Search This Blog

Friday, December 12, 2014

Friday, June 1, 2012

two law colleges start at kollam from this academic year onwards.when it is flooded with advocates,new generation will prefer to corporate and multi level company sectors.they will be paid lakhs per month.it is good for the company and the young generation  ,but it is a fact that invention will be accepted and proclaimed as good when it is a reality.so practice is the guru, theory is a belief.guru is real, belief may sometimes unreal.who will stick on the practise-those who is good for ambulance chasing,canvass the clients,follow unethical areas.....alas!!!!long live practice.

Monday, July 4, 2011

S.Harikumar and Sandhya Vijayan

Advocates and legal consultants
Sivasaral building near collectorate
Thevally-P O,Kollam,Kerala State.
Phone-9447362985,7293780685, 0474-2798632.
e-mail;ss.harikumar@yahoo.com
www.advocateharikumar.blogspot.com











Friday, December 31, 2010

Honourable Supreme Court has constituted a Special Investigation Team chaired by Retd.SupremeCourt Judge Mr.B.P.Jeevan Reddy, to take steps to bring back unaccounted monies .
What prevents our Govt., to publish the names of persons who amass illegal wealth?
The order of Constituting a SIT headed by S.C Judge is a direct encroachment of the powers of Executive?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx







Delay in sending FIR to the Court, when fatal? SC JT DT 04.07.2011
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 562 of 2007

Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh & Ors. ...Appellants Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent WITH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 982 of 2008

Joga Singh ...Appellant Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent AND

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 983 of 2008

Nishabar Singh & Anr. ...Appellants Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent J U D G M E N T

Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.

1. All the aforesaid three appeals have been filed against the common judgment and order dated 15.12.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal Nos. 17-DB of 2005; and 360-
 DBA of 2005. The High Court partly affirmed the judgment and order dated 25/26.11.2004 of the Sessions Court in Sessions Trial No. 97 of 2003 convicting three appellants, namely, Joga Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Nishabar Singh under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter called `IPC'), and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. Further, the High Court convicted accused/appellants, namely, Bhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh who had been acquitted of all the charges by the trial court and awarded the sentences similar to the other accused.

2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are as under: A. Prosecution version as mentioned in the complaint of Trilok Singh (PW.9) is that, at 5.00 PM on 6.11.2002, he was present in his house alongwith his sons, namely, Gian Singh (deceased), Nishan Singh (deceased), his wife Swaran Kaur, daughter Harbhajan Kaur, grandson Harbhajan Singh and maternal grandson Ajaib Singh (injured) (PW.10). Bhajan Singh armed with Neja (Spear), Gurdeep Singh armed with Mogra (Pestle), Puran Singh armed with Gandasa, Joga Singh armed with sword, Nishabar Singh armed with Gandasa and Mukhtiar Singh armed with sword, accompanied by two ladies, namely, Chinder Kaur and Manjit
 Kaur, entered his house and raised Lalkara that they would teach them a lesson for tethering their cattle in the street. All the accused attacked Gian Singh (deceased) and Nishan Singh (deceased). Gurdeep Singh opened the attack by giving Mogra blow on the head of Gian Singh and Mukhtiar Singh inflicted a sword blow on the waist of Gian Singh, as a result of which he fell down. Joga Singh inflicted a sword blow on Nishan Singh's chest, Bhajan Singh inflicted Neja blow on his waist, Puran Singh inflicted Gandasa blow on his right elbow, Nishabar Singh inflicted Gandasa blow on his waist and, as a result, Nishan Singh fell down on the ground. Joga Singh inflicted a sword blow on the stomach of Ajaib Singh (PW.10), Mukhtiar Singh inflicted sword blow on the neck of Ajaib Singh, and as a result, he fell down. All the assailants then fled away from the spot with their respective weapons. Gian Singh and Nishan Singh died on the spot due to injuries. Ajaib Singh (PW.10), injured, was taken to the hospital. B. On the basis of the complaint, an FIR was lodged and registered (Ex.PB-1). SI Prakash Chand (PW.18) accompanied by Surinder Kumar, Photographer and other police officials reached the place of occurrence at about 8.15 P.M. Photographs of the dead bodies etc., were taken, inquest reports were prepared on the dead bodies of Gian Singh and Nishan Singh and blood stained earth was picked up from the place of occurrence. It was sealed in separate parcels. Dead bodies were sent for post-mortem
 examination and site plan etc. were prepared. Post-mortem was conducted on 7.11.2002 by Dr. Rajesh Gandhi (PW.11), who opined that the cause of death of both the persons was shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries. Ajaib Singh (PW.10), injured, was also examined on 6.11.2002 with diagnosis of multiple stab injuries in chest and abdomen. He was operated upon on 7.11.2002 and was discharged from the hospital on 20.11.2002. C. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh was arrested on 10.11.2002, and on his disclosure statement, Neja (Spear) was recovered from his residential house. On the disclosure statement of Puran Singh - appellant, the Gandasa was recovered from underneath his box at his residential house, and on the same day, on the disclosure statement of Joga Singh - appellant, that he had kept concealed sword underneath his bed in his residential house, the sword was recovered. On 11.11.2002, Gurdeep Singh made a disclosure statement, on the basis of which, Mogra alleged to have been used in the crime was recovered from his residential house. On the same day, Mukhtiar Singh also got the concealed sword recovered from the house of Bhajan Singh. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up in the court. Charges were framed against all the six appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC. The two ladies, namely, Chinder Kaur and Manjit Kaur were
 discharged. As all of the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed trial, they were put on trial.

D. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses including injured Ajaib Singh (PW.10), and Trilok Singh (PW.9), the complainant. All the appellants were examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called `Cr.P.C.'). Joga Singh, appellant, pleaded that at the time of the incident, he was present in his house which was adjoining to the house of the complainant. Ajaib Singh (PW.10) came to his house and called him saying that he was being called by someone at the `Phirni' of the village. When he came out, Gian Singh and Nishan Singh (both deceased) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10) pounced upon him and tried to drag him towards their house forcibly. Apprehending and suspecting that they would take him inside their house and kill him, he pushed Gian Singh, as a result of which, his head was struck against the wall. The other persons, namely, Nishan Singh (deceased) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10) in order to save him and to wriggle out of this situation, took out kirpan and wielded the same at random in self defence. It was in this background that Gian Singh, Nishan Singh and Ajaib Singh suffered injuries. The other accused simply denied the allegations and complained of their false implicity in the case. However, none of the appellant/accused adduced any evidence in defence.

E. On conclusion of the trial, the trial court held that appellants Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh were entitled to benefit of doubt and acquitted them of all the charges. However, the other remaining three appellants, namely, Joga Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Nishabar Singh were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, and Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC, and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-, each under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, and seven years imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC; in default of payment of fine, they would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. However, they were acquitted of charges under Section 148 I.P.C.

3. Being aggrieved, the three appellants convicted by the trial court filed Criminal Appeal No. 17-DB of 2005, while against the order of acquittal of the other three appellants, the State of Haryana filed Criminal Appeal No. 360-DBA of 2005. The High Court heard both the appeals together and disposed of the same by a common judgment and order dated 15.12.2006, maintaining the conviction of appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 17-DB of 2005. It also reversed the judgment and order of the trial court which acquitted the other three appellants, and convicted them for the same
 offence. The High Court awarded them same sentence as one awarded to the persons convicted by the trial court. Hence, these appeals.

4. Shri Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that no independent eye-witness has been examined. The High Court has placed a very heavy reliance on the evidence of Trilok Singh, complainant (PW.9) and his grandson Ajaib Singh (PW.10). In spite of the fact that a large number of persons had witnessed the incident, none of them has been examined. It is evident from the depositions of Trilok Singh (PW.9) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10) and judgments of the courts below that the place of occurrence has been tempered with by the prosecution and thus, the prosecution failed in its duty to disclose the correct facts. Injuries attributed to the deceased persons as well as Ajaib Singh (PW.10) by the witnesses do not tally with the medical evidence. There had been inordinate delay of 3 hours in lodging the FIR, though the Police Station was in close vicinity of the place of occurrence. Information of offence was sent to the Illaqa Magistrate as required under Section 157 Cr.P.C. after inordinate delay of 3 hours. Weapons used in the commission of the crime had not been shown to the medical experts for their opinion to ascertain whether the injuries on the persons of the deceased and Ajaib Singh (PW.10), injured, could be caused by those weapons. The High Court
 committed an error in interfering with the order of acquittal so far as the three appellants are concerned. Thus, the appeals deserve to be allowed.

