Latest news with #IPC
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Woman, cousin arrested for husband's murder in Aligarh
A woman, along with her cousin brother, was arrested for the alleged murder of her husband in a village under the jurisdiction of Gangiri police station in Aligarh on Friday. The accused woman was reportedly involved in an illicit relationship with the co-accused, who shot dead the husband. The woman did not inform the police about her husband's murder. The woman did not inform the police about her husband's murder. (For representation only) Superintendent of Police (Rural), Aligarh, Amrit Jain, stated that information was received on June 18 regarding the discovery of the body of 30-year-old Rishi Singh, a resident of Nagla Himachal village, within the limits of Gangiri police station. A case was registered based on a complaint by Rahul Kumar, the deceased's brother, under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the wife, Lalita Yadav, and her cousin Neeresh at Gangiri police station. 'Both accused were arrested on Friday near Naugawan crossing in Aligarh. Based on clues provided by Neeresh, a country-made pistol was recovered. Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 3/25/27 of the Arms Act were added to the case,' informed SP Rural, Aligarh. During interrogation, Lalita confessed that she had been married to Rishi for four years. Rishi, who was a driver, often stayed away from home. Lalita frequently visited her aunt's house, where she met her unmarried cousin Neeresh. She admitted to having an illicit relationship with Neeresh, and they planned to eliminate Rishi, who stood in their way. 'Rishi discovered Lalita's affair and asked her not to allow Neeresh into their house. However, she refused to follow these instructions. On the night of June 17-18, Neeresh came to Rishi's house and had drinks while Lalita was away. After midnight, Neeresh shot Rishi and informed Lalita, who did not report the murder to the police or relatives,' said SP Amrit Jain. Both accused were sent to judicial custody following court orders after their presentation in Aligarh.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Interstate cyber fraud gang busted in Barnala
The Barnala police have busted an interstate cyber fraud gang involved in duping people under the guise of facilitating personal loans while the kingpin, Amit Kumar, remains at large, senior superintendent of police Sarfaraz Alam said on Friday. He said that the action had been taken after a complaint was received via the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal which led to the registration of the first information report on June 9, under sections 318(4) BNS and 66-D IT Act. Followed by which the police conducted raid on June 10 at a fake call centre operating out of Zirakpur and apprehended six accused involved in this interstate cyber fraud operation which are Pawan Kumar, resident of SAS Nagar, Bhawan Mewara, resident of Jodhpur, Ambika, resident of Shimla, G Chinna Reddy, resident of Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, Jada Veera Siva Bhagyaraj, resident of Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh, Kona Chiranjeevi, resident of Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. He further said that 67 mobile phones, 18 ATM cards, 17 SIM cards, 1 laptop, 1 CPU , ₹55,000 in cash have been recovered from their possession. The police informed that initial investigations reveal that this gang has been operating for the past two years, targeting individuals across Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Telangana, Goa, Karnataka, Rajasthan, and other states through fake call centres and social media-based loan scams. It further said that in light of the pan-India footprint of this gang, concerned state police departments are being informed about fraud complaints related to their jurisdictions so that further legal action can be taken at their end in coordination with ongoing investigations. Scrutiny of 21 bank accounts associated with the gang has already revealed suspicious transactions worth approximately ₹6 crore. Given their consistent two-year operation, total fraudulent transactions are estimated to be in the range of ₹20–22 crore, with monthly inflows exceeding ₹1 crore across various accounts. The police said that Kingpin Amit, who is on the run, is a resident of Zirakpur and leads a lavish lifestyle. He is believed to own a luxury gym in a posh locality of Zirakpur, two high-end flats in Mohali and luxury vehicles. Notably, as per the police records, Amit and Bhawan Mewara have many cases registered under Sections 420, 406, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, and 474 of the IPC at Zirakpur Police Station. Reddy also has a past record with cases under Sections 302, 147, and 148 of the IPC in Andhra Pradesh. SSP Alam stated that efforts are underway to trace and apprehend the kingpin, adding that further arrests and disclosures are likely in the coming days as the probe expands.
