‘Participating in Operation Sindoor doesn't give you immunity': SC denies relief to army officer in dowry death case
The Supreme Court refused to grant relief to an army officer who has been charged with the murder of his wife in a case of dowry death. The army officer had moved the top court against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision denying him relief.(HT photo)
While rejecting the army officer's plea urging protection from arrest, a bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and K Vinod Chandran asked him to surrender within a period of two weeks, according to ANI news agency.
The army officer had moved the top court against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision denying him relief.
While passing the order, the court said that an 'exemption from surrender' was only allowed in cases involving less serious offences, unlike the charges that the army officer had been accused of.
During the hearing, the bench noted that the fact that the convict was an army officer only showed he was capable of having strangulated his wife to death, as per ANI. After hearing the counsels' arguments, the court agreed to issue a notice to the respondent State of Punjab, while denying the army officer's appeal. SC says serving in Operation Sindoor no guarantee of immunity
The top court, while passing the judgment in the case, said that participation in 'Operation Sindoor' does not give the officer immunity to commit atrocities at home. The court's observation came after the defence counsel highlighted the convict's role as a black cat commando in the Indian Army, who had served during 'Operation Sindoor'.
The accused had been previously convicted by a Punjab court for committing dowry death under section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), following which he appealed against the decision in the Punjab and Haryana HC.
The HC suspended his sentence, until his appeal stood pending, after he had served three years in prison. However, the HC last month rejected his appeal, upholding his conviction and handing him ten years of imprisonment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
3 dead, 3 injured as fire breaks out at factory near Delhi's Rithala metro station
ANI 25 Jun 2025, 09:37 GMT+10 New Delhi [India], June 25 (ANI): Three people died and three were injured as a fire broke out in a polyethylene factory near the Rithala Metro Station in New Delhi, according to the Delhi police. A total of 15 fire tenders from the Delhi Fire Service rushed to the accident site after fire broke out in the polyethylene factory near the Rithala Metro Station. According to Divisional Fire Officer AK Jaiswal, the factory was engaged in printing on plastic and clothes. 'Printing on plastic and clothes is done in this factory. The people here told us that 2-3 people have been taken to the hospital. 15 fire tenders are present at the spot. The fire is under control, but we cannot enter the second and third floors... When we are able to enter, then we will see if there is any casualty or not.' Firefighting operations are ongoing, and authorities are awaiting access to the upper floors to determine whether there are any casualties. Further details are awaited. (ANI)
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
Justice After 32 Years: Postmaster Acquitted By High Court Over Minor Error
Betul: After a legal battle spanning more than three decades, postmaster Mankaram from Betul has finally been acquitted by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a 32-year-old case that began with a minor clerical lapse. The case dates back to 1983, when an inspection revealed that Mankaram had failed to record a deposit of Rs 3,596 in the branch register. However, the amount had been properly deposited in the government treasury and also reflected in the account holder's passbook. Despite the absence of any financial misconduct, the error was treated as criminal embezzlement. In 1993, a trial court convicted Mankaram under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (criminal breach of trust by a public servant), sentencing him to imprisonment "till the rising of the court" and imposing a fine of Rs 3,000. Mankaram appealed the decision, but the sessions court upheld the conviction. Refusing to give up, he moved the Madhya Pradesh High Court in search of justice-a process that took 32 years to yield results. Finally, Justice MS Bhatti of the High Court overturned the lower court's ruling and acquitted Mankaram, stating clearly that the act amounted only to a disciplinary lapse, not a criminal offense. The judge emphasized that lower courts must assess whether an act was committed with criminal intent before delivering such judgments.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
'Do not play with the Supreme Court': SC bench slams jail staff for keeping man illegally behind bars over typo in bail order
NEW DELHI: SC on Tuesday fumed at Ghaziabad jail SP refusing to release a Muslim man, who converted to Hinduism to marry but got booked under UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, for a typographical error in the court's order granting him bail. SC on April 29 gave bail to Aftab, who voluntarily converted to Hinduism by performing rituals at an Arya Samaj Mandir & married a Hindu girl according to Hindu rites. The girl's aunt had lodged a missing person complaint when she eloped with Aftab to get married to him. Ghaziabad police lodged a case under Section 366 (kidnapping) of IPC and Sections 3 and 5(1) of the UP anti-conversion law and arrested Aftab on Jan 10 last year, a week after his marriage. Three days later, the police filed a chargesheet. Allahabad HC rejected his bail plea. The SC, while granting bail, mentioned Sections 366 of IPC and Sections 3 and 5, instead of 5(1), of the UP anti-conversion law. On presentation of the bail order before the additional and sessions judge, Ghaziabad, and on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 1.5 lakh with two sureties, order for release of Aftab aka Rahul from jail was issued on May 27. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Τι είναι το ChatGPT για το οποίο μιλάνε όλοι; courses AI Undo You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi Nearly a month later, on Wednesday, Aftab's counsel told a bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh, "The release order was returned by the jail authorities on the ground that the charges mentioned in the jail register - Section 366 of IPC and Sections 3 and 5(1) of the anti-conversion law - does not match with the particulars mentioned in the release order." The bench fumed at the hair-splitting by the jail authorities to keep the man illegally behind bars for more than a month and said if this was the reason for refusing to release the petitioner, then it would initiate contempt of court proceedings against the officials concerned. "Do not play with the Supreme Court," the Justice Viswanathan-led bench warned. It ordered the superintendent of Ghaziabad district jail to remain present in court on Thursday. "Director general (prisons) will remain present through virtual mode," the bench said. Though the SC caught the lapse on part of jail officials, the petitioner innocently requested the court to modify the order and mention the sections correctly to enable his release from prison.
