Whether Forwarding message in social media is equal to endorsing the message?

Words are more powerful than acts
45. Not all murders are given capital punishment. We look into the
circumstances and all related aspects under which the act was done.
Those words used in the message are not said under emotion. People use such words during quarrel and later they may regret but putting things in writing or typing means they know the consequences and do it.
46. Forwarded message is equal to accepting the message and
endorsing the message.

MADRAS HIGH COURT
PRONOUNCED ON : 10.05.2018
CRL. OP No.12229 of 2018
S. RAMATHILAGAM, J.

Print Page

Whether salary can be paid to physically handicapped employee even if she does not attend duty?

Now back to the case: As has been extracted, the medical

report is unambiguous; in fact, it reads distressingly. With loss of


bowl control and faecal incontinence--and further always to be

attended to--the employee has precious little to offer to her

employer as her contribution in the workplace. Prone to infections

and potential to spread them, the employee poses danger to herself

and to others as well. The employer seems to have understood that

keeping an employee on the rolls, as if she had been in service,

must mean that she should perform the ritual of attending office.

We are afraid it is misplaced, if not perverse. We cannot, however,

hide our surprise at the vigour with which, the giant of an

employer, the Railways, has pursued the matter against a woman

who has already been beaten by fate to her wheel chair for life.

      67. We do not deny that the employer may have been spurred

by a sense of duty, but a generous spirit of accommodation might

have been much appreciated. Lest the employer's insistence on the

employee's physical presence under impossible--and perilous--

circumstances should be taken as a display of official hubris. Let



us not forget every disabled person is not a Stephen Hawkins to

contribute, still.

       68. Here is a conflict, as it seems, between the employee's

constitutional right--right to dignity and privacy--and the

employer's right--right to compel an employee to discharge the

allotted functions. Need we say, it is the constitutional right that

prevails? Nevertheless, we hasten to add, it may be a constitutional

canon but needs the facts to justify it. Here, the facts, we think,

justify this conclusion.

       69. We may end our disposition with a quote that puts the

issue in perspective: "Dignity is as essential to human life as water,

food, and oxygen. The stubborn retention of it, even in the face of

extreme physical hardship, can hold a woman's soul in her body

long past the point at which the body should have surrendered it."34




34 Laura Hillenbrand, Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption (2010,
  Random House) [Gender changed to contextualize]



Result:

      70. Under these circumstances, we hold that the learned

Tribunal has rendered Ext.P10 order in consonance with the

principle of law calling for no interference. In the facts and

circumstances, we dismiss the Original Petition as devoid of merit.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                         PRESENT:

           MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
                                             &
              MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

          3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

                              OP (CAT).No. 182 of 2016 (Z)
                           

        UNION OF INDIA,
           Vs

                FANCY BABU,
             

Print Page

Supreme Court Guidelines for curtailing Eve-Teasing

 Before undertaking suitable legislation to curb eve-teasing, it is necessary to take at least some urgent measures so that it can be curtailed to some extent. In public interest, we are therefore inclined to give the following directions:

1) All the State Governments and Union Territories are directed to depute plain clothed female police officers in the precincts of bus-stands and stops, railway stations, metro stations, cinema theatres, shopping malls, parks, beaches, public service vehicles, places of worship etc. so as to monitor and supervise incidents of eve-teasing.

2) There will be a further direction to the State Government and Union Territories to install CCTV in strategic positions which itself would be a deterrent and if detected, the offender could be caught.

3) Persons in-charge of the educational institutions, places of worship, cinema theatres, railway stations, bus-stands have to take steps as they deem fit to prevent eve-teasing, within their precincts and, on a complaint being made, they must pass on the information to the nearest police station or the Women’s Help Centre.

4) Where any incident of eve-teasing is committed in a public service vehicle either by the passengers or the persons in charge of the vehicle, the crew of such vehicle shall, on a complaint made by the aggrieved person, take such vehicle to the nearest police station and give information to the police. Failure to do so should lead to cancellation of the permit to ply.

5) State Governments and Union Territories are directed to establish Women’ Helpline in various cities and towns, so as to curb eve-teasing within three months.

6) Suitable boards cautioning such act of eve-teasing be exhibited in all public places including precincts of educational institutions, bus stands, railway stations, cinema theatres, parties, beaches, public service vehicles, places of worship etc.

7) Responsibility is also on the passers-by and on noticing such incident, they should also report the same to the nearest police station or to Women Helpline to save the victims from such crimes.

8) The State Governments and Union Territories of India would take adequate and effective measures by issuing suitable instructions to the concerned authorities including the District Collectors and the District Superintendent of Police so as to take effective and proper measures to curb such incidents of eve-teasing.

Supreme Court of India

Dy.Inspector Gen.Of Police & Anr. vs S.Samuthiram on 30 November, 2012

Bench: K.S. Radhakrishnan, Dipak Misra

 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8513     OF 2012

Print Page