News18
5 hours ago
- News18
'Act Was Brutal But...': MP HC Commutes Death Sentence Of Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old
Last Updated: The court held that while the convict's actions were horrifying, they were not executed with a degree of cruelty or depravity that would justify the death penalty. The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday commuted the death sentence of a 20-year-old tribal man convicted of raping a 4-year-old child, converting the punishment to rigorous imprisonment for 25 years. The Court acknowledged the 'barbaric" nature of the act but found that it did not rise to the level of 'brutality" necessary to warrant capital punishment. The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra held that while the convict's actions were horrifying, they were not executed with a degree of cruelty or depravity that would justify the death penalty. 'In this case, no doubt that appellant's act was brutal as he has committed rape upon the victim of four years and three months of age and after committing rape also throttled her treating her dead and thrown the victim in such a place where she could not be searched and left the spot but it is also clear that he has not committed brutality," the Court observed, distinguishing between the two concepts while citing Supreme Court precedents. Background of the Case The convict, a 20-year-old from a Scheduled Tribe, was sentenced to death by a trial court for abducting and raping a 4-year-old girl and leaving her for dead in a mango orchard. The trial court had noted that the victim suffered permanent disability as a result of the assault. The incident occurred after the convict allegedly entered the complainant's hut under the pretext of requesting a cot and later abducted the minor victim from a nearby house during the night. He was later arrested and charged under Sections 450, 363, 376(a), 376AB, 307, and 201 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. Advocate Samar Singh Rajpoot, appearing for the Appellant, argued that the case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, with no eyewitness testimony or conclusive proof linking the convict to the crime. He contended that the post-mortem report did not conclusively support the trial court's finding of permanent disability and that the evidence had likely been fabricated post-arrest. He further urged the Court to consider mitigating factors including the convict's age, clean record, illiteracy, tribal background, and the fact that he had been working in a roadside eatery after leaving home at a young age. State's Response Opposing the appeal, Deputy Advocate General Yash Soni argued that the gravity of the offence, committed against a 4-year-old and followed by the child being left to die, warranted no leniency. He asserted that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. High Court's Observations The Court rejected the defence argument that the child had suffered permanent disability, noting that the only medical testimony, by Dr. Rakesh Shukla, did not provide clear evidence or specify the nature or extent of injury that could establish lifelong disability. However, it upheld the conviction under all relevant sections, including aggravated rape under the POCSO Act, while commuting the sentence on the ground that the act, though 'barbaric," did not involve 'brutality" in the legal sense established by the Supreme Court in Manoharan v. State, Bhaggi v. State of MP, and Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal. 'There is no report that he has previously committed any such type of offence… He is not properly educated," the Court noted. Final Sentence The High Court affirmed the convictions but converted the death penalty to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment without remission, along with a fine of Rs.10,000 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. In default of payment, the convict will undergo an additional year of rigorous imprisonment.
New Indian Express
8 hours ago
- New Indian Express
No consistency in victim's testimony: Delhi HC upholds man's acquittal in rape case
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court's decision to acquit a man accused of rape, stating that the woman's testimony lacked consistency and did not inspire confidence. Justice Amit Mahajan, in an order passed on June 17, dismissed the state government's plea against the March 2018 verdict that acquitted the man of charges under IPC Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation). 'It is trite law that the accused can be convicted solely based on evidence of the prosecutrix as long as the same inspires confidence and corroboration is not necessary. However, the testimony of the prosecutrix is full of inconsistencies and the same does not inspire confidence,' the court observed. The court noted the delay in filing the FIR—lodged nine days after the alleged April 1, 2015 incident—and that the woman continued working at the accused's factory in the meantime. It also flagged contradictions in her husband's statements and criticised the state for failing to present a credible case, refusing to grant leave to appeal.
News18
11 hours ago
- News18
Massive Traffic Jam Outside Jaipur Hotel As Couple Forgets To Draw Curtains Of Room Before...
Last Updated: The incident, reportedly from Jaipur, attracted immediate public attention and created a commotion at the scene. A video showing a couple engaged in an intimate moment inside a hotel room has gone viral, drawing mixed reactions across social media. Reportedly filmed at a five-star property in Jaipur, the footage appears to have been captured by a passerby through a window with open curtains. The clip, widely circulated online, has raised concerns over privacy violations and voyeurism, even as some users criticised the couple for a lack of discretion. The individual who filmed and posted the video remains unidentified, but the incident has sparked a heated debate over personal boundaries, consent and digital ethics. Although the faces of the couple, reportedly staying at Jaipur's Holiday Inn near 22 Godown, are not clearly visible in the video, their actions leave little doubt about what was taking place. The footage also captures a crowd gathered outside the hotel, abusing the couple, indicating that the incident attracted immediate public attention and created a commotion at the scene. As soon as the video started circulating, people on the Internet were left divided over the sharing of such content. While some stated that the couple should have kept the scene behind curtains for their privacy and out of decency, others called out the passersby for recording the video illegally. A section of users even criticised the hotel for not ensuring their customers' privacy. One wrote, 'A video of a couple's private moments recorded from the street at Jaipur's Holiday Inn hotel went viral, creating a stir. This is a violation of privacy, which may be illegal under Indian law (such as IPC Section 354C). Some believe that the couple should have been careful, but recording and sharing is unethical. The hotel's responsibility is also in question, such as the arrangement of curtains. This incident highlights the challenges of privacy in the digital age." Another added, 'They are doing it in a hotel and not on any highway. Those making such videos must face legal action." A user contradicted the same with, 'They left the curtains open. Didn't you see it? Why do hotels provide curtains? This is their own mistake, as they should have paid attention to the curtains." 'It is immoral to post such private moments of a couple, even if they were careless. They were doing this in a hotel room and not on the road. Imagine someone posting a video from your bedroom with your wife," another comment read. Amid the back-and-forth comments over the now-viral clip, it is yet to be seen if any action will be taken against the circulation of the clip. About the Author Buzz Staff First Published:
