MESCOM staff brave floods to restore power supply in Mangaluru
Mangaluru: Despite adverse weather conditions and heavy flooding in Berike, Deralakatte, the staff members of MESCOM (Mangalore Electricity Supply Company) took action to repair a disrupted power line on Tuesday. The continuous thunderstorm had caused a power outage affecting approximately 40 houses in the area.
Responding to the complaint lodged by the local residents, MESCOM linemen Vasanth and Suresh ventured into the flooded region to rectify the tripped power line. Guided by a local resident, they fearlessly waded through rainwater to reach the electricity pole and successfully carried out the necessary repairs.
ALSO READ: Mangaluru: House in Ullal collapses due to heavy rain, wind
The selfless efforts of Vasanth and Suresh have garnered immense praise from the local community. A video capturing their efforts to restore the power supply, despite the challenging weather conditions and waterlogged surroundings, has quickly gone viral on social media platforms.
ದೇರಳಕಟ್ಟೆಯ ಬೆರಿಕೆ ಎಂಬಲ್ಲಿ ಬಿರುಗಾಳಿಗೆ ವಿದ್ಯುತ್ ಕಂಬದ ತಂತಿಗಳು ಪರಸ್ಪರ ಸ್ಪರ್ಶಿಸಿ ಟ್ರಿಪ್ ಆಗಿ ಸ್ಥಳೀಯರಿಗೆ ವಿದ್ಯುತ್ ಸಂಪರ್ಕ ಸ್ಥಗಿತಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದು ಸ್ಥಳಕ್ಕೆ ಬಂದ ಮೆಸ್ಕಾಂ ಪವರ್ ಮೆನ್ ನೆರೆ ನೀರಲ್ಲಿ ಮುಳುಗಿ ಕಂಬವನ್ನೇರಿ ತುರ್ತು ದುರಸ್ಥಿ ಕಾರ್ಯ ನಡೆಸಿದ ವ್ಯಾಪಕ ಪ್ರಶಂಸೆಗೆ ಪಾತ್ರರಾಗಿದ್ದಾರೆ. pic.twitter.com/r9NcinX5YE
— Jafar Swadiq (@JafarSwadiq3) July 5, 2023
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.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
