Mega DSC exams off to a peaceful start in Eluru

Eluru District Collector K. Vetriselvi on Friday (June 6) said the Mega District Selection Committee (DSC) exams has begun peacefully in the district.
On Friday, she made a surprise inspection of the examination centre at Siddhartha CBSE School in Vatluru, Eluru. She examined the arrangements and the conduct of the examinations at the centre.
She said that three exam centres have been arranged in the district for the DSC exams, being held from June 6 to June 30. Each day, the exams will be held in two shifts: from 9:30 a.m. to noon and from 2:30 p.m. to 5 p.m. A total of 17,584 candidates are expected to appear for these exams.
Police security has been arranged at all exam centres, and Section 144 (CrPC) has been enforced. For the convenience of candidates, a control room has also been set up with the following phone numbers: 9030723444 and 9505644555. The Collector advised all candidates to reach their assigned exam centres well ahead of time.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Hindu

2 hours ago

• The Hindu

Several senior leaders of Imran Khan's party get relief from Pak courts

Several senior leaders of jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan's party have been granted relief by courts in protest-related cases, a media report said on Sunday (June 22, 2025). Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders, including its chairman Gohar Ali Khan and Leader of the Opposition Omar Ayub, were on Saturday acquitted by a court in Islamabad in two protest-related cases from last year, the Dawn newspaper reported. Islamabad Judicial Mag­istrate Shahzad Ah­med anno­unced the verdict in the cases related to a protest on April 26 last year. The protest moved from the office of PTI leader Shoaib Shaheen towards the Karachi Com­pany, reportedly in violation of Section 144 and other legal provisions. After hearing all arguments, the court acquitted Barrister Gohar, Omar Ayub, Ali Bukhari, Shoaib Shaheen, Malik Rafique, Amir Dogar, Amir Mughal and others. Meanwhile, an anti-terrorism court in Lahore granted bail to former Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi in a May 9, 2023, riots case. ATC-I Judge Manzer Ali Gill announced the verdict in the case related to the Shadman Police Station attack case during the May 9 riots that erupted after the arrest of PTI founder Khan. The judge deferred till June 26 a decision on another bail petition of the PTI leader in a case relating to the burning of police vehicles near Lahore Corps. Mr. Qureshi's counsel had argued that the PTI leader was not even present in Lahore on May 9 — the day of the alleged attack — and was in Karachi with his wife for her medical treatment. The counsel stated that the allegation of conspiracy against Mr. Qureshi regarding the May 9 attacks was not proven and the petitioner should be granted bail, as many co-suspects in the same case had already been allowed bail. Earlier, former Punjab governor Omar Sarfraz Cheema also filed a bail petition in the same Shadman Police Station attack case. Mr. Khan is booked in several cases in Lahore in connection with the May 9, 2023, violence, including for allegedly inciting his supporters to attack government and military buildings, which erupted after his arrest by paramilitary Rangers from the Islamabad High Court premises. The 72-year-old cricketer-turned-politician has been behind bars since August 2023 after he was booked in multiple cases.

New Indian Express

2 days ago

• New Indian Express

Telangana HC notice to Naveen Mittal in evacuee property NOC case

In the second petition, Agarwal contested a decision of the trial court which had kept in abeyance the cognisance proceedings against Mittal and other public servants due to the pending sanction under Section 197 CrPC. The petitioner alleged that the NOCs were issued illegally to third parties in criminal collusion with other accused persons. She claimed that forged and fabricated documents were used and that the NOCs were issued with false recitals. She also alleged that objections raised by her were recorded without her being served any notice or given an opportunity to be heard. The NOC proceedings allegedly went so far as to declare the title and possession in favour of the applicants, effectively undermining her own claim to the property. Agarwal asserted that the entire process was aimed at misclassifying the disputed land as 'non-evacuee' property, thereby nullifying her title which is based on GO No 388 dated December 20, 1954. This government order had declared the subject land as evacuee property, forming the basis of her claim. The two writ petitions came up for hearing before separate Single Judge Benches — one headed by Justice K Lakshman and the other by Justice N Tukaramji. After hearing the submissions, both benches issued notices to Mittal.

Time of India

3 days ago

• Time of India

Consensual ties turning bitter can't warrant rape charges, rules Chhattisgarh HC

The Chhattisgarh High Court nullified a rape charge against a man. The court observed the relationship was consensual. It stated a souring consensual relationship isn't grounds for criminal proceedings. RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside a charge framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a man, observing that the relationship between the complainant and the applicant was consensual. The court emphasized that a consensual relationship turning sour cannot be a ground for invoking criminal proceedings. Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha noted that a consensual relationship going bad or partners growing distant does not justify invoking the criminal machinery of the State. Such conduct, he observed, not only burdens the courts but also tarnishes the reputation of an individual with the stigma of a heinous offence. The court allowed the criminal revision petition filed by the man, thereby setting aside the order dated July 3, 2021, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh, which had framed rape charges against him in the sessions trial. The applicant, a resident of Tikrapara, Raipur, had challenged the framing of the charge. His counsel argued that the trial court had erred in framing the charge without considering the details of the investigation. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Memperdagangkan CFD Emas dengan salah satu spread terendah? IC Markets Mendaftar Undo It was submitted that statements of neighbours recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which were annexed with the charge sheet, indicated that the applicant and the complainant cohabited as husband and wife in a consensual relationship. The complainant, a housewife originally from West Bengal, had lodged a report on March 3, 2020, at Chakradhar Nagar Police Station, Raigarh. She alleged that after her marriage, she moved to Bilaspur where she met the applicant at an NGO office. According to her, the man promised to keep her as his wife, rented a separate house, and sexually exploited her since 2008. She further stated that she later moved to Raigarh with her children and continued to live with the man, who allegedly continued to sexually abuse her under the false promise of marriage. The applicant's counsel pointed out that the complainant was already married, having solemnised her marriage in 1991. It was further submitted that her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC, recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh, as well as a complaint she filed at the Sakhi One Stop Center, Raigarh, on February 4, 2020, clearly identified the applicant as her husband. In that complaint, she stated that she had a "love marriage" with him twelve years ago and had three children from the relationship. She had sought advice to ensure that her husband fulfilled his marital obligations. Additionally, the applicant's counsel informed the court that he had lodged a complaint with the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur, on February 25, 2020, regarding the complainant's conduct and inconsistencies in her government identification documents. The documents reportedly showed her using different names and identifying herself as the applicant's wife on several official records. The High Court observed that the complainant had been residing with the applicant since 2008 with her own consent and had engaged in a consensual physical relationship. It also noted that she had changed her husband's name to that of the applicant on government ID cards, reinforcing the view that she had willingly lived with him. The court reiterated that there is no universal formula for determining whether consent was voluntary or given under a misconception, and that each case must be assessed on its unique facts and surrounding circumstances. Concluding that the applicant had made a valid case for judicial interference, the High Court quashed the rape charge against him.