Cops attacked in bid to enforce high court order
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Chetganj Station Officer Dilip Mishra stated that a team of electricity department officials and staff went to the site amidst tight security arrangements to comply with a High Court order ensuring that the power connection to the commercial site of Dhaval Prakash Agrawal was provided. However, the building owner, Kanhaiyalal, and his family members tried to stop the process and, in doing so, attacked the police team.
The police used force to pacify the situation. This scuffle led to chaos on the busy road, said Mishra, adding that Kanhaiyalal, Pooja, Jyoti, and Shashilata were caught at the scene while others managed to escape. They were booked for breaching peace and rioting, he added.
On this busy road, which has a lane of showrooms of garments and textiles of top brands, Agrawal purchased a shop from builder Aamir Ansari. However, the landowner, Kanhaiyalal, was demanding a huge amount to allow Agrawal to get the electricity and water connections. Agrawal approached the High Court, which ordered the provision of these utilities. To comply with the same order, the electricity department team, escorted by police, reached the site.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
Chhattisgarh HC defers hearing on Chaitanya Baghel's plea, ED to file reply in two weeks
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing on a petition filed by Chaitanya Baghel, son of former Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, in connection with the multi-crore liquor scam and money laundering case. A single bench of Justice Arvind Kumar Verma granted the Enforcement Directorate (ED) two weeks to file its reply, postponing the next hearing accordingly. Chaitanya Baghel, who was arrested by the ED on July 18 from his residence in Bhilai, has been in judicial custody for the past 24 days. His arrest followed fresh raids and the recovery of financial documents allegedly linked to illicit transactions. The ED claims Baghel played a key role in laundering over Rs 1,000 crore of 'proceeds of crime' generated through the liquor syndicate, and that Rs 16.7 crore was funnelled into real estate projects to disguise the origin of the funds. In his petition before the High Court, Chaitanya has challenged the legality of his arrest, terming it 'unconstitutional' and alleging procedural violations by the ED under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Supreme Court had earlier dismissed his plea for relief and directed him to approach the High Court for a remedy. The liquor scam, which allegedly operated between 2019 and 2022 during the Congress-led government, is estimated to have caused losses exceeding Rs 2,100 crore to the state exchequer. The ED has accused a network of bureaucrats, politicians, and businessmen of orchestrating the scam, with instructions allegedly coming from the 'highest political executives' of the state. Several high-profile arrests have already been made, including former Excise Minister Kawasi Lakhma, a businessman, an ex-IAS officer and an ITS officer. The FIR filed by the Economic Offences Wing in January 2024 named over 70 individuals and entities. Bhupesh Baghel has publicly condemned the ED's actions, alleging political vendetta and misuse of Central agencies to target Opposition leaders. He has, however, affirmed his faith in the judiciary and pledged full cooperation with the investigation. The next hearing in the High Court is expected to take place in the last week of August. Bhupesh Baghel and Chaitanya Baghel are accused in the alleged liquor scam of Chhattisgarh. The ED has considered Chaitanya Baghel as the mastermind of this scam. The alleged illegal syndicate operated through the Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited (CSMCL), taking bribes from liquor distillers and awarding them market share in return. Off-the-books sales of country liquor through government shops, manipulation of FL-10A licenses for foreign liquor trade, and cartel-like market practices were allegedly used to launder massive proceeds of crime.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Lok Sabha speaker admits notice for removal of Justice Varma, sets up 3-member panel
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Tuesday admitted a notice for the removal of High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma and constituted a three-member committee to probe charges against him. Making the announcement in the Lok Sabha, Birla said the process of removal of Justice Varma should begin as the charges against him were serious in nature. Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass Batch-1 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 2 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 3 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals By Vaibhav Sisinity View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 4 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program The speaker set up a three-member committee comprising Supreme Court judge Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and senior advocate of Karnataka High Court B V Acharya. "The committee will submit its report as early as possible. The proposal (for removal of Justice Varma) will remain pending till the receipt of the report of the inquiry committee," Birla said.
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
Not uncommon for husbands to suppress real income to avoid paying wives their due: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court recently stated that it was a common practice in matrimonial cases for husbands to suppress or conceal their real income to avoid paying their wives their legitimate dues. These observations were made while hearing a petition filed by Nidhi Jain against an order dated June 7, 2024, passed by a family court in Dwarka where her applications for summoning witnesses to prove her husband Ankit Jain's concealment of assets were dismissed. 'By seeking to summon the statements of accounts of family members of the respondent, the petitioner intends to bring on record the chain of diversion of funds from the sale of Noida property to establish that the said funds were used for the purchase of Shakti Nagar property by the respondent. Denying the petitioner an opportunity to prove the same would frustrate the objective of maintenance proceedings,' the Justice said. 'Matrimonial litigation, particularly where financial dependency and concealment are alleged, demands a sensitive and pragmatic approach. The documents and witnesses sought to be introduced by the petitioner are not collateral or immaterial, but rather, they directly affect the determination of maintenance, which is a matter of subsistence,' Justice Dudeja added, while setting aside the order and directing the family court to permit Nidhi to summon the witnesses. Nidhi had claimed before the court that after her marriage in February 2012, she was subjected to domestic violence by her husband and his family to fulfill dowry demands. She also alleged that in November 2012, Ankit's family locked the matrimonial home and transferred her jewellery and cash to their accounts, deserting her without resources. She also contended that her husband had misrepresented his financial situation throughout the trial, falsely portraying himself as having no significant income or assets. She had submitted that Ankit had transferred assets to his family members to mislead the court and to avoid paying legitimate maintenance dues. One example, which she cited, was the sale of a property in Noida whose sale proceeds were transferred to his family members and later utilised to purchase another property. An application under Section 311 CrPC (power to summon material witness, or examine person present) was moved by Nidhi to prove these concealments and establish Ankit's true financial status, which was initially allowed by the family court. On June 6, 2024, the family court dismissed her petition to summon witnesses, which compelled her to move the High Court. On the other hand, Ankit's counsel had submitted in court that the witnesses sought to be summoned by Nidhi were not relevant to her case and that her actions were a deliberate attempt to delay the case. 'The Family Court's reliance on procedural history to justify its refusal, such as alleged delays and multiple applications, does not outweigh the petitioner's right to a fair opportunity to substantiate her claim,' the High Court ruled on July 31.
