Latest news with #JNishaBanu
New Indian Express
02-06-2025
- New Indian Express
Madras HC upholds disciplinary action against inspector in corruption caseprobe
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court recently confirmed an order passed by a single judge upholding disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Tirunelveli deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police against an inspector in 2024 over corruption charges. A bench of justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy made the decision while dismissing an appeal filed by inspector, B Saravanan, challenging the single judge's order which had permitted the DIG to proceed with the inquiry on two of the three charges made against him. According to the judgment, the charges were that he had demanded Rs 40,000 bribe for granting station bail to suspects in a criminal case involving pollution and demanded Rs 1 lakh for not implicating a tractor owner in a sand theft case. Saravanan claimed that the charge memo was issued due to personal vendetta and that the accused did not lodge any complaint. Dismissing his appeal, the division bench said the charges involve the morale of the officer and their veracity could be ascertained only after proper probe. Saravanan cannot take umbrage of the fact that the accused did not file any complaint, the judges added.
Time of India
31-05-2025
- Time of India
HC dismisses appeal by police official challenging memo
Madurai: has confirmed the order passed by a single bench, which denied relief to a police official from Tirunelveli district. The official had challenged the charge memo issued to him on two charges: demanding a bribe from some accused to grant station bail and not registering a case against a person in an illegal sand mining case. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court was hearing the appeal preferred by B Saravanan, the appellant, challenging the order passed by the single bench. The appellant was working as an inspector of police in Tirunelveli district. The charge memo had three charges against him. The first charge pertained to the allegation that the appellant permitted the accused to carry 600kg of waste wires while taking them to court and allowed them to shift those wires to another vehicle. The second charge was that the appellant demanded a bribe of Rs40,000 for granting station bail to the accused in a case. The third charge was that the appellant demanded a bribe of Rs1 lakh for not implicating a person in a case, as the tractor owned by him was alleged to have been involved in sand theft. Challenging the charge memo, the appellant filed a petition in 2024. The single bench observed that since the accused pleaded guilty and paid a fine in the matter pertaining to waste wires, the first charge did not stand to legal scrutiny and was accordingly quashed. As far as the second and third charges were concerned, they were factual disputes that could be adjudicated during inquiry proceedings. The single bench held that the inquiry should proceed and partly allowed the petition. Challenging the order of the single bench, the appellant preferred the present appeal. A division bench of justice J Nisha Banu and justice S Srimathy observed that although the appellant contended that the accused did not make any allegation of bribe against him, that alone could not be a factor to disprove the charges of demanding a bribe. As rightly held by the single bench, the charges of bribery levelled against a police officer involve the morale of the officer concerned, and the veracity of the charges can be decided only during the inquiry proceedings. There was no infirmity in the order passed by the single bench, the judges observed, and dismissed the appeal.
News18
26-05-2025
- News18
Wife's Academic, Career Priorities Can't Be Deemed Cruelty Under Matrimonial Law: Madras HC
Last Updated: The court highlighted that the man was not ready to sacrifice his career, and wanted his wife to come and live with him but she wanted to focus on her academics and career The Madras High Court recently held that a wife's decision to pursue higher education abroad, even if she fails to inform her husband or his family, does not by itself amount to 'cruelty" under matrimonial law. The bench of Justices J Nisha Banu and R Sakthivel made this observation while deciding a man's appeal challenging the family court's rejection of his divorce petition. The man had sought dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, claiming that his wife's conduct – especially her decision to study in the United States without his consent – amounted to mental cruelty. The court highlighted that the man was not ready to sacrifice his career, and wanted his wife to come and live with him but she wanted to focus on her academics and career. 'Since both are equally qualified and educated and pursuing their careers as they desire, this court cannot find fault with the act of the respondent in prioritising her academics or career," it observed. The couple married in July 2014 and lived briefly together in Hyderabad and Puducherry. Disputes arose within a year, and the woman eventually moved to the US in 2016 for higher studies. The man alleged that she did not inform him of her plans and deliberately abandoned the marriage. He also accused her of verbal abuse, showing indifference, and refusing to relocate to Canada where he later took up employment. The woman, however, contested the allegations claiming that she had informed her husband and his family about her plans and that her decision to study abroad was a career move, not a marital abandonment. She insisted that she remained open to reconciliation, provided she was assured of a respectful and safe marital environment. On the point of desertion, the high court noted that the woman had only gone to the US for her higher studies and, undisputedly, had conveyed the same to her husband in August 2016 via Skype and that his family members were also duly informed by her parents. 'Even while assuming that she failed to inform the petitioner and his family, that alone cannot be termed as cruelty considering the facts and circumstances of this case," the court held. The family court had, in 2020, dismissed the man's divorce petition, holding that the evidence did not support his claims of cruelty. The court also observed that minor marital quarrels were common and did not amount to cruelty under the law. Challenging this decision, he filed a civil miscellaneous appeal before the high court arguing that the trial court had overlooked crucial facts, including his wife's refusal to join him in Canada and her continued absence from the marital relationship. On the issue of physical altercation, the high court noted that the scuffle between the couple was a minor one in the first year of the marriage, which both parties condoned, and therefore, it could only be considered as normal wear and tear in a marriage. 'Such minor scuffles, though not desirable and appropriate, do not amount to cruelty," the court observed. The court, however, noted that the couple had lived apart for nearly nine years and all attempts at reconciliation had failed. It stressed that while individual career choices and disagreements alone may not amount to legal cruelty, the long-standing separation and failure of all efforts at mediation demonstrated that the marriage had irretrievably broken down. The court observed that there was no possibility of reunion between the couple. Accordingly, it allowed the man's appeal and dissolved the marriage. First Published: May 27, 2025, 03:00 IST
New Indian Express
11-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Madras HC lifts interim stay on release of NIRF rankings
MADURAI: Lifting the interim stay on the release of the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) rank list for this year, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently dismissed a PIL petition alleging malpractices and lack of transparency in its evaluation. The direction came after the union government stated that a scientific method prescribed by an expert body is being followed for publication of the NIRF rank list. A division bench of justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy passed the orders on the plea moved by C Chellamuthu of Dindigul who stated that the NIRF rankings are calculated merely based on the data provided by the educational institutions on their website without any verification or auditing.
New Indian Express
01-05-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
Madras HC bars private companies from extracting ground water for commercial use
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has granted interim stay restraining private companies in Vedasandur in Dindigul district from extracting groundwater for commercial use. A Division Bench of Justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy issued the order on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by N Ramachandran of Vedasandur. The petitioner stated that he had complained to officials about exploitation of ground water for commercial purpose. However no action was taken before he lodged a representation to the CM's grievance cell. Though officials assured to take action, no action has been taken so far. Further, he stated that five RO water bottling plants were extracting ground water without obtaining certification/licence. This may lead to significant environmental issue and scarcity of water. 'No government authorities have taken effective action despite several representations and communications,' he stated and requested the court to direct authorities to initiate criminal and civil proceedings against the companies and collect fine/compensation from them.
