Uttar Pradesh: Owners of stray cattle to face Rs 5,000 penalty
Noida, Jan 16: The Noida Authority on Wednesday doubled the penalty imposed on owners of animals and cattle found roaming at public places and roads in the city, officials said.
So far, a penalty of Rs 2,500 is imposed on offenders, besides another Rs 1,000 which is remitted with the authority, the officials said.
Now, they will be required to pay Rs 5,000, the Noida Authority said in a statement.
"All owners are requested to keep their animals tied at appropriate spots and not let them stray out on roads, or in public places, which is leading to accidents. Failing to keep them in appropriate places, the authority will forfeit them a penalty will be imposed and punitive proceedings could be initiated against offenders, the authority said.
As many as 475 cattle have been captured and shifted to a cow shelter in Sector 94 in the past six months. During the same period, 75 cattle owners approached officials to get their cattle released, it said.
The cow shelter is spread over an area of seven acres and has 1,325 cattle at present.
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.
Allahabad HC sets aside maintenance order in favour of earning wife, says she didn't tell truth
Prayagraj (PTI): The Allahabad High Court has set aside a lower court order mandating a man to pay maintenance to his estranged wife, observing that she earns her living and did not reveal the true salary in her affidavit.
Justice Madan Pal Singh also allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the man, Ankit Saha.
"A perusal of the impugned judgment indicates that in the affidavit filed before the trial court, the opposite party herself admitted that she is a post-graduate and a web designer by qualification. She is working as a senior sales coordinator in a company and getting a salary of Rs 34,000 per month," the court said in the December 3 order.
"But in her cross-examination, she has admitted that she was earning Rs 36,000 per month. Such an amount for a wife who has no other liability cannot be said to be meagre; whereas the man has the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents and other social obligations," it observed.
The high court observed that the woman was not entitled to get any maintenance from her husband "as she is an earning lady and able to maintain herself".
The man's counsel argued in court that the estranged wife did not reveal the whole truth in the affidavit.
"She claimed herself to be an illiterate and unemployed woman. When the document filed by the man was shown to her before the trial court, she admitted her income during cross-examination. Thus, it is clear that she did not come before the trial court with clean hands," the counsel submitted.
The court, in its order, said, "Cases of those litigants who have no regard for the truth and those who indulge in suppressing material facts need to be thrown out of the court."
It impugned the lower court's February 17 judgment and order, passed by the principal judge of a family court in Gautam Buddh Nagar and allowed the criminal revision petition filed by the man.
