Padmapriya ‘suicide’: Setback for former Udupi MLA Raghupathi Bhat as SC sets aside HC order

News Network
September 18, 2017

Udupi, Sept 18: In a major setback to BJP leader and former Udupi MLA Raghupathi Bhat, the Supreme Court has set aside the 2014 order of the Karnataka High Court, which directed a trial court in Udupi to order further investigation against Athul Rao on charges of abetting Padmapriya, wife of Mr. Bhat, to commit suicide, adultery and enticing a married woman. Athul was a close friend of Padmapriya.

A Bench, comprising Justice Dipak Misra (as he then was) and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, in its August 18, 2017 verdict, allowed Athul’s plea and set aside the High Court’s September 16, 2014 order.

Also, the Supreme Court directed the Udupi trial court to conclude within six months the trial of the case against Athul.

The police had filed charge sheet against Athul under Sections 417, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code accusing him of cheating and forgery in connection with his actions of procuring several official documents, including the rent agreement for a flat in New Delhi, where Padmapriya allegedly committed suicide on June 14/15, 2008.

The charges were based on fraudulent information and false representations made by Athul to show that Padmapriya was his lawfully wedded wife. Athul’s claim was that he had only helped Padmapriya, “on her request,” to come out of her marital house.

Not satisfied with the charge sheet filed by the police in August 2008 and the supplementary charge sheet in July 2009, Mr. Bhat had filed a private complaint against Athul before a magistrate court in Udupi making allegations under Sections 497 (adultery), 498 (enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman) and 306 (abetment to suicide). The magistrate court had ordered a separate investigation based on Mr. Bhat’s complaint.

However, Athul moved the High Court challenging the probe ordered on Mr. Bhat’s complaint.

And the High Court quashed the investigation ordered by the magistrate but allowed Mr. Bhat to file an application seeking further investigation before the trial court, where the police had already filed the charge sheet against Athul. The High Court had asked the trial court to consider Mr. Bhat’s plea “in accordance with the law.”

The trial court, after hearing Mr. Bhat’s application, on August 7, 2014 rejected his plea for further investigation while observing that “investigation officer had probed the case from all angles in the context of allegations in the complaint” besides making it clear that additional charges could be framed against Athul if any evidence is revealed during trial.

This made Mr. Bhat to move High Court against rejection of his plea for further probe. The High Court, in its September 16, 2014 order, allowed Mr. Bhat’s petition and directed the trial court to order further investigation.

But Athul moved the Supreme Court, which on February 2, 2015 stayed the High Court’s order related to further investigation.

In its final order, the apex court held that the High Court “committed manifest error in interfering with the discretionary order passed by the trial court, which had rightly, giving proper reasons, rejected Mr. Bhat’s plea for further investigation.

Comments

Kalandar Manna…
 - 
Tuesday, 19 Sep 2017

Raghupathi Bhatta has to be punished, The law should be same for all.

Danish
 - 
Monday, 18 Sep 2017

Mr. Raguphathi bhat is innocent and the rest god knows.

Truth
 - 
Monday, 18 Sep 2017

Yeddyruappa also claimed innocence for his wife's death

Unknown
 - 
Monday, 18 Sep 2017

Will never get justice

Suresh
 - 
Monday, 18 Sep 2017

Nothing new in this?  Dirty law of India

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.
Agencies
February 8,2020

Mumbai, Feb 8: Anil Ambani, the brother of Asia’s richest man has pleaded poverty in his dispute with three Chinese banks seeking $680 million in defaulted loans.

“The value of my investments has collapsed,” Anil Ambani said, according to a court filing by the banks in a London lawsuit.

“The current value of my shareholdings is down to approximately $82.4m and my net worth is zero after taking into account my liabilities. In summary, I do not hold any meaningful assets which can be liquidated for the purposes of these proceedings.”

The lawsuit was filed by three state-controlled Chinese banks which argue that they provided a loan of $925 million to Ambani’s Reliance Communications Ltd. in 2012 with the condition that he personally guarantee the debt. The comments were disclosed on Friday as Ambani sought to avoid depositing hundreds of millions of dollars with the court ahead of a trial.