5. On the contrary, Shri Rajeev Gaur "Naseem", learned counsel appearing for the State of Haryana has opposed the appeals with vehemence contending that it was pre-planned attack by the appellants as Gurdeep Singh and Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh had come to the house of the complainant on that day at 7.00 A.M. and told him not to tether the cattles in the street, otherwise the complainant's family would face the dire consequences. It was in pursuance of the common object of teaching the lesson to the family, the attack was made on the same day at 5.00 P.M. The appellants committed gruesome murder of two innocent persons and caused grievous injuries to Ajaib Singh (PW.10). The weapons had been recovered on the disclosure statements of the appellants, and were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for report and the report was positive. Law does not prohibit to place reliance upon the evidence of closely related persons, rather the requirement is that evidence of such persons must be scrutinised with caution and care. However, evidence of an injured witness has to be relied upon, unless the injuries are found to be superfluous or self-inflicted just to create evidence against the other party. There is no material discrepancy in the medical and ocular evidence. In case the common object
 stands proved, such trivial discrepancies become immaterial and insignificant. The High Court was right in reversing the order of acquittal of three appellants as the High Court came to the conclusion that the findings of fact so recorded by the trial court were perverse. Thus, the appeals lack merit and are liable to be dismissed.

6. We have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Injuries:

I. Dr. Rajesh Gandhi (PW.11) along with Dr. R.N. Boora conducted the post-mortem examination on the body of Gian Singh and found following injuries:-

(1) A stab wound was present on the back at level of T5 vertebra, 2 cm. lateral to mid line on right side. Horizontally placed. Wound was 3 x 2 cm. On opening rupture of right lung was present. Fluid blood approximately 250 ml. was present in cavity. On further extending the dissection an incised wound was present on the posterior surface of liver which was 2 x 1 cm. Fluid blood approximate 700 ml. was present in abdominal cavity.

(2) On opening skull a haematoma of size 5 x 2 cm. was present on right parietal side.

The witness further opined that the cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries described above which were ante- mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in normal course of nature.
 II. On the same day at about 10.30 AM, Dr. Rajesh Gandhi (PW.11) and other Doctors conducted autopsy on the dead-body of Nishan Singh and found following injuries on his person:-

(1) Incised wound was present in front of neck 2 cm. lateral to mid line on left side, obliquely placed and on opening there was hole in trachea and oesophagus. The size of wound was 6 x 3 cm. External carotid artery was also punctured.

(2) Incised wound was present on anterior lateral aspect of right elbow. Size was 6 x 3 cm. x muscle deep.

(3) Stab wound was present on the back on the right side 4 cm. below scapula, 6 cm. medial to mid axillary line obliquely placed and size was 3 x 2 cm. and deep upto lung. On opening the lung was sharply cut.

(4) Stab wound was present in the mid epigastric region 6 cm. inferior to xiphisternum. Spindle shaped obliquely placed size was 4 x 2 cm. Omentum was lying outside. On opening there was incised wound on the interior surface of liver whose size 2 x 2 cm. There was collection of 800 ml. of fluid blood in abdominal cavity. III. Ajaib Singh (PW.10) was examined and following injuries were found on his person:

(1) Incised wound on left shoulder 6 x 3 cms x muscle deep. (2) Sword injury in stomach.

(3) Injury on the neck.

He was operated upon exploratory laprotomy with restion ananstomosis with repair of liver tear with bilateral intercostals tube drainage with peritoneal lavage.



8. Shri Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that there has been delay in lodging the FIR and sending the copy of the FIR to the court. Therefore, the prosecution failed to give a fair picture with regard to genesis of the crime.

9. Prompt and early reporting of the occurrence by the informant with all its vivid details gives an assurance regarding its true version. In case, there is some delay in filing the FIR, the complainant must give explanation for the same. Undoubtedly, delay in lodging the FIR does not make the complainant's case improbable when such delay is properly explained. However, deliberate delay in lodging the complaint may prove to be fatal. In such case of delay, it also cannot be presumed that the allegations were an after thought or had given a coloured version of events. The court has to carefully examine the facts before it, for the reason, that the complainant party may initiate criminal proceedings just to harass the other side with mala fide intentions or with ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance. The court proceedings ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment and persecution. In such a case, where an FIR is lodged clearly with a view to spite the other party because of a private and personal grudge and to enmesh the other party in long and arduous criminal proceedings, the court may take a view that it amounts to an abuse of the process of law.
 (Vide: Sahib Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1997 SC 3247; G. Sagar Suri & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 2000 SC 754; Gorige Pentaiah v. State of A.P. & Ors., (2008) 12 SCC 531; and Kishan Singh (dead) thr. Lrs. v. Gurpal Singh & Ors., AIR 2010 SC 3624)

10. In the instant case, the occurrence took place at about 5 p.m. on 6.11.2002. Trilok Singh (PW.9) was going to Police Station, Safidon, when Prakash Chand (PW.18), Sub Inspector met him along with other police officials in old bus stand, Safidon. Statement of Trilok Singh (PW.9) was recorded there by Prakash Chand, Sub Inspector. The evidence on the file proves that the special report was received by the Ilaqa Magistrate at 10.45 p.m. on 6.11.2002. The occurrence had taken place in village Chhapar, which is about 6 Kms. from Police Station Safidon. Two sons of Trilok Singh (PW.9), namely, Gian Singh and Nishan Singh had died in this occurrence. Ajaib Singh (P.W.10) was seriously injured. He was shifted to the hospital. So, after making all these arrangements, Trilok Singh (PW.9) had made his way to the Police Station to lodge report with the police. In view of the above, we reach an inescapable conclusion that there is no delay in lodging the FIR with the police in this case.

DELAY IN SENDING THE COPY OF FIR TO COURT



11. In Shiv Ram & Anr. v. State of U.P., AIR 1998 SC 49, this Court considered the provisions of the Section 157, Cr.P.C., which require that the police officials would send a copy of the FIR to the Illaqa Magistrate forthwith. The court held that if there is a delay in forwarding the copy of the FIR to the Illaqa Magistrate, that circumstance alone would not demolish the other credible evidence on record. It would only show how in such a serious crime, the Investigating Agency was not careful and prompt as it ought to be.

12. In Munshi Prasad & Ors. v. State of Bihar, AIR 2001 SC 3031, this Court considered this issue again and observed:

"While it is true that Section 157 of the Code makes it obligatory on the officer in charge of the police station to send a report of the information received to a Magistrate forthwith, but that does not mean and imply to denounce and discard an otherwise positive and trustworthy evidence on record. Technicality ought not to outweigh the course of justice -- if the court is otherwise convinced and has come to a conclusion as regards the truthfulness of the prosecution case, mere delay, which can otherwise be ascribed to be reasonable, would not by itself demolish the prosecution case."

While deciding the said case, this Court placed relied upon its earlier judgments in Pala Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab, AIR 1972 SC 2679; and State of Karnataka v. Moin Patel & Ors, AIR, 1996 SC 3041.


13. In Rajeevan & Anr. v. State of Kerala, (2003) 3 SCC 355, this Court examined a case where there had been inordinate delay in sending the copy of the FIR to the Illaqa Magistrate and held that un-explained inordinate delay may adversely affect the prosecution case. However, it would depend upon the facts of each case.

14. A similar view was reiterated in Ramesh Baburao Devaskar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 13 SCC 501, wherein there had been a delay of four days in sending the copy of the FIR to the Illaqa Magistrate and no satisfactory explanation could be furnished for such inordinate delay. While deciding the said case, reliance had been placed on earlier judgments in State of Rajasthan v. Teja Singh & Ors., AIR 2001 SC 990; and Jagdish Murav v. State of U.P. & Ors., (2006) 12 SCC 626. [See also Sarwan Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab AIR 1976 SC 2304: State of U.P. v. Gokaran & Ors. AIR 1985 SC 131; Gurdev Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab (2003) 7 SCC 258; State of Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003) 11 SCC 271; State of J & K v. Mohan Singh & Ors., AIR 2006 SC 1410; N.H. Muhammed Afras v. State of Kerala, (2008) 15 SCC 315; Sarvesh Narain Shukla v. Daroga Singh & Ors., AIR 2008 SC 320; and Arun Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar (2010) 1 SCC 108].

