked by the Baramati Taluka police in connection with a March 3, 2023 complaint accusing them and others of cheating the complainant of ₹ 3.37 crore. His plea for anticipatory bail had been earlier rejected. While police formally recorded his arrest only at 9pm on October 26, he was produced before a magistrate around 12.20pm on October 27 — nearly 48 hours after being apprehended. Nazirkar moved the high court challenging the legality of this delay, citing Article 22 of the Constitution and Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code, both of which require a person taken into custody to be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours. The government's counsel argued that Nazirkar was not under arrest during this period, claiming he was being medically evaluated — first referred from Baramati to Sassoon Hospital in Pune, but ultimately admitted to a private hospital in Baramati shortly after midnight and discharged only on the evening of October 27. They pointed out that Nazirkar's son was with him and that he had remained in touch with his family over the phone. The court, however, rejected this line of defence. 'The arrest commences with the restraint placed on the liberty of the person and not with the time of arrest recorded by the arresting officer,' the bench said. 'The test is whether a person has been deprived of their liberty to go where they please.' The judges observed that once Nazirkar was apprehended by police, his liberty was curtailed — making it an arrest in the eyes of the law. They held that relying on the 'pre-arrest medical examination' argument to bypass the 24-hour rule would defeat the purpose of constitutional protection and could encourage abuse of power. 'There is no legal provision that allows exclusion of time for medical examinations prior to arrest. Such police conduct could lead to unscrupulous tendencies,' the court noted, terming the arrest illegal. Nazirkar was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹ 1 lakh and one or more sureties in the same amount.
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Health
- Time of India
Minor seeks permission from Delhi high court to terminate pregnancy after sexual assault, HC asks AIIMS for report
New Delhi: A 16-year-old minor victim of sexual assault sought the Delhi High Court 's nod on Friday to terminate her 26-week-old pregnancy. Taking note of her plight, HC asked for a report about the feasibility of carrying out the termination procedure from the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) after it was informed that, on intimation of the police, the hospital set up a board on Friday itself. "Keeping in mind the urgency cited, the above medical board is directed to conduct the necessary medical examination and to give the requisite report. Let such report be transmitted to this Court in a sealed envelope on or before 30 June 2025, or the investigating officer of the case would be permitted to collect such sealed envelope, containing the report, from the concerned medical board," Justice Manoj Jain noted. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi The girl, who was sexually assaulted twice, moved the court through her mother and informed her that she is currently at an approximate 26-week gestational period as per the latest ultrasound findings. Since the current gestational age is beyond the permissible limit of 24 weeks, the mother sought the intervention of the HC for termination of the pregnancy, claiming that the minor learnt only on 21 June 2025 that she was pregnant. Through their counsel, the mother-daughter duo said she wants to terminate the pregnancy arising out of the alleged sexual assault and sought that a medical board be constituted to submit its medical opinion in terms of Section 3(2)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. The plea also sought a clear direction to the authorities to medically terminate such pregnancy as she is not willing to continue with it. It was also submitted that since the pregnancy is a direct consequence of sexual assault, the anguish caused by such pregnancy is required to be presumed as a grave injury to her mental health. Aware of the urgency of the situation, as the minor is a victim of sexual assault, the court asked AIIMS to immediately examine the victim and furnish a report so that it can take a call if she is fit to undergo the procedure. Last year, the HC, in a separate matter of a widow suffering from depression, recalled its nod for termination of the fetus after AIIMS, where the woman was medically examined, opined against it. In its report, AIIMS said as per the MTP Act, the provision of termination of pregnancies beyond 24 weeks is to be done for fetuses having significant abnormalities and "feticide in this case is neither justified nor ethical as the fetus is grossly normal. "
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SC asks BMC engr facing contempt over toilet construction to explain delay to HC
New Delhi: The importance of toilets can be best assessed by the fact that a few months delay in construction of a toilet block led to Bombay High Court initiating contempt proceedings against a Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation engineer and in turn the matter ended up with the Supreme Court on Friday. The Bombay HC on Oct 4 had directed the BMC to construct within three months toilets at a slum cluster in Kalina, Santacruz E, invoking right to life guaranteed under Article 21 which included dignified living and the provisions under Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. Four months later, on Feb 2, the HC found that the toilet blocks remained incomplete and had slammed the BMC threatening to take contempt action. BMC executive engineer Maheshkumar Sampat Jare, who had been bearing the brunt of the HC's displeasure, attempted to explain that the survey took some time and since it is a toilet block having 32 units - 15 for women, 16 for men and one for handicapped persons, it would require nine months for completion, as was estimated by his superiors in the corporation. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai The HC on May 6 again found that despite its Feb 2 order, the toilet blocks had not been completed and initiated contempt proceedings against Jare. A week later, the toilet complex was inaugurated. With the contempt sword hanging, Jare rushed to the SC. Senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal told a bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh that Jare had an unblemished service record of 35 years, that he would retire 18 months later and that it would be unfortunate to undergo the rigours of contempt of court proceedings when he had done everything possible under his control to finish the project as expeditiously as possible. The bench said, "When the High Courts issue contempt notices, as a matter of principle, the Supreme Court should not interfere with it except in exceptional circumstances." However, it noted that the toilet block has since been inaugurated and told Jare to appear before HC and explain the circumstances which led to the delay. Agrawal said that strong remarks have been made by the HC in its order and that the alleged contemnor is apprehensive about his fate. The bench requested HC to decide the issue involved in the contempt proceedings without being influenced by its observations in the earlier orders. "HC is seeking an explanation only. So go before the HC and explain everything," the bench told Jare.
