Latest news with #PADS
The Courier
15 hours ago
- General
- The Courier
Pitlochry couple whose dog died after ‘bully' attack open hearts and home to senior pair
A Pitlochry couple who lost their pet dog following a tragic attack on their own doorstep have made sure some good comes from their heartache. Norman and Cathy Hawkes' 12-year-old Jack Russell terrier Misty was savaged by two bully-type dogs last month. She died from her injuries three days later. The pensioners were lost without their little sidekick. And so they have offered up their sofa to two elderly dogs from Perthshire rehoming charity PADS. The pair found themselves looking for new digs after their last owner was no longer able to care for them. Rosie is 10 and a Jack Russell, with a lot of similarities to Misty. Chichi is 11 and half-Chihuahua – so a lot of dog in a small package. Bonded pairs are hard to rehome, even more so when they're senior dogs. But Norman, 79, says the newcomers deserve a second chance. And their arrival has been a godsend for him and Cathy too. 'I think Misty would approve,' he told The Courier. Misty battled bravely to stay alive after she was mauled in her own garden on Sunday May 18. But her injuries were too much for her, and she died on the Wednesday. The two dogs involved in the attack in Pitlochry's Kennedy Place were destroyed. Norman, who was hurt himself and saw it all happen, says he and Cathy still desperately miss Misty and her funny little ways. But when they saw PADS appealing for people to rehome some of the dogs in its care, including a Jack Russell, they decided to open up their hearts again. 'The two of them have always been together, so we couldn't break them up,' he said. 'They've settled right in.' 'Rosie is a Jack Russell and some of the things she does really remind us of Misty,' he added. 'Chichi is a wee fatty, but we'll soon sort him out.' Norman says the couple are grateful to PADS for matching them up. And he urged anyone who's thinking about getting a dog to consider rehoming – and particularly an older dog. 'PADS does great work, so I'm glad we could help them,' he added. 'But it's good for us too. It's nice to have a dog around again. 'We'll never replace Misty, but it's helping.' Police Scotland say a 31-year-old man has been charged in connection with the Dangerous Dogs Act and a report has been submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.
India Today
5 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Court shuts Rs 30,000 crore Mumbai land scam case involving real estate tycoon
A special court in Mumbai has accepted the closure report filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in a decades-old case against prominent builder Niranjan Hiranandani and others. The case involved allegations of misuse of land in Powai originally allotted for affordable housing that was allegedly used to construct luxury Judge SE Bangar accepted the ACB's closure report, saying that there was no proof of corruption, monetary gratification, or criminal conspiracy. The judge said, 'The ACB, Mumbai, has rightly concluded that no criminal offence warranting prosecution is made out,' and added, 'The closure reports are based on cogent investigation, verified compliance, and supported by judicial orders of the constitutional court.'advertisementThe allegations were linked to the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS), executed by Lake View Developers—a Hiranandani Group entity—alongside the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) under a Tripartite Agreement signed on November 19, 1986. Activists had accused the developer of diverting concessional land, meant for affordable housing, to construct luxury flats, allegedly causing a Rs 30,000 crore loss to public funds. In 2012, the ACB registered an FIR following a sessions court direction based on a complaint by activist Santosh Daundkar. The complaint named Hiranandani, then Urban Development Department Secretary Thomas Benjamin, and unknown officers from MMRDA and BMC. Daundkar sought the case be handed over to the CBI and Enforcement ACB initially filed an "A summary" report in 2013, indicating insufficient evidence. This was rejected by the court in 2018. Following a re-investigation, a closure report was filed again in 2019, which Daundkar 2008 and 2010, three Public Interest Litigations (PILs) were filed by individuals including activist Medha Patkar, raising concerns over developments in the PADS region. However, while disposing of the PILs in 2023, the High Court found that construction and handover obligations were fulfilled. A court-appointed committee confirmed to these proceedings, the ACB said, 'In view of the PILs having attained finality, there is nothing brought on record by the Complainant to infer any element of any criminal offence whatsoever on the part of the alleged accused persons.'In its final report, the ACB said it found no evidence that officers of MMRDA, BMC, or the Urban Development Department engaged in illegal activities or that the developer breached any terms of the Tripartite Agreement or earned unlawful court also said that the High Court had 'conclusively examined' issues related to affordable housing obligations, flat amalgamation, and flat sales. During its investigation, the ACB found no breach of agreement terms, irregularities, or illegal actions by the accused. IN THIS STORY#Mumbai#Maharashtra
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Special court closes Powai land case against Niranjan Hiranandani, others
