Dishonour killing: Father poisons 22-year-old daughter, burns body in field

coastaldigest.com news network
March 2, 2018

Mysuru, Mar 2: In a fresh case of so called honour killing, a casteist man belonging to Vokkaliga community killed his own daughter for being in love with a boy belonging to Dalit community at Gollanabeedu village in HD Kote taluk of Mysuru district.

The victim has been identified as Sushma (22), daughter of Kumar who was arrested by police on Thursday on charge of poisoning the former to death and later burning her body secretly in the field.

Sushma, who was in love with Umesh, a resident of Alanahalli village on the outskirts of Mysuru, had eloped with him two years ago. A few village elders had brought the girl back to the village after advising both Umesh and Sushma to stay away from each other.

Sushma’s parents recently asked her to marry a boy from their community. However, she opposed the marriage and was adamant on marrying only Umesh. In a fit of rage, her parents had allegedly poisoned her on February 22 and burnt her body in their field. They had even ploughed their land so that the villagers do not doubt them. As Sushma disappeared suddenly, it raised suspicion among the villagers. Her relatives alerted the police, after which the incident came to light.

Police, who arrested Kumar, brought him to the land where he had burnt the body of his daughter, and conducted a mahazar. Additional SP Rudramuni said that one of the constables, who came to know that Kumar had killed his daughter and burnt the body, immediately brought it to the notice of the higher officials. A suo motu case was registered and a probe conducted, he said.

Comments

MYB
 - 
Friday, 2 Mar 2018

Evil practices still exists in the community which are not bother to debate by hypocrite media and the community intellectuals instead they are much interested to intimidate in minority internal affairs business.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 7,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 7: Former Minister and Leader of the Opposition Siddaramiah on Tuesday termed the shutting by private clinics in the state by doctors as an 'inhuman act'.

Taking to micro-blogging site Twitter, the Congress leader said due to the fear of Novel Coronavirus, the doctors have closed their private clinics, which was against their profession.

This has affected the people, especially those, who are suffering from other deceases. He urged Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa to intervene and resolve the issue immediately.

Despite the government instructions not to close down their clinics, the doctors have not been responding positively, Mr Siddaramaiah noted.

In this connection, the government should act seriously and give necessary warning to the doctors, to either open their clinics to serve the people, or face action, he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 9,2020

Kozhikode, Jun 9: Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's daughter Veena T is all set to marry DYFI National President and CPM state committee member PA Muhammad Riyas on June 15. Interestingly, it's the second marriage for both. 

Veena, the elder daughter of Pinarayi Vijayan and Kamala Vijayan, is an IT entrepreneur based in Bengaluru.

According to sources, the marriage will be a simple function in Thiruvananthapuram where only close relatives will participate. The marriage registration has already been done. 

"It's only a private affair of two individuals," Riyas told media persons, reluctant to divulge more details. 

The 44-year-old Muhammad Riyas started his political career with the Students Federation of India (SFI) and climbed up the rungs through DYFI. He had unsuccessfully contested against UDF's M K Raghavan from Kozhikode parliament constituency in 2009. 

The son of retired IPS officer P M Abdul Khadar, Riyas is the familiar face of the left in primetime TV discussions, strongly articulating the CPM stance. 

A law graduate, he had begun at the grassroots level and gradually worked his way up the ladder. 

His marriage to Dr Sameeha Saithalavi, a former syndicate member of Calicut University, happened in 2002. The couple separated in 2015 and they have two sons aged 10 and 13. 

The 40-plus Veena is MD of the IT firm Exalogic Solutions since 2014. 

Prior to that, she was the CEO of RT Technosoft, a Thiruvananthapuram-based company owned by NRI industrialist Ravi Pillai. Before that, she had a six-year stint with Oracle. She has a son from her first marriage. 

"They both were divorced for more than five years. They knew each other and the marriage decision was taken by them only. It's completely a private affair," said a DYFI leader.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.