24 September, 2009

RBI against loan prepayment penalty

The Reserve Bank of India has frowned on the practice of banks slapping penalty charges on premature repayment of loans, saying it does not approve of such charges. But it stepped back from any role in enforcing its point of view.
Replying to an RTI query, the central bank said, “RBI does not approve of charging penalty or foreclosure charges. We have... advised banks to lay out appropriate internal principles and procedures so that usurious interest including processing and other charges are not levied by them on loans and advances.”
The RBI admitted it had received complaints on levy of prepayment penalty by banks who had been “suitably advised”. But it was silent on what action had been taken against banks who ignored the advice. The charges disadvantage those wanting to pay off a loan or move to one offering better terms.
Early Bird Fine Foreclosure:
Usually refers to a lender seizing a property when borrower is unable to repay loan. But in India, the term also refers to prepayment of loan before scheduled time
Most banks levy 2% penalty on capital left in case of prepayment
In case of HDFC and ICICI Bank, the penalty is 3%
Most banks waive penalty if repayment is made with borrower’s own money. But they charge it if borrower takes a loan from another bank to prepay existing one
Banks penalise early repayment
Even though most banks operating in India impose penalty charges on premature repayment of loans, RBI’s reply to a quer filed under RTI noted that, “In the context of granting greater functional autonomy to banks, operational freedom has been given to scheduled commercial banks on all matters pertaining to banking transactions, including foreclosure of loans.”
The applicant asked RBI if it was aware of private and multinational banks levying foreclosure charges or penalties for premature payment of loans and what steps had been taken in this matter. RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal also asked what steps had been taken by RBI to ensure that uniform interest rates were charged by all banks.
For credit card operations, RBI has advised banks to formulate a well documented policy and a fair practice code that charges interest rates that could depend on the payment or the default history of the cardholder.
“There should be transparency in levying of such differential interest rates... banks should upfront indicate to the credit card holder, the methodology of calculation of finance charges with illustrative examples, particularly in situations where a part of the amount outstanding is paid by the customer,” RBI’s CPIO said.
The central bank said in order to ensure transparency, banks should use only external or market-based rupee benchmark interest rates for pricing of their floating rate loan products.
“Banks should not offer floating rate loans linked to their own internal benchmarks or any other derived rate,” it said.
Source:- The Times of India 22 September 2009 Page No.1 Delhi

Apollo gets stiff dose from HC

Hospital Told To Reserve 200 Beds For Free Treatment Of Poor

Declaring that healthcare is a fundamental right of every person, Delhi High Court on Tuesday directed Indraprastha Apollo Hospital to reserve at least 200 beds for the poor people and provide them free treatment.
Slamming Apollo for not providing free treatment to poor patients, a division bench of chief justice A P Shah and justice Manmohan directed the hospital to comply with its agreement with the state government under which the hospital had committed to provide free treatment to 40% poor patients in OPD and 33% poor patients in Indoor Patient Department.
‘‘The hospital has made a complete mockery (of agreement) by not providing free treatment to the poor people,’’ the HC said while slapping a fine of Rs 2 lakh on the hospital. The court’s order came on a PIL filed by NGO All India Lawyers Union through its counsel Ashok Aggarwal, alleging the hospital was violating court’s previous order on the matter.
‘‘Poor people have been deprived of their right to free treatment and right to health is a fundamental right of every citizen... not only the government but also individual, group of individuals and NGOs are obliged to ensure it,’’ the court said. The bench said patients belonging to BPL families, class III and IV government employees, poor professionals, self-employed and people recognized by the health secretary as the poor would be eligible for free treatment.
The HC asked Delhi government to direct all its hospitals to set up a referral centre for sending poor patients for free treatment at Apollo Hospital. For that, chief secretary of Delhi government has been asked to draw guidelines within four weeks. The state government has been told to set up a committee that will monitor whether the hospital is implementing the court direction or not.
Apollo, meanwhile, has been told to appoint a nodal officer to take care of the case referred by the government hospitals for free treatment. The bench also asked the hospital management to maintain record of patients treated for free and send it to the state government and Directorate of Delhi Health Services.
In September 1998, the HC had directed Apollo Hospital to follow its agreement with the city government, said the NGO. According to the NGO, Delhi government had spent Rs 16 crore on the construction of the hospital, apart from allotting 15 acre land at a token price of Re 1.
Source:- The Times of India 23 September 2009 Page No.11 Delhi

