The Supreme Court has allowed an estranged couple’s plea for divorce by mutual consent by waiving the waiting period of six months, exercising its powers under the Constitution to do “complete justice”.

A bench of justices Kurian Joseph and Rohinton Fali Nariman granted the relief to the couple after taking into consideration their several years of litigation, separation after a few days of marriage, and both parties’ desire to move on with life.

The bench also noted that they had amicably settled their disputes and the monetary part of the settlement had been complied with, and all that remained were the criminal cases against each other and the plea for divorce by mutual consent.

Taking on record the submissions made by the parties that they have to move on with their respective lives, the bench said, “We are of the view that it is a fit case to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent by waiving the statutory period of waiting.”

The bench was also of the view that since the parties had settled their disputes amicably, “the interest of justice would be met, in case, the whole disputes are also finally settled” and quashed the criminal cases the couple had lodged against each other and their respective family members.

The couple had submitted before the court that they had lived as husband and wife only for a few days in 2010 when they were married and that “they have exercised their free will and have taken a conscious decision to part and put an end to all other litigation as well”.

Trial court judges are expected to “remain sensitive” while recording statements of children and required to take active part within the boundaries of law to elicit truth, the Delhi High Court has said.

Justice S P Garg observed this while dismissing an appeal filed by a man challenging a judgement passed by a trial court last year which had sentenced him to five-year jail under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for sexually assaulting a five-year-old girl.

“The presiding officer is expected to remain sensitive particularly when a child of tender age is under examination.

While conducting trial, court is not required to sit as a silent spectator but to take active part within the boundaries of law to bring on record the relevant facts for the purpose of eliciting truth,” the court said.

The court said that sentence awarded to the 42-year-old man was based upon “fair reasoning” and the crime committed by him was “horrible” as he had “ravished” the child who was like his own daughter.

“The accusations are very specific, certain and clear.

What else can be expected from a child aged around five years? Her statement on material and vital facts remained unchallenged,” the judge noted in his order.

According to the police, the man had sexually assaulted the child in April 2014 when she had gone to his house.

During the trial, he had denied the allegations and claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case.

His counsel argued before the high court that trial court had ignored the inconsistencies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses and overlooked the fact that child was not competent to depose and she had given the statement at her mother’s behest.

While dismissing his appeal, the high court said there were no valid reasons to suspect the version of the girl and to discredit her testimony.

“The appellant (man) exploited her (child’s) innocence and betrayed the trust of her family members as neighbour. The appeal lacks in merits and is dismissed,” the court said.PTI

A Vaishali district court today ordered registration of an FIR against BSP president Mayawati and three other party leaders for allegedly making inflammatory speeches last week spreading animosity in the society.

The three other BSP leaders are its national general secretary Nasimuddin Siddiqui, Uttar Pradesh unit president Ram Achal Rajbhar and state secretary Mewa Lal.

Chief Judicial Magistrate Jairam Prasad took cognizance of a complaint filed by Hajipur resident Ajit Singh and directed that an FIR be lodged against the four in Town police station.

The petitioner, through his advocate, claimed that he felt aggrieved by the inflammatory speeches made by Mayawati and her partymen which have affected unity and integrity of the country.

At a public meeting in Lucknow on July 21, Mayawati instigated her party workers to target expelled BJP leader Dayashankar Singh’s mother, wife and daughter during a protest in the wake of Singh’s unsavoury remarks against the BSP chief, the petitioner alleged.

They case was lodged against them under various Sections of the IPC including 153(a) (promoting enmity between groups), 295(a) (deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings), 120(b) (criminal conspiracy), and POSCO Act.PTI

A Delhi court has dismissed a suit filed against the Ministry of Communication and IT and Postal Department by a telemarketing firm seeking recovery of over Rs 11 lakh allegedly misappropriated by its employees and public servants.

Additional District Judge Kaveri Baweja rejected the plaint saying it was not maintainable as the alleged breach of trust was done by the firm’s own employee and recovery cannot be done from the central government and postal authorities.

“In these circumstances, since as per the case of the plaintiff (firm), it is its own employee, who committed alleged breach of trust, for which FIR has also been registered by plaintiff, the suit for recovery of the misappropriated amount of Rs 11,46,800 does not lie against defendants herein i.e. Union of India and postal authorities,” the judge said.

The court said, “Accordingly, in view of the discussion, the preliminary issue is decided against the plaintiff and in favour of the defendant. Suit of plaintiff is accordingly dismissed as being not maintainable.”

According to the suit, firm Eage Shopping Pvt Ltd sells goods through teleshopping and Internet to customers on the basis of online and cash payment on delivery.

