NMC faces 1 cr penalty for ignoring HC orders on rehab
Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court on Tuesday lashed out at the Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) for failing to act on its repeated directives related to the rehabilitation of licensee vendors displaced by the Ganesh Tekdi railway station parking plaza project. The division bench comprising Justices Avinash Gharote and Abhay Mantri warned that it was inclined to impose a penalty of 1 cr on the civic body for its "insensitive" conduct and disregard for court orders.The court was hearing a petition filed by Syed Sakir Ali Abdul Ali and 34 others through Counsel Mahesh Dhatrak, who challenged the prolonged delay in implementing a revised proposal under Section 37 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act.The proposal, crucial for rehabilitating affected shopkeepers, was to be submitted by NMC to the state govt as directed by the court on February 27. However, as of May 5, the civic body failed to send the required proposal.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 hours ago
- Business Standard
SC refuses to quash Pocso charges against judge, cites shocking allegations
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to quash proceedings under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act against a suspended judicial officer accused of sexually abusing his daughter. Describing the case as 'shocking', the bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan held that it was certainly not fit for quashing by any legal standard. The observations were made during the hearing of a special leave petition in Sandeep vs State of Maharashtra. Bombay High Court order upheld The petition was filed against the 15 April order by the Bombay High Court, which had also declined to quash the charges under the Pocso Act. According to LiveLaw, Justice Manmohan further stated orally: 'This is a shocking case. This is a judicial officer—serious allegations of incest! Madam, this is not the case to be entertained for quashing by any standard. I don't know what legal advice you are getting, but this is not a case, certainly, by any standard. Your daughter is making the allegations, no? She must have been scarred for life.' Petition dismissed, trial to be expedited The bench dismissed the petition, stating, 'After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned passed by the High Court.' Additionally, the court directed that the name of the victim be masked wherever it appears in the paperbook of the special leave petition. The court also allowed the trial to be expedited, paving the way for faster proceedings.
NDTV
7 hours ago
- NDTV
Supreme Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Ex Judge Accused Of Raping Minor Daughter
Show Quick Read Summary is AI-generated, newsroom-reviewed New Delhi: Calling it "shocking", the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to quash the criminal proceedings against a former judicial officer accused of sexually abusing his minor daughter. "The daughter is making an allegation. It is a shocking case. He is a judicial officer and these are serious allegations of incest. This is shocking. And the daughter has made the allegations. She must have been scarred for life. How can this be a case for quashing?" a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan asked. The bench, as a result, dismissed his appeal against a Bombay High Court passed on April 15, 2025, upholding the framing of charges by the trial court. The bench did not agree to the submissions that the judge was framed due to the long-standing matrimonial dispute with his estranged wife and the case was a "counter blast" and lodged after his father died by suicide allegedly after being harassed by the complainant's side. "We don't want to get into all this. Suicide may be because of the son's (judge) actions," Justice Manmohan remarked. The counsel for the former judge said, "This man's entire life has been ruined starting with his matrimonial problems." "His father committed suicide. The complaint was made much later and was never mentioned during earlier legal proceedings," the lawyer added. The bench, however, noted the serious allegations and charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against him. The case stems from an FIR registered on January 21, 2019, in Bhandara, Maharashtra after the alleged incidents of abuse taking place between May 2014 and 2018. It came on record that a chargesheet had been filed but formal charges were yet to be framed in the case. The former judge was charged under Section 354 of IPC for assaulting a woman with intent to outrage her modesty apart from Sections 7, 8, 9(l), 9(n), and 10 of the POCSO Act, relating to various forms of sexual assault, including aggravated and incestuous abuse. The plea alleged the complaint was made with malicious intent and the FIR was registered four years -- coinciding with an ongoing custody dispute and matrimonial litigation -- after the alleged events. The plea said the statutory presumption under the POCSO Act was improperly invoked, as no foundational facts had yet been established. With top court's refusal to quash the charges, the former judge is expected to stand trial in a special POCSO court.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
9 hours ago
- Business Standard
SC refuses to quash FIR against ex-judge accused of raping minor daughter
Calling it 'shocking', the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to quash the criminal proceedings against a former judicial officer accused of sexually abusing his minor daughter. 'The daughter is making an allegation. It is a shocking case. He is a judicial officer and these are serious allegations of incest. This is shocking. And the daughter has made the allegations. She must have been scarred for life. How can this be a case for quashing?" a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan asked. The bench, as a result, dismissed his appeal against a Bombay High Court passed on April 15, 2025, upholding the framing of charges by the trial court. The bench did not agree to the submissions that the judge was framed due to the long-standing matrimonial dispute with his estranged wife and the case was a 'counter blast' and lodged after his father died by suicide allegedly after being harassed by the complainant's side. 'We don't want to get into all this. Suicide may be because of the son's (judge) actions,' Justice Manmohan remarked. The counsel for the former judge said, 'This man's entire life has been ruined starting with his matrimonial problems." 'His father committed suicide. The complaint was made much later and was never mentioned during earlier legal proceedings,' the lawyer added. The bench, however, noted the serious allegations and charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against him. The case stems from an FIR registered on January 21, 2019, in Bhandara, Maharashtra after the alleged incidents of abuse taking place between May 2014 and 2018. It came on record that a chargesheet had been filed but formal charges were yet to be framed in the case. The former judge was charged under Section 354 of IPC for assaulting a woman with intent to outrage her modesty apart from Sections 7, 8, 9(l), 9(n), and 10 of the POCSO Act, relating to various forms of sexual assault, including aggravated and incestuous abuse. The plea alleged the complaint was made with malicious intent and the FIR was registered four years -- coinciding with an ongoing custody dispute and matrimonial litigation -- after the alleged events. The plea said the statutory presumption under the POCSO Act was improperly invoked, as no foundational facts had yet been established. With top court's refusal to quash the charges, the former judge is expected to stand trial in a special POCSO court.
