![]() Sunday, Aug 04, 2002 |
| Other States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Other States
-
Jammu & Kashmir
By Luv Puri
Both were ordered released with a compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs. Besides, they should be given government accommodation till they were in India. The direction was passed on a public interest litigation petition filed by an organisation World Human Rights Protection. Shehnaz alias Sayeda is a resident of village Haryan Da Bagh in tehsil Sumani. Mirpur, in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and was arrested on October 6, 1995 on Indian soil near the Line of Control. The woman had jumped into a river and was saved by the villagers. A case was registered against her under the Egress and International Movement Control Order. She was convicted on November 15, 1995 to undergo one-year imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500. In default, she was asked to further undergo the sentence of three months and was lodged in the district jail, Poonch. Thereafter, she was shifted to the Central Jail on January 28, 1996. During her detention she gave birth to a girl on October 6, 1997. A Division Bench of the J&K High Court, comprising T.S. Doabia and S.K. Gupta at Jammu, while ordering the release of Shenaz said that so far as the mother was concerned she had already been punished and her stay in India was not of her free volition. To keep her in further custody would not be correct. The order of detention passed by the Secretary to Government, Home Department, on August 3, 2002 whereby the woman was detained under the Public Safety Act for a period of 24 months for alleged involvement with militant activities was passed mechanically and without the application of the mind and hence was being quashed. The court directed the State to pay Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation to be deposited in the name of her minor daughter. The interest on of this amount would be spent on the welfare of the child. The State was at liberty to recover this amount from Din Mohammed, jail warden, if it was proved that he was responsible for the alleged rape of the woman. Otherwise, the State which was equally liable for the illegal act of its servant was burdened with the damages.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|