HC poser on space sale in Gurgaon societies

There is good news for people living in highrises and apartments in Haryana who have been fighting builders over control of common properties. In a recent judgment defining the status of common properties in group housing complexes in Haryana, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked director town and country planning (DTCP) to look into the objections filed by Silver Oaks Society (SOS) against builder DLF for selling off such facilities commercially.
SOS had objected to the sale of shops, community centre and club, parking places and nursery school on the grounds that such properties belonged to the apartment owners collectively and DLF could not have sold them off or retained them as its own property.
The DTCP has been given six months to decide on SOS objections on the basis of the criteria laid down by the court. The latter also ordered that owners in Silver Oaks Colony, which has 749 apartments, who were denied membership of the condominium association, be permitted to join the same and fresh elections be held within two months under supervision of the DTCP.
Complexes such as Heritage City, Garden Estate, Silver Oaks and Central Park in the Millennium City, where thousands of people reside, are or have been involved in disputes with the builders over this matter.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked DTCP to examine afresh the declaration filed by DLF under the Haryana Apartment Ownership Act while transferring properties to the buyers saying, “the competent authority is to be guided by the provisions, objects and spirit of the Act in this matter.” The court said in the decision that all properties in such condominiums in Haryana are either apartments or limited areas and facilities or common areas and facilities. Anything not covered by the definition of apartment had to fall into either categories, leaving no scope for outside ownership.
The judgment was delivered on a petition filed by SOS in 2003 and covers an issue of vital interest to dozens of group housing societies in Gurgaon and the rest of the state. The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Justice Daya Chaudhary.
Said Col B K Dhawan, president of Apartment Owners Association (Haryana), “This will bring relief to all multistoreyed complexes in Haryana, especially in Gurgaon and Faridabad.”
Source:- The Times of India 23 September 2009 Page No.6 Delhi

14 September, 2009

SC to Kerala: Pay teachers or will review ministers' expenses

Rejecting the argument that it was facing cash crunch, the Supreme Court on Monday warned the Kerala government that it would review the expenses incurred on ministers and MLAs if the state failed to pay arrears for 17 years to part-time teachers.
In a lighter vein, a bench of Justices B N Aggrawal and G S Singhvi also asked the state government counsel "Your Chief Minister travels by which class, economy or business?"
The remarks come in the backdrop of the austerity measures suggested by the UPA government to all its ministers and government functionaries.
"We can't go by your claims. If you do not comply with the order by September 30, we will have to review the expenses incurred on your ministers and MLAs," the bench sternly told the counsel who agreed to abide by the direction.
The apex court made the remarks while dealing with a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Aided Higher Secondary Teachers Association challenging the reluctance of the state to pay arrears to part-time teachers in state government and aided schools.
During the argument, the state government has taken the stance that due to financial crunch it was not able to implement a government order issued on August 19, 2008, relating to payment of arrears to part-time teachers with retrospective effect from 1992.

Bar makes out a case against Queen’s English, wants Hindi

Hindi may be the national language, but the judiciary still swears by the Queen’s English. Now, language is the bone of contention between lawyers and judges with a section of lawyers alleging that Delhi’s judges prefer English-speaking lawyers to Hindi-speaking ones.
Alleging discrimination by judges, the lawyers now want to be allowed to argue cases in Hindi. Launching a “signature campaign” last week, a group of lawyers from Delhi High Court and the five district courts made a petition to the effect. Spearheading the campaign, Ashok Aggarwal, president of the Delhi unit of the lawyers’ association, said use of Hindi in courts will not only help lawyers present their cases in a better way, it will also benefit the litigants. “Most litigants are not well versed in English. For the better understanding of the litigants and that of their counsels, it is important for the courts to encourage using Hindi,” Aggarwal said.
Sharing an anecdote, Aggarwal said once a lawyer was asked to sit down by a HC judge and was stopped in the middle of arguments for using Hindi. “The judge told him that Hindi was not the language to be used in courts,” he said, adding that the Delhi High Court Act does not allow lawyers to argue in Hindi.
So far, the petition has managed to get the support of 3000 lawyers. “We have received a huge response and collected over 3,000 signatures so far to support our campaign,” Aggarwal informed. The association’s aim is to collect 5000 signatures and then the petition will be sent to Chief Justice of Delhi High Court.
Many trial court judges appreciated the move stating that it will help the judiciary in getting over the “British hangover”. “It is a great attempt on the part of the lawyers. Our constitution provides for equality and everyone should be allowed to use the national language in courts. In trial courts, using hindi is still allowed but one cannot argue in English in HC. It’s high time things change,” a metropolitan magistrate said.
Source:- The Times of India 14 Sep. 09 Page No. 3 Delhi
For any query:- deepakmiglani@hotmail.com

