Latest news with #JMFC
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
Terror accused Yasin Bhatkal appears via video in court
Mangaluru: Seventeen years after a terror conspiracy was uncovered in coastal Karnataka, the long-stalled trial against Yasin Bhatkal — the Indian Mujahideen co-founder — has resumed. On Wednesday, Bhatkal was produced before the Mangaluru JMFC court via video conference from Delhi's Tihar Jail, where he is serving time for his involvement in other terror attacks. The 2008 Ullal police case had named 13 individuals, including Bhatkal, for allegedly conspiring to carry out bombings and stockpiling explosives in the Mukkacheri and Chembugudde areas of Mangaluru. The Karnataka police had booked them under multiple sections of the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). While seven of the accused were arrested and tried — with three sentenced to life imprisonment in 2017 — six remained untraced. Bhatkal had been on the run and was later arrested in a different case. Police say that due to his incarceration in another state, he hadn't been produced in the Ullal case until now. Coordination between Ullal police and Tihar authorities facilitated his video appearance on July 24. The court has set the next hearing for August 20. Authorities hope that Bhatkal's inclusion in the trial will help bring closure to one of the earliest known Indian Mujahideen plots in Karnataka. This marks a key step forward in ongoing anti-terror prosecutions involving pan-India networks.
Hans India
17 hours ago
- Hans India
Terror Accused Yasin Bhatkal Appears via Video in Mangaluru Court
Mangaluru: Seventeen years after a terror conspiracy was uncovered in coastal Karnataka, the long-stalled trial against Yasin Bhatkal — the Indian Mujahideen co-founder — has resumed. On Wednesday, Bhatkal was produced before the Mangaluru JMFC court via video conference from Delhi's Tihar Jail, where he is serving time for his involvement in other terror attacks. The 2008 Ullal police case had named 13 individuals, including Bhatkal, for allegedly conspiring to carry out bombings and stockpiling explosives in the Mukkacheri and Chembugudde areas of Mangaluru. The Karnataka police had booked them under multiple sections of the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). While seven of the accused were arrested and tried — with three sentenced to life imprisonment in 2017 — six remained untraced. Bhatkal had been on the run and was later arrested in a different case. Police say that due to his incarceration in another state, he hadn't been produced in the Ullal case until now. Coordination between Ullal police and Tihar authorities facilitated his video appearance on July 24. The court has set the next hearing for August 20. Authorities hope that Bhatkal's inclusion in the trial will help bring closure to one of the earliest known Indian Mujahideen plots in Karnataka. This marks a key step forward in ongoing anti-terror prosecutions involving pan-India networks. (eom)
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
To reduce backlog of cases, govt to open 56 JMFC courts
Bhubaneswar: With over 19 lakh cases pending in lower courts, the govt on Wednesday decided to open 56 new courts, with the highest number, 13, in the tribal-dominated Mayurbhanj district, for speedy trial of cases and to enhance judicial infrastructure. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "Our aim to have courts in every block will be a success soon. We emphasise an easy and quick justice delivery system, allowing people to avail of judicial services close to their homes. The work on new courts will start soon," said law minister Prithiviraj Harichandan. Besides having a civil judge (junior division)-cum-judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) for each court, there will be a bench clerk, stenographers, junior clerks, typists, copyists, house orderlies, peons, and watchmen for the courts to function in a full-fledged manner, a law department letter said. For the courts, 840 new gazetted and non-gazetted posts will be created. The lower courts have a total backlog of 316,057 civil cases and 1,604,768 criminal cases. The previous year witnessed the filing of 418,016 criminal cases, whilst 456,352 were concluded. In the civil category, 81,014 new cases were registered, and 99,776 were resolved. Official records indicated a surge in criminal cases attributed to 42,819 MV Act violations detected through automated CCTV-based challans. The district-wise analysis shows Khurda courts leading with 208,064 unresolved cases, with Cuttack following at 199,154 cases. Balasore and Jajpur districts report 132,003 and 101,294 pending cases respectively. Also, significant case backlogs exist in Ganjam (98,835), Sundargarh (97,696), Bhadrak (96,897), and Angul (90,559) districts. Explaining the significance of having more JMFC courts, Odisha high court lawyer Trilochan Nanda said such courts can take all cases into cognisance, but some big and heinous cases are not triable there. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "The JMFC courts can try and hear cases of theft and sundry offences, although they can remand to judicial custody persons involved in murder too. A murder case can't be tried in a JMFC court. These have to be transferred to a sessions court. In our state, there are additional and session courts at the sub-division level," Nanda said. He further explained that it is a significant development because, for all petty cases, people from remote villages had to frequently attend court for each hearing. Now, theft, minor brawls, misbehaviour, and intimidation can be heard in JMFC courts.
