Friday, September 11, 2015

Cops find Indrani’s threat email to Sheena, Mikhail

The Khar police, probing the Sheena Bora murder case, have now stumbled upon a threat email sent by Indrani Mukerjea to Sheena just a month before she was killed. 

The Khar police, probing the Sheena Bora murder case, have now stumbled upon a threat email sent by Indrani Mukerjea to Sheena just a month before she was killed. Cops found three messages in Sheena's gmail inbox while scrutinizing Indrani's laptop.

One of the three emails Indrani sent on March 8, 2012, is addressed to Sheena and forwarded to her brother Mikhail. In it, Indrani threatened to disinherit both Sheena and Mikhail if they "acted smart". Indrani also threatened to stop their monthly payouts of Rs 40,000 each. There are two other emails Indrani sent to Sheena dated May 4 and July 7, 2012. Sheena was strangulated by Indrani, Sanjeev Khanna and Shyamvar Rai on April 24, 2012, and her body was burnt in Raigad district the next day. There is no clarity as to why Indrani may have sent the last two mails, after Sheena was killed. Official believe these may have been sent to throw off investigators.

Sources said Mikhail did not reply to the email as he feared that Indrani may stop his monthly pocket money. As he was jobless and had to take care of his grandparents in Guwahati, it would have been a big blow for him. However, Sheena replied to Indrani, threatening to expose her in front of Peter. "Now what she wanted to expose we don't know. We are assuming that Sheena may have been threatening to tell Peter the truth that Sheena and Mikhail were Indrani's children and her not brother and sister as she told Peter," said source.

At the same time, Indrani also learnt about Sheena's relationship with Rahul, Peter's son from his first marriage, which she did not approve of. On several occasions, Indrani had told Sheena to break off with Rahul but Sheena did not listen and instead threatened Indrani that she would expose her lies to Peter.

Investigations revealed that Sheena had left her rented flat in Khar following heated arguments with Indrani who wanted her to move back to Guwhati. But Sheena later returned to Mumbai and took up a house in Andheri.

Mikhail, who has turned a witness in the case, has told cops that Indrani had made three attempts to kill him.

Meanwhile, the police said that the motive behind Sheena's murder will be clear only after the forensic auditing team gives reports of Peter's books and accounts wherein there are lots of transactions from Peter's accounts to Indrani and from her accounts to that of her ex-husband Sanjeev Khanna. Khanna had diverted the money to hotels and other businesses. There are also jealousy and fear angles. Firstly, Indrani was upset that Mikhail and Sheena often blackmailed her by threatening to expose her to her husband Peter Mukerjea. Also, Indrani thought if Sheena married Rahul, she would end up ruling the Mukerjea household. Lastly Khanna had been pressuring her to ensuring that their child Vidhie got a major share of Peter's wealth.

Muslim woman goes to court against bigamy

The questions arose during the hearing of a petition filed by one Zafar Abbas Merchant from Raipur in Chhattisgarh.

Can a Muslim man remarry without the consent of his first wife? Does it amount to bigamy under the Indian Penal Code? A petition to quash a complaint of bigamy against a man from Chhattisgarh led Gujarat high court to discuss whether IPC should prevail over Muslim personal laws.

The questions arose during the hearing of a petition filed by one Zafar Abbas Merchant from Raipur in Chhattisgarh. Merchant's wife Sajedabanu had returned to her parental home in Bhavnagar from Raipur in 2001 following marital discord. Merchant remarried in 2003 without her consent. A year later, Sajedabanu filed a police complaint accusing Merchant of bigamy.

The Bhavnagar police booked him for bigamy, cruelty, wife-beating and also under dowry prohibition laws. The offence of bigamy, section 494 of the IPC, was invoked for not taking consent of his first wife for second marriage.

Merchant moved the high court in 2010, claiming that his second marriage is not bigamous as Muslim personal laws permit a man to marry four times. Against this, Sajedabanu's lawyer argued that provision of personal law — of giving equal justice to all wives — was violated by not obtaining the first wife's consent and ill treating her. Hence, dilution of conditions of personal laws invites offence under IPC, the lawyer said.

The HC appointed an amicus curiae to assist the court. He read out aayat from Sura-e-Niqah justifying more marriages; he also read out passages saying a man is permitted more than one wife but should do justice between them.

The amicus curiae submitted there was no compulsion to get consent from the first wife for a man to marry a second time as per sharia laws as well as country's personal law. When the marriage is not illegal as per personal law, second wedding does not attract IPC provisions, he said.

After all parties referred to plethora of court judgments and literature on religious laws, the HC reserved is order on the subject.

Court query

"I am a judge. I am expected to decide on this issue. Don't misunderstand me and this is not to hurt any sentiment. But there is one God, who made rules. Then why are there separate rules for different communities?"Justice J B Pardiwala

AMICUS CURIAE'S REPLY

"God made same rules for entire mankind. Bigamy is there in all religions, and there are examples in all mythologies. But the man-made rules later restricted the practice. Till the enactment of the Hindu Marriage Act in 1955, even Hindus were allowed to practice bigamy".

Unfriend your partner on Facebook if you want to stay together, therapist says

Unfriend your partner on Facebook 'if you want to stay together', therapist says
Some 1.4 billion are on Facebook as people around the world become more and more used to living their lives online.

A therapist has come up with some unexpected advice for couples looking to strengthen their relationship - unfriend each other on Facebook. 

New York-based couples counsellor Ian Kerner told PRI about how he created a Facebook account for a short period and found it negatively impacted on his marriage.

"I realised for a little while with my own wife that I didn't really want her to be my friend on Facebook. I didn't want all of that extra information. If anything, I wanted less information - I wanted more mystery and more unpredictability," he said. 

"I didn't want to know that she was posting about being tired or having her third coffee for the day. So I specifically unfriended her during my brief tenure on Facebook. It's something that I do recommend to couples." 

Some 1.4 billion are on Facebook as people around the world become more and more used to living their lives online. 

However, Kerner said that whilst it can make you feel closer to your partner to be able to get constant updates on their lives, it's important to leave a little mystery. 

"There's something about being in a relationship where you want some unknowningness and some unpredictability," he added.

Eight years on, iPhone continues to break tech industry's rules


You will hear some