15. Thus, from the above it is evident that the Cr.P.C provides for internal and external checks: one of them being the receipt of a copy of the FIR by the Magistrate concerned. It serves the purpose that the FIR be not anti-timed or anti-dated. The Magistrate must be immediately informed of
 every serious offence so that he may be in a position to act under Section 159 Cr.P.C., if so required. Section 159 Cr.P.C. empowers the Magistrate to hold the investigation or preliminary enquiry of the offence either himself or through the Magistrate subordinate to him. This is designed to keep the Magistrate informed of the investigation so as to enable him to control investigation and, if necessary, to give appropriate direction. It is not that as if every delay in sending the report to the Magistrate would necessarily lead to the inference that the FIR has not been lodged at the time stated or has been anti-timed or anti-dated or investigation is not fair and forthright. Every such delay is not fatal unless prejudice to the accused is shown. The expression `forthwith' mentioned therein does not mean that the prosecution is required to explain delay of every hour in sending the FIR to the Magistrate. In a given case, if number of dead and injured persons is very high, delay in dispatching the report is natural. Of course, the same is to be sent within reasonable time in the prevalent circumstances. However, un- explained inordinate delay in sending the copy of FIR to the Magistrate may affect the prosecution case adversely. An adverse inference may be drawn against the prosecution when there are circumstances from which an inference can be drawn that there were chances of manipulation in the FIR by falsely roping in the accused persons after due deliberations. Delay provides legitimate basis for suspicion of the FIR, as it affords sufficient
 time to the prosecution to introduce improvements and embellishments. Thus, a delay in dispatch of the FIR by itself is not a circumstance which can throw out the prosecution's case in its entirety, particularly when the prosecution furnishes a cogent explanation for the delay in dispatch of the report or prosecution case itself is proved by leading unimpeachable evidence.

16. In view of the above, we are in agreement with the High Court that there was no delay either in lodging the FIR or in sending the copy of the FIR to the Magistrate. It may be pertinent to point out that defence did not put any question on these issues while cross-examining the Investigating Officer, providing him an opportunity to explain the delay, if any. Thus, we do not find any force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants in this regard.

17. It has further been submitted on behalf of the appellants that there is contradiction in medical evidence and ocular evidence. The trial Court has examined this issue and in para 22 of the impugned judgment, observed as under:

".......that accused Joga Singh and accused Mukhtiar Singh had attacked their victims with swords whereas accused Nishabar Singh had used `Gandasa' for the purpose resulting in the deaths of Gian Singh and Nishan Singh and brutal attempt on the life of P.W. Ajaib Singh. The trial court
 had further observed that the skull injury attributed to accused Gurdeep Singh does not receive corroboration from the medical evidence on record because such forceful blow was bound to leave some external mark of injury at the site of the impact but no such mark was seen there by the doctor."

The trial court reached the conclusion that it seems that accused Puran Singh was also implicated in this case along with his father Bhajan Singh alias Harbhajan Singh because he is a brother of prime accused Joga Singh. Thus, the involvement of accused Puran Singh in the incident is also doubtful.

18. This has to be examined in the light of the evidence of two eye witnesses, namely, Trilok Singh (PW.9) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10). There is no contradiction between their statements which rather corroborate each other. Ajaib Singh (PW.10) corroborates the version of Trilok Singh (PW.9). He also deposed that Gurdeep Singh was armed with `Mogra'. Joga Singh and Mukhtiar Singh were armed with swords. Puran Singh and Nishabar Singh were armed with `Gandasas'. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh was armed with `Neja'. Gurdeep Singh inflicted a `Mogra' blow on the head of Gian Singh while Mukhtiar Singh inflicted a `sword' blow on the waist of Gian Singh. He fell down on the ground. Then Joga Singh inflicted a sword blow on Nishan Singh's chest . Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh inflicted a `Neja' blow on his waist. Puran Singh inflicted
 a `Gandasa' blow on his right elbow. Nishabar Singh inflicted a `Gandasa' blow on his waist and as a result, Nishan Singh fell down on the ground. Ajaib Singh (PW.10) further deposed that when he tried to rescue Gian Singh and Nishan Singh, Joga Singh inflicted a sword injury in his stomach. Mukhtiar Singh inflicted a sword injury on the back of his neck. Nishabar Singh inflicted a `Gandasa' injury on his left shoulder.

19. Depositions of Trilok Singh (PW.9) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10) fully corroborate the medical reports. The High Court correctly appreciated this issue as under:

"So, according to their testimonies two injuries were caused to Gian Singh (deceased), four injuries were caused to Nishan Singh (deceased) and three injuries were caused to Ajaib Singh (PW.10). In medical evidence also, two injuries were found on the body of Gian Singh (deceased) and four injuries were found on P.W.10 Ajaib Singh as per copy of medico legal report Exhibit P.AA. There is some conflict about the seat of the injuries as stated by P.W.9 Trilok Singh and P.W. 10 Ajaib Singh."

The testimonies of Trilok Singh (PW.9) and Ajaib Singh (PW.10) are fully reliable. Ajaib Singh (PW.10) is an injured witness in the same occurrence and his testimony cannot be ignored.

20. The High Court has dealt with the injuries found on the person of Ajaib Singh (PW.10) and held as under:

"Regarding injuries to PW.10, Ajaib Singh, it can be said that these were dangerous to life. He was operated upon for small gut perforation and liver laceration. He remained admitted in PGI MS Rohtak, from 6.11.2002 to 20.11.2002. PW.17 Dr. Paryesh Gupta and PW.19 Dr. Satish Bansal proved the nature of the injuries of PW. Ajaib Singh. The appellants and their acquitted co-accused had the intention or knowledge to cause his death. Determinative question is intention and knowledge, as the case may be, and not nature of the injury. Bodily injury may not be sufficient to cause death. An accused may be convicted under Section 307 of the Code if he had intention to cause death.

After scrutinizing the testimonies of P.W.11 Dr. Rajesh Gandhi, PW.17 Dr. Paryesh Gupta and PW.19 Dr. Satish Bansal, we are of the considered opinion that the trial court over depended on their opinion evidence. The trial court should not have rejected the direct evidence of P.Ws Trilok Singh and Ajaib Singh on the strength of the uncanny opinion expressed by the doctors. This makes us to interfere in the impugned judgment for setting aside the acquittal of Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh. They are vicariously liable with appellants Nishabar Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Joga Singh on the principle of vicarious liability enunciated under Section 149 of the Code. Conviction of appellants Nishabar Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Joga Singh on the basis of direct evidence and medical evidence is well founded and we do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment in this regard."

21. The evidence of the stamped witness must be given due weightage as his presence on the place of occurrence cannot be doubted. His statement is generally considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence and this lends support
 to his testimony that he was present at the time of occurrence. Thus, the testimony of an injured witness is accorded a special status in law. Such a witness comes with a built-in guarantee of his presence at the scene of the crime and is unlikely to spare his actual assailant(s) in order to falsely implicate someone. "Convincing evidence is required to discredit an injured witness". Thus, the evidence of an injured witness should be relied upon unless there are grounds for the rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies therein. (Vide: Abdul Sayeed v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2010) 10 SCC 259; Kailas & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 793; Durbal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2011) 2 SCC 676; and State of U.P. v. Naresh & Ors., (2011) 4 SCC 324).

22. In State of U.P. v. Hari Chand, (2009) 13 SCC 542, this Court re- iterated the aforementioned position of law:

"In any event unless the oral evidence is totally irreconcilable with the medical evidence, it has primacy."

23. Thus, the position of law in such a case of contradiction between medical and ocular evidence can be crystallised to the effect that though the ocular testimony of a witness has greater evidentiary value vis-`-vis medical evidence, when medical evidence makes the ocular testimony
 improbable, that becomes a relevant factor in the process of the evaluation of evidence. However, where the medical evidence goes so far that it completely rules out all possibility of the ocular evidence being true, the ocular evidence may be disbelieved. [Vide: Abdul Sayeed (Supra)].

24. In a case like at hand, where two persons died on the spot and other received grievous injuries, the eye witnesses also make an attempt to save themselves and rescue the persons under attack. In such a fact-situation, the witness is not supposed to be perfectionist to give the exact account of the incident. Some sort of contradiction, improvement, embellishment is bound to occur in his statement.

Thus, in view of the above, we have no hesitation to hold that submission of the learned counsel for the appellants in this regard is preposterous.

