Youth gouges out father’s eye with car key for not handing over property

News Network
August 29, 2018

Bengaluru, Aug 29: In a shocking incident, a youth gouged out his father’s eye with a set of car keys after a clash over a property dispute yesterday in the city.

The accused Abhishek Chethan (35) was arrested by the police while his father S S Parameshwar was admitted a hospital after the coldblooded attack.

According to police the son had been pressuring his father to sign over a property in JP Nagar to him. “The accused entered his father’s house at Shakambari Nagar on Tuesday morning while he was performing a ceremony to mark one month of his wife’s death and attacked him,” said a police officer.

Parameshwar was badly injured as his son allegedly gouged out one of his eyes with the keys and damaged the other.

Abhishek then allegedly pushed his father down and tried to escape. However, the neighbours heard the screams of a family member and when Abhishek tried to flee, they chased him, nabbed him and handed him over to the police.

He has been arrested on the charge of attempt to murder. The neighbours took Parmeshwar, who was bleeding profusely, to a hospital in an autorickshaw. “Doctors told us that they are trying to restore partial eyesight,” said the police.

Abhishek, who works in an automobile company, is the oldest of three children, and lived on the second floor of a building owned by his father.

Parameshwar resided on the first floor. According to the police, soon after their mother passed away last month, Abhishek allegedly got into a fight with his younger brother.

He wanted a house in J P Nagar to be given to him, even though his father had refused his past requests. On Tuesday morning, he visited his father to discuss the matter. Parameshwar opposed his claim, and in a fit of rage, Abhishek allegedly punched his father with a key and gouged out his right eye-ball. He then punched his left eye,” said the police.

Comments

Ramprasad
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Aug 2018

Better to change father's will paper and nominee name. Son should not be there in paper

Ibrahim
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Aug 2018

Son should be punished by giving life long compensation

Kumar
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Aug 2018

Should punish him equally and the son should earn and take care his father. Police should verify that

Danish
 - 
Wednesday, 29 Aug 2018

Is that youth own son to the victim..!Strange

 

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
March 6,2020

New Delhi, Mar 6: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking framing of a proper mechanism to deal with alleged misuse of the sedition law by the government machinery. A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar dismissed the plea filed by a social activist and said it was open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority.

At the outset, the apex court told advocate Utsav Singh Bains, appearing for the petitioner, that he could not seek quashing of an FIR in a sedition case filed against the management of a Karnataka school for allegedly allowing students to stage an anti-CAA and anti-NRC drama.

Bains told the bench that he was not just pressing for a prayer to quash the FIR but the petitioner has also sought a direction for framing of a proper mechanism to deal with the alleged misuse of the sedition law.

"Let the affected party come and we will hear them. Why it should be done at your instance," the bench said, refusing to entertain the petition.

The petition had sought quashing of the FIR against the principal and other staff of the Shaheen School at Bidar who have been booked under sections 124A (sedition) and 153A (promoting enmity between different groups) of the Indian Penal Code.

The plea had also sought an apex court direction for a proper mechanism to deal with alleged government misuse of the sedition law.

Section 124A of the IPC says that "whoever brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards... the Government shall be punished with imprisonment for life...".

The plea had sought a direction to the Centre and the Karnataka government "to quash the FIR registered in connection of seditious charges against the school management, teacher and a widowed parent of a student for staging a play criticising CAA, NRC and NPR."

The petition had claimed that the police "also questioned students, and videos and screenshots of CCTV footage showing them speaking to the students were shared widely on social media, prompting criticism."

The drama was staged on January 21 by students of the fourth, the fifth and the sixth standard.

The sedition case was filed based on a complaint by social worker Neelesh Rakshyal on 26 January.

The complainant alleged that the school authorities "used" the students to perform a drama where they "abused" Modi in the context of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens.

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 24,2020

Udupi, Apr 24: While several state governments and NGOs are actively working to provide essentials to the needy amid the COVID-19 lockdown, a fisherwoman in Karnataka's Udupi has proved that even a small gesture of help for others can make a huge difference in the society.
A fisherwoman, Sharadakka, distributed rice to 140 needy families in her neighbourhood during the ongoing lockdown. The contribution was made by spending all her life savings amounting to Rs 30,000. The amount was saved by her over a period of time in an effort to build a house for herself.
On Thursday Udupi Deputy Commissioner G. Jagadeesh visited her and ensured help to build her house.
"Spending her meagre earnings, Sharadakka generously filled many empty stomachs amid the nation-wide lockdown, which is a matter of pride," said the Deputy Commissioner.

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 19,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 19: A recent government order prohibiting congregations, Ramadan prayers is discriminatory and needs to be withdrawn, JD(S) MLC B M Farookh has demanded.

In a letter to the chief secretary, Farookh pointed out that the order contained certain conditions such as restriction of the use of public address system and delivering Azan in low decibels, which had nothing to do with the prevention of Covid-19 disease.

“These days, Azan includes a call for the community to pray at home and does not offer namaz at mosque. The order also prohibits preparation and distribution of porridge, which has always been taken up in the interest of the poor. The High Court has noted that the relief distribution by NGOs or individuals should not be prevented and the state machinery has to coordinate the same by ensuring social distancing. The ban on distribution of porridge by mosques amounts to discrimination. The order needs to be withdrawn or revisited,” he wrote in his letter.

Further, observing that a religious fair was conducted in Kalaburagi recently, in violation of the government’s social distancing norms, Farookh sought the government to ensure that social distancing norms are enforced with regard to festivals of all communities without discrimination.

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.