Latest news with #Section164CrPC
Indian Express
13-05-2025
- Indian Express
Mundra port drug haul: SC junks bail plea of accused
Taking into account factors like 'flight risk' and 'risk of witness tampering or elimination', the Supreme Court Tuesday rejected the bail plea of an accused facing charges under UAPA for his alleged role in the smuggling 2,988.21 kg of heroin worth over Rs 21,000 crore from Afghanistan to India. Opposing his bail plea of Harpreet Singh Talwar alias Kabir Talwar, a Delhi resident, the NIA had said the narcotics was trafficked to India 'disguised as legal imports in the form of 'semi-processed talc stones and bituminous coal' and 'the proceeds… sent back to the consigners, who used these funds for funding terrorist activities of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)'. It said that 'the narco-traffickers were located in Afghanistan and were sending heroin via Iran and Pakistan to India (with help of ISI & Iranian middle men)'. In September 2021, the DRI had intercepted the heroin consignment at Mundra port and NIA took over the probe. As per the investigators, a total of 6 consignments were imported in India, sent by the same consigners from Afghanistan. The one intercepted at Mundra was the 6th consignment. Talwar was arrested by NIA in August 2022. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N K Singh said that 'the appellant faces serious charges, which allegedly carry grave societal ramifications, including the facilitation of cross-border drug trafficking… The scale and sophistication of the operation, involving foreign syndicates, shell firms, medical visas, and false documentation, elevates this case far beyond routine NDPS violations'. The bench, however, said that 'at this stage, it would be premature and speculative to extend the allegations against the appellant to the domain of terror financing'. 'While the prosecution has invoked provisions of UAPA and has broadly linked the smuggling enterprise to trans-national syndicates with suspected affiliations, there is no compelling reason to currently link the appellant and proscribed terrorist organisations, either within or outside the country. The evidentiary foundation to sustain such a grave allegation must be clear and compelling — something that can be seen only after a substantial portion of evidence is led by both the parties,' it said. The bench also took note that 'multiple key witnesses still remain to be examined, and the trial while underway, will take time in completion. Out of 24 most vulnerable or material witnesses, two have died, and two others are untraceable. One of the deceased witnesses, a retired customs officer, was found dead on the very day he was scheduled to record his statement under Section 164 CrPC. The risk of witness tampering or elimination — whether directly attributable to the appellant or not — is a real and present concern that militates against the grant of bail at this stage.' The SC also directed the special court to list the matter twice in a month and record statements of prosecution witnesses. The court gave Talwar liberty to renew his bail prayer after six months or upon substantial advancement in the trial, whichever is earlier. It also asked the NIA to submit to the special court an additional list of witnesses who, in its assessment, are sensitive, or material, inasmuch as their testimony may have a direct bearing on the role of the accused or other co-accused in the ongoing trial and probe.
Time of India
30-04-2025
- Time of India
Marriage with minor will not undo rape; HC awards 10-year to man though his wife turned hostile
Cleared - mani Chennai: A 21-year-old man, who eloped with a minor girl aged 17 years, and later married her, has been found guilty of rape and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 years. The girl, now pregnant and 22-years-old, turned hostile and did not support the prosecution's rape charges. As a result, in Nov 2022, the Nilgiris sessions court sentenced him to one-year jail term for kidnap and unlawful confinement. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai On Tuesday, however, Justice P Velmurugan of Madras high court found him guilty of rape and imposed 10-year jail term on the man saying: "Once the girl was a child at the time of occurrence, there is no question of elopement and consent." Rejecting the defence that later marriage nullified the Pocso offence, the court ruled that the offence was against the society, not just the individual concerned. Justice Velmurugan held that accepting such a defence would defeat the object of the Pocso Act and would lead to "disastrous consequences." The accused, who was aged 22 years at the time of the incident, and later married the girl, claimed that the girl had left her home fearing a marriage arranged by her parents and had voluntarily come to him. He argued that he merely took her to his relatives' house and stayed briefly before returning. The defence maintained there was no allegation of sexual contact before the police or the Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC, and the medical report did not conclusively indicate sexual assault. The girl, when examined, did not support the prosecution and was declared hostile. It was the prosecution case the girl went with the accused to Mysore, stayed in his relatives' house, and "they had a physical relationship." Medical evidence showed her hymen was not intact. The sessions court convicted the man for kidnap and illegal confinement, but acquitted him for offences under the Pocso Act. The case originated from a missing complaint filed by the girl's father. The present appeal was filed by the State govt. Justice Velmurugan, after reviewing the evidence, held that even if the girl approached the accused, he knew she was underage and failed to alert the authorities. The court noted that in her statement to a male magistrate, the girl said "they were together," which, the court held, indirectly pointed to a physical relationship. It accepted the prosecution's view that the girl may have avoided explicit terms due to shyness. The trial court, it said, erred in not giving proper weight to this and the medical findings. During sentencing, the man pleaded with the court that he cared for his wife and mother, and that his wife was pregnant. He sought leniency, claiming ignorance of the law's seriousness. But the court noted that under Pocso, the minimum punishment is 10 years, which cannot be reduced. Besides the jail term, the court iposed a fine of ₹1,000 on him. The trial court's earlier sentence for kidnap and wrongful confinement will run concurrently with the present sentence. MSID:: 120770588 413 |
