Yesterday, On 9th May, Tahawwur Rana, accused in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, has been sent to Tihar Jail till June 6. The NIA claims he met LeT operative Abdur Rehman in Dubai and planned future attacks in India.
Today, On 11th April, The National Investigation Agency (NIA) informed the court that Tahawwur Rana, accused in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, may have planned similar attacks in other Indian cities. Rana is currently facing extradition proceedings. The agency emphasized the seriousness of the threat posed by his alleged involvement.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India upheld that if an alleged rape victim refuses to undergo a medical examination, it can lead to negative inferences against their claims. The bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh, made this important observation while hearing an appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh. The appeal was against a High Court judgment that had acquitted an accused in a rape case.
Today, on 12th November, the Supreme Court ordered AIIMS to assess the health of E. Abubacker, former PFI chairman, to evaluate his bail eligibility on medical grounds. Despite opposition from the NIA, the Court mandated hospitalization for a thorough examination, emphasizing the need for urgent medical intervention, with further hearings scheduled in two weeks.
A man petitioned the Delhi High Court today (22nd Oct) for a medical examination of his wife, claiming she concealed her transgender identity, leading to emotional distress and legal complications. He argues that the rights of both spouses in marriage are interdependent, and seeks to avoid maintenance and domestic violence allegations based on her gender status.
Yesterday(on18th March),The Kerala High Court upheld a protocol mandating that only gynaecologists conduct examinations of sexual assault survivors, dismissing a petition filed by government hospital gynaecologists. The decision was made in response to a petition challenging the protocol’s requirement, which mandates only gynaecologists to conduct examinations on survivors of sexual offences. The petitioners argued that this requirement contradicts existing laws and international guidelines and called for a modification of the protocol to extend the responsibility of medical examinations to all registered medical practitioners. Despite their petition being dismissed, the court granted the petitioner-gynaecologists the liberty to approach the appropriate State authorities with their grievances.