25. It has further been submitted that a large number of persons had gathered at the place of occurrence but no independent witness has been examined by the prosecution for the reasons best known to it. In a case like this where without having any substantial cause two persons had been killed and one had been seriously injured, no neighbour, even if he had witnessed the incident, would like to come forward and depose against the assailants. More so, the defence did not ask SI Prakash Chand (PW.18), the
 Investigating Officer as to why he could not have furnished the explanation for not examining the independent witness. In view thereof, we are of the considered opinion that the appellants are not entitled to take any benefit of doubt.

26. Evidence of a related witness can be relied upon provided it is trustworthy. Such evidence is carefully scrutinised and appreciated before reaching to a conclusion on the conviction of the accused in a given case. (Vide: M.C. Ali & Anr. v. State of Kerala, AIR 2010 SC 1639; and Himanshu @ Chintu v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 2 SCC 36).

27. It has further been submitted that the High Court had no justification to reverse the judgment of acquittal so far as the three appellants are concerned.

28. This Court time and again has laid down the guidelines for the High Court to interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court. The appellate court should not ordinarily set aside a judgment of acquittal in a case where two views are possible, though the view of the Appellate Court may be more probable one. While dealing with a judgment of acquittal, the appellate court has to consider the entire evidence on record, so as to arrive at a finding as to whether the views of the trial Court were perverse or otherwise unsustainable. Interference with the order of
 acquittal is permissible only in "exceptional circumstances" for "compelling reasons". The appellate court is entitled to consider whether in arriving at a finding of fact, the trial Court had failed to take into consideration admissible evidence and/or had taken into consideration the evidence brought on record contrary to law. Similarly, wrong placing of burden of proof may also be a subject matter of scrutiny by the appellate court.

The expressions like `substantial and compelling reasons', `good and sufficient grounds', `very strong circumstances', `distorted conclusions', `glaring mistakes', etc., are not intended to curtail the extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of `flourishes of language' to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with the acquittal. Thus, where it is possible to take only one view i.e. the prosecution evidence points to the guilt of the accused and the judgment is on the face of it perverse, the appellate Court may interfere with an order of acquittal.

The appellate court should also bear in mind the presumption of innocence of the accused and further that the trial Court's acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference in a routine manner where
 the other view is possible should be avoided, unless there are good reasons for interference.

(See: Sanwat Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1961 SC 715; Suman Sood alias Kamaljeet Kaur v. State of Rajasthan (2007) 5 SCC 634; Brahm Swaroop & Anr. v. State of U.P., AIR 2011 SC 280; V.S. Achuthanandan v. R. Balakrishna Pillai & Ors., (2011) 3 SCC 317; and Rukia Begum & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2011) 4 SCC 779).

29. The High Court has reached the conclusion that the judgment of the trial Court was perverse as the trial Court held that it was a clear cut case of common object. The High Court has decided the issue as under: "There was common object which appellants Nishabar Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Joga Singh shared with their acquitted co-accused Bhajan Singh alias Harbhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh. They entered the courtyard of the house of P.W. Trilok Singh by raising `Lalkara' that they would teach a lesson for tethering cattle in the street. By application of Section 149 of the Code, they all the six were liable for inflicting injuries to Gian Singh and Nishan Singh, which resulted in their deaths and brutal injuries to P.W. Ajaib Singh. The trial court was not justified in acquitting Bhajan Singh alias Harbhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh on hypothetical medical evidence, by ignoring the reliable direct evidence of P.Ws. Trilok Singh and Ajaib Singh."

In view of the above, we do not find any reason to accept the submissions so made on behalf of the appellants.

30. It is a settled legal proposition that while appreciating the evidence of a witness, minor discrepancies on trivial matters, which do not affect the
 core of the prosecution's case, may not prompt the Court to reject the evidence in its entirety. "Irrelevant details which do not in any way corrode the credibility of a witness cannot be labelled as omissions or contradictions." Difference in some minor detail, which does not otherwise affect the core of the prosecution case, even if present, would not itself prompt the court to reject the evidence on minor variations and discrepancies. After exercising care and caution and sifting through the evidence to separate truth from untruth, exaggeration and improvements, the court comes to a conclusion as to whether the residuary evidence is sufficient to convict the accused. Thus, an undue importance should not be attached to omissions, contradictions and discrepancies which do not go to the heart of the matter and shake the basic version of the prosecution witness. As the mental capabilities of a human being cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb all the details, minor discrepancies are bound to occur in the statements of witnesses. [Vide: Vijay @ Chinee v. State of M.P., (2010) 8 SCC 191; and Brahm Swaroop (Supra)].

31. In the instant case, we could not find any major contradiction either in the evidence of the witnesses or any conflict in medical or ocular evidence which may tilt the balance in favour of the appellants. There had
 been minor improvement, embellishment etc., which remain insignificant and have to be ignored.

32. The theory of self-defence put forward by Joga Singh, appellant, that he caused the injuries to the complainant party to save himself, is most improbable and not worthy of acceptance. The High Court has rightly rejected the same, observing that Joga Singh, appellant, could not even suspect that the complainant party was nurturing a sinister design against him when he was called from his house initially.

33. In view of above, we do not find any force in either of these appeals. The same are dismissed. The judgment of the High Court dated 15.12.2006 is affirmed in its totality. The appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 562 of 2007, namely, Bhajan Singh, Puran Singh and Gurdeep Singh have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 2.8.2008 and 22.7.2009. Their bail bonds are cancelled, they are directed to surrender within a period of two weeks from today, failing which, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, (Haryana) shall ensure to take them into custody and send them to jail to serve their remaining part of the sentence. A copy of this judgment and order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, (Haryana) for information and compliance.

....................................J.

(Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN)

.....................................J.

(SWATANTER KUMAR)

New Delhi,

July 4, 2011








kzmKXw 2011      
C¶v F¶Xv Hcp bmYmÀ°yamWv. AXpsIm­mWv C¶s¯ bmYmÀ°y¯n \n¶psIm­v \msfbpsS kp{]`mXw \mw ImWp¶Xv. 2010 F¶ hÀjw Hcp bmYmÀ°yambn \½psS ap¶n \n¡p¶p. \msf AXv Ncn{X¯nsâ `mKamIp¶p. \msf apX ]pXnb hÀj¯nsâ bmYmÀ°y¯n \n¡phm³ \½Ä X¿mdmhpIbmWv. B {]`mX¯nsâ hmXmb\§fn \½Ä t\m¡n¡mWp¶Xv {]Xo£bptSbpw k¼Õar²nbptSbpw Hcp ]pXnb \msfbmWv.
IgnªIme bmYmÀ°y§Ä \½p¡v Hcp amä¯nsâ KXnthKw X¶n«mWv IS¶pt]mIp¶Xv. imkv{X kmt¦XnI cwK§fn AXv hfsc henb amäw \ap¡p X¶p. kXy¯n \mw C¶v Pohn¡p¶Xv H¶pw km²yaà F¶v ]dbm³ Ignbm¯ Hcp temI¯mWv. kabt¯bpw Imet¯bpw Zqct¯bpw \mw IogS¡nbncn¡p¶p. Xnc¡nsâ temI¯n kab¯n\v ap³t] ]mbp¶ bmKmiz§fmWv \½Ä. Bcmepw   _Ôn¡m³ Ignbm¯ KXnthK¯n ]mªpsIm­n cn¡pIbmWv.
em]vtSm¸pw samss_ t^mWpw C¶v a\pjysâ imcocnI Ahbh§fmbn amdnbncn¡p¶p. CXv c­pw CÃm¯ \nanjs¯ Ipdn¨v \ap¡v Nn´n¡m³ IqSn Ignbp¶nÃ. A{X I­v hnhckmt¦XnI hnZybpsS hfÀ¨ \½sf IogS¡n Ifªp.
hyàn_Ô§fpw aqey§fpw ]W¯nepw A[nImc¯n\pw th­n hgnamdn sImSp¡p¶ ImgvNbpw \mw I­pIgn ªncn¡p¶p. kuµcyaÕc¯n d®À A]v Bbnt¸mbn F¶p ]cnX¸nIp¶ amXm]nXm¡Ä Xsâ aIfpsS \áXm {]ZÀi\¯nsâ AÇoew ImWm¯sX´msW¶v F{X BtemNn¨n«pw a\ÊnemIp¶nÃ. PmfyXbnÃmsX AÇoew ad\o¡n ]pd¯ph¶t¸mÄ AXns\ IebpsS I®nse B[p\n IXbmbpw Ignhmbpw ImWm³ A´mcmjvSvI I¨hS kaqlw tIm¸v Iq«nbXv \½Ä I­dnªXmWv. {]ikvXnbpsS ]n¶mse aIsf \S¯m³ am\w hn¡p¶Xv AhfpsS IgnhmsW¶v ]dbm³ amXm]nXm¡Ä X¿mdmIp¶
Xpw \mw sXm«dnª bmYmÀ°y§fmWv.DÅh\pw CÃm¯hcpw X½nepÅ A´cw hfsc hepXmIpt¼mÄ DÅh\mIm³ G
Xp amÀ¤hpw kzoIcn¡p¶ A[nImchÀ¤w CÃm¯hs\ hn[nbnÃm¯h³ F¶v ]dªv ASna¸Wn sN¿n¡p¶Xpw \mw I­dnªXmWv. Ipw`tImW§Ä¡v tImSnIfpsS aqeyw D­mbt¸mÄ AsXm¶pw hmÀ¯ AÃmXmbn XocpIbmWv. DÅh³ A[nImcw I¿mfp¶Xpw A[nImcw I¿mfp¶h³ DÅh\mIp¶Xpw \mw ImWp¶XmWv. DÅh\pw CÃm¯h\pw HmÀ¡m\pÅ Hcp {]XoIambn alm\mb KmÔnPn amdnbncn¡p¶p F¶pÅXv Imew I\nªp \ÂInb IoÀ¯nap{ZbmWv. BÀ¡pw HmÀ¡mw, BÀ¡pw ]n³XpScmw. ImcWw At±lamWv tNmZyw sN¿s¸«n «nÃm¯ almßmhv.
Dowry death.

