Mangaluru : Case of Jewllery robbed, two nabbed.
Mangaluru, Sep.5: Surathkal police arrested two persons near Thokkottu Kallapu in connection with robbery of a handbag with gold jewelries.
The arrested have been identified as Mohammed Salman (26), a resident of Kudroli and Husain Tanveer (28) from B.C Road Kaikamba in Bantwal taluk.
Police seized gold ornaments worth Rs. 8.5 lakh, two wheeler worth Rs. 50,000 and a car valued around Rs. 2.5 lakh. The total value of seized items is estimated around Rs. 11.50 lakhs.
Police said that on August 26 a lady from Bajpe had visited her relative in Surathkal Chokkabettu. While returning she had gone to Mallamar beach and she had kept all the jewelries in the handbag.
On noticing lonely lady in the beach the accused attacked her from behind and fled away with her handbag. A case was filed at Surathkal police station.
Surathkal police station inspector Ramakrishna K.G and other police personnel took part in the operation under the direction of Assistant commissioner of police, Mangaluru north sub division, Rajendra D.S.
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.
Madras HC rules spousal privacy as a fundamental right, disallows evidence obtained through snooping
Chennai: In a landmark judgment, the Madras High Court emphasized the protection of spousal privacy as a fundamental right, ruling that evidence obtained by one spouse snooping on the other is inadmissible in court. This ruling came as Justice G.R. Swaminathan overturned a lower court's decision that had allowed a husband to submit his wife's call records in a marital dispute case.
The court made it clear that privacy, as a constitutionally guaranteed right, includes the privacy of married individuals from each other, rejecting the notion that marital misconduct permits invasion of personal privacy. "Law cannot proceed on the premise that marital misconduct is the norm. Privacy as a fundamental right includes spousal privacy, and evidence obtained by invading this right is inadmissible," stated the court.
The case originated in Paramakudi Subordinate Court, where the husband submitted the wife's call data as evidence to support claims of adultery, cruelty, and desertion. He had obtained these records without her consent, an act the High Court deemed a violation of privacy. Additionally, the call records were not accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, making them procedurally inadmissible.
Justice Swaminathan noted that allowing such evidence would open doors to spouses spying on each other, damaging the foundational trust in marital relationships. “Trust forms the bedrock of matrimonial relationships. The spouses must have implicit and total faith in each other. Snooping destroys the fabric of marital life,” he stated.
The High Court further advised that allegations of misconduct could be pursued through authorized methods, such as interrogatories or affidavits, cautioning that the court must not assume marital misconduct as a norm justifying privacy breaches.