The embattled Indian tycoon says that while he agreed to give a non-binding “personal comfort letter,” he never gave a guarantee tied to his personal assets -- an “extraordinary potential personal liability.”

The 60-year-old is the brother of Mukesh Ambani, who’s worth $56.5 billion and is the wealthiest man in Asia. Anil, on the other hand, has seen his personal fortune dwindle over recent years, losing his billionaire status. His Reliance Communications filed for bankruptcy last year.

The banks asked Judge David Waksman to force Ambani to put up $656 million into the court’s account.

Representatives for Ambani’s Reliance Group said they couldn’t immediately comment. They said the group will issue a statement once the court issues the final order.

Ambani’s lawyer, Robert Howe, said the court shouldn’t order his client to make a payment he can’t make. The tycoon argues that an order requiring him to do so would hinder his ability to defend himself in the case, Howe said.

“There’s no evidence of some giant pot of gold that he can pull $1 million, let alone $10 million, let alone $100 million,” Howe said.

Bankim Thanki, an attorney representing Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China, said in a filing that Ambani’s statements are “plainly a yet further opportunistic attempt to evade his financial obligations to the lenders.”

Ambani was caught up in another legal wrangle last year when India’s Supreme Court threatened him with prison after Reliance Communications failed to pay Rs 5.5 billion ($77 million) to Ericsson AB’s Indian unit. The judges gave him a month to find the funds, and his brother, Mukesh, stepped in just in time to make the payment.

Anil said in a filing that he recognized that the judge would want to know if he could satisfy any order to put up funds from outside resources, including his family.

“I can confirm that I have made enquiries but I am unable to raise any finance from external sources,” he said. Judge Waksman had said in an earlier ruling that he believed Ambani’s defence would be shown to be “opportunistic and false.”

Ambani’s lawyer told the judge that as a result of the comments the tycoon’s relatives were unlikely to lend any funds.

There is a “very substantial risk they will never get it back,” Howe 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.
coastaldigest.com news network
March 23,2020

Mangaluru/Udupi, Mar 23: The coastal district of Dakshina Kannada including the city of Mangaluru today refused to return to normalcy from yesterday’s Janata Curfew, as the government imposed lockdown in the district till the month end to contain the Covid-19 caused by the deadly novel coronavirus.

The lockdown coupled with the prohibitory orders under Section 144 has forced all the commercial establishments barring few to remain closed in the district.

The police started issuing stern warning to the people through loudspeakers against venturing out of their homes unnecessarily. People are allowed to move only in case of any emergency or basic needs.

The police warning came after a few people started ignoring the lockdown and ban orders. A few private buses also were seen plying on the roads in the morning.

Under the proibitory orders, the district administration banned from venturing out of their homes except in case of emergency or extreme necessity. All public programmes including religious ceremonies, cultural programmes also are banned. All shops, commercial establishments, workshops and godowns with other unessential goods are supposed to remain closed. Bus service, both government and private, are to suspended. Mass prayers and religious ceremonies are not allowed in temples, mosques and churches. Beaches and other tourist spots are closed.

Udupi

The lockdown in 9 districts of Karnataka has forced many private buses in Udupi to stay off the roads for second day on Monday. Some buses plying between Udupi to Kundapur have resumed service a day after Janata Curfew, with very minimum occupancy.

Due to lockdown in Dakshina Kannada, all services operating from Mangaluru to Udupi, Manipal, and Kundapur have been suspended till the month end. Buses on Karkala-Udupi route have also stopped their operations.

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 3,2020

Mysuru/Chamarajanagara, Apr 3: In order to prevent the transmission of Novel Coronavirus though overcrowding, the central jails in Mysuru and Chamarajanagar have begun releasing some of their inmates.

As many as 55 undertrials and convicts were released from Mysuru jail since the last two days, while 18 were released from the prison in Chamarajanagar. The jail inmates had been released on interim bail, for a period of two months.

While the undertrials were facing charges that involved a maximum prison term of seven years, the convicts were facing criminal miscellaneous cases of the family court. Most of the convicts released were prisoners who had not paid the maintenance costs ordered by the family courts in divorce cases.

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.