13 September, 2009

BIGAMY: AN ISSUE OF ONE TOO MANY

More Hindus take two wives than Muslims, according to a survey. Surprised? It’s been that way for more than 30 years
The Law Commission recently recommended a good way to prevent a married Hindu man from taking another wife: Deeming such a marriage illegal even if he converted to Islam before he wed a second time.
That Law Commission report, ‘Preventing Bigamy via Conversion to Islam’, essentially highlighted an important and little-known truth — namely that more Hindus than Muslims commit bigamy.
This has been true for more than a quarter of a century. In 1974, a government survey found Muslims to account for 5.6% of all bigamous marriages and upper-caste Hindus accounting for 5.8%. The difference may appear to be small but it is big, in real terms. The 1971 census records 45.3 crore Hindus and six crore Muslims. Allowing for women and children to make up 65% of each group, as many as one crore Hindu men had more than one wife in 1971, compared to 12 lakh Muslim men.
The trend continues, says sociologist Asghar Ali Engineer, head of Mumbai’s Institute of Islamic Studies. “The survey was conducted on a large sample in all parts of India and the report wasn’t made public. Further, polygamy was higher in South India than in the north, and more so among rich and middle-class Hindus than the poorer sections.”
Go back still further – to 1961 – and the census records polygamy to be highest among adivasis, Buddhists, Jains, and Hindus, with Muslims right at the end. Engineer says the law matters only up to a point. “With both survey results coming out after the Hindu Marriage Act was passed in 1955, it shows that bigamy is basically a problem of a male-dominant culture than religion.”
Bigamy disadvantages Hindu women more than Muslim, says Chandigarh sociologist Nirmal Sharma. This, because a Hindu man will desert his lawfully wedded wife to live with another, while the multiple wives of Muslim men are entitled to equal legal and social rights. “Closet bigamy in Hindus is worse than open polygamy among Muslims,” he says.
Fiza alias Anuradha Bali, who married Haryana’s deputy CM after the pair converted to Islam, says, “Our laws were far more liberal in ancient times. Most kings and many of our mythological figures had more than one wife.” Though Chand has converted back to Hinduism, Fiza insists she remains his “customary wife while the first one remains the legally-wedded one. There is no way to get out of a dual marriage in spite of a legal ban.”
Supreme Court lawyer Praveen Agarwal cautions that Hindu bigamists often go scot free because “the courts can do little until there’s a formal complaint.” And this is not always possible because in many cases, the two wives don’t even know of each other’s existence, says Agarwal. He adds that it is relatively easy for a Hindu man to remarry because temples don’t hold records. “However, if the matter goes to court, the second marriage is declared null and void.”
Take the case of K Suryanarayana, the Indian engineer killed in Afghanistan, who left behind a second wife and daughter. Though she laid claim to compensation from the government, the court ruled in favour of the first wife.
Agarwal suggests that stringent and time-consuming Hindu divorce may force many men to resort to bigamy. “Instead of going in for longdrawn-out and financially debilitating divorce procedures, men simply desert the first wife and marry again.”
Engineer says that bigamy is not as rampant among Muslims as believed. The Quran only offers conditional permission for a man to take four wives: in times of war or a crisis that sees women outnumber men. “The 2001 census found 935 females for every 1000 males in India. Among Muslims, it was 930: 1000. So it would be difficult to find even one wife for every man,” he says. Engineer says polygamy will never cease to exist. Perhaps it’s better to regulate it, he says.
Source:- The Times of India 13 September 2009 Page No. 17 Delhi

