Prohibitory orders in Jharkhand village after clash during Muharram procession
At least three persons were injured in the clash that took place during Muharram procession in Palhe village in the Patan police station area in Jharkhand on Sunday evening.
Also read: Violent student clash outside mosque at Pune's Azam Campus leaves two in ICU
"Prohibitory orders under Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, earlier section 144 of CrPC, have been imposed for 48 hours from 6 am on Monday in the village as a precautionary measure," Deputy Commissioner (DC) Sameera S told PTI.
She said that the persons involved in the incident are being identified and statements of the injured are being recorded. The peace committee is working in the area to calm the situation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Wife living separately from husband without valid reason not entitled to maintenance: HC
Prayagraj , The Allahabad High Court has observed that a wife living separately from her husband without a valid reason is not entitled to maintenance and set aside a family court order granting maintenance to a married woman. Wife living separately from husband without valid reason not entitled to maintenance: HC Allowing a revision petition filed by the woman's husband, Vipul Agrawal, Justice Subhas Chandra Sharma set aside the February 17 order of maintenance passed by the additional principal judge of the family court in Meerut. "The trial court has recorded the finding that the wife failed to prove that she is living separately from the husband with sufficient reasons and the husband is neglecting to maintain her, even though the amount of maintenance has been fixed in favour of the wife at ₹5,000 per month. "As per the provision contained under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , if the wife is living separately from the husband without sufficient reasons, she is not entitled to maintenance," the high court said. During the course of the hearing, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial court has recorded the finding that the wife is living separately from her husband without sufficient reasons. Despite this, the family court has fixed the amount of maintenance at ₹5,000 per month. He also submitted that the trial court has not considered the earning capacity of the petitioner but fixed the amount of maintenance in favour of the wife and a minor child at ₹5,000 and ₹3,000, totalling ₹8,000 per month. However, the lawyer representing the woman and the state counsel submitted that she is living separately from her husband due to his neglect and that is why the trial court has allowed the application and fixed the amount of maintenance. Allowing the revision petition of the husband, the court said, "In view of the aforesaid finding as recorded by the trial court in relation to the second issue and the order fixing the amount at ₹5,000 per month in favour of the wife, both are contradictory and in violation of the provision as contained in section 125, CrPC. Therefore, the order dated February 17, 2025 being erroneous requires interference by this court." The court, in its judgment dated July 8, sent the matter back to the family court to decide it afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. However, the court made it clear that the petitioner will continue to pay an amount of ₹3,000 per month for the wife and ₹2,000 per month for the child as interim maintenance during the pendency of the application. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
TMC-BJP war of words after 2 found dead in Khejuri
1 2 Khejuri: The deaths of two persons under mysterious circumstances on the sidelines of a local function at Khejuri in East Midnapore on Friday night have sparked a tussle among rival political parties. The bodies of Sujit Das, 23, of Purba Bhangonmari, and Sudhir Chandra Paik, 65, of Jhantihari, were found at the venue of a 'jalsa' at Bhangonmari village. While BJP claimed they were murdered, Trinamool said a police investigation would uncover the truth. Locals said the duo might have been electrocuted after a halogen light fell on them. In a statement on X, Bengal leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari said the victims had gone to attend a Muharram festival at the Janaka area of Khejuri last night when they were murdered. He named seven people allegedly responsible for the deaths, including a local TMC neta. "The presence of injury marks and blood stains on the deceased suggest suspicious circumstances behind these deaths," he said. Trinamool spokesperson Kunal Ghosh said: "This constant attempt to lace everything with religious poison to incite people is disgraceful politics." You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Wife living apart without valid reason not entitled to maintenance: HC
The Allahabad High Court has observed that a wife living separately from her husband without a valid reason is not entitled to maintenance and set aside a family court order granting maintenance to a married woman. Allowing a revision petition filed by the woman's husband, Vipul Agrawal, Justice Subhas Chandra Sharma set aside the February 17 order of maintenance passed by the additional principal judge of the family court in Meerut. "The trial court has recorded the finding that the wife failed to prove that she is living separately from the husband with sufficient reasons and the husband is neglecting to maintain her, even though the amount of maintenance has been fixed in favour of the wife at Rs 5,000 per month. "As per the provision contained under section 125(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), if the wife is living separately from the husband without sufficient reasons, she is not entitled to maintenance," the high court said. During the course of the hearing, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial court has recorded the finding that the wife is living separately from her husband without sufficient reasons. Despite this, the family court has fixed the amount of maintenance at Rs 5,000 per month. He also submitted that the trial court has not considered the earning capacity of the petitioner but fixed the amount of maintenance in favour of the wife and a minor child at Rs 5,000 and Rs 3,000, totalling Rs 8,000 per month. However, the lawyer representing the woman and the state counsel submitted that she is living separately from her husband due to his neglect and that is why the trial court has allowed the application and fixed the amount of maintenance. Allowing the revision petition of the husband, the court said, "In view of the aforesaid finding as recorded by the trial court in relation to the second issue and the order fixing the amount at Rs 5,000 per month in favour of the wife, both are contradictory and in violation of the provision as contained in section 125(4), CrPC. Therefore, the order dated February 17, 2025 being erroneous requires interference by this court." The court, in its judgment dated July 8, sent the matter back to the family court to decide it afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. However, the court made it clear that the petitioner will continue to pay an amount of Rs 3,000 per month for the wife and Rs 2,000 per month for the child as interim maintenance during the pendency of the application.
