High court stays further proceedings against Ajai Rai
Justice Sameer Jain passed the order in a petition filed by Ajay Rai challenging summons issued against him as well as charge sheet filed by police.
In his petition, Rai sought quashing of the summoning order dated Sep 9, 2019 and charge sheet dated Nov7, 2017 as well as entire proceedings of case no. 2436 of 2019, (state Vs. Surendra Patel and others) arising out of case crime no- 193 of 2017 under section 188 (Disobedience to an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) lodged at police station- Kotwali police station of Varanasi.
As per the petitioner's counsel, charge sheet was filed against Rai under section 188 IPC but cognizance was taken by court concerned on the charge sheet submitted for section - 188 of criminal procedure code (CrPC), therefore, cognizance order passed by the court concerned was bad in the eyes of law and was liable to be quashed. On the other hand, additional advocate general, representing state govt, Manish Goyal, submitted that although prima facie, cognizance order appeared to be bad, the entire proceeding could not be quashed.
The court in its order dated Jul 28, after hearing parties concerned, fixed Aug 5 as next date of hearing and said, "Meanwhile, further proceedings pending against the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, remain stayed."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
13 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Making undertrials stand with raised arms is not legal'
Days after four undertrials were held guilty of contempt of court and given a bizarre punishment of standing with their hands raised in the air, a sessions court has called the action illegal, asking the magistrate to first understand legal provisions before using its discretionary powers. (Getty Images/iStockphoto) Additional sessions judge Anju Bajaj Chandna of Dwarka court passed the order on Friday. The judge set aside the July 15 order passed by judicial magistrate first class Saurabh Goyal. Magistrate Goyal, who was presiding over a complaint case of alleged land grab and forgery in Dwarka's Palam village, had held the four guilty of contempt of court for wasting the court's time and causing delay in payment of bail bonds. The judge made them stand with their hands raised up in the air till noon. Two of the accused, Kuldeep and Rakesh, moved the sessions court, seeking setting aside of the previous order on grounds that it was a gross misuse of law and an act of judicial overreach. Terming the punishment as illegal, the court said, 'The order cannot qualify the test legality and propriety. The order passed by Ld. Magistrate is not only illegal but even the legal procedure has not been adopted'. The court observed that non-furnishing of bail bonds by the accused persons cannot be termed as a contemptuous by any stretch of interpretation. The court observed that the magistrate had failed to take note of the fact that new criminal laws had come into effect from July 1, 2024, and proceedings conducted under the older IPC was an 'incorrect application of law'. The judge added that even if the proceedings are viewed through the IPC and CrPC sections, the order passed is 'absolutely against the substantive and procedural law'. The court said that the accused persons not furnishing the bail bonds did not fall within the ambit of IPC Section 228 (intentional insult or interruption to a public servant sitting in judicial proceedings) and in no manner be taken as an insult or interruption. 'It is also clear that the magistrate did not afford any opportunity to the accused persons to show cause as to why they should not be proceeded against…without hearing, the accused were asked to stand in the court till the rising of the court with their hands straight in the air. The kind of sentence is not contemplated in law,' the court remarked. Explaining that it was the duty of the court to ensure that no person can be detained without proper legal justification, the court said that the Magistrate completely failed in his duty and responsibility to conduct judicial proceedings legally and properly. 'The order is not sustainable…the Ld. Magistrate is advised to properly read and understand the legal provisions before using his discretionary powers,' the court observed.
Hindustan Times
43 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
PMC issues stern warning over water meter resistance
The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC), under the direction of additional commissioner Pradip Chandran, has issued a firm warning to residents obstructing its ongoing water meter installation drive. In an official order dated July 31, the PMC stated that individuals interfering with civic work would face legal action under Section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (previously IPC Section 353), which pertains to using assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging their duty. Additionally, the water connections of violators will be disconnected. Additionally, the water connections of violators will be disconnected. (HT) The civic body aims to install 2.62 lakh water meters citywide to improve water management and monitor usage. While 1.85 lakh meters have been successfully installed, work on the remaining 1.77 lakh has been hampered due to resistance, particularly in core city areas such as Kasba Peth, Market Yard, Dhankawadi, Katraj, Yerawada, Sasanenagar, Mohammadwadi, and Peth localities. 'If someone interferes with the PMC's water meter installation work, their water connection will be disconnected and legal action will be initiated,' Chandran reiterated. The initiative comes amid rising concerns over unauthorised water connections, population pressure, and significant losses due to leakages. In response, the PMC has divided the city into 141 zones to conduct a detailed water audit and assess consumption patterns. Water resources minister Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil recently reviewed the city's water management and called for urgent repair of leakages and better monitoring systems. He underscored the need for optimal water use and supported regulation through metering. While the PMC's target is to supply 150 litres of water per citizen daily in metered areas, political opposition has grown amid fears of public backlash. In many households, daily consumption for a family of four exceeds 500 litres, raising concerns that monthly bills could rise sharply once metering is fully implemented. Several sitting MLAs and former corporators have expressed reservations, citing voter discontent.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Public outcry doesn't lessen seriousness of offence: Delhi HC
Public outcry and media coverage do not lessen the seriousness of an offence, the Delhi High Court has said while denying bail to a man accused of raping and murdering his eight-year-old cousin. (HT Archive) The man was booked under various provisions of Indian Penal Code including murder, kidnapping, and Section 6 (penetrative sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, 2012. The FIR, filed in 2016, was based on a complaint by the victim's father, who reported that his daughter had been abducted while playing outside their home. Police learned that the accused had raped the girl, strangled her, concealed her body in a plastic bag, and buried it in a pit. In his bail petition, the man said he was falsely implicated in the case under public pressure and glare of media trial. He said he had already spent more than nine years in jail and there was no likelihood of the trial to conclude in the near future. The Delhi police, represented by additional public prosecutor Amit Ahlawat, said there had been no delay in trial and four out of 20 witnesses had supported prosecution's case. The complainant's lawyer opposed the bail asserting that the accused's family members had been threatening him. Rejecting the man's contention, justice Girish Kathpalia in his ruling delivered on Friday, said , 'The broad picture recorded above shows the gruesome manner in which an eight-year-old girl was raped and killed, that too by her own cousin. Merely because there was public outcry and media coverage of the incident, gravity of offence does not get diminished.' In its five-page ruling, the judge said the man exploited the relationship of trust between the cousins in a 'brutal manner.' 'One also cannot ignore that a relationship of trust between the cousins was exploited by the accused/applicant and in such a brutal manner,' the court said.
