Man mistakenly arrested in Karnataka compensated with Rs 5 lakh
Bengaluru, Aug 1: A 56-year-old man has been compensated with Rs 5 lakh for having been wrongfully arrested in a criminal case, due to a confusion over his name.
Ningaraju N, a resident of Kalidasa Layout here, had approached the High Court claiming that in the criminal case filed in 2011, the alleged accused Raju NGN was not him.
Quashing the case against him, the HC said, It is rather shocking that a person has been arrested without ascertaining whether he was the person who was required to be arrested and that the warrant had been issued against him.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj in his judgment dated July 7 noted that, his identification was not cross-checked and verified, resulting (in) an innocent person being arrested.
The HC said that the Right of Life and Liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is paramount and there is a violation of the fundamental right in this case.
The court said the state was liable to compensate the arrestee for having put him through loss of liberty as also loss of reputation. The compensation was fixed at Rs 5 lakh which the court said was payable within eight weeks.
Ningaraju was arrested because the name of his father (Ningegowda) was similar to the name of the person named in the warrant.
I'm unable to comprehend as to how the name of the father being similar or even identical would have any role to play in the arrest, extrapolating the same logic if the arrest warrant has been issued for one brother, another brother or maybe even the sister could be arrested, merely, because the father name is identical.
Ningaraju was arrested on the wrong assumption that he was the ex-director of the Ms India Holiday (Pvt) Ltd, which was under liquidation.
Further, to prevent such incidents in the future the High Court directed that if Guidelines or Standard Operating Procedure are already issued to cater to this situation, training in this regard to be provided to all arresting officers.
If such a SOP is not already in place, the Director General of Police was directed to issue the guidelines as to what steps to be taken by the arresting officer before arresting a person including the verification of identity. This was directed to be issued within four weeks.
The HC will hear the matter again on September 1 to assess the compliance of the directions.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Trump says EU has until July 4 to approve last year's trade deal or it will face higher tariffs
Washington (AP): President Donald Trump has said in a social media post that goods from the European Union would face higher tariff rates if the 27-member bloc fails to approve last year's trade framework by July 4.
The announcement on Thursday appeared to be a deadline extension after the president said last Friday that EU autos would face a higher 25 per cent tariff starting this week. Trump made the updated announcement after what he described as a "great call" with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
Still, the US president was displeased that the European Parliament had yet to finalize the trade arrangement reached last year, which was further complicated in February by the US Supreme Court ruling that Trump lacked the legal authority to declare an economic emergency to impose the initial tariffs used to pressure the EU into talks.
"A promise was made that the EU would deliver their side of the Deal and, as per Agreement, cut their Tariffs to ZERO!" Trump posted. "I agreed to give her until our Country's 250th Birthday or, unfortunately, their Tariffs would immediately jump to much higher levels."
It was unclear from the post whether Trump was implying that the tariff rates would jump on all EU goods or the increase would only apply to autos.
His latest statement indicates he might be backing away from his earlier threat on EU autos by giving the European Parliament several more weeks to approve the agreement.
Under the original terms of the framework, the US would charge a 15 per cent tax on most goods imported from the EU.
But since the Supreme Court ruling, the administration has levied a 10 per cent tariff while investigating trade imbalances and national security issues, aiming to put in new tariffs to make up for lost revenues.
