Latest news with #StateofPunjab
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘Cash-for-sex scandal': Punjab and Haryana HC disposes of PIL, asks petitioner to approach magistrate
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday disposed of a public interest litigation seeking forensic analysis of audio clips allegedly involving a senior IPS officer in an alleged cash-for-sex scandal, directing the petitioner to approach the competent Magistrate under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). A division bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, with Justice Sanjiv Berry, passed the order during resumed hearing of the matter. The case had earlier come up on May 5, when a bench comprising Chief Justice Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel had directed the State of Punjab to file its response. The petitioner, Supreme Court Advocate Nikhil Saraf, represented by Advocate Amit Sharma, had sought an independent forensic examination of two viral audio recordings and the disclosure of the name of the officer allegedly referred to by a woman constable during her arrest under the NDPS Act. Appearing for the State of Punjab and the Director General of Police, Senior Advocate Salil Sabhlok questioned the maintainability of the petition. He submitted that the audio clips were 'inaudible, doctored and unverified,' and argued that the petition was motivated, lacked genuine public interest, and had been filed without exhausting available remedies. He also submitted that the complaint against the officer was still pending before the DGP. In response, Advocate Amit Sharma argued that the affidavit filed by the State 'appeared to have been submitted without even reading the petition.' He submitted that the State had failed to address the material placed on record, including evidence of systemic failures, prior judicial findings of breakdowns in criminal enforcement, and continued institutional inaction despite specific court directions. 'This petition is not about any single officer,' Sharma told the bench. 'It brings to light a larger pattern of silence, complicity, and selective protection.' He referred the court to several annexures, including High Court orders documenting delayed FIRs in rape and murder cases, instances of non-compliance with court directions, and the imposition of ₹1 lakh costs on the officer now at the centre of the present petition. Sharma also reminded the bench that in another case, the same DGP had submitted that a gangster's interview had not taken place in Punjab, a claim later contradicted by official records, prompting the court to seek an affidavit in that matter as well. He further submitted that the petitioner had approached multiple statutory bodies, including the DGP, the Chief Minister's Office, the State Women's Commission, and the Police Complaints Authority, but none had taken action. 'If the State believes the audio recordings are false or inaudible, the remedy lies in forensic analysis, not institutional denial,' Sharma argued. After hearing both sides, the bench disposed of the PIL with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned under appropriate provisions of BNSS. It also observed that if the Magistrate failed to act, the petitioner would be at liberty to return to the High Court.
NDTV
3 days ago
- NDTV
Delhi Court Convicts Man For Using Vulgar Language, Outraging Woman's Modesty
New Delhi: In a verdict reinforcing the right of women to live with dignity and without fear, a Delhi court has convicted a man under Sections 506 (Part II) and 509 of the Indian Penal Code for criminal intimidation and using obscene and abusive language intended to outrage a woman's modesty. The incident involved the accused sending a series of highly vulgar and threatening messages to the complainant. Some of the messages included: "Darwaza khol de mujhe tere saath s** karna hai", "R** tujhe main bataunga, bahut samajhdar apne aap ko samajhti hai", and "R* darwaza khol de, nahi to main tujhe chhodunga nahi". The court observed that such language goes far beyond casual abuse and directly targets the woman's character and dignity. "The word 'R**' is not a simple insult; it is loaded with sexual connotations, casting aspersions on the woman's morality and loyalty. These words are capable of shocking the conscience of any reasonable person," the court noted. Citing multiple precedents, including Rupan Deol Bajaj v. KPS Gill and State of Punjab v. Major Singh, the court reiterated that the modesty of a woman is intrinsically linked to her gender, and words or acts that degrade her in this regard are punishable under law. "To constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC, it must be shown that the act or speech was intended to insult the modesty of a woman. In this case, that threshold is clearly met," the judge ruled. The complainant had also alleged that the accused threatened her with rape and murder if she didn't comply with his demands. Statements such as "Darwaza nahi khola toh goli maar dunga" were held to constitute criminal intimidation under Section 503 IPC. The court held that these were not hollow threats but grave intimidations that created fear and terror in the mind of the woman. The court noted that the accused, while testifying in his own defence, admitted that the messages originated from his mobile number. Although he claimed the messages stemmed from a rent dispute, he did not deny their vulgar content. His admission was taken on record under Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, which states that