Bengaluru techie jumps gate to flee stray dogs, residents seize phone, brand him a thief
The techie, who hails from North India and currently lives in the city for work, said the chase began while he was walking home late at night. Cornered behind a parked car, he had to make a split-second decision: jump over the car or enter a gated building compound. Opting for the latter to protect himself, he said he scaled the gate and landed inside.
(Also Read: 19 km in 32 minutes? Bengaluru's Yellow Line wins praise on day 1, but frequency a concern)
Read his full post here:
What followed, according to his Reddit post, was unexpected. Within seconds, three residents, a man in his 60s, a woman he presumed to be the man's daughter, and another woman, came out and confronted him.
Despite apologising and explaining that he was being chased by dogs, the residents allegedly refused to believe his account.
'They said, 'Even if dogs were chasing you, why trespass? We don't care about your situation,'' the techie recounted in the now-viral post.
In a bid to prove his identity and intent, he reportedly handed over his PAN and Aadhaar numbers, his address, and even showed his company profile. But the residents allegedly confiscated his phone, saying they would return it only after verifying his story the next morning.
The techie said he repeatedly requested them to either check their CCTV footage or call the police, but they declined. 'For almost 30 minutes, they kept my phone while I stood there feeling completely helpless,' he wrote.
Eventually, a neighbour was called to review the CCTV footage, which reportedly confirmed his version of events. Only then was his phone returned.
The incident left the tech professional shaken. 'I was in a life-threatening situation with dogs chasing me, but instead of empathy, I got treated like a criminal,' he wrote.
Citing Sections 81 and 97 of the Indian Penal Code, which permit entry onto private property to avoid danger, the Reddit user questioned the legality of the residents' actions, especially the seizure of his phone without police involvement, which he said could amount to wrongful confinement of property under Section 403 IPC.
HT.com could not independently verify the claims made by the Reddit user.
(Also Read: Bengaluru Metro's Pink Line to open in two phases by September 2026: Report)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Boys equallyvulnerable to sexual assault, says city court
New Delhi: It is a myth that only girls are subjected to penetrative sexual assault, boys are equally susceptible to this heinous crime, a court recently observed while sentencing a man to rigorous imprisonment of 15 years for committing an unnatural offence on a 10-year-old boy in 2019. Though the boy had turned hostile during the trial and refused to identify the accused, additional sessions judge Anu Aggarwal underlined that even if the survivor changed his stand, turned hostile and didn't support the case of the prosecution on certain aspects, his testimony couldn't be considered wholly unreliable to discard the entire case of the prosecution. In an order dated July 31, the court said, "Boys are as vulnerable to sexual abuse and exploitation as girls, and they are equally susceptible to the heinous crime of penetrative sexual assault. It is generally presumed that only girls can be subjected to penetrative sexual assault. However, this is a myth." It also awarded a compensation of Rs 10.5 lakh to the survivor. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi The man was convicted under Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act and under IPC Section 377 (unnatural offences). Additional public prosecutor Arun KV cited a report by the Union women and child development ministry, noting that approximately 54.7% of the child sexual assault survivors are boys. He also said male children were equally vulnerable to sexual abuse and endured severe psychological trauma. The court, noting that the Pocso Act covered all children irrespective of gender, said, "The mental trauma that the sexually abused boy experiences is the same as that of other sexually abused survivors. They experience fear, flashbacks and undergo post-traumatic stress disorder." In the societal framework, masculinity is wrongly associated with emotional strength, the judge pointed out. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
A Court ruling with no room for gender justice
In its judgment, Shivangi Bansal vs Sahib Bansal, that was delivered in late July, the Supreme Court of India has effectively endorsed the suspension of the arrest or coercive action under the anti-cruelty law in Section 498-A of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code (IPC). Apart from being predicated on false premises, the judgment sets a dangerous precedent for both criminal justice and gender equality. In many marriages, women suffer great levels of inequality. Apart from being discriminated against and stereotyped, they also face harassment and violence including torture. To redress violence in the domestic sphere, the Parliament has brought in laws such as Section 498-A in the IPC in 1983. Section 498-A IPC (Section 85 of the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) penalises cruelty against women, by her husband or his relative with imprisonment for three years and a fine. Cruelty is defined wide enough to include dowry harassment and driving the woman to suicide or injury to life or health. The statement of objects of the Amending Act which brought in the law has underlined the need to expand the scope of the law to apply to all kinds of cruelty within marriage. This was done in the wake of a large number of dowry deaths and also noting that cruelty cases 'culminate in suicide by, or murder of, the helpless woman concerned, constitute only a small fraction of the cases involving such cruelty'. Penal legislation such as the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 were enacted to operate harmoniously with other laws enacted for violence against women. Therefore, Parliament, as the policymaker, after legislative deliberation and study, has chosen to enact the anti-cruelty law in this particular socio-cultural context. Blanket protection from arrest However, it is without properly appreciating these social realities that the Allahabad High Court directed that no arrest or coercive action must be taken against the accused persons for a 'cool-off' period of two months from the complaint. It also directed the district-level constitution of family welfare committees, to which cases are directed to be transferred to. These directions are now endorsed by the Supreme Court, amounting to a temporary but blanket protection for the accused from arrest or coercive action, when it is permitted by the criminal law. Importantly enough, this was done in an individual dispute without examining in detail the socio-political implications of such a suspension. Nor was the State government heard in elaborate detail — at least going by the top court's judgment — before approving the suspension concerning a central