In Ranbir @ Raju and another V. State of Haryana, the 
honourable Supreme Court of India directed all trial courts 
to add S. 302 to the charge of S. 304 B, so that death 
sentence can be imposed in such heinous and barbaric 
crimes against women. In the society, women are treated like 
baby making machines and home servants. They are 
burning their midnight oil for the welfare of their family 
by sacrificing their life. Female infanticide, honour killing, 
dowry death etc., are the honourary words garlanded in the 
dead body of a women when she is killed inside the four 
walls if her house.
In India dowry prohibition Act 1961 defined dowry. 
By S. 2 of the Act dowry means “any property or 
valuable security given or agreed to be given either 
directly or indirectly by one party to the marriage 
o the other party to the marriage or by the parents 
of either parties of marriage or by any other person, 
to either party to the marriage or to any other person, 
at or before or any time after the marriage in connection 
with the marriage of the said party”. So the dowry 
means property or valuable security given or agreed 
to be given either directly or indirectly by one party 
to the other party to the marriage. By the enactment 
of this Act even the demand for dowry is punishable 
by this Act. This enactment empowers the Magistrate 
of Judicial 1st class to punish the offenders with 
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less 
than five years. The offence is made non-bailable and 
non compoundable also. The enactment did not become 
much success. A report published in the year 1997 
claimed that at least 5000 women die each year because 
of dowry death. According to Indian police every year it 
receives over 2599 reports of bride burning. There is 
an increase of 40.4 % dowry death cases during the 
year 2008 over the year 1998 level. The more stringent 
sections like 498 A and 304 B were incorporated in 
the year 1983 and 1986 respectively in the Indian Penal 
Code to protect the women from cruelty from husband 
and relatives. Cruelty defined by 498 A IPC by which 
any willful conduct likely to drive women commit 
suicide or to cause physical injury or any harassment 
with a view to coercing to meet any demand for 
property or valuable security shall attract the punishment 
for a period of three years imprisonment and fine. 
So the mental or physical cruelty or any harassment 
to women with a view to obtaining any property is 
punishable under the law, even the long years after 
the marriage. In 304 B IPC if the death of women 
is under any of the unnatural circumstances 
within seven years of her marriage may come under 
the purview of dowry death if it is shown that she was 
subjected to cruelty by demanding dowry soon 
before her death. The accused shall be punished 
for a term which shall not be less than seven years 
of imprisonment and may extend to life term.
          Despite of such enactments the system of dowry 
and related harassment is notoriously common in Indian 
society. It is reported that 7000 dowry related deaths 
occur in India annually. In the year 2009, 8383 dowry 
death cases registered allover India.
Dowry is a common practice in many Asian 
countries including Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, 
SreeLanka. In marital relation the criteria of 
nuptial knot is nothing but her ability to bring 
dowry.It is a common practice despite of cast, religion, 
educational status etc., It is shame full to see that 
one human being is treated by another human 
being as money bringing machine and child 
making equipments. They are more a commodity 
for the pleasure of man hood than human being.
From the very early ages, women are treated like 
second class citizens. They were not given equal 
status as that of men. It is stated that women 
should be protected by her male relatives such as 
father, mother and son in her worldly life, otherwise 
they would sell their chastity for the livelihood. But 
actually this is not for their protection but for 
their slavery. Let the women live in the society 
with minimum human dignity up to her last breath.
No one has the right to take the life of another. 
Women are also entitled to live in the society 
as child, wife, mother, grandmother etc., every 
day new statutes and amendments are created 
for the welfare of women. Bur these welfare statutes 
and amendments are in a standstill. Give them good 
opportunity to fight with their counterparts. Sometimes 
she may be your sister, daughter, mother or wife. 
Why the society don’t see their sacrifice for family. 
Don’t tie them behind the shield of chastity. In 
epic Ramayana King Rama subjected his wife 
Sitha to fire test to prove her chastity. It is 
more a message of sacrifice than a test of chastity. 
Now the life of women is insecure in the male dominated 
society wherein they are treated as the protectors of
women as a whole.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ദീപാവലി ഐതിഹ്യത്തിന്റെ വെളിച്ചം












From webworld daily


ദീപാവലിയുടെ ഐതിഹ്യത്തിനും പ്രാദേശിക ഭേദമുണ്ട്. ഉത്തരേന്ത്യയില്ദീപാവലി ആഘോഷം അഞ്ച് നാളുകള്നീളുന്നുവെങ്കില്ദക്ഷിണേന്ത്യയില്ദീപാവലി ആഘോഷം പ്രധാനമായും ഒരു ദിവസം മാത്രമേയുള്ളൂ.

അഞ്ച് നാളുകള്ക്കും വിവിധ ഐതിഹ്യങ്ങളാണുള്ളത്.

മരണത്തിന് മേല്ഇഛാശക്തി നേടുന്ന വിജയത്തിന്റെ ദിനമായാണ് ദിനം ആഘോഷിക്കുന്നത്.

ധനത്രയോദശി എന്നാണ് ആദ്യദിനം അറിയപ്പെടുന്നത്. ഹിമ എന്ന രാജാവിന്റെ പുത്രനെ മരണവിധിയില്നിന്നും അദ്ദേഹത്തെ ഭാര്യ രക്ഷപ്പെടുത്തിയ ദിനമാണ് ഇത്.

രാജകുമാരന്വിവാഹത്തിന്റെ നാലാം ദിവസം പാമ്പുകടിയേറ്റ് മരിക്കുമെന്നാണ് ജാതകത്തില്‍ . രാജകുമാരന്റെ വിവാഹത്തിന്റെ നാലാം രാത്രിയില്അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ ഭാര്യ വീട്ടില്മുഴുവന്വിളക്കുകള്കൊളുത്തി. ആഭരണങ്ങളുടെയും നാണയങ്ങളുടെയും കൂമ്പാരം വീട്ടിലെ വാതിലിനു മുന്നില്നിരത്തി.

ഒരു പാമ്പിന്റെ രൂപത്തിലെത്തിയ യമദേവന് വീട്ടിലെ പ്രഭാപൂരത്തില്കണ്ണ് മഞ്ഞളിച്ച് അകത്തേക്ക് കടക്കാനായില്ല. അന്നു രാത്രി മുഴുവന്രാജകുമാരി പറഞ്ഞ കഥകള്കേട്ട് പാമ്പ് പിറ്റേന്ന് തിരിച്ചുപോയെന്നാണ് ഐതിഹ്യം.
***************************

വ്രതശുദ്ധിയുടെ പതിനെട്ടാം പടി താണ്ടാന്
  http://malayalam.webdunia.com/img/cm/searchGlass_small.png
From webworld daily

നാടെങ്ങും ശരണമന്ത്രങ്ങളാല്മുഖരിതമാക്കി വീണ്ടുമൊരു മണ്ഡലകാലത്തിന് തുടക്കമായി. വൃശ്ചിക മാസത്തിന്റെ ആദ്യപുലരിയിലാണ് ശബരിമല വ്രതം ആരംഭിക്കുന്നത്. വ്രതം അനുഷ്ഠിക്കുമ്പോള്ഭക്തര്അയ്യപ്പമുദ്രയുള്ള മാല കഴുത്തിലണിയും. മാല ക്ഷേത്രസന്നിധിയിലോ ഗുരുസ്വാമിയുടെ മുന്നിലോ പൂജിച്ചാണ് ധരിക്കാറ്. മാലയിടുന്നതോടെ വ്രതത്തിനു തുടക്കമാവുന്നു.

