New Mexico judge resigns after Tren de Aragua gang member arrested at his home
A New Mexico judge resigned from the bench after an alleged Tren de Aragua gang member was arrested at his home.Doña Ana County Magistrate Judge Joel Cano wrote his resignation on March 3, but the Supreme Court and 3rd Judicial District Court did not receive it till March 31. Homeland Security Investigations Las Cruces began looking into Venezuelan native Cristhian Ortega-Lopez in January.
Show more
Show less
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Forced narco tests illegal, results not admissible: Supreme Court
Setting aside a high court order allowing narco-analysis tests on accused persons without consent, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asserted that involuntary or forced tests are not permissible under the law. The Supreme Court held that compelling an accused to undergo narco-analysis, without free and informed consent, violates the constitutional protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) and the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the report of such an involuntary test or any information discovered as a result is not admissible as evidence in criminal or other proceedings," the bench clarified. The order came days after a Patna High Court order accepting a police officer's submission to subject all accused persons and witnesses in a criminal case to narco-analysis testing. The submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer was accepted during the hearing of a bail plea filed by the its ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its landmark 2010 judgment in Selvi and Others v State of Karnataka, which held that forcibly subjecting individuals to narco-analysis, polygraph, or brain mapping tests was unconstitutional. The court reiterated that these techniques, if not voluntarily undertaken, breach personal liberty and the right against safeguards laid down in the Selvi case judgement:No lie detector or narco-analysis test shall be conducted without the accused's voluntary accused must be informed of the legal, emotional, and physical implications of the to legal counsel must be provided before deciding on consentConsent must be recorded before a Judicial guidelines for polygraph tests should be followed, and similar protocols adopted for narco-analysis and brain mapping top court further clarified that an accused may voluntarily choose to do so at an appropriate stage, such as during the presentation of defence evidence in a even in such cases, the court emphasised that there is no indefeasible right to undergo narco-analysis. It also said that judicial authorisation must account for the totality of circumstances, including safeguards and genuine InMust Watch
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Calling a rapist 'family' is not just
The Supreme Court recently used its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to uphold the conviction of a 25-year-old man for raping a 14-year-old girl without imposing a sentence. Some hailed the decision as a 'landmark', but it has raised serious concerns about the message it sends on child protection and justice. In 2018, a child was kidnapped in West Bengal. Later, she was found married to the man who had raped her and gave birth to his child. The court acknowledged that a crime had taken place and upheld his conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, but reasoned that sending him to jail would make the victim the 'worst sufferer' because she had now built a life with the accused. The bench of Justices A S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan made the decision based on the report of a committee consisting of a clinical psychologist, a social scientist and a child welfare officer, which found that the woman, now 21, is emotionally attached to the accused and protective of her 'small family'. Has the court interpreted her trauma-based dependence as 'consent' and survival as 'choice'? In another recent case, the Orissa High Court adopted a similar approach. Justice S K Panigrahi granted bail to a 26-year-old man accused of raping a girl he had allegedly been in a relationship with since 2019, when she was 16. The complainant said the accused had physical relations with her on the false promise of marriage and that she became pregnant twice, in 2020 and 2022, but was forced to terminate both pregnancies. A case under the POCSO Act was filed in 2023. In 2024, the accused sought bail, claiming both families had agreed he should marry the complainant. The judge, while granting bail, remarked that the allegations, though serious in statutory terms, arose out of a 'consensual relationship' between two individuals who were close in age and shared a personal bond before the case was filed and did not prima facie exhibit characteristics of force, coercion or exploitation.
India Gazette
4 hours ago
- India Gazette
SC grants bail to Uttarakhand man accused of religious conversion for marrying inter-faith
New Delhi [India], June 11 (ANI): The Supreme Court recently granted bail to a Uttarakhand-based man who was booked for religious conversion and cheating for marrying a woman who belonged to a different faith. A bench of Justices B V Navarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma granted the man relief by observing that the state government of Uttarakhand cannot object to the marriage when the same has taken place as per the wishes of the couple's parents. 'We observe that the respondent-State cannot have any objection to the appellant and his wife residing together inasmuch as they have been married as per the wishes of their respective parents and families. Thus, the top court found that this was an appropriate case where bail should be granted to the man.' The man had been booked for having committed religious conversion under The Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, for Cheating and Cheating by personation (pretending to be someone else) under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, following his marriage with a woman who belonged to another faith. As per the man's counsel, the marriage was arranged by the families of the couple, who were aware of the inter-faith nature of the union. However, following the marriage, certain individuals and organisations raised objections. An FIR was lodged against the man, leading to his arrest and imprisonment. After being in custody for six months, the Supreme Court, on May 19, directed that the man be immediately released on bail. 'We also make it clear that the pendency of the criminal proceeding against the appellant herein would not come in the way of the appellant and his wife residing together on their own volition', the Court stated, in its order. The man had moved the Supreme Court against the Uttarakhand High Court's decision to reject his bail plea. The top court allowed his appeal and directed the concerned trial court to release him on bail. (ANI)