criminal enactment. As a result of the judgment and its binding nature, even when there is overwhelming evidence of this serious crime, no arrests can be made by the police for at least a period of two months after its filing. This move also places a chilling effect on the complainants, who are otherwise already disadvantaged and discouraged from filing police complaints. The safety of the complainant is also severely put to risk. Further, the delay and inaction of the police in a proper investigation of complaints pertaining to 'problems inside marriage' are also legitimised by the judgment. Now, it might be true that family law jurisprudence in the country could improve with alternate dispute resolution mechanisms such as mediation, rather than adversarial litigation. There is substance in the general argument that in cases of divorce or custody of children, conciliatory and effective resolution is more desirable than a long adjudicative process. Family cases are also highly sensitive and emotionally charged, which makes them much more suitable for the former than the latter. These aspects do not, however, apply when serious allegations of violence are made which come under the ambit of the penal law. The question of 'misuse' The narrative of 'misuse' of the anti-cruelty law is often heard in popular discourse. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court itself has echoed a similar sentiment in a series of cases. In Preeti Gupta and Anr. vs State Of Jharkhand and Anr. (2010), the Court held that several cases which are not bona fide are filed under this provision. In Sushil Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India and Ors. (2005), the Court even said that 'by misuse of the provision a new legal terrorism can be unleashed'. In Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar and Anr. (2014), the Court already issued strict guidelines before arrest in anti-cruelty cases. It directed 'the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters' under Section 41 of the earlier Criminal Procedure Code which deals with appearance before police officers. Such guidelines have already rendered police action difficult. Yet, before the Court, apart from individual allegations, there is no concrete empirical data with evidence of any such 'misuse' of the anti-cruelty law. Every time the Court is faced with a dispute, it pertains to individual facts and counter versions. Being a complex social problem, this is also an area where the Court has much less institutional competence to conclude that there is overall 'misuse'. To venture into the terrain of legislative wisdom, therefore, is outside the corners of judicial expertise. One of the arguments often used is the allegedly low conviction rate in such cases, which is around 18% as per the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data in 2022. This means that almost one out of five cases leads to conviction, which is much higher than those in several other offences. Even otherwise, a low conviction rate does not automatically translate into the misuse of the law. In a society such as ours, with close-knit and dominating family relationships, it is attributable to various factors such as the problems in investigation, systemic bias and social and familial pressure on the woman to settle matters. The requirement of family members having to testify in criminal court is a daunting task. Moreover, there is a high burden of proof of 'beyond reasonable doubt' in criminal cases in addition to the difficulty in finding evidence for violence in intimate spaces. Survey findings The NCRB recorded that at least 1,34,506 cases were registered under the law in 2022. The National Family Health Survey-5 has reported the ground reality — that there is a gross under-reporting of violence against women in several States. The rising number of cases, a report by the women's centre Humsafar said, 'may be attributed to growing awareness among women about the law'. Therefore, to draw conclusions of widespread misuse from individual cases 'reflect institutional bias that exists within the criminal justice system' (A comprehensive study on the efficacy of Section 498-A). Now, even if we assume that there are false cases filed under the law, the potential for misuse is inherent in any law. The veracity of the allegation under any criminal complaint can only be determined upon a proper investigation. Now, by selectively suspending the anti-cruelty law, the Court has made the victims of cruelty much more vulnerable than ever under India's justice system. To subject certain criminal provisions to a more rigorous test than the others also has effects on the uniformity and the consistency of the criminal law. The Court itself reiterated in Sushil Kumar Sharma (2005), wherein the constitutional validity of this very law was under challenge, the settled legal principle that misuse of a law is no ground to strike it down. Now, it has acted exactly against this idea, making rigid the possibilities of victims of cruelty to aspire for any meaningful semblance of justice. Thulasi K. Raj is a lawyer at the Supreme Court of India
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Telangana high court quashes 2019 case against CM, gives appearance exemption in 2021 case
Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana high court on Monday quashed a criminal case filed in 2019 against chief minister A Revanth Reddy for allegedly violating the model code of conduct (MCC) during the Huzurnagar assembly by-election. The case (FIR No. 267/2019) was registered at Garidepally police station against Revanth, then a Congress MP, and N Uttam Kumar Reddy, also a Congress MP at the time. They were accused of holding a meeting in Ponugodu mandal on Oct 19, 2019, without prior permission from election officials. The police later filed a chargesheet (No. 403/2023). The court held that violations of the MCC alone are not legally maintainable as criminal offences unless there is proof of intentional disobedience. Since the chargesheet lacked such evidence, the case was quashed. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad In a separate order, Justice Lakshman dispensed with the CM's personal appearance before the principal special judicial first class magistrate for excise cases in another matter (chargesheet No. 45/2024). However, the court directed that he must appear whenever specifically required. That case stems from FIR No. 211/2021, registered at Kamalapur police station in Warangal district. Revanth, listed as accused No. 7 along with six other Congress leaders, was charged under section 188 IPC and section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act. Police alleged that during a meeting on Oct 24, 2021, attended by around 2,500 party workers, the accused violated Covid-19 restrictions and the MCC by exceeding the permitted limit of 1,000 participants. The high court has issued notices to the state govt and the complainant in the 2021 case, asking them to file their responses by Sept 9, 2025. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