പതിനെട്ടാംപടി ചവിട്ടുന്നതിനു വ്രതനിഷ്ഠയിലും ഇത്രയും പടികള്താണ്ടണമെന്നു വിശ്വാസം. പഞ്ചേന്ദ്രിയങ്ങളായ കണ്ണ്, ചെവി, നാക്ക്, മൂക്ക്, ത്വക്ക്, അഷ്ടരാഗങ്ങളില്പെട്ട കാമം, ക്രോധം, ലോഭം, മോഹം, മദം, മാല്സര്യം, അഹങ്കാരം, അസൂയ, ത്രിഗുണങ്ങളായ സാത്വികം, രാജസ്വം, തമസ്വം തുടര്ന്നു വിദ്യ, അവിദ്യ എന്നിവയാണു മണ്ഡല വ്രതവേളയില്താണ്ടേണ്ട പടികള്‍. കടുത്ത വ്രതമനുഷ്ഠിക്കുന്നവര്ക്കേ ഇതിനു കഴിയൂ.

മണ്ഡലകാലം മുഴുവനും ബ്രഹ്മചര്യം അനുഷ്ഠിക്കണം. ദിവസവും രാവിലെയു വൈകിട്ടും കുളി നിര്ബന്ധം. സുഗന്ധവസ്തുക്കള്‍, വാസന സോപ്പ്, പൗഡര്‍, ഹെയര്ഓയില്തുടങ്ങിയവ ഒഴിവാക്കുന്നത് നന്ന്. ശരീരശുദ്ധിക്കു പുറമേ മാനസിക ശുദ്ധിയും അനിവാര്യം. സ്വാമിഭക്തര്എല്ലാ ദിവസവും ക്ഷേത്രദര്ശനം നടത്തണം.

കറുപ്പോ കാവിയോ നിറത്തിലുള്ള വസ്ത്രങ്ങളാണു വ്രതകാലയളവില്ഉചിതം. വ്രതം അനുഷ്ഠിക്കുമ്പോള്സസ്യാഹാരം, പഴവര്ഗങ്ങള്എന്നിവ മാത്രമേ കഴിക്കാവൂ. യാതൊരു ജീവിയേയും കൊല്ലരുത്, കള്ളം പറയരുത്, മാതാപിതാക്കള്‍, ഗുരുക്കന്മാര്‍, തന്നേക്കാള്മുതിര്ന്നവര്ഇവരോടൊക്കെ വിനയപൂര്വ്വം പെരുമാറണം. സര് ചരാചരങ്ങളും "സ്വാമി'യെന്നു സങ്കല്പിക്കണം.

ത്യാഗം സഹിക്കാന്കരുത്തു നേടണം. അന്യന്റെ വസ്തുക്കള്മോഷ്ടിക്കരുത്. കള്ളസാക്ഷി പറയരുത്.
ലഹരിപദാര്ത്ഥങ്ങള്ഉപയോഗിക്കരുത്, കോപിക്കരുത്. അയ്യപ്പധ്യാനം എപ്പോഴും മനസ്സിലുണ്ടാവണം. അന്നദാനം നല്ലത്. നഗ്നപാദരായി സഞ്ചരിക്കുന്നത് ഉത്തമം. വീടുകളില്ആഴിപൂജ, ഭജന നടത്തുന്നതും പതിവാണ്.

മരണവീടുകളില്പോകേണ്ടി വന്നാല്കുളി കഴിഞ്ഞേ വീട്ടില്കയറാവൂ. പ്രസവം നടന്ന വീടുകളില്പോകുന്നതും ഒഴിവാക്കുന്നതാണ് ഉചിതം. പ്രസവം നടന്ന വീടുകളില്നിന്നു ഭക്ഷണം കഴിക്കാന്പാടില്ല.

മല്സ്യമാംസാദികള്കഴിക്കരുത്. ക്ഷൗരം പാടില്ല. വിശ്രമവേളകളില്പുണ്യകഥകള്വായിക്കുക. ശരണം വിളിക്കാതെ അന്യവീടുകളില്പ്രവേശിക്കരുത്. എല്ലാവരെയും സ്വാമിയെന്നു വിളിക്കുക.

ശബരിമലദര്ശനം കഴിഞ്ഞ് വീട്ടിലെത്തി കത്തിച്ച നിലവിളക്കിനു മുന്പില്തേങ്ങ ഉടച്ച് ശരണം വിളിയോടെയാണു മാല ഊരേണ്ടത്. തൊട്ടടുത്ത ക്ഷേത്രസന്നിധിയില്ദര്ശനം നടത്തിയും മാല ഊരി വ്രതം അവസാനിപ്പിക്കാം.

***************************************

THE AYODHYA VERDICT
by harikumar


               The Ayodhya verdict has come out after a long hearing which started on 23.07.1996.It had ended in the majority judgment which directed to partition the disputed land into three portions. The judgment 0f the Luknow bench was acclaimed as comfortable, having the social out look, which protects the secular nature of our country.
              The issue is a matter of belief than  history. The court itself admits that there is no particular area in Ayodhya to find the birth place of Lord Rama, but it was in Ayodhya. But the court concluded that the portion under the central dome of the demolished structure where idol of Ram lalla had been kept in a make shift temple was the birth place of Lord Rama. So 2.77 acres area of land was equally partitioned to Nirmoshi Akhara,Bhagavan Sri Rama Virajan. No scientific evidence except the report of Archeological survey to find that there exited a temple before 1855. But the concluded portion of Hon’ble Khan.J, opined that the disputed structure was a mosque constructed  by or under orders of Emperor Babar and that it was built not after demolishing any temple but on an area where some temples were already in ruins. So it was ruined in favor of the Hindu Plaintiff.
                  The evidence as per Civil procedure Code is weighed as preponderance of Probabilities. Hence how it was weighed on the probabilities with out negative evidence. It is not the fiction but the facts which helps to conclude the judgment. Even though the court had found that an idol of Ram lalla surreptitiously placed on 23.12.1949.
                  On 30.09.2010, the nation feared to disturb  the secular stone again., but it did not happen as feared. One party is happy on the judgment,the other unhappy. They are prepared to approach the higher forum. But is it possible to pronounce an amicable judgment  pronounce once again. The judgment on evidence never support  both parties. So a political will can resolve the issue permanently. Every political party take it as a way for vote bank. It is not the problem of true believers. They are like true mother in the story of King Solomon who appeared before him for her beloved child. They never allow to partition the worship place with Blackrock boundary walls. The true political will could find out the real believers, the pulse of whole nation, whims of real Indian to decide the child to be divided or not. Ram and Rahim are one and the same before the real believers. He prays “Ram and Rahim, let the people  to understand the true human being, who was created by you in the Earth to lead towards the structure of peace and happy”
                                       *************************************