admitted facts need not be further proved. The defence raised procedural objections, such as the absence of a Call Detail Record (CDR) analysis or IMEI number verification. However, the court rejected these arguments, noting that the WhatsApp messages -- the main evidence -- had already been admitted by the accused himself. "Minor lapses in investigation do not affect the core of the prosecution's case, especially when the evidence is independently corroborated by the victim's testimony and the accused's own admission," the court said. The court further discussed the legal contours of Section 509 IPC, clarifying that not all insults amount to an insult to modesty. However, when the words used are capable of "shocking the sense of decency of a woman," they fall squarely within the purview of this section. The court also explained that "modesty" as envisaged under law is not defined in the IPC but is broadly understood as "womanly propriety of behaviour." Quoting Rupan Deol Bajaj, the court held that, "The ultimate test is whether the words or actions of the accused could be perceived as capable of outraging the modesty of a woman." Given the nature and content of the language used, the court held that this legal standard was clearly met. The Court held that the prosecution had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the court convicted the accused under Section 506 (Part II) for criminal intimidation and Section 509 IPC for using words intended to insult the modesty of a woman.
The Hindu
5 days ago
- The Hindu
Marriage is spiritual union, not legal battle: Bombay High Court flags misuse of matrimonial laws
The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed a criminal case involving serious charges of cruelty, unnatural sex, and dowry harassment, observing that marriage is a sacred institution and should not be reduced to prolonged legal battles that serve no constructive purpose. A Division Bench comprising Justices Nitin W. Sambre and M.M. Nerlikar in an order dated July 8, 2025, that was made available on Monday (July 15, 2025), allowed three connected criminal applications seeking to quash FIR registered at Beltarodi Police Station, Nagpur, under Sections 498-A, 377 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The charges were levelled by a woman against her husband, two sisters-in-law, and a maternal aunt-in-law following a matrimonial dispute. 'Needless to mention that considering the recent trend of filing first information reports against as many as persons from husband side, has become imperative to look the matters of matrimonial disputes from a different angle, and therefore, if the parties settle their disputes amicably in order to live peacefully, it is the duty of the Court to encourage such action by entertaining the prayer for quashing of the first information report, charge sheet or criminal proceedings,' the order said. The Bench noted that the parties had reached a mutual settlement, culminating in a decree of divorce passed by the Family Court on July 1, 2025, under Section 13(B) of the Special Marriage Act. The informant — wife also appeared before the court and gave her consent for quashing of the criminal proceedings, stating she wished to move forward in life. 'Marital discord has now a days become menace in society due to various factors. The parties who are fighting due to these marital discords are having several remedies in law. The small issue between the two are spoiling the entire life and the marriages which are sacrosanct in Hindus are at stake,' the order read. The Bench observed that although the offences were non-compoundable, the court was empowered under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash proceedings if doing so would serve the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the legal process. Citing precedents such as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, the court held that matrimonial offences with a predominantly civil character should not be allowed to drag on when the possibility of conviction is remote and the parties have resolved their differences. 'The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution means more than mere survival or animal existence,' the court stated, adding that in cases where reconciliation is no longer possible, ending litigation early is essential to protect the mental and emotional well-being of both parties. 'Marriages are not merely a social contract, but a spiritual union that binds two souls together. However, now days, these scared marriages receive set back in the above circumstances. The distress, disharmony and lack of adjustment amongst the persons lead to conflict,' the judges observed. The court also flagged the rising trend of multiple FIRs being filed against entire families in matrimonial disputes and urged courts to look at such matters through a different lens. It further noted that legislation intended to protect marital relationships – such as the Domestic Violence Act and the Special Marriage Act – is increasingly being misused, leading to a flood of litigation, psychological distress, and irreversible harm to families and children. 'It is the duty of the court to encourage a respectful settlement and not drag parties through prolonged criminal trials, especially when the dispute is private in nature and both sides have chosen to part ways amicably,' the court held. Accordingly, the FIR, charge sheet, and criminal proceedings pending before the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur, is hereby quashed and set aside, the court observed.