MUMBAI : A special court Monday closed criminal proceedings against developer Niranjan Hiranandani and others in the alleged Rs 30,000 crore Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) land scam case. The judge observed that prosecuting the accused would not be in keeping with justice and that there was no prima facie case after the state Anti-Corruption Bureau submitted a closure report saying there was no evidence of corruption, monetary gratification, dishonest intention, or criminal conspiracy. The case relates to allegations that prime public land leased at concessional rates for affordable housing was diverted to construct luxury real estate and commercial premises by private developers, notably Niranjan Hiranandani, managing director of the Hiranandani group . "Having perused the closure report, I find that no material or anything incriminating, which could connect the accused…with the alleged crime has been found…in my opinion it would thus, be futile to unnecessarily prosecute the accused.., sans any material against them," special judge Shashikant Eknathrao Bangar said in a 119-page order made available on Tuesday. The judge said the closure reports are based on cogent investigation, verified compliance, and supported by judicial orders of the Bombay high court. Pointing to the HC's orders in three related PILs alleging breach of agreement with govt and misuse of FSI and development rights, the judge said allegations concerning breach of affordable housing obligations, amalgamation of flats, and sale of flats were conclusively examined and remedied. The judge noted that the high court had constituted a three-member joint committee to verify compliance and accepted reports in 2016 and 2017, which confirmed that out of 2,200 flats of 80 sqm, 1,337 were constructed, 12 locked, and 887 remained to be completed as per the plan and timeline. "The directions for completion of the remaining flats were passed with monitoring provisions. Any further breach or non-compliance was made subject to the court's ongoing supervision, obviating the need for separate criminal proceedings…the ACB rightly concluded that no prosecutable offence remained. There was no material to show abuse of public office or conspiracy," the judge said, adding that the probe was a 'fair' one. The ACB, through public prosecutor Ramesh Siroya, submitted before the court that sale of larger flats and amalgamation, though deviating from the spirit of the Agreement, was retrospectively regularised through the high court hearing the PILs. The agreement dated 19 Nov 1986, was executed between the state, MMRDA, and the developer for an area of 232 acres. Based on activist Santosh Daundkar's plea alleging that Hiranandani and others were involved in irregularities in the housing project, a court in 2012 ordered a probe. The ACB filed an FIR against Hiranandani and senior urban development department officer Thomas Benjamin and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC. In 2013, the ACB sought to close the case on the grounds that there wasn't sufficient evidence. Daundkar opposed the move. The ACB's closure report, which was rejected by the court on Jan 4 2018, led to a directive for further investigations. Following this, a second closure report was submitted on Aug 30, 2019. Daundkar challenged this report too and sought a reinvestigation. He alleged malafide transfer of the investigating officer, who was purportedly preparing to file a chargesheet against top officials and the builder. Daundkar argued that the final report was a result of administrative interference and suppression of crucial material. He contended that the final report is based heavily on the HC's civil PIL orders and ignores criminal aspects. He sought a fresh probe by an independent agency. The ACB said the allegations were not supported by documentary evidence or witness statements. "There are around 8,000 residents (approx) residing in PADS. None of the residents have filed any criminal complaints over the years pertaining to the development carried out in PADS," it submitted. It also pointed out that Daundkar had neither purchased any commercial premises nor was a resident or investor in the development. The judge rejected Daundkar's plea against the closure report, saying it reiterated allegations already considered in PILs and brought no new substantive material.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Legal battle ends in Hiranandani Gardens case
MUMBAI: The curtain has come down on the legal battle over alleged corruption in the development of Hiranandani Gardens, the landmark township built by Lake View Developers of the Hiranandani Group in Powai. The case revolved around the allegation that the developer had used 233 acres of government land earmarked for affordable housing to build luxury apartments and sold them at a premium. A special court trying cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act on Monday accepted the second closure report submitted by the Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), which stated that there was no criminality involved in the implementation of the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS), also called 'Hiranandani Gardens'. The verdict brings relief to developer Niranjan Hiranandani, former urban development department secretary TC Benjamin and others who were named as accused in the case. 'In my opinion, this is not a fit case to proceed against the accused persons and I am inclined to accept the closure report for the reasons mentioned herein above,' said Judge Shashikant Bangar of the special court while accepting the second closure report filed by the ACB. The special court had rejected the ACB's first closure report filed in 2018, and ordered a further investigation. While accepting the second closure report on Monday, the court noted that none of the allegations levelled by the complainant against the developer and others had been proved to be true by the investigation. The First Information Report (FIR) was filed in 2012 on a complaint by activist Santosh Daundkar, who alleged that Hiranandani had colluded with Benjamin and officials of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to build luxury housing on government land earmarked for affordable houses. The project, called the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS), goes back to 1986, when the state had handed over 233 acres on an 80-year lease at a rate of 40 paise per acre, in return for constructing affordable housing. Daundkar alleged that Hiranandani had violated the agreement by building a posh residential complex. He also alleged that the builder had failed to hand over 15% of the developed flats to the state government, in accordance with the agreement. The ACB filed its second closure report on August 30, 2019, which means the investigation had concluded and no offence was made out against the accused. They had neither engaged in any illegal activities or fraud in PADS, nor had the developer violated the tripartite agreement or gained any illegal profit, nor had the government suffered any loss, the report stated. The court observed that the ACB had twice investigated the case, adding that 'it is clear that the said investigating officers have taken all relevant records, papers, documents from MMRDA and other authorities and they have collected all the relevant witness statements of the officials'. The special court said that based on orders passed by the high court, the developer had built 1,511 flats of 40sq m and 887 flats of 80sq m each, and handed over possession of 256 flats to MMRDA in 2022. 