14 tips in married life
1. Communicate-not just about your feelings- but about your day.  Share stories with one another about what is going on at work or in a friend's life; share what you saw on the news or in a magazine with your significant other if you found it interesting.  Discussing regular day to day occurrences is just as important as staying in tune with each others' feelings.  It keeps you in tune with your spouse on a daily basis.
2. Take showers together- it doesn't have to be sexual!  My husband and I have done this from the beginning of our relationship, did it start out sexual?  Probably.  But over time it became an intimate thing, just extra time that we can spend together catching up on the day- it just happens that we are naked and in the shower!
3. Go to the park and swing, slide or just play-it's a young and fun thing to do.  It keeps you playful and is a great way to relieve stress.  Real life can get so with overwhelming with work, kids, bills, laundry, chores- sometimes a play break is what's needed to alleviate all of that, even if it's only for half an hour.
4. Take walks-morning walks are a great way to start your day, not a morning person?  Take an evening walk.  Getting fresh air and exercise together is good for your health and the health of your relationship.  Walking relieves stress, keeps you fit and allows quality time to be spent together.
5. Date nights-put everything on hold for an hour or two and plan on just doing something alone with your spouse.  It can be dinner, a walk, the mall, whatever, just make the time for just the two of you with no one else around, catch up on your day or week or just joke around and have fun.  But making time for just the two of you is important.
6. Play video games or wrestle-a healthy dose of competition is always good and it can be an entertaining way to not only have fun but a great stress buster as well.  Just don't take it too seriously and be a sore loser because that would defeat the whole purpose.
7. Have sex-even if you don't want to, you need to keep the sexual chemistry between you and your significant other alive.  Being intimate and showing your love for one another is a significant part of your union.
8. Hold hands- it may seem insignificant; however, this small but intimate gesture shows that you care about each other even when you are doing something simple like walking from the car to the grocery store.
9. Give praise-telling your significant other that they are great at something can be a huge ego boost.  It shows that you care and that you pay attention and like the way he/she does something.  It's always nice to know that your spouse appreciates the things you do and the way you do them.
10. Be thankful-a simple thank you for taking the trash out, taking the kids to school, fixing that faucet or simply being a great spouse goes a long way.  Letting someone know that you are thankful for what they do means a lot.
11. Have time apart-couples don't need to spend 24/7 together.  Spending time away with the girls or the guys makes you appreciate one another.  Have your own lives apart from one another. Schedule dinners or mini vacations if you can to keep up with friends.
12. Don't always nag-if you start nagging too much you will create resentment.  Reminding someone of something a few times is one thing but becoming obnoxious about it will produce hostility and that's not the outcome that you are looking for.  Take a different approach, ask nicely, explain what you need done and by when.  The nicer you are the better.
13. Share advice-you never know when great, unexpected advice can come about.  My husband and  I work in two totally different professions yet we manage to swap advice on work all the time.  The advice does not have to be work related, it can be about the kids, the chores, money management, it doesn't matter, be open to sharing different ideas.
14. Pick and choose your battles-Over the years I have learned that life is short and arguments are lame.  Now I only get mad at things that I feel are truly important.  I've learned to pick and choose my battles.  Everyone will have that one battle that they choose to fight, just choose it carefully.  Just think "is this really worth getting mad about?  Will I still be mad about it this tomorrow morning?  Will I even remember this next week?"  Most of the time the answer is no.  I've learned that this approach makes for a healthier and happier relationship and definitely causes less stress.
By Khristina.blog-yfittopostblog.com.(published in yahoo)
                     ****************************************

SHOULD A WOMAN MARRY HER RAPIST

BYKALPANA SHARMA(18.10.2010)THE TIMES OF INDIA

When a rapist offers to marry the victim, one would think it's the perfect solution. But isn't this victimization of the victim all over again?

You normally don't expect a girl to marry her rapist but in a recent case in West Delhi, a woman wanted to marry the guy who allegedly raped her. This is obviously not a one off case and definitely brings to limelight the existence of an insensitive society that doesn't think twice before putting a girl up for trial, once again.

This March, K G Balakrishnan, the then Chief Justice of India had said, "A woman should be allowed to have a baby out of rape and/or marry the man and drop the rape charge if she so wishes." But most don't call the step justified. Kavita, an NGO worker stresses on the point. "The girl has already been wronged once. And to add to the misery, her predator neatly escapes the consequences of the crime by simply marrying the girl. You never know if this practice catches on, rapists might resort to such techniques on any girl he fancies. This is just not done."

The rapist also takes advantage of the social stigma that no man will accept a woman who has been raped. A source from National Commission of Women reveals, "We have bailed out some small town girls in the past. We make sure that mindless community panchayat decisions are challenged. But in some cases it gets very difficult when the girl's family and the girl herself agree to marry the rapist." But the girl should be given her due, and allowed to make a free decision without having to succumb to the social attitudes.

Psychologist Seema Hingoranny agrees, "A woman should never marry her rapist. Rape is a big trauma and the victim requires intensive therapy to get out of it. Some people get married because of their insecurity and the stigma that no one will marry them. But these girls barely forgive the rapist." She goes on to add, "Also, you cannot completely ignore the psychological status of the man. Someone who can commit such a heinous crime has something incorrect in his character and such marriages can never work. It could lead to more violence. I am totally against this idea. Instead of getting her married to the rapist, family and the government should think of ways to rehabilitate her."

Some have issues with its TV potrayal too. Says an activist, "Indian television has replicated these real life incidents into reel life. What they don't understand is that this could lead to serious repurcussions. TV channels should ensure that they are not propogating the act by showing victims marrying their rapists."

The aftermarks of the incident that are so deeply etched in the girl's mind never let her get over the trauma. And the dilution of punishment for the rapist should not be tolerated!
                        ***********************************************

Modern Etiquette: How to impress, or fail, in work introductions

Mon, Oct 18 03:53 PM
One of the most common business needs is one that many of us often stumble over and even fear -- making introductions.
I'm not talking about formal, behind-the-podium introductions but rather face-to-face introductions between you, colleagues, clients, and superiors.
While it may seem simple on the surface, very few people, including high-level executives, know how to make a correct introduction.
This simple lack of understanding always surprises me as introductions set the tone for the future of a budding business relationship. Done well, an introduction can serve to reassure a prospective partner or client that they are dealing with a seasoned professional.
But if it's botched, an introduction might also serve as your final sign off.
By following these simple dos and don'ts of introduction, you'll put yourself in a good light and those you're introducing at ease.
DO:
- Always introduce yourself, whether it's a chance meeting for a few seconds or a business dinner lasting several hours. When you introduce yourself first you establish control of the meeting or encounter, demonstrate initiative and an ability to be direct - all plusses in a business situation.
- Always state your name and something about yourself. For example you might say, "Good morning Mr. Doe, I'm Harry Smith from Atlas Motors."
- If you fail to introduce yourself to a newcomer, or fail to introduce those whom you know but who don't know each other, you demonstrate a lack of leadership.
- Always introduce from the bottom up. That is the "lesser authority" is always introduced to the "higher authority" by saying the higher authority's name first. For example, a junior executive should be introduced to a senior executive. Similarly, a company executive should be introduced to a client. Clients and customers are always considered more important than someone in your firm, even if the client has a lower rank than your colleague. Example: "Ms. Higher Authority, I would like to introduce Mr. Lesser Authority from our legal department. Ms. Higher Authority is the Vice President of Human Resources."
- Always highlight the company or position of the individuals you are introducing and, if appropriate, include pertinent information about each. For example you might say: "Mark Stevens, I'd like to introduce John Doe, he's the senior vice president at ABC Cell Phones, and the person to call if you need anything related to cellular phones. John, Mark is president of Stevens Associates, the best P.R. firm in the country for promoting products."A descriptive introduction eliminates the inevitable silence that often follows as unfamiliar individuals try to guess what the other does or whether they have anything in common. By providing the information you put each individual at ease and establish an opening for conversation.
- Always stand for introductions. This goes for both men and women and for both business and social occasions. No exceptions.
DON'T:
- Never give yourself an honorific such as "I'm Ms. Doe" or "I'm Dr. Doe." It falls in the same tasteless category as drinking a toast to one's self.
- Never assume intimacy due to an introduction. When you meet someone for the first time, you should continue to call him or her by his or her title and last name until invited to be on a first-name basis.
- Never "meet" people. When introducing people, the proper wording is "Mr. Doe, I'd like to introduce to you Mr. Joe," and not "Mr. Doe, I'd like you to meet Mr. Joe."
- Never respond to an introduction with just "hi" or "hello." When responding to an introduction you should always repeat the name of the person you are meeting (i.e. "Hello Mrs. Martin"). Adding a courtesy statement such as, "I've been looking forward to meeting you" or "How do you do?" is always appreciated.
- Never assume "ladies first" in your introduction. In the business world, gender has no bearing on order of introduction - it's based on seniority and rank.
- As the saying goes, "You never get a second chance to make a great first impression." Knowing that your first impression is a correct one will go a long way towards boosting your professional image and your self-confidence.
(Editing by Belinda Goldsmith)
(Pamela Eyring is the president and director of The Protocol School of Washington which provides certified professional etiquette and protocol training. Founded in 1988, PSOW is the only U.S. school of its kind to become accredited. PSOW's website is http://psow.edu. Any opinions expressed are her own.)
******************************************