Indian Express
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Punjab and Haryana HC slams delay in parole case, says prisoners are not ‘second-class citizens'
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the District Magistrate of Moga to decide within two weeks the parole application of a convict seeking temporary release to support his ailing mother and children. The court pulled up state authorities for what it called a 'culture of apathy' in handling parole pleas, saying such delays violate a prisoner's right to life and dignity. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, who passed the order on July 9, said, 'It is deeply concerning that state agencies display such laxity in dealing with applications for temporary release. The administration cannot truly comprehend the value of liberty as perceived by a prisoner, who lives its absence every single day.' The petitioner, Jaspal Singh alias Jassa, is serving a 10-year sentence under the NDPS Act for a 2020 case in Ferozepur. He applied for eight weeks of parole in September last year to care for his mother, who suffers from age-related illnesses, and to reunite briefly with his two children. But despite nearly 10 months passing, the application remained undecided, prompting him to move the High Court. Justice Brar said the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962, was humanitarian in spirit and must not be reduced to a 'paper ritual.' Citing the Supreme Court's landmark 1978 ruling in Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration, he noted, 'Convicts are not, by mere reason of the conviction, denuded of all the fundamental rights which they otherwise possess.' The judge also pointed to earlier High Court judgments that fixed timelines for such decisions, including Joginder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Mahammad Shehbaz vs. State of Punjab. Appearing for Singh, Advocate Lakhwinder Singh Lakhanpal argued that the inaction had caused mental agony to the prisoner and his family. The state, represented by Additional Advocate General Subhash Godara, admitted the parole file was still awaiting a police report before the District Magistrate could act. Disposing of the petition, the court not only ordered the DM to take a final call on Singh's application within two weeks but also laid down a broader rule: all parole pleas must be decided within four months. Failure to do so without valid reasons could invite contempt proceedings, the judge warned. The High Court has also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the legal representatives of Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh to ensure compliance across the region.
Indian Express
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
In a first, SC comes out with roster specifying post-wise quota for SC, ST staff
For the first time, the Supreme Court has come out with a roster specifying the post-wise quota to streamline the implementation of the reservation policy for appointment and promotion of its staffers belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This was done as per the 1995 ruling by a five-judge Constitution bench in R K Sabharwal vs State of Punjab, which said that in government appointments, reservation should be post-based (based on the number of posts in a cadre and not vacancy-based (based on number of vacancies arising in a given year). The judgment also said there should separate rosters for direct recruitment and promotion. Under the roster, a post identified for a particular category will continue to to remain with it even after the retirement of the person holding the post. An internal circular issued by the top court on June 24 notified that the Model Reservation Roster and Register has been uploaded on the Supnet and is effective from June 23, 2025. It urged the staff to convey their objections or representations in the roster or register, to the Registrar (Recruitment). As per the model roster, the SC/ST employees will get their respective shares in direct recruitment and STs will get 7.5% in promotions. Highly-placed sources told The Indian Express that though there was reservation earlier, the R K Sabharwal judgment mandates that there has to be a 200-point roster so that the reservation process is streamlined. The sources, however, said that there was no such policy until now and the implementation of reservation was haphazard along with backlogs for SCs and STs. A 200-point roster has been finalised as mandated by the ruling to streamline the process and maintain adequate quotas for reserved category as well as general category, sources said, adding that it is not restricted to direct recruitments but will apply for reservation in promotions as well. They said that though the reservation as of now is only for SCs and STs, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai is working to ensure OBC reservations too. The sources pointed out that the reservation applies to all posts, from the Registrar to peon. CJI Gavai said, 'We have finalised (the roster) and published it. We have invited objections from the staff. After taking into consideration the objections, it will be finalised and implemented.'
