Court Enhances Compensation for Bus Accident Death Victim

Hyderabad: Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao enhanced the motor accident compensation to Rs 16.93 lakh in an appeal arising out of the death of an agriculturist who was run over by an APSRTC bus at Jogipet. The judge was dealing with an appeal filed by Ashila Manemma and her three children, challenging the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Medak, Sangareddy, which had fixed the income of the deceased at Rs 1,500 per month and awarded compensation of Rs 2.23 lakh. The claim arose out of a January 2013 accident, in which Ashili Shankarappa allegedly fell from an APSRTC bus after the driver moved the vehicle suddenly while he was boarding it, resulting in his death on the spot. The judge noted that the deceased owned several extents of agricultural land and that APSRTC did not cross-examine the evidence adduced by the claimants. Holding that the Tribunal committed a serious error in drastically undervaluing the income of the deceased, the judge re-fixed the monthly income at Rs 10,000, added future prospects, applied the appropriate multiplier and recalculated compensation under various heads. Accordingly, the total compensation was enhanced to Rs 16,93,100 with interest at nine per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. The judge directed APSRTC to deposit the enhanced compensation amount within 60 days.

Plea alleges improper police probe in suicide case

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea alleging police inaction in connection with the suicide of a woman at LB Nagar. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Kuncham Saidulu, father of the deceased. The petitioner complained of failure on the part of the LB Nagar police station house officer in conducting a proper investigation into his daughter’s death, which he claims occurred following sustained harassment arising out of marital discord and dowry demands. The petitioner contended that his daughter died by suicide at her residence and left behind a suicide note specifically naming several individuals responsible for her physical and mental harassment. Despite registration of a case for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the police allegedly did not carry out a meaningful investigation or take steps to arrest the accused persons, who were arrayed as respondents in the writ plea. It was contended that the continued inaction of the police, despite clear allegations and material on record, was illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, besides being contrary to principles of natural justice. The petitioner sought a direction to the respondent police authorities to conduct a comprehensive and time-bound investigation, take coercive steps against the accused, and ensure a fair and transparent enquiry. The government pleader appearing for the state sought time to obtain instructions.

Bail to accused in exploitation case

The Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused in a case registered for alleged sexual exploitation on the promise of marriage. The case arose from a complaint lodged by the mother of the victim stating that her 18-year-old daughter went missing from home in October. During investigation, the police alleged that the victim went along with the petitioner, who allegedly had physical relations with her and later left her at her house after learning that a missing complaint was registered. It was alleged that the victim left home again, intending to marry the petitioner but later came to know that he was already married, following which the offence was altered to one relating to sexual intercourse by deceitful means. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the relationship between the petitioner and the victim was consensual, as reflected in the victim’s own statement, and that the ingredients of the alleged offence were not made out. It was further contended that the petitioner was in judicial custody since November 6 and that the crucial part of the investigation was already completed. After considering the submissions and the material on record, the judge noted that the petitioner was in custody for over a month and that prosecution witnesses, including the investigating officer, were already examined. Taking into account the stage of investigation, the nature of the relationship between the parties, and the period of incarceration, the judge held that the petitioner was entitled to conditional bail.