THE KASHMIR PROBLEM
byharikumar
1.His Highness Rajarajeswar Maharajadhiraja Shri HariSingh denied the policy of accession either India or Pakistan. About 136 states accepted the proclamation of Indian Government and acceded to Indian Union. There the still burning Kashmir problem had sown its seeds. A historian cannot pass through without blaming Shri HariSingh on his analyses the history of 60 years. The Independence Act of 1947 was passed and two nations came into existence, Kashmir did not include either of the two nations. By signing the Indian Independence Act Mr. Mountbatten, architecture of Indian division, aimed future disintegration of this historic land .He gave the right of choice to the people. In 1949, the Constitution took its final shape and the states were merged with Indian union but Kashmir was the only exception to this. Pakistan decided to draw benefits from this situation. She turned her troops towards Kashmir. Pakistan’s invasion forced the Maharaja of Kashmir acceded to Indian union on three subjects viz.Defence, Foreign affairs and Communication. The Constitution came into force on January 26, 1950,granted special position to Jammu and Kashmir. Article 31 and 370 were applicable to the state, which affects the Centre-state relation than other states. This special status is on the basis of the Government of India Act 1935; the authorities inherited to the Maharaja were not interested to amend the status.
2.India made her first complaint against Pakistan’s aggression in Kashmir in the beginning of 1949 before the UN Security Council. A cease fire accepted the two nations on January 1, 1949 and UN supervised it .Indian leaders Sardar Patel and Nehru were ready to let Kashmir to go to Pakistan if the people wished so in a plebiscite. India sticks to the idea of plebiscite till the year 1953.At the same year Pakistan entered in to  a Middle East Defense pact with the United States of America ,supplied arms to Pakistan and the problem of Kashmir began to burn again. So after 1953 the situation underwent a major change.
3.Our former prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru demanded the unilateral accession of Kashmir to India , he could not consider the plebiscite really a solution for the problem after the year 1953. Trained youth from Pakistan makes violence in Kashmir valley. The first bilateral peace talks with Pakistan held in 1962. After that two bilateral peace talks were held in the year 1965 and 1972. In India 1972 Indian Prime Minister Mrs.Indira Gandhi and Pakistan President Z.A.Bhutto signed Simla Pact to restore peace in Kashmir valley. Indian Government is ready to resolve the Kashmir problem on the ground of Simla Pact.
4. Terrorism in Kashmir will destroy the unity and integrity of our nation. We have got clear evidence of Pakistan’s part of making terrorism in Kashmir valley. She is raising the issue in international summits as a shield to cover her internal disturbances. We are destroying all her attempts in a successful way we are ready to accept an amicable and feasible solution to improve the situation. But when we are forced to take weapons, we can reply them in the same coin. Because it is the duty of a Federal Government to preserve the unity and integrity of the nation.
5.Secularism is one of the basic features of Indian Constitution. Out of many divorce factors we are thinking and working for the unity of India. The neighboring countries spreading communal diversions in the disturbing areas. Mr. M.C.Chagla, the eminent son of India, emphasizes this attitude of Pakistan in the Security Counsel. He said, “ her(Pakistan’s) philosophy is that in the very nature of things Muslims must hate the Hindus and the Hindus must hate the Muslims.”
EARLY PROPOSALS AND REACTIONS.
1.There are three main proposals put before the Government of India and Pakistan to cool the burning volcano. The first proposal was that the present line of control should be changed into a permanent line, ie: to divide Kashmir between India and Pakistan. This division of Kashmir on the line of control was rejected by Pakistan. The second concept of the independent Kashmir is supported by a limited groups of people living inside and out side the Kashmir. Because every one can understand the illogical idea if standing Kashmir as an independent state. Pakistan has been trying to bag the apple from the very beginning. Mr.Sardar Qayyum Khan, Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, supporting this idea .This may lead to the ultimate accession of Kashmir to Pakistan. Thirdly, the self determination of the idea of plebiscite is an early outcome of this problem. But for India ,now it I an untenable solution.
2.We cannot accept a plebiscite till Pakistan give up her aggression to Kashmir valley. The question of Mandir and Masjid arised by Pakistan cannot reflect the real result of a referendum. The communal organization in Kashmir shaking the interest if people in Kashmir to accede to the Indian Union. They are raising communal questions before the people. India is not ready to split for religious groups once again. We have to protect the faith of 100 million Muslims. According to Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan , “Pakistan should not allow any weakness in its traditional stand that Kashmir people be allowed to accede to Pakistan.” Pakistan media, which have great influence in Kashmir region, spreading communal propaganda before the people.
A DROWNING MAN WILL CATCH AT A STRAW.
1.The people of Kashmir thinks that Pakistan has great interest in their issue.Mr.Z.A.Haq,former President and army Chief openly expressed his interest upon Kashmir. The commotion broke out during the death of Mr.Z.A.Haq is a clear evidence to this fact. The people were misguided by Pakistan’s authorities and they believed that India was behind his death.
2.The situation in Pakistan occupied Kashmir is not peaceful Mr.Rathore, was removed from the power of Prime Minister ship On June29,1991. His slogan of Azadi was not accepted by Mr.Sharif’s ministry. This proved Pakistan’s intension of Azadi for Kashmir. Their aim is to make terror on India. Pakistan’s media is spreading religious fanaticism among the people in Kashmir. American army had visited POK and aimed to develop a permanent military settlement there. Human rights violations is the main issue of Pakistan about Kashmir. They got success against India in this matter. On 13 Jume,1991, Amnesty International visited Kashmir and commended that there were wide spread violation of the legal system in Kashmir. Government of India were warned to take proper steps to rebuild human rights in Kashmir valley. But the recent visit of Amnesty International in Pakistan and their report against Pakistan is a clear evidence of what is happening in the Country. Pakistan is not even capable of controlling her internal disturbances.
FIND THE VALUE OF FAITH.
1.We cannot still raise the region if Jammu and Kashmir into the main stream of Indian policies. Many times we heard the death knell of Democracy in Jammu and Kashmir. To make Kashmir a democratic state still a dream of the people. We have to accept that it is not an easy task to device a mutually acceptable solution to this 60 years old volcano. Very intellectual and well organized committee can only solve this burning problem. The bilateral negotiation and arriving at a feasible solution is very worth full. This should be as a view to help the democratic mind of people. No military force can completely control the people of a nation or a state.; Moral and also economic reform policies can change the mind of militants. It can be done by introducing economic aids and self employment scheme. Pakistan is attracting youth from poor economic group. A part of Indian military can be used for educating the people, especially the youth. Indian military could peacefully solve Hazarat Ball mosque crisis, which was a great operation of Kashmir militants.
2.A good politician can settle policies in Kashmir, a good administrator can give welfare guidance to people and a stable government can re-stabilize democracy in Kashmir in its full sence.The people in Kashmir will admits India’s opinion and they will understated our interest in their burning problem. Then they will co-operate with us and raise slogan for their mother land. We should bring home that the region of Kashmir cannot stand an independent state we have seen both the  disintegration of a great nation and American civil war. We had also witnessed the burial of democracy in our neighboring countries many times with in the span of 60 years.
3.Pakistan should come forward to resolve the issue of bilateral discussion on the basis of Simla agreement. They should understand our great tradition. It is our grate ancient King Asoka, whom discovered the summer capital if Kashmir. They should try to learn lessons from our secular policy. They have no rights to interfere our internal affairs. We should solve or burning problem of the Punjab. The Punjab is now a prosperous land. Kashmir is a land of natural beauty .About 7.20 lakhs tourists visited the state in 1987. Tourists will come to Kashmir if we give security to their life and property. It is the duty if the UN to warn against the aggression of a nation to a peace loving country. By attacking Kashmir Pakistan is attacking Indian people. It is the violation of Human rights. So they should let them free to access to their mother land. Kashmir is the integral part of India, No one can claim for Kashmir. The government of India should take a proposal to attract the people of the valley. Some  leaders of Kashmir working with the help of neighboring nations should be isolated with the help of the Kashmir people. The government take the people’s issue as the issue of our nation. Army of the valley should make more people friendly. Violators should be handle with strict law. They should act for the people beyond any suspicion on the people of Kashmir. The three men delegation alone should not resolve the issue. The Chief Minister of the State should accept the emotions of the  people. It was  not by bullets but by the ballots the Chief Minister was elected. He come among  the people as a protector. Introduce scheme for the people who have been suffering for the last 60 years, A willful national government with the support of determined state ruler can resolved the issue amicably ad permanently.

                                ************************************