In February 2012, the firm entered into an agreement with Postal Department for availing services of Express Parcel as per which the department would deliver the articles to the customers and collect money on behalf of the company, it said.

It added the department was required to remit money to the firm through cheque in the name of Eage Shopping Pvt Ltd.

The plaint alleged that the firm came to know that some of its officials in connivance with postal officials and others embezzled its funds and stocks and had issued cheques in the name of ‘M/s Eage Shopping’ instead of ‘M/s Eage Shopping Pvt Ltd’ to release the cheques into sham bank account.

It claimed that defendants have received Rs 11.46 lakh from the firm’s customers but did not give it.

An FIR was lodged at Janak Puri Police Station for the alleged offences of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy against the firm’s employees for misappropriating its funds after which the company filed the suit.

The court also noted that the firm’s employee himself used to receive cheques from concerned postal officials in a wrong name i.e. in the name of sham company ‘M/s Eage Shopping’ instead of ‘M/s Eage Shopping Pvt Ltd.’

“He also got the said cheques encashed in sham account in the name of ‘M/s Eage Shopping’, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff company by aforesaid breach of trust,” it said.PTI

The National Green Tribunal has directed a five-star hotel here to submit details of its water consumption after a plea alleged that the hotel was illegally extracting ground water and causing environmental degradation.

A bench headed by Justice U D Salvi directed Hotel Jaypee Vasant to inform the tribunal about the supply of water it received through tankers between August, 2015 to January, 2016 and also submit all bills in this regard.

“We direct the Respondent No 1 (Hotel Jaypee Vasant) to make a candid statement as to the supply of water through tankers between the period of August, 2015 to January, 2016 and place all such bills for the said period before us on the next date,” the bench said while posting the matter for next hearing on July 15.

During the hearing, Delhi Jal Board told the bench that the hotel has two sanctioned water lines and the average consumption for 26 days is 139 kilo litres that is 5.3 litres per day through one of the water lines. The consumption from the other water line is almost negligible, he said.

The counsel appearing for the hotel informed the bench that the water requirements are met either by Delhi Jal Board or water tankers.

The tribunal had last year issued notices to three five-star hotels, Central Ground Water Authority, Delhi Jal Board, New Delhi Municipal Council, Central Pollution Control Board.

The directions came while hearing a plea filed by Delhi resident Shailesh Singh seeking directions to immediately stop withdrawal of ground water without permission.

Singh had alleged that these five-star hotels were using “several lakh litres” of ground water and the sources of water are not visible in their premises.

The plea had alleged that according to Delhi Pollution Control Committee, one of the hotels was extracting 2,22,600 litres of water from supply and is having two bore-wells to extract ground water.

Earlier, the tribunal had imposed a fine of Rs 7.5 lakh on one of the hotels after it found “unsatisfactory” rain water harvesting systems in their premises.PTI

In a first, a teenager, who allegedly ran over a 32-year-old marketing executive while driving his father’s Mercedes, will now face trial as an adult after the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) today said the offence allegedly committed by him was “heinous”.

The Presiding Officer of the JJB passed the order on the application of Delhi Police which had sought transfer of the case to trial court to try as adult the accused who turned major just four days after the April 4 incident.

It is the first of its kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to Sessions court.

As per section 2(33) of the Act, “heinous offences” include the offences for which minimum punishment under IPC or any other law for the time being in force is imprisonment for seven years or more.

The police had on May 26 chargesheeted the juvenile in the JJB for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder entails a maximum of 10 years jail.

The JJB had reserved its order yesterday after hearing for over an hour arguments by Special Public Prosecutor Atul Shrivastava who had said the boy belongs to the age group of 16-18 years and this offence comes under definition of “heinous crimes” so his case should be transferred to the trial court.

The JJB today accepted the argument and allowed the plea of Delhi Police, Shrivastava said.

Initially, a case under IPC sections 304 A (causing death by rash or negligent act) was lodged against the teenager but later on he was booked for the alleged offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sent to the reform home.

Police had said in its charge sheet that the boy had fatally run over victim Siddharth Sharma with his father’s Mercedes when Sharma was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in north Delhi on April 4.

The final report was filed for alleged offences under IPC sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 279 (driving on a public way so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life) and 337 (causing hurt by an act which endangers human life) against him.

The Board had on April 26 granted bail to the youth who sought the relief to appear in entrance examinations.

Police had said that the car was being driven at a speed of at least 80 km per hour and Sharma was flung several feet into the air by the impact of the crash and landed around 15 metres away from where he stood.PTI