A woman has been acquitted by a Thane court in a cheque bounce case on the ground that the complainant failed to prove the allegations against her.

Deepak Shripatrao Bhosle of Bhandup had stated in his complaint that he had advanced a loan of Rs five lakh to Bhanumati Bhoir, who ran a tiffin service, and she issued a cheque for the sum which bounced for insufficient funds.

He had alleged that Bhoir had issued the cheque dated February 11, 2010 drawn on IDBI Bank which when deposited with Canara Bank was returned unpaid on September 3, 2010.

The complainant had also served a legal notice to the woman which remained unanswered.

The woman’s counsel, A D Chavan, told the court that the entire case was totally cooked up. He said the woman had never taken any loan from the complainant and had never issued any cheque for the said amount.

The woman admitted that a signed blank cheque was issued by her sometime back as security which was allegedly misused by the complainant.

Thane’s First Class Judicial Magistrate R T Ghogle observed that there is no documentary evidence on the point of advancement of loan amount to the accused. Thus, it cannot be said that the cheque was drawn in discharge of liability, he said.

“It is the defence of the accused that the complainant had misused the blank signed cheque without her consent. A sum of Rs. 5,00,000 is a huge amount. Thus, the possibility of misuse of cheque by Deepak cannot be ruled out,” he noted.

“It is axiomatic from record that the disputed cheque was issued in blank form, only with signature of accused. Thus it is quite probable that it might have been given as security for certain amount,” the magistrate said.

Veritas (India) Ltd said Income Tax officials carried out search and seizure proceedings for three days from September 10 at the premises of the company and promoters.

Mumbai-based Veritas (India) Ltd deals in international trade and distribution of chemicals, petrochemicals, polymers, rubber, heavy distillates among others.

The Company is in the process of collating and responding to all the queries raised by the Income Tax authorities and accordingly final report relating to search/survey operation will be concluded as per the laid down procedures, VIL said in a regulatory filing.

“.. Under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Authorities had carried out search and seizure proceedings at the premises of the Company, its promoters and its senior officials on September 10, 2015 to September 13, 2015,” the company said.

It added that upon conclusion of the process, material development, if any, will be intimated in due course of time.

“The company continues to operate in normal course of business,” the filing said.

VIL also has overseas subsidiaries and offices. It is broadly into three business verticals of trading, logistics and power generation.

All the twelve convicts found guilty in the case relating to the July 11, 2006 serial train blasts, which claimed 188 lives in local trains in Mumbai, pleaded leniency in the court on the point of sentence citing humanitarian grounds.

Designated Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) Judge Yatin D Shinde had on September 11 held them guilty of complicity in the crime while acquitting 34-year-old Abdul Wahid Shaikh, also an accused, in the case.

They were found guilty of planting bombs in local trains which exploded at various stations in the peak hours causing panic among the commuters returning home from work.

The judge called each convict before him and recorded their respective statements on the quantum of sentence to be awarded to them.

After the court records their statements, their lawyers and the prosecution would argue on the quantum of sentence. The proceedings would continue tomorrow.

Convict Kamal Ansari pleaded that minimum punishment be given to him. “I have small kids”, Ansari told the court.

Another convict, Tanvir Ahmed, a doctor, said he had chosen the profession to help the poor and he wished to serve the needy. He also said that he had worked in a charitable hospital.

“I have no past criminal record and I have behaved well in the jail (as an undertrial). I did a post graduation in disaster management and have improved my academic records”, Tanvir told the court. He also said that he did pose a danger to the society and prayed for minimum punishment.

Another convict, Mohammed Faisal Shaikh, also prayed for a lesser sentence saying he was suffering from brain tumor for the past three years. “I got brain tumor in jail. I also have spine-related ailments”. He said he was not convicted by any court earlier and does not have any intention to commit any crime in future.

Shaikh said his parents were old and there was nobody to take care of them. “My brother has also been convicted in the same case”, he said seeking minimum punishment.

Yet another convict, Ehtesham Siddiqui, told the court that he hails from a poor family and was operating a small business (before arrest). “I could not get education as we were poor and with great difficulty I was able to learn. My brother runs the family and he is not financially sound”, said Siddiqui.

He further said that after going to jail he was able to get education and currently he is doing graduation in law. He also pleaded for minimum punishment saying that there is nobody to take care of his family after he goes to jail.

Hearing a case of child custody, the Bombay High Court on Monday directed interpol wing of CBI to issue a red corner notice to bring back an Italian who has left India for his home country with his adopted 7-year-old daughter despite a written undertaking to the court that he would not go abroad with the child.

A bench headed by Justice V M Kanade also directed the CBI Interpol to issue a yellow corner notice to bring back the child whose custody was being sought by her mother, who hails from Goa.

The bench, while asking the CBI interpol to issue the notices to the father and daughter respectively, however, ruled that no coercive action be taken against them.