'The investigation has been carried out fairly, and as per the directions of this court,' said Special Judge Shashikant Bangar. After the ACB filed its second closure report, Daundkar had filed a protest petition, alleging that the investigating officer Pramod Bhosale, who was in the process of filing a charge sheet, was transferred midway. This amounted to administrative interference and resulted in suppression of crucial material. He alleged that the officials failed to prevent the misuse of government land and monitor the PADS implementation. However, the special court said, 'The protest petition lacks merit in view of the binding adjudication by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay.' The court, however, said the dispute is purely civil in nature. 'There is no alleged breach of terms of the tripartite agreement, any other irregularities and illegal acts found to be committed by the accused/respondents. The investigating officer found that there are no sufficient and concrete grounds to proceed against the accused/respondent persons to file a charge sheet against the said accused persons,' the court added. The high court in 2016 and 2017 had accepted the reports that of 2,200 flats of 80sq m, 1,337 flats were constructed, 12 were locked, and 887 remained to be completed, as per the plan and timeline. 'In view of the accepted compliance framework and absence of mens rea or criminal intent proven during investigation, the ACB rightly concluded that no prosecutable offence remained.' The court held that there was no material to show abuse of public office or conspiracy by the public authorities or developers.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Spl court closes Powai land case against Hiranandani
Mumbai: A special court Monday closed criminal proceedings against developer Niranjan Hiranandani and others in the alleged Rs 30,000 crore Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) land scam case. The judge observed that prosecuting the accused would not be in keeping with justice and that there was no prima facie case after the state Anti-Corruption Bureau submitted a closure report saying there was no evidence of corruption, monetary gratification, dishonest intention, or criminal conspiracy. The case relates to allegations that prime public land leased at concessional rates for affordable housing was diverted to construct luxury real estate and commercial premises by private developers, notably Niranjan Hiranandani, managing director of the Hiranandani group. "Having perused the closure report, I find that no material or anything incriminating, which could connect the accused…with the alleged crime has been found…in my opinion it would thus, be futile to unnecessarily prosecute the accused.., sans any material against them," special judge Shashikant Eknathrao Bangar said in a 119-page order made available on Tuesday. The judge said the closure reports are based on cogent investigation, verified compliance, and supported by judicial orders of the Bombay high court. Pointing to the HC's orders in three related PILs alleging breach of agreement with govt and misuse of FSI and development rights, the judge said allegations concerning breach of affordable housing obligations, amalgamation of flats, and sale of flats were conclusively examined and remedied. The judge noted that the high court had constituted a three-member joint committee to verify compliance and accepted reports in 2016 and 2017, which confirmed that out of 2,200 flats of 80 sqm, 1,337 were constructed, 12 locked, and 887 remained to be completed as per the plan and timeline. "The directions for completion of the remaining flats were passed with monitoring provisions. Any further breach or non-compliance was made subject to the court's ongoing supervision, obviating the need for separate criminal proceedings…the ACB rightly concluded that no prosecutable offence remained. There was no material to show abuse of public office or conspiracy," the judge said, adding that the probe was a 'fair' one. The ACB, through public prosecutor Ramesh Siroya, submitted before the court that sale of larger flats and amalgamation, though deviating from the spirit of the Agreement, was retrospectively regularised through the high court hearing the PILs. The agreement dated 19 Nov 1986, was executed between the state, MMRDA, and the developer for an area of 232 acres. Based on activist Santosh Daundkar's plea alleging that Hiranandani and others were involved in irregularities in the housing project, a court in 2012 ordered a probe. The ACB filed an FIR against Hiranandani and senior urban development department officer Thomas Benjamin and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC. In 2013, the ACB sought to close the case on the grounds that there wasn't sufficient evidence. Daundkar opposed the move. The ACB's closure report, which was rejected by the court on Jan 4 2018, led to a directive for further investigations. Following this, a second closure report was submitted on Aug 30, 2019. Daundkar challenged this report too and sought a reinvestigation. He alleged malafide transfer of the investigating officer, who was purportedly preparing to file a chargesheet against top officials and the builder. Daundkar argued that the final report was a result of administrative interference and suppression of crucial material. He contended that the final report is based heavily on the HC's civil PIL orders and ignores criminal aspects. He sought a fresh probe by an independent agency. The ACB said the allegations were not supported by documentary evidence or witness statements. "There are around 8,000 residents (approx) residing in PADS. None of the residents have filed any criminal complaints over the years pertaining to the development carried out in PADS," it submitted. It also pointed out that Daundkar had neither purchased any commercial premises nor was a resident or investor in the development. The judge rejected Daundkar's plea against the closure report, saying it reiterated allegations already considered in PILs and brought no new substantive material.