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi court allows widow to stay in matrimonial home years after in-laws threw her out
Delhi's Karkardooma court has recently, in a Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act case, granted liberty to a widow to reside in the matrimonial home along with her minor child. This house was shared by the in-laws and the woman along with her husband when he was alive. Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC-Mahila Court) Sonika on July 19, 2025, granted liberty to the complainant woman to reside in the matrimonial shared household along with her minor child.(Pexel/Representative) She was allegedly thrown out of the matrimonial house in 2018. Her husband expired in November 2015. She alleged physical assault and demand for dowry by the in-laws. Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC-Mahila Court) Sonika on July 19, 2025, granted liberty to the complainant woman to reside in the matrimonial shared household along with her minor child. The court ordered, "Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to reside alongwith her minor child in the aforesaid shared household and the respondents are hereby restrained from dispossessing the petitioner without due process of law." However, the court has declined to grant maintenance from her in-laws in the absence of any property or business jointly owned by her husband and other in-laws. While dealing with the issue of maintenance, the court observed that the petitioner had not placed any document to show that any of the respondents had any joint property/business with the deceased husband of the complainant. "In the absence of any joint/coparcenary property, the respondents cannot be burdened with the liability to maintain the petitioner," JMFC said in the order passed on July 19. The court also noted that the prayer of maintenance was not preferred in the application for residence. Advocate Manish Bhadauria, counsel for the complainant, submitted that in August 2018, the respondents threw the petitioner out of the shared household in wearing clothes. "Thus, it is prayed that the present application be allowed and the petitioner be granted the relief of maintenance and residence," counsel prayed. On the other hand, advocate Praveen Goswami, counsel for respondents, submitted that no cruelty was ever committed by respondents. It was further submitted that the petitioner had not specified any date or time when she was harassed by any of the respondents, and the allegations levelled in the petition as well as the present application are omnibus and general in nature.
NDTV
2 days ago
- NDTV
'Can Stay In Matrimonial Home': Court Relief For Widow Thrown Out By In-Laws
New Delhi: Delhi's Karkardooma court has recently, in a Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act case, granted liberty to a widow to reside in the matrimonial home along with her minor child. This house was shared by the in-laws and the woman, along with her husband when he was alive. She was allegedly thrown out of the matrimonial house in 2018, nearly three years after her husband died in November 2015. She alleged physical assault and demand for dowry by the in-laws. Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC-Mahila Court) Sonika on July 19, 2025, granted liberty to the complainant woman to reside in the matrimonial shared household along with her minor child. The court ordered, "Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to reside along with her minor child in the aforesaid shared household and the respondents are hereby restrained from dispossessing the petitioner without due process of law." However, the court has declined to grant maintenance from her in-laws in the absence of any property or business jointly owned by her husband and other in-laws. While dealing with the issue of maintenance, the court observed that the petitioner had not placed any document to show that any of the respondents had any joint property/business with the husband of the complainant. "In the absence of any joint/coparcenary property, the respondents cannot be burdened with the liability to maintain the petitioner," JMFC said in the order passed on July 19. The court also noted that the prayer of maintenance was not preferred in the application for residence. Advocate Manish Bhadauria, counsel for the complainant, submitted that in August 2018, the respondents threw the petitioner out of the shared household. "Thus, it is prayed that the present application be allowed and the petitioner be granted the relief of maintenance and residence," counsel prayed. On the other hand, advocate Praveen Goswami, counsel for respondents, submitted that no cruelty was ever committed by respondents. It was further submitted that the petitioner had not specified any date or time when she was harassed by any of the respondents, and the allegations levelled in the petition as well as the present application, are general in nature.
