Latest news with #Section482
India Gazette
2 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
Karnataka HC reserves order on RCB marketing head's interim relief plea for June 12
Bengaluru (Karnataka) [India], June 11 (ANI): The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday reserved the order on the petition filed by RCB's marketing head Nikhil Sosale, seeking interim relief on the ground that his arrest in alleged connection with the Bengaluru stampede was illegal. The High Court reserved the order for June 12 at 2:30 pm. Earlier today, both parties submitted their arguments in front of the Court. Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, representing the state government in the HC, said, 'My submission is that relief sought under Article 226 is impressible unless lordships declare arrest is illegal and petition is not maintainable.' 'Legality of arrest is to be considered, from the facts we have presented, the legality of arrest,' Advocate General said. 'Statement made by CM has nothing to do with the arrest. Look at the grounds of arrest of each of the accused, milord. The petitioner was fleeing,' he said. The AG further claimed that organisers were responsible for the stampede that claimed the lives of 11 people. 'Even assuming arrest is illegal, only a WHPC is maintainable and not a petition under Section 482. Grounds of arrest are to be given at the earliest, and in the instant case, they have been supplied,' Shetty said. The Advocate General also mentioned that Sosale is not in their custody but in judicial custody. The Karnataka HC questioned the state government, 'Who has to obtain the license? They are employees of the company. Don't look at them as the company.' Replying to this, the AG said that the company act through its directors. 'On behalf of the company, petitioners are supposed to take a license. It is for them to show that they are not responsible,' he said. The High Court emphasised that the court will look at them as individuals, not as a company. 'We will not identify the company with an individual. Leave this company aside. Let us look at them as individuals,' the Court said. The HC further asked, 'How do you know who is responsible today?' Advocate General Shetty said, 'He was fleeing away, milord, and he admits that he was taking care of the affairs of the company.' The HC said, 'Before you arrested these people and grounds of arrest were furnished. Your submission is those are the reasons why you arrested him as a person responsible for the event.' Senior Advocate Sandesh Chouta, representing the RCB marketing head, said, 'According to them, the person who was invited for the celebration has been arrested. You have suspended police officials. But even DyCM has been invited.' 'That is an incorrect submission, milord. The invitation is only by RCB,' the Advocate General countered. A day after the stampede that claimed the lives of 11 people, the Karnataka police suspended multiple IPS officers, including the Bengaluru city police Commissioner, B Dayananda. (ANI)
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
'Judges also human': Justice Abhay S Oka admits error in judgment
NEW DELHI: Judges are also human and they can make mistakes while judging, Justice Abhay S Oka said Monday while admitting that he committed a mistake in deciding a case as a Bombay HC judge in 2016 relating to interpretation of the Domestic Violence Act and said it was a continuous learning process for judges. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now While holding that HCs have jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC to quash proceedings of an application filed under Section 12(1) of DV Act, which says an aggrieved woman may approach a magistrate for relief such as payment of compensation, Justice Oka, who penned the verdict for the bench comprising himself and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, said as an HC judge, he had taken a contrary view on the issue. SC said that HCs must keep in mind that DV Act is a welfare legislation specially enacted to give justice to women who suffer from domestic violence. 'Even for judges, learning process always continues' Therefore, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 for quashing proceedings under Section 12(1), the high court should be very slow and circumspect. Interference can be made only when the case is clearly of gross illegality or gross abuse of the process of law, the bench said. Generally, the high court must adopt a hands-off approach while dealing with proceedings under Section 482 for quashing an application under Section 12(1). Unless high courts show restraint... the very object of enacting the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 will be defeated, the bench added. Justice Abhay S Oka, who penned the verdict for the bench, said: "Before we part with this judgment, we must mention here that one of us (Abhay S Oka) is a party to a judgment dated Oct 27, 2016, of Bombay high court (HC) in writ petition 2473 of 2016 in which the view taken is that remedy under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is not available for quashing the proceedings under Section 12(1) of DV Act, 2005." Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "This view was found to be incorrect by a full bench of the same high court. As judges, we are duty-bound to correct our mistakes in properly constituted proceedings. Even for judges, the learning process always continues," he said. "There are decisions of high courts taking a view that the jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC is not available to quash proceedings... under Section 12(1) of Domestic Violence Act. The decisions are primarily based on the premise that the proceedings.. . predominantly of a civil nature. The said view is not correct for the reasons set out earlier," Justice Oka said while correcting the orders of high courts and also correcting his stand taken as an HC judge nine years ago.
Hindustan Times
15-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Hindustan Times
Sonu Nigam gets relief from Karnataka HC in Bengaluru concert row; grants permission for video conference
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed that no coercive steps be taken against singer Sonu Nigam until the next date of hearing, in connection with a recent criminal case registered against him for allegedly making offensive remarks during a concert. (Also Read: Kannada director who replaced Sonu Nigam's songs says apology 'not enough': How can someone who thinks so lowly of us…) The court also permitted the singer to appear via videoconferencing to record his statement if required by the investigating officer (IO). Alternatively, if the IO insists on a physical appearance, the court said the officer could visit Sonu, with the singer bearing the associated expenses. The case stems from a complaint lodged after an incident at a concert. Some Kannadiga fans had requested Sonu to sing in Kannada. The singer allegedly took offence to the tone of the request and reportedly remarked, 'This is why Pahalgam happened,' drawing a controversial comparison to the April 22 terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir. During the hearing, Sonu's counsel, Dhananjay Vidyapati, argued that the complaint was filed solely for publicity and that the alleged offence of public mischief under Section 505 of the IPC was not made out. He also said it was a solitary incident, the concert proceeded smoothly, and the complaint was filed by a third party. The state counsel, however, maintained that Sonu's remarks needed to be examined in the course of investigation to determine intent. 'Whether the comments were intentional or not cannot be adjudicated under Section 482 (CrPC). He has not cooperated with the investigation. He could have at least said he was busy,' the State submitted. Arguing against special privileges, the State's counsel added, 'A person who does not respect due process of law cannot be given benefit under 482… He is not a normal man, but that is precisely why he should not have made such a statement.' When the court asked why Sonu's statement could not be recorded virtually or even at his residence, the State objected, saying that would amount to giving the singer 'too much convenience.' Responding to concerns raised by Sonu's counsel about the media spectacle that would follow a physical appearance, the court observed: 'If you want physical appearance, you go to his place and record his statement. He could bear the expenses.' The court recorded the State's submission that no coercive steps would be taken if Sonu cooperated with the investigation. It stayed the filing of any final report in the case until the next date of hearing.
Deccan Herald
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Deccan Herald
SC dismisses dowry case by granddaughter-in-law of ex-governor
"We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the invocation of the extraordinary power under Section 482, CrPC which, as rightly held by the High Court, secures the ends of justice and puts to naught a criminal proceeding," a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said.