Bombay HC against child custody on rotation formula

A sessions court’s prescription to keep a set of warring parents happy giving them custody of their children in rotation every alternate month was shot down by the Bombay HC. Calling the formula ‘peculiar’ and ‘shocking’, Justice Abhay Oka said shunting the three children between the homes every month would be too ‘traumatic’.
Justice Oka said the sessions judge did not seem to have considered the effect this arrangement will have on the children. The judge added, “The children have already suffered because of the attitude adopted by parents of not settling the disputes at least for the sake of children.’’ The court said where a couple was fighting over the custody of their children, it was better to grant custody to one parent.
In this case, Janice had married Mark Pereir in 1989. They have two daughters, aged 16 years and 14 years, and a 12-year-old son. Janice moved the magistrate’s court in 2007 under the Domestic Violence Act and sought custody of the children. The court directed Mark to desist from causing domestic violence and handed over temporary custody of the children to Janice. Mark then filed an appeal in the sessions court, which granted the mother and father custody of the children every alternate month.
The judges had interviewed the children, who said they wanted to celebrate Christmas and New year together. Meanwhile, pending the verdict the custody will remain with the father, and mother will have visitation rights. (The names of the couple have been changed)
Source:- The Times of India 13 September 2009 Page No. 9 Delhi

12 September, 2009

Delhi High Court slams elderly duo seeking 24X7 serving of booze

Two senior citizens have earned the wrath of Delhi High Court for filing a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought permission for restaurants and bars in the city to serve liquor 24x7.
Calling the petition meritless, the HC said that PIL is being misused. Stressing the need to curb it, the court on Wednesday imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on the petitioners. ‘‘It is shocking that such petitions are being filed in the name of public interest. PIL was made for a different purpose,’’ a bench comprising chief justice A P Shah and Justice Manmohan said.
Petitioners Shirish Gupta and Jagdish Lal had filed the petition through their advocate Shikha Singh seeking an amendment to the Delhi Police Act, which would have allowed bars to serve liquor 24X7. ‘‘The government has allowed eateries to remain open till 1am but the state excise department has issued licence to only bars and restaurants located within 5-star hotels to serve liquor 24 hours.’’
The petition also said that globalisation and increasing influence of western culture are promoting the culture of night life and Indians are now not averse to going to pubs and bars for socializing and unwinding themselves.
Source:- The Times of India 10 Sep. 09 Page No.6 Delhi

Delhi High Court:Experience over degree for school job:Ex-IAF Instructor Gets Sports Teacher’s Post

The Delhi High Court has said that the experience of an applicant should be counted over qualification during selection as physical education teacher (PET).
The high court on Thursday directed the Centre to appoint a former Indian Air Force man for the post of physical education teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya within a month after considering his 20 years experience in the force as equivalent qualification.
Giving preference to experience over qualification, a Division Bench of Justice Mukul Mudgal and Justice Reva Khetrapal set aside an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) upholding the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan’s decision rejecting the application filed by Girish Ahuja for the post of physical education teacher.
Girish Ahuja served as ground training instructor in the Indian Air Force for 20 years and obtained a certificate from the Central government in order to apply for the post in August 2007.
The Bench rejected the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan’s argument that his experience in the Indian Air Force could not be considered as equivalent qualification for the post of physical education teacher since it was not equivalent to diploma in physical education or BPED.
After Girish Ahuja retired from the Indian Air Force, he later applied for the post of PET in Kendriya Vidyalaya, under the ministry of human resource development (HRD), in August 2007, but his application was rejected by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan that runs the schools on the ground that he was not holding a degree required to be a physical training teacher in a school.
Ahuja claimed his experience was certified by the ministry of labour as well as the ministry of personnel, public grievance and pension.
Source:- The Times of India 11 Sep. 09 Page No.5 Delhi
For any query:- deepakmiglani@hotmail.com

