Latest news with #K.Rajasekar
The Hindu
25-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Madras High Court Bench asks Registrar General to ensure former ACJ's daughter gets family pension
Pension has always been characterised as a matter of right and not charity or bounty. When it comes to extending the benefit to persons with intellectual disability, the authority must exhibit alacrity, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has observed. A Division Bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar held that the son/daughter of a pensioner who was a person with intellectual disability and fell within the scope of the pension rules should be disbursed with family pension on submission of a medical certificate evidencing his/her incapacity to earn livelihood without insisting on certificate denoting income from all sources. The sanction order should be passed without delay after documents mentioned in the statutory rules were submitted, the court observed while hearing the appeal preferred by the Principal Accountant General (A&E) against a Single Bench order, directing payment of family pension to a person with intellectual disability who was the son of a deceased government employee. The court was told that the order had been complied with. However, the appellant wanted certain strong remarks to be expunged, and the court expunged them. The court observed that at this juncture it was reminded of the daughter of one of the distinguished judges of the HC, who retired as its Acting Chief Justice. It was agonising to note that his daughter, a person with physical and intellectual disability, had not been sanctioned family pension even though more than a year had passed since her mother's demise. Her father passed away in 2020 and mother in 2024. Application for sanctioning family pension was submitted. The office of the appellant sought certain details and documents. It was furnished by her younger sister, the legal guardian. The admissibility report for family pension was forwarded to the Secretary of Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Justice) to obtain sanction from the President of India. Subsequently, a letter sought submission of the same set of documents, and the matter lay there, the court observed. 'We call upon the Registrar General of the Madras HC to liaison with the authorities concerned and ensure that the daughter of the former ACJ gets her family pension at the earliest,' the court directed. Referring to Rule 54(6) of CCS (Pension) Rules and Rule 49(6) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, the court said a medical officer not below the rank of a civil surgeon must give a certificate setting out the mental or physical condition of the child. Nowhere was there any requirement to produce an income certificate noting income from all sources. In the present case, the appellant had insisted on furnishing such a certificate, the court observed. When the statutory rule itself contemplated certificates only from a Doctor/Medical Board stating that the son/daughter of a deceased employee by virtue of physical or intellectual disability could not earn a livelihood, the authority could not ask for anything more, the court observed.
The Hindu
06-06-2025
- The Hindu
Two detained under Goondas Act for manufacturing spurious liquor
Two persons who were arrested by the Central Intelligence Unit (CIU) on charges of manufacturing spurious liquor were detained under the provisions of the Goondas Act. The duo has been identified as K. Rajasekar, 45, of Marakkanam and S. Pandian, 46, of Ramapuram in Chennai. The CIU police busted a fake liquor manufacturing unit at Poothurai near Puducherry on May 9 and arrested the duo. They ran a fake bottling unit on the premises and sold spurious liquor by affixing fake labels. Acting on the recommendations of Villupuram Superintendent of Police P. Saravanan, Collector Shiek Abdul Rahman invoked the provisions of the Goondas Act against them. The orders were served on them in the Cuddalore Central Prison.
United News of India
03-06-2025
- Business
- United News of India
Madras HC upholds TN govt online gaming rules
Chennai, June 3 (UNI) In a landmark judgment, the Madras High Court on Tuesday upheld the Tamil Nadu government's regulations on online real money gaming, rejecting multiple petitions filed by gaming companies and individuals challenging the state's right to impose such restrictions. A Division Bench comprising Mr Justices S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar ruled that the state has the constitutional authority to regulate online games in the interest of public health and safety. The court emphasized that the right to privacy is not absolute and that reasonable restrictions can be imposed to prevent social harm. The key provisions validated by the court include mandatory Aadhaar-based Know Your Customer (KYC) verification, a ban on playing online real money games between midnight and 5 a.m., and the enforcement of age and monetary limits for players. These measures, the government argued, are intended to curb gaming addiction, especially among youth. The petitioners—major gaming platforms like WinZO, Games24x7, Junglee Games, and Head Digital Works—contended that the rules were excessive and paternalistic. They also contended that the night-time ban and compulsory Aadhaar verification infringed on users' rights. The court, however, rejected these arguments, stating that the state must act when public welfare is at stake. This ruling could influence similar regulatory efforts in other Indian states and marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the legality and impact of online gaming platforms. It may be recalled several people in the State have ended their lives after losing large sums of money in only rummy and other games. UNI GV 1520
The Hindu
03-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Madras High Court upholds night ban on online real money games in Tamil Nadu
The Madras High Court, on Tuesday (June 3, 2025) upheld the validity of a ban imposed by Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (TNOGA) on playing Real Money Games (RMG) between 12 midnight and 5 a.m. It also refused to interfere with requirements such as mandatory Aadhaar verification for playing the RMG. A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by online gaming companies and others to declare as unconstitutional Section 5(2) read with 14(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act of 2022. The petitioners had challenged the two legal provisions since they empower the TNOGA to impose restrictions such as time, monetary and age limits for playing RMG. The litigants had also urged the court to declare as null and void certain provisions of the TNOGA (RMG) Regulations, 2025. Denying any kind of relief to them, the Division Bench held the State legislature was fully competent to enact a law governing online games by invoking Entry 6 (public health and sanitation) and Entry 26 (trade and commerce within the State) of List II (State list) in the seventh schedule to the Constitution. 