Muslim techie washed away in Cauvery while taking selfie; Hindu friend sacrifices his life in rescue bid

Bengaluru, Feb 22: Thanks to joint efforts by the Protector of Emigrants in Bengaluru and Indian Embassy in Qatar, a 26-year-old woman from Karnataka who had been kept in confinement in Qatar has been rescued and brought back to India.

Anupama (name changed) from Holenarasipura in Hassan district arrived in Bengaluru on Thursday night. She was allegedly locked up in a house for 14 days, restrained from using a mobile and wasn't fed. There were three other women with her. On the midnight of February 12, they broke the window panes and fled before contacting local police.

Anupama, a diploma graduate in computer science, was jobless and her friend working in Kuwait suggested she try for a job abroad. She contacted an agency based in Chikkamagaluru which offered her a nanny's job in Qatar. After document verification, the agency demanded she pay Rs 2 lakh but she said she didn't have that kind of money.

The agency sent Anupama on a visitor visa but told her if questioned by immigration officials, she must claim she was visiting her sister. They also gave her a return ticket.

As Anupama was travelling abroad for the first time, she said she was ignorant about several things.

On January 12, Anupama left Bengaluru. But as she reached Qatar, all her documents, including passport, were confiscated by the agency. Her return ticket was cancelled and she was sent to a house to work as babysitter-cum-cook for Rs 30,000. She lived with four other maids in the same house, where they were made to work for 16-18 hours a day.

"I used to wake up around 5.30am every day and had to prepare breakfast for the employers by 6.30am. My work would end around 11pm every day. We never even got time to eat," Anupama told media on Friday. Four days into work, Anupama's nose started bleeding. However, the employers cared little and insisted she continue to work. After 18 days, she requested her employers that she be relieved.

The agency sent her to a house where three women were already present and locked her up with them. "They used to give us a glass of raw rice, an onion, tomato and potato to cook for ourselves. While we got rice every day, we had to use the vegetables for three days. We were not supposed to use mobiles or go out. Two people were monitoring us," she recalled.

Anupama and the others decided to approach police but for that they needed to escape. Around 1.30am on February 12, the four women managed to break window panes and jumped out. They ran for more than a kilometre and managed to approach police, who summoned the agency and got the women to speak to their families.

Anupama called her brother-in-law, who approached the Protector of Emigrants office in Koramangala, Bengaluru. Shubham Singh, PoE in Bengaluru, said they took up the issue with the Indian Embassy in Qatar, which immediately got in touch with Qatar police. Anupama said, "We were kept in prison for a couple of days and were sent to the deportation centre later."

Meanwhile, the Indian embassy got the agency to return the women's documents. However, the agents did not pay their salaries. Two of the women were sent to Hyderabad and the third to Kerala. On Friday, Anupama met Singh at his office, where her statement was recorded. "We have started the process of initiating action against the agency in India," he said.

Bengaluru, Jan 10: State’s primary and secondary education minister, S Suresh Kumar on Friday asked the Department of Public Instruction to register a complaint in the cybercrime police station against the teacher who shared a video of a child mispronouncing a Kannada word.

The viral video shows the child from a government school incorrectly pronouncing the word 'Pakkelubu' (ribcage).

The minister observed, 'It is normal for children to pronounce words incorrectly and only repetitive practise will make them say it correctly. If a video of such a mistake is made and spread on the Internet the child will see it in future and be demoralised and might start hate learning. The person who made and posted this video has committed a grave crime.

Mangaluru, May 21: The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 7.64 crore compensation to the next of kin of a man who was killed in a crash-landing of Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai in Mangalore on May 22, 2010. The accident killed 158 out of 166 passengers on board.

The family of the 45-year-old Mahendra Kodkany, which include his wife, daughter and son, were earlier granted Rs 7.35 crore as compensation by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). This compensation will now get enhanced after adding 9 per cent interest per annum (on the amount yet to be paid), to be paid by Air India.

Kodkany was the regional director for the Middle East for a UAE-based company. The aircraft overshot the runway and went down a hillside and burst into flames.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi said: "The total amount payable on account of the aforesaid heads works out to Rs 7,64,29,437. Interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum shall be paid on the same basis as has been awarded by the NCDRC. The balance, if any, that remains due and payable to the complainants, after giving due credit for the amount which has already been paid, shall be paid within a period of two months."

The apex court noted that in a claim for compensation arising out of the death of an employee, the income has to be assessed on the basis of the entitlement of the employee. The top court said: "We are unable to accept the reasons which weighed with the NCDRC in making a deduction of AED (UAE currency) 30,000 from the total CTC. Similarly, and for the same reason, we are unable to accept the submission of Air India that the transport allowance should be excluded. The bifurcation of the salary into diverse heads may be made by the employer for a variety of reasons."

The top court observed that the deceased was evidently, a confirmed employee of his employer. "We have come to the conclusion that thirty per cent should be allowed on account of future prospects", added the court.

The top court noted that if the amount which has been paid by Air India is in excess of the payable under the present judgement, "we direct under Article 142 of the Constitution (discretionary powers) that the excess shall not be recoverable from the claimants," said the court.