Latest news with #Section65B
News18
04-07-2025
- News18
Lawyer Suspended For Two Years Over Fake Rs 80,000 Court Fee Charged From Client
Last Updated: The three-member disciplinary committee also directed the advocate to pay Rs 25,000 as costs to the complainant within a month of receiving the order. In a disciplinary action against professional misconduct, the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) has suspended advocate Ranjeeta Vengurlekar from practising law for two years after finding her guilty of duping a client by charging a fictitious court fee of Rs 80,000. The three-member disciplinary committee — comprising Chairman Dr Uday Warunjikar and members Sangram Desai and Aniruddha Garge — also directed the advocate to pay Rs 25,000 as costs to the complainant within a month of receiving the order. The complaint was filed by Abhijeet Jagannath Zadokar, who alleged that Vengurlekar had taken Rs 80,000 from him under the pretext of paying court fees, but handed over a fraudulent receipt. He claimed that over time, he paid a total of Rs 1.5 lakh for legal services, and ultimately suffered financial losses to the tune of Rs 21 lakh due to the mishandling of his legal matter. The advocate denied all allegations, claiming that the money was partly her professional fee, and that the complainant had merely sought legal consultation from her office in Badlapur. She also denied any responsibility for the alleged financial losses suffered by the complainant. However, during the inquiry, the complainant stepped into the witness box and submitted detailed evidence, including WhatsApp exchanges and a Section 65B certificate authenticating the electronic records. The committee found that despite being served through post and even personally via messenger, neither Vengurlekar nor her lawyer appeared for the hearings after filing a brief written reply. The committee noted that the evidence submitted by the complainant had remained unchallenged throughout the proceedings, as the respondent failed to cross-examine or counter the claims. 'Bare perusal of the record goes to show that the complainant has proved his case about misconduct," the committee observed, holding that the receipt allegedly provided by the advocate for the Rs. 80,000 court fee was prima facie bogus. It added that although criminal action may also lie in such matters, the Bar Council's scope was limited to examining misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The disciplinary body emphasized that while it was not passing any order on other prayers made by the complainant, it found sufficient grounds to impose a professional penalty. We are of the view that it would be appropriate to pass an order of suspension for period of two years, the order concluded. First Published:
India Gazette
10-06-2025
- India Gazette
Court asks Director FSL to appear personally over non filing of report in a case against Kejriwal
New Delhi [India], June 10 (ANI): The Rouse Avenue court on Monday issued a notice to the Director of Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) to appear personally over non-filing of a report pertaining to a CD in a defacement case against former CM Arvind Kejriwal. Earlier, on May 23, the court directed him to examine a CD in a case of public property defacement and asked him to file the report. An FIR has already been registered in this case against former CM Arvind Kejriwal, ex-MLA Gulab Singh, and MCD councillor Nitika Sharma. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Neha Mittal issued a notice to the Director of FSL to appear in person on June 28. While issuing notice, the court noted that the notice issued to the Director, FSL, had been received back duly served. However, no report has been received from the Director, FSL. ' In view thereof, issue notice to Director, FSL to appear in person for 28.06.2025,' ACJM ordered on June 9. On May 23, Delhi police filed a Status report stating that the CD has been sent to FSL for expert opinion and the result of the same is awaited. After hearing the submissions of the Investigation Officer (IO), the court had issued notice to the Director requesting him to expedite the result in the present case and to file a report. On May 8, after hearing an application moved by the IO, the court had released the CD containing the photographs along with a Section 65B certificate. It was submitted by IO that the CD is required to be sent to FSL. From the submissions made, it appears that the CD is required for further investigation in the present matter. Further, the complainant has expressed his inability to provide the photographs, the court had noted on May 8. The court on March 11, directed Delhi police to file an FIR on a complaint filed against former CM Arvind Kejriwal, former MLA Gulab Singh and MCD councillor Nitika Sharma in a matter related to defacement of public property in Dwarka area in 2019. On March 28, police had informed the court that they had registered an FIR on a complaint against Arvind Kejriwal and others. The complainant has alleged a Violation of the Defacement of Public Property Act in the Dwarka area. This direction was passed on a complaint filed by one Shiv Kumar Saksena. The court said that it is of the considered opinion that the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed. ' Accordingly, the concerned SHO is directed to register FIR immediately under section 3 of the Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 and any other offence that appears to have been committed from the facts of the case,' ACJM Mittal ordered on March 11. (ANI)
India Gazette
23-05-2025
- India Gazette
Court requests Director FSL to expedite examination of CD in defacement case against Kejriwal
