4 yrs RI for Telgi, 5 others

4 yrs RI for Telgi, 5 others

Hyderabad: Fake stamp paper scam kingpin Abdul Karim Telgi and five others were today sentenced to four-years rigorous imprisonment by a special CBI court here after they pleaded guilty in the case


Judge V Raghunath Rao pronounced the terms for Telgi, P Abdul Waheed, Thomas Jacob, Badruddin K Jamadar, B Sadasiva and K Mohd Yousuf after they pleaded guilty on charges under section 120-B of Indian Penal Code (IPC) pertaining to criminal conspiracy and under sections 258 (Sale and circulation of fake stamps), 260 (possession of fake stamps) and 420 (cheating) of IPC , with fine of Rs 500 each.


The judge, however, dropped charges under IPC section 255 dealing with counterfeiting (printing) of government stamp papers against Telgi on the grounds of lack of material evidence. The court also found them guilty under section 69 (B) of Indian Stamp Act and imposed sentences of six months simple imprisonment.


Telgi's advocate Farhatullah told reporters that his client confessed his involvement in the scam.


The judgment has come in one of the two cases registered against Telgi and his associated in Hyderabad.


The CBI has not yet filed chargesheet in the other case. Telgi faces about 50 cases in the fake stamp paper scam in different parts of the country.


All the sentences will run concurrently. The judge in his orders also directed that the remand period if any undergone by all the accused is set off under section 428 CrPC. Telgi, currently lodged in a Bangalore jail, was brought by an escort police party of Karnataka and produced in the court on January 20, which posted the case for framing of charges today.

The CBI had filed a charge sheet in the court against Telgi and five others after the case was transferred to the agency by Hyderabad Police in 2004.

Two Delhi doctors sentenced for negligence

New Delhi, Dec 3 (IANS) A city court Monday awarded two years' jail to an anaesthetist and a surgeon of a private hospital in Greater Kailash for a boy's death during an operation.

In a rare verdict, Metropolitan Magistrate J.P. Nahar held surgeon Omkar M. Parmar, 68, and anaesthetist N. Dutta, 73, guilty of the death of 13-year-old Gaurav Batra at Sukhda Hospital of Greater Kailash in 1995.

They were sentenced under section 304 A (causing death by rash and negligent act) of the Indian Penal Code.

Rejecting the doctors' plea for leniency, the court said the complainant parents had lost their only child due to their negligent acts. The court also fined the two doctors Rs.10,000 each.

However, the court later granted them bail on a surety bond of Rs.15,000 each.

"Bail bonds are furnished and are accepted till Dec 29 and both the convicts will have to surrender by 10 a.m. on the same day if they fail to obtain bail from the appellate court," the court said.

Victim Gaurav, who was advised surgery for tonsillitis, was operated upon for his ailment after being admitted in the hospital on June 13, 1995, the prosecution said.

However, his parents panicked when he did not gain consciousness even after being under observation for hours in the hospital.

They made several phone calls to doctors Parmar and Dutta to come and attend to their son but they failed to do so and the boy died, the prosecution alleged.

Law Commission submits report on Dowry Death

PIB Press Release October 10 - The Chairman of the Law Commission of India, Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan today submitted a Report on Dowry Death to the Union Law Minister, Dr. H. R. Bhardwaj.

The question that has been examined by the Law Commission in this Report is whether Section 304-B of Indian Penal Code, should be amended to provide for more stringent punishment of death sentence to curb the menace of dowry death. This section provides for punishment of imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life. Although this section has come into force w.e.f. November 19, 1986 yet the incidents of dowry death have not shown any significant decline. This gave rise to demands for death sentence for the offence of dowry death in order to imbibe necessary deterrence in the law.

The Commission examined Section 304-B IPC in the light of various judicial pronouncements and critically dealt with the substantive as well as procedural aspects of the subjects. The Commission finds that the offence of murder is not the same thing as the offence of dowry death. Though death of bride may be a common element in both the offences, the absence of direct connection between the husband and the death of wife distinguished the offence of dowry death from the offence of murder. Besides, the presumptive character of the offence of dowry death and cardinal principle of proportionality as well as the underlying scheme of the Penal Code go against the proposed prescription of death sentence in case of dowry death. It may be pertinent to point out that where a case of dowry death also falls within the ambit of the offence of murder, awarding death sentence may be legally permissible. The guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for award of death sentence, especially, the dictum of rarest of rare case, will, however, have to be adhered to in such cases.