The bench asked the authorities to ensure that both, father and daughter, were presented before the High Court after they were brought from Italy to face the proceedings filed by the Goan woman.

The couple were locked in a custody battle over the child. They were given joint guardianship of the girl by a Pune adoption Centre. However, they split after a year. In 2011, the Italian husband got the custody of the child from a Pune family court.

Both challenged the family court order in the Bombay High Court. The wife challenged the order as she was not granted the custody of her daughter while the husband contested it after the family court refused to remove the mother as a joint legal guardian.

The HC also directed the wife to make a representation to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in the Government of India regarding her grievances.

The bench further asked the MEA to intimate the HC order (regarding red corner and yellow corner notices being issued to the father and daughter) to the Indian Embassy in Italy which in turn would convey it to Juvenile court in Venice, Italy.

The HC also asked the Union of India to explore the possibility of providing legal aid to the applicant (wife).

Amid raging row over meat ban, Union Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma on Monday said though he did not favour any type of “ban”, it would be a good gesture if people respected sentiments of other communities during their special occasions and not consume non-vegetarian food.

“In principle, I am not in favour of this ban work…Let it be people’s choice of whatever they want to eat…But I am in favour of, if you have to respect somebody’s sentiments, suppose, he is a non-vegetarian person and for one day or two days or three days, you want to take a stop, it is just to respect his sentiments,” he said.

“Asking people to stop eating non-vegetarian for few days does not amount to putting a ban… People do not eat non- vegetarian food during Navratra festival. Hotels also do not sell non-vegetarian food during the festival,” he said.

Sharma’s remarks come in the backdrop of Maharashtra prohibiting meat in Mumbai for the Jain festival of fasting. The state government move came within months of its banning beef there.

Nowadays, TV debates are turning out to be no less dramatic than soap operas.

A national TV debate on controversial self-styled godwoman ‘Radhe Maa’ turned into an on-air brawl when a female astrologer got up and slapped another panelist – a self-proclaimed godman – who retorted back with his own punches.

The dramatic on-air brawl took place during the airing of the show ‘Äaj Ka Mudda’ on IBN7 when the panelists were debating over ‘Radhe Maa’.

At one point during the discussion, female astrologer Deepa Sharma got so agitated that she simply got up and dished out one slap on the cheeks of Hindu Mahasabha’s Om Ji Maharaj.

Startled and shocked, the self-proclaimed godman made no delay in responding and in no time, both of them were seen exchanging blows.

Watch it here as tweeted by Sayoni Ayyar, an anchor with the above-mentioned news channel.

A Bandra Family Court granted divorce to a man, who alleged that his wife didn’t allow him to have sex as per her guru’s instructions.

During the court hearing, the wife of the 30-year-old argued that her husband wanted to indulge in unnatural sex, following which she refused to get intimate. The couple got married in 2011.

In his petition, the man maintained that on the wedding night he was impressed with his wife as she had brought packets of condoms, on the first wedding night.

However, after four months, the man was astounded, as her wife refused to have sex on her guru’s advice. According to the husband, his wife also told him that she didn’t want to have kids for the next five years.

While delivering the judgement, Justice SA Morey said, “The wife has no sufficient cause for denial of physical intimacy to the husband. Therefore, the act of respondent (wife) amounts to mental cruelty.”

The man also accused his wife of fighting with the family members and also frequently calling him up at his office, causing disruptions in his work.

The 30-year-old in his PIL also said that his wife hacked his account and sent derogatory e-mails against him to his friends.

He also maintained that his dream of marrying a woman who would manage his home was completely shattered.

The court also categorically rejected the wife’s claims that her husband wanted to indulge in unnatural sex.

In a big relief for the meat dealers, Bombay High Court on Monday stayed the ban on sale of meat on September 17, which implies that meat can now be sold on that day.

The Bombay High Court passed the order while responding to a petition moved by the Mutton Dealers Association, which challenged the ban on slaughter and sale of meat during Jain festival Paryushan.

In its ruling, the HC said that “though the state government circular banning meat sale on two days was issued in 2004, it was never fully implemented.”

The High Court, however, refused to interfere in the slaughter of meat or shutting down of meat shops in the city.

The Maharastra government had earlier imposed the ban on meal sale for four days, September 10, 13, 17 18 but the BMC had on Friday revoked the ban to be imposed on September 13 and 18.

The move was taken following severe protests from Shiv Sena and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS). The High Court had also severely criticised the ban and questioned how the corporation can restrict the sale of meat.

The BMC counsel had on Friday informed court that the ban was originally meant only for slaughter of animals and the ban on sale of meat was consequential. It had argued that this was keeping in mind the health concerns of the public since the meat sold will be fresh.

The court had questioned that when there is storage available, it is an individual’s choice ‎when they want to purchase and it cannot be restricted.