Ridiculous to expel student with beard: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday severely reprimanded a convent school in Vidisha in Madhya Pradesh for expelling a Muslim student for his refusal to shave his beard, an alleged disobedience which cost him an academic year.
Asking the principal of Nirmala Convent School to immediately take back the student, Mohammad Salim, a Bench comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi expressed its deep anguish at such ridiculous rules framed by schools.
Agreeing with Salim’s counsel senior advocate B A Khan, the Bench said: “How on earth could a school disentitle a student from pursuing studies just because he has kept a beard?”
“Then there will be no end to such prima facie ridiculous rules. Tomorrow the school authorities would say they would not allow entry to students who are not fair in complexion,” wondered the Bench. The Bench also appeared quite in sync with the present fashion trends. “These days it is a fashion for youngsters to sport an earring. Can these boys be denied admission to a school?” the Bench asked before issuing notice to the principal of the convent school and directing it to allow Salim to continue with his studies there.
The case had a roller coaster ride in the judiciary. His plea against the “ridiculous” nobeard rule of the school was dismissed by the MP High Court, against which he had appealed in the SC.
In the SC, he was in for a rude jolt as on April 30 this year a Bench comprising Justices R V Raveendran and Markandey Katju had not only dismissed his appeal, but peppered him with the now infamous “Talibanisation” comment. But, the Bench was quick to regret its comments and on July 6 it had recalled its order along with an apology for the unwarranted comment.

Source:- The Times of India 12 Sep. 09 Page No.9 Delhi

Supreme Court stays Gandhi Peace Foundation eviction

The Centre’s long standing row with NGO Gandhi Peace Foundation and its attempt to evict it from the official premises in Delhi was scotched by the Supreme Court, which not only stayed the eviction process but also gave the UPA government a lesson or two on Gandhian values.
The SC may have not have entertained a plea against UP chief minister Mayawati for her alleged ‘‘natakbaaz’’ comment against Gandhiji, but it was quite strong in its comments when the Centre accused the NGO of indulging in anti-government activities in its Deshbandhu Gupta Road government bungalow.
A Bench comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi was critical of the ministry of urban development’s notification asking the non-government organization, founded with the purpose of espousing the virtues professed by Gandhi, to vacate the premises. The ministry’s counsel A K Srivastava accused the foundation of not only carrying out anti-government activities by constructing staff quarters and servant quarters within the premises, but also sub-letting part of the premises to other NGOs and organizations in breach of the lease deed stipulations.
Violation of lease provisions was one thing, but was it anti-government activity? Puzzled by the nature of the accusation, the Bench came with a caustic observation — ‘‘There is no dearth of people in this country who will call Gandhi anti-national.’’
Smelling a rat in the hurried manner in which the Centre proceeded with the eviction case against the foundation, the Bench said: ‘‘These are sacred institutions. You can’t permit these institutions to be shut.’’ Srivastava, who had to play substitute for additional solicitor general Indira Jaising, laboured hard to save the day for the Centre by referring to the July 14, 2009 letter of the ministry to the officebearers of the foundation.
He said the NGO in response to the communication admitted to having sublet part of the premises to other institutions and organizations. Construction of staff quarters and servant quarters was also not denied, he added.
Objecting to the Centre’s hurry in proceeding with the eviction without giving the foundation a decent opportunity to defend its case, the Bench said the government had not been able to evict unauthorised occupants in bureaucrats and politicians from government bungalows despite repeated orders of the apex court.
‘‘Eminent government servants are qualified to be under unauthorized occupation for staying beyond the permissible period,’’ said the bench and added in a lighter vein that ‘‘if such a notification (to evict unauthorized occupants) is issued, 50% of occupants of government quarters will fall foul.’’
Inquiring into the genesis of the case, the court found that constructions were undertaken at the premises in the 1960s. It said: ‘‘Before passing an order, you (Centre) are required to consider their cause. And no order could be passed unless you are able to establish that the cause shown by them is of no use,’’ the bench said and dismissed the Centre’s petition.
Source:- The Times of India 12 Sep. 09 Page No.6 Delhi

