IAS officer, brother thrash 2 employees of telecom service provider over router; booked
Mumbai, Jan 3: Two men working for a leading telecom service provider were allegedly thrashed by an IAS officer and his brother at the latter's residence in Navi Mumbai over an Internet router issue, police said on Wednesday.
Four security guards of the residential society also allegedly joined the brother duo in attacking the two men with pipe and wooden sticks on December 30 evening, an official said quoting the FIR.
The accused are identified as IAS officer Aman Mittal, currently posted as Maharashtra water supply and sanitation department deputy secretary, and his brother Devesh Mittal, besides the four security guards.
"Two men who work for Airtel fibre internet installation service had visited the residence of Devesh Mittal to fix an internet router issue. An argument broke out between the duo and Mittals who claimed they are not getting the expected Internet range in the bedroom," the official said quoting the FIR lodged by Sagar Mandhre (27), who works as an engineer for Airtel.
Mandhre stated that he was attacked by Aman Mittal and his brother Devesh who were joined by four security guards of the building with a pipe and wooden sticks. They also thrashed Mandhre's colleague Bhushan Gujar, who works in the sales team, the official said.
The incident was captured on CCTV cameras installed on the premises of the building, he added.
"After some time, Aman Mittal called up Rabale police station, following which police personnel reached the spot and took Mandhre and Gujar to the police station," he said.
A case was registered against the Mittal brothers and four security guards under Indian Penal Code sections pertaining to causing hurt by dangerous weapon or other means and wrongful confinement, the official said.
The IAS officer lodged a cross-complaint against Mandhre and Gujar stating that they attacked him with the router machine.
Based on Mittal's complaint, an offence was registered under section 324 (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon or means) of the IPC against Mandhre and Gujar, he said, adding that further investigation is underway.
Nobody has been arrested so far.
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.
Where is question of offence when there is consensual relationship? SC asks
New Delhi (PTI): Where is the question of an offence when a relationship is consensual? the Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who had challenged an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that had quashed an FIR against her former live-in partner in a case of alleged sexual assault on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the woman lived together with the man and also had a child from him.
"Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They were living together and she also had a child from him and then there is no marriage and now, she says sexual assault? For 15 years they lived together," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
The woman's counsel told the court that she had lost her husband earlier and was introduced to the accused by her brother-in-law.
The court was also told that the accused had promised to marry her and sexually exploited her.
Justice Nagarathna then asked, "Why did she go and live with him before marriage?"
"She lived with him. She had a child from him. He walks out because there is no marriage bond. Legal bond is not there. He walks out, that is the risk in a live-in relationship. So once he walks out, it does not become a criminal offence," she said.
The woman's lawyer submitted that the accused was already married and had concealed this fact.
"See, if there was marriage, the question of her rights would have been better. She could have filed regarding bigamy. She could have filed for maintenance. She would have got those reliefs. Now since there is no marriage, they live together, this is the risk. They can walk out any day. What do we do?" Justice Nagarathna said.
She suggested that the woman could pursue remedies, such as maintenance for the child, and asked the parties to go for mediation.
"Even if he goes to jail, what will she gain? We can think of some maintenance for the child. Child is now seven years (old). At least, some monetary compensation can be made for the child," Justice Nagarathna said.
The apex court issued a notice in the matter and asked the parties to explore if a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.
