Puttur: Youth mistakes rat poison for medicine; Dies
Puttur, Sep.7: A youth from Belthangady who was suffering from hip pain at Puttur railway station and had mistakenly consumed rat poison instead of medicine, breathed his last on Friday.
The deceased has been identified as Akshatananda (23) son of Kariya alias Giriyappa from Belthangady.
Akshatananda was taking medicine for hip pain. On Sunday, Sep. 2 he had gone to Puttur railway station where he developed hip pain. It is said that, in a hurry, Akshatananda consumed rat poison mistaking it for medicine.
He was immediately rushed to a local hospital from where he was then shifted to Wenlock hospital in Mangaluru. But on Friday he breathed his last after failing to respond to the treatment.
A case has been filed in Puttur town police station as per the complaint given by deceased's father.
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.