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Life sentence is rule, death exception, says Cal HC, spares convict the noose
Kolkata: Life sentence was the rule and death an exception, the Calcutta High Court observed on Thursday as it commuted the death sentence awarded to a 33-year-old man convicted of murdering a woman in a hotel room in Bakkhali in 2018 to life term. The division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md Shabbar Rashidi also said that the case did not fall in the 'rarest of rare' category and sentenced Samar Patra to life imprisonment saying even though his involvement in the murder had been established beyond doubt, he could still be reformed. Patra had been booked under section 302 IPC dealing with murder that attracts death sentence or life imprisonment along with a fine. A lower court had on March 22, 2023 convicted him of the murder and awarded a death sentence along with a fine of Rs 5,000. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata "It has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again that life imprisonment is a rule and death penalty is an exception in awarding sentences in cases where death and life imprisonment are the prescribed punishments," the HC held. The victim and Patra had checked into the hotel together on April 11, 2018. When they did not respond to repeated calls the next day, the hotel manager informed police and the woman was found dead on the bed. The ventilation window in the attached washroom was found broken and Patra was missing. An autopsy revealed the victim had died due to strangulation by ligature, which was ante mortem and homicidal in nature. After his arrest, Patra claimed he found the woman hanging from the ceiling fan when he woke up at night, brought down the body but fled as he was terrified. "As a man of ordinary prudence, it was expected that the appellant should have called upon officials of the hotel and reported the matter to police," the HC observed while upholding his conviction. "The appellant is aged about 33 years. Nothing of unfavourable behaviour has been reported against the appellant, which does not rule out the possibility of reform. The evidence on record does not suggest that the murder of the victim was pre-planned or committed with premeditation and extreme brutality. Rather, the evidence on record shows that the appellant and the victim had visited and stayed together in the hotel on previous occasions as well. Such circumstances belie the existence of any previous enmity between them," the bench held.
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
HC notice over Madkaikar's graft mix-up
Panaji: The high court has issued a notice to power department executive engineer Kashinath Shetye and others over a petition challenging a lower court's order to file an FIR after an ex-minister alleged corruption in govt. The challenge has been filed by the Ant-Corruption Bureau (ACB). The lower court had directed the ACB and the vigilance department to register an FIR based on the statements about corruption made by Pandurang Madkaikar, a former minister and BJP member. Madkaikar said he paid Rs 15-20 lakh to get his work done and claimed that ministers were busy only counting money. Shetye and others filed a complaint with the ACB and the vigilance department in March, seeking an investigation and legal action against corrupt individuals referred to by Madkaikar in his media interactions. The ACB submitted to the HC that the special judge did not consider its reply, which stated that the allegations of bribery by Madkaikar were due to a misunderstanding between Madkaikar and his associate. The confusion, the ACB said, was about whether the amount was required to be paid to the minister as gratification or to govt treasury as fees for land conversion. The ACB said that Madkaikar later gave a statement clarifying that what was asked to be paid was, in fact, processing fees for issuing a conversion sanad, to be credited to the public exchequer. Although this was brought on record by the prosecution, the special judge did not consider it, the ACB said. Moreover, the ACB argued that the order was without jurisdiction and challenged the powers of the special judge appointed under the Prevention of Corruption Act to assume the role of a magistrate. The ACB said the judge was not authorised to entertain an application seeking direction to a police officer to register an FIR and commence an investigation. The HC was told that when the ACB and the vigilance department recorded the statements of Madkaikar and his associate, both reiterated that the money was for conversion fees.