'It is a well known fact that so far as online real money games such as rummy and poker, it has (sic) created public heath risks in the State of Tamilnadu. This is elaborated in the expert committee reports whereby these games have posed serious mental and physical health risks to the citizens in the State,' the judges wrote. They agreed with Advocate General (AG) P.S. Raman and TNOGA counsel B. Arvind Srevatsa that the question of repugnancy would not arise at all in the present case since the State had not invoked any of the entries in List III (concurrent list of subjects on which both the Parliament as well as the State legislatures could enact laws). The court also recorded AG's submission that the night ban on RMG had been imposed based on research findings that self-control would be much lower and the dopamine levels, linked to reward-seeking behaviour, would be much higher during night hours thereby making real money gaming more addictive. On his part, Additional Public Prosecutor E. Raj Thilak, representing the Director General of Police/Head of Police Force, told the Division Bench that as many as 47 death by suicides, due to addiction to online games, had been reported in Tamil Nadu between 2019 and 2024 and it was reason enough for the State to regulate RMG. 'This court concurs with the reasons adduced by the State Government for regulating online RMGs. The adverse effects are much larger to the people than the need for securing the individual right to free trade. Regulation becomes a priority to ensure the safety and protection of the general public,' the judges observed. Disadvantages of playing games of skill online Disagreeing with the argument of online gaming companies that there was hardly any difference between playing games of skill, such as rummy and poker, in person or through online mode, the court said, there were definitely certain risks involved when playing the games of skill through online mode. Authoring the verdict, Justice Subramaniam said, when playing the games in physical mode, the players get to read each others' mind even by the slightest hand movement, body language and facial expressions. However, they get to lose this advantage while playing the games of skill through online mode. In online mode, 'the players may not even know against whom the game is played... So it is imperative that the government take adequate steps to streamline and regulate these unexplored waters to ensure fair play and secure the physical and financial safety of the players indulging in these online RMGs,' the Bench said. The court also held it did not find any reason to dilute the Aadhaar requirement since it provides for two-step authentication to confirm that the RMG players were 18 years and above. Further, the scope for manipulation/deceit was comparatively lesser in the Aadhaar verification process than others, it said. Our country is distinct from the rest of the world The Division Bench also rejected the contention of online gaming companies that the State could not adopt a paternlistic attitude and restrict their right to trade and commerce just because of some random suicides involving individuals who could not have control over their actions. 'Our country is built on a social and cultural fabric which is distinct from the rest of the world. A random comparison with the rights or laws prevalent in other countries cannot be blindly applied here... Protecting rights of the people is first and foremost as derived from our Constitution. Hence, laws and policies must primarily be focused towards this ideal,' the judges concluded. (Assistance for overcoming suicidal thoughts is available on the State's health helpline 104, Tele-MANAS 14416. and Sneha's suicide prevention helpline 044-24640050)
The Hindu
19-05-2025
- The Hindu
‘Exorcist' and schoolgirl's father escape POCSO Act conviction due to doubts over her age
Trigger warning: the following article has references to child sexual abuse, sexual assault, and rape. Reader discretion advised. An 'exorcist' and the father of a schoolgirl have escaped punishment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act of 2012 because of the prosecution's failure to prove she was only 16 years old when the duo subjected her to sexual assault and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, respectively. A Division Bench of Justices A.D. Jagadish Chandira and K. Rajasekar held that a certificate issued by the school headmistress was insufficient to prove the age of the victim. A radiologist who conducted the ossification test was not examined, and the test report was not marked as evidence before the trial court, they said. The judges, therefore, set aside the conviction of the girl's father Gunasekaran and the 'exorcist' Sivakumar for the offences under Sections 7 (sexual assault) and 5 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, which the trial court had invoked to impose five years of rigorous imprisonment and life sentence, respectively. Charged under rape Nevertheless, since Additional Public Prosecutor A. Thiruvadi Kumar had succeeded in proving the other facts of the case before the High Court, the Division Bench convicted the girl's father under Section 354 (outraging a woman's modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to three years of simple imprisonment. The Bench also found the 'exorcist' guilty under Section 376(1) (rape) of the IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. It also reduced the fine amount of ₹5 lakh imposed on him by the trial court under the POCSO Act to ₹25,000 for the IPC offence, with a default sentence of one year of simple imprisonment. The judges further ordered that the compensation of ₹7 lakh ordered to be paid to the victim by the trial court by invoking the provisions of the POCSO Act, should instead be paid from the Tamil Nadu Victim Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/Other Crimes 2018. What is the case about? According to the Inspector of an All Women Police Station in Ramanathapuram, the girl was first molested by her father in 2018 when she was 14 years old and studying in Class VII. He later moved abroad for a job. Subsequent to his return to the country in 2020 due to COVID-19, the convict continued to sexually assault his daughter and threatened her with dire consequences if it was revealed to her mother. Meanwhile, the mother, concerned about her daughter's changes in behaviour, took her to the 'exorcist' for remedy. The exorcist, however, further subjected the girl to penetrative sexual assault in 2021. The girl then opened up to her mother, who immediately called the child helpline 1098, leading to the registration of the POCSO Act case against the father and the 'exorcist'. Accused found guilty Though the convicts raised multiple grounds to attack the prosecution case on merits and attempted to get acquitted from all charges, the judges rejected those grounds and held that the evidence adduced by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The Division Bench also observed there was nothing wrong on the part of the trial court in having conducted a joint trial against the two convicts though the charges levelled against them were of different periods, spanning between 2018 and 2021, and the alleged offences too had occurred at different places. 'The accused have understood the charges for which they have been facing the trial and they were not able to establish prejudice, if any, caused to them... This court finds that no prejudice had been caused to them due to their joint trial and there is no miscarriage of justice against the accused,' the Bench concluded. The judgment was reserved at the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court but delivered at its principal seat in Chennai.