HC acquits Pandher in one Nithari case : Confirms Death For His Servant, Koli

The Allahabad High Court on Friday acquitted Noida businessman Moninder Singh Pandher for want of evidence in one of the sensational Nithari serial murders, but upheld the death sentence of his domestic help, Surinder Koli.
The order by a division bench of Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Justice Kashi Nath Pandey came on an appeal filed by 52-year-old Pandher and 38-year-old Koli, challenging the death sentence awarded on February 13 by the Ghaziabad additional sessions judge for murder.
While allowing the appeal of Pandher and dismissing that of Koli, the bench made it clear that the ‘‘findings recorded by them were confined to the murder of 14-year-old Rimpa Haldar’’. The judgment should not, in any way, affect decisions in other Nithari cases by the trial court, the bench asserted.
‘‘The depraved and brutish acts of Surinder call for only one sentence and that is death. We agree with the reasoning of the sessions judge,’’ the bench said.
Pandher’s son Karandeep Singh, who was present in the high court, said: ‘‘Justice has happened. There is a God, and there is justice in the country. I am looking forward to justice in the remaining cases.’’
The high court, Karandeep said, had sustained CBI’s chargesheet and ‘‘we are moderately happy about that’’.
Pandher’s lawyer Monisha Bhandari said she would try to obtain bail for her client in the other cases.
While ordering, ‘‘Set Pandher at liberty forthwith unless he is wanted in any other case’’, the bench reasoned that the CBI had not filed any chargesheet against Pandher on the ground that there was no evidence against him for committing the murder of Rimpa and he was in Australia from January 30 to February 15, 2005, when she was murdered.
From Allegation To Acquittal
Dec 29, 2006 Nithari killings come to light with the discovery of skeletal remains of 8 children in the drain of a house in Nithari, Noida. House owner M S Pandher and his help Surinder Koli arrested
Dec 30 More skeletons tumble out of the drain
Jan 10, 2007 CBI takes over investigation
Feb 8 Special CBI court sends Pandher and Koli to 14 days in CBI custody
Mar 22 CBI files first chargesheet in Gzb court. Slaps lesser charges on Pandher. Koli charged with committing all 19 murders, rape and kidnap
May 1Parents of three victims move court against CBI for letting off Pandher on kidnap, murder charges
May 11 Court asks CBI to probe Pandher’s role
Nov 01SC issues notice to CBI on allegation by victim’s kin that agency is trying to shield Pandher
Feb 13, 2009 Gzb trial court pronounces Pandher and Koli guilty of rape and murder of
14-year-old Rimpa Haldar. Both file appeal
Koli’s confession saved Pandher
Servant Said There Was Nobody In The House When He Killed Rimpa
The Allahabad High Court on Friday acquitted Noida businessman Moninder Singh Pandher for want of evidence in one of the sensational Nithari serial murders, but upheld the death sentence of his domestic help Surinder Koli. The high court said the sessions judge had summoned Pandher mainly on the ground that a number of murders were committed in House D-5, Sector 3 of Noida owned by him and a saw was also recovered on his submission. But, the high court opined, summoning of Pandher under Section 319 of the CrPC was not correct as according to the prosecution, Rimpa was not killed by a saw but a knife to which Surinder had admitted in his confessional statement.
The sessions judge had considered four incriminating circumstances about involvement of Pandher in Rimpa murder case: first, Pandher was continuously living in Pandher’s house; second, dozens of murders were committed there; third, pieces of bodies wrapped in polythene bags were thrown in front and back of the house and lastly, the confessional statement of Koli.
The high court did not agree with the findings of the trial court mainly on the ground that there was no evidence of conspiracy by Pandher in Rimpa’s murder. The confessional statement of Koli, who admitted to the killing ‘‘when no one was present in the house’’, too, completely exonerated Pandher. From the prosecution’s evidence, it was proved that Pandher was in Australia from January 30 to February 15, 2005, while Rimpa was murdered on February 8.
In a terse comment on Koli, the bench observed: ‘‘The crime indulged in by Koli was not only gruesome, and cold but blood-curdling, heinous, atrocious and cruel and in the totality of circumstances, the court could not forbear from expressing that the accused Surinder Koli is a menace to the society.’’
‘The findings recorded are only confined to the murder of Rimpa Haldar and the lower court shall not import any observation/comments in the body of this judgment for being applied to the decision while hearing other cases relating to Nithari incident,’’ the bench observed
The Nithari murders had come to light in December 2006 when the police raided Pandher’s house following complaints by villagers that several of their children had disappeared. Pandher and Koli were arrested for the murder of a girl, Payal, and later a total of 19 cases were registered by the police after human skulls, bones and clothes belonging to young girls were recovered from the house.

Source:- The Times of India 12 Sep. 09 Page No.1 Delhi