New Delhi [India], May 23 (ANI): The Rouse Avenue court issued a notice on Friday to the Director of Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and requested the examination of a CD in a case of public property defacement. The court has asked the Director to file the report. An FIR has already been registered in this case against former CM Arvind Kejriwal, ex-MLA Gulab Singh, and MCD councillor Nitika Sharma. During a hearing on Friday, Delhi police filed a Status report stating that the CD has been sent to FSL for expert opinion, and the result of the same is awaited. After hearing the submissions of the Investigation Officer (IO), Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Neha Mittal issued a notice to the Director. 'Issue notice to the Director, FSL through concerned SHO with request to expedite the result in the present case and to file the report regarding the same case,' ACJM Mittal ordered on May 23. The matter has been listed on June 9, 2025, for further proceedings. On May 8, after hearing an application moved by the IO, the court released the CD containing the photographs along with the Section 65B certificate. It is submitted by IO that the CD is required to be sent to FSL. From the submissions made, it appears that the CD is required for further investigation in the present matter. Further, the complainant has expressed his inability to provide the photographs, the court noted on May 8. Delhi police filed a status report on April 19 in the case of alleged defacement of public property against former CM Arvind Kejriwal, a formal MLA, and an MCD councillor. Police submitted that they are making consistent efforts to trace the accused persons. Therefore, they require some more time. This report is in the Rouse Avenue court. Delhi police had also stated that during investigation, on 03/04/2025, on the instance of the complainant, a site plan was prepared and has been placed on record. 'Furthermore, consistent efforts are being made to trace the accused persons,' the report stated. The court on March 11, directed Delhi police to file an FIR on a complaint filed against former CM Arvind Kejriwal, former MLA Gulab Singh and MCD councillor Nitika Sharma in a matter related to defacement of public property in Dwarka area in 2019. On March 28, police informed the court that they had registered an FIR on a complaint against Arvind Kejriwal and others. The complainant has alleged a Violation of the Defacement of Public Property Act in the Dwarka area. This direction was passed on a complaint filed by one Shiv Kumar Saksena. The court had said that the court is of the considered opinion that the application under section 156(3) CrPC deserves to be allowed. 'Accordingly, the concerned SHO is directed to register FIR immediately under section 3 of the Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 and any other offence that appears to have been committed from the facts of the case,' ACJM Mittal ordered on March 11. (ANI)
Time of India
22-05-2025
- Time of India
Two acquitted in Thane contractor murder case due to lack of evidence and missing body
Thane: A Thane sessions court on Tuesday acquitted two men accused of murdering a building contractor and dumping his body in a creek, citing a lack of conclusive evidence and the absence of the victim's body. Gaurav Rajesh Singh (27), a driver, and Sachin Sarjerao Patil (25), were accused of killing Rakesh Manik Patil, the biological son of former Shiv Sena corporator Manik Patil, over a family property dispute. The alleged murder took place on Sept 20, 2020, at a bungalow in Vijay Garden, Thane. The case stemmed from tensions after Manik Patil allowed his son Rakesh to occupy the upper floor of his bungalow, asking Sachin, his live-in partner's son, to vacate. The prosecution claimed that the accused shot Rakesh with a country-made pistol and disposed of his body in Vashi creek. However, the court noted the absence of the body, ballistic confirmation, and credible forensic evidence. CCTV footage lacked proper certification under Section 65B, and testimonies regarding stolen ornaments were inconsistent. Judge S B Agrawal ruled that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and convincing chain of events. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo In this case, the chain was broken at multiple points—missing body, unclear cause of death, and inconclusive chemical reports. Due to these gaps, the court concluded that the evidence failed to rule out other possibilities or definitively establish guilt. Both accused, previously released on bail after being in custody since 2020, were acquitted of all charges under IPC Sections 302, 201, and 34, as well as Section 3(25) of the Arms Act. MSID:: 121343013 413 |
Time of India
08-05-2025
- Time of India
No Means No: HC Affirms Sexual Act Without Woman's Nod Is Rape
Nagpur: In a powerful reaffirmation of a woman's right to bodily autonomy , the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court ruled that once a woman refuses to engage in sexual activity, any act thereafter amounts to rape, irrespective of her past relationship with the accused or her perceived morality. "A woman who says 'No' means 'No'. There exists no further ambiguity. It is an offence if sexual intercourse is done without the consent of a woman," stated the division bench of Justice Nitin Suryawanshi and Mahendra Chandwani, while upholding the conviction of three men in the 2014 gang rape in court was hearing appeals filed by Wasim Khan, Sheikh Kadir, and a juvenile, all sentenced to life imprisonment for gang rape, attempt to murder, criminal intimidation, and offences under the Information Technology Act. The woman was abducted, sexually assaulted at multiple locations, and left judges rejected arguments based on the woman's prior intimacy with Wasim, her live-in relationship with another man, and her marital status. "Even if she was in an intimate relationship with Wasim before entering into a live-in relationship, a person cannot force a woman to have intercourse without her consent," the court noted. "Her morals or her past do not negate her right to say No."Citing Section 375 of Indian Penal Code and Section 53A of Indian Evidence Act, the court underscored that a woman's character or number of sexual partners she had are legally irrelevant in assessing consent. "Sexual intercourse, when consensual, may give pleasure to both. But if it is done without consent, it is an assault on her body, mind, and privacy," the bench rape as "the ravishment of a woman without her consent by force, fear or fraud," the judges said the crime is not merely physical, but deeply invasive & dehumanising. "It objectifies a woman & shakes the core of her being," they court also addressed the evidentiary concerns raised by the defence. Though the tape containing videos of the crime lacked Section 65B certificate (which authenticates electronic records), the judges ruled this was not fatal to the prosecution, given the overall consistency of the survivor's testimony and corroborating evidence. They emphasised that rape can be established even without physical injuries or presence of the Chandrapur sessions court judgment, the High Court concluded that consent cannot be implied, presumed, or overridden. "A woman's right to refuse is absolute. Her dignity & autonomy must be respected in every circumstance," the court said.
