Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court fell down in the courtroom on Monday morning after he felt dizzy but returned to work in the post lunch session

“

News
Columns
Interviews
Law Firms
Apprentice Lawyer
Legal Jobs
हिंदी
ಕನ್ನಡ

News
Madras High Court judge falls down in court unwell but returns to work in the afternoon
Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court complained of uneasiness while hearing a matter in his courtroom at around 11 am Monday.

Madras High Court
Ayesha Arvind
Published on: 
10 Jun 2024, 7:41 pm
2 min read
Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court fell down in the courtroom on Monday morning after he felt dizzy but returned to work in the post lunch session.

He complained of physical uneasiness while hearing a matter at around 11 am and tried to get up and rush to his chambers but felt dizzy and “fell down.”

He was then rushed to his chambers by his court staff and some of the lawyers present in the courtroom.

However, he refused to take the day off and resumed work post lunch at 2.15 pm.

Justice N Anand Venkatesh
When the lawyers in his court room urged him to go home and rest, Justice Venkatesh said that the “in house” doctor in the Court had checked him and given him ORS.

It was probably a case of food poisoning and there was nothing to worry about, he told everyone present in his court room.

“It was probably food poisoning. I began to feel uneasy and dizzy. I thought I will quickly go to my chambers to avoid a scene but that did not happen. I fell down here (at the dais) and ended up creating a scene. However, the in-house doctor checked me and I took rest. I am so grateful to all of you and my court staff. The female staff members of my court took care of me like a mother,” the judge said.

When some senior counsel asked him why he did not go home after the incident, the judge said coming back to the court made him feel better.

“This court is like my temple. I do not need to go anywhere else. I took rest and felt energised to come back here,” Justice Venkatesh said.

Madras High CourtJustice Anand Venkatesh
News
UP Police doing a poor job in probing cyber crimes, misuse of non-consensual images: Allahabad High Court
The Court said that offenders cannot go scot-free on account of inadequacy in investigations or pedantic view adopted by the trial court.

Image sharing (Picture for representation)
Bar & Bench
Published on: 
10 Jun 2024, 4:42 pm
3 min read
The Allahabad High Court recently expressed concern over the poor quality of investigation by the Uttar Pradesh police into cases of sharing and circulating non-consensual images, particularly of women.

Justice Ajay Bhanot said that the circulation or transmission of “indecent videos” is an emerging menace to the society and that women are the most vulnerable targets.

The Court said it has been repeatedly expressing its concern at the poor quality of police investigation into cyber crimes but without much success.

“Cyber offences are becoming a menace for the society. In particular indecent photographs of persons being captured, stored or transmitted through digital devices is tearing apart the social fabric of the country. Women victims are more vulnerable to such offences. These offences may have lifelong traumatic consequences for the victim,” the Court said.

Therefore, it urged the Uttar Pradesh Police to gear up to face the challenge of the emerging menace.

Justice Ajay Bhanot
The Court added that such offences may leave lifelong traumatic consequences for the victims and that it is the responsibility of the police to investigate cyber crimes in a professional manner.

“The police authorities have to gear up their investigations skills and proficiency to meet the challenge,” the single-judge said.

Besides highlighting the poor investigation, the Court also noted that there was lack of supervision in such matters.

“These are two fault lines. The Court has been noticing and red flagging for the police authorities but with little success,” the single-judge said.

Justice Bhanot made the remarks in at least three cases while hearing the bail petitions moved by the accused.

The Court in one of the cases on