Udupi: Police have arrested two persons in connection with a fake gold fraud case reported under the jurisdiction of Padubidri police station.

The accused have been identified as Kavya (32) from Buduganahalli in Tumakuru district and Venkatesh (42) from Santhebennur taluk in Davangere district. Police have seized 7.61 grams of gold ornaments and Rs 6,000 in cash from them.

According to police, the incident occurred on January 13, when Bassamma was walking near the old post office in Padubidri. A man and woman approached her and showed a gold chain with a Lakshmi pendant, claiming they were in urgent need of money.

Believing their claim, Bassamma handed over her gold ornaments worth Rs 1.50 lakh along with Rs 6,000 in cash in exchange for the chain.

However, when she later got the chain checked at a jewellery shop, she found it to be fake. By the time she returned to the spot, the accused had fled.

Based on the complaint, a case was registered, and police launched an investigation.

The arrests were made under the supervision of Udupi SP Hariram Shankar and Additional SP Sudhakar S. Naik, with a team of police officers executing the operation. Further investigation is underway.

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.



New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the Centre's response on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, on the ground that those are allegedly discriminatory against women.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Panchol took note of the submissions made by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who appeared in the matter for petitioners Poulomi Pavini Shukla and the Nyaya Naari Foundation, and issued a notice to the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs.

The plea says the current Shariat inheritance rules are "manifestly discriminatory" against women, often granting them only half or less of the share allocated to their male counterparts.

Bhushan said the 1937 Act violates Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.

He said matters of succession are civil in nature and do not constitute an "essential religious practice" protected under Article 25.

"Saying women will get half or even less than half compared to male counterparts is discriminatory," the lawyer said.