The Commission found a lot of misgivings and misapprehension associated with the subject of dowry death. Dowry death is quite often confused with the offence of murder. There may be instances where the two may overlap with each other. This gives rise to demand for parity in the matter of sentence in both these cases. Nevertheless, the two offences are distinct and independent offences. The Commission has proceeded to spell out the finer nuances of the offence of dowry death for their better understanding and appreciation to dispel the ambiguity and confusion shrouding the notion of dowry death vis-à-vis murder. This will help in providing clarity on the subject for its correct understanding and appreciation to the concerned authorities while dealing with the cases of dowry death.

The Commission has, there, not recommended death penalty for dowry death cases. However, the Commission has favored the increasing of the minimum sentence from seven years to ten years in such cases.

Rajasthan court expected to hear Mohanty plea Friday

Jaipur, July 5 (IANS) A lower court here is likely to hear Friday Orissa's senior police official B.B. Mohanty's plea converting a non-bailable warrant against him into a bailable one.

Mohanty's application said that the Rajasthan police had June 6 submitted an appeal based on false and fabricated facts in the court under Section 25 of the Police Act.

"We filed the application with the court a few days back and the court is likely to hear it on Friday," P.C. Pradeep Sharma, Mohanty's advocate, told IANS here Thursday.

Orissa Director General of Police Mohanty is facing charges of helping his son, Biti Hotra Mohanty, escape from jail as he had given surety for his parole. Bitty, convicted of raping a German tourist in Alwar, was sentenced to seven years in jail. He had gone on parole in November 2006 but did not return.

The advocate said Mohanty wants to provide his full cooperation to the state police in the inquiry but the investigating official was trying to arrest him by presenting "false and misleading facts".

"After considering the case diary it would become clear to the court that Mohanty's case is not a non-bailable offence," Sharma said.

Mohanty's petition says that Section 225 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) clearly states that an offence is non-bailable when a person helps a convict, given life sentence or 10 years in jail or death sentence, escape.

If a convict has been sentenced for less number of years than that, the person helping the accused in escaping does not come under the category of non-bailable offence, the lawyer said.

Such cases come under Section 225(B) and are bailable offences, he added.

The court had on June 8 issued a bailable warrant against Biti and arrest warrant against his father and had given police time till July 7 to carry out the orders.

Bathinda court issues arrest warrant against Dera chief

Bathinda (Punjab), June 20 (IANS) A court here Wednesday issued non-bailable arrest warrants against Dera Sacha Sauda sect chief Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh for hurting religious sentiments of the Sikh community.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate A.L. Kitchi issued the warrants on the basis of a May 20 case registered against the Dera chief, in which he was charged under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The judge directed that the Punjab police will have to take the permission of the state government before arresting him.

The court order came even as a letter from the Dera head reached the protesting Sikh community (Sant Samaj) leaders in Chandigarh.

Though contents of the letter were not made public, sources in the Sant Samaj said that it was a re-worded apology to the Sikh community.

Sikh leaders were meeting in Chandigarh to deicide their further course of action after the latest letter.

They have been protesting at Mohali near Chandigarh since Tuesday seeking immediate arrest of Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh for committing blasphemy by portraying himself like 10th Sikh guru Gobind Singh.

The Dera chief had apologized to the Sikh gurus for his "unintentional act" in May after the Akal Takht, the highest temporal seat of Sikhs, issued a deadline to his sect to wind up all its activities in Punjab by May 27.

The Sikh leadership also asked Sikhs to socially boycott the Dera head and his sect followers.

The Dera-Sikh controversy had led to widespread violence in Punjab for over a week in May.

Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh lives in the sprawling headquarters of the sect near Sirsa in neighbouring Haryana, 100 km from here.

The Punjab police will have to seek the help of their counterparts in Haryana to arrest him from his fortified headquarters even as millions of his supporters are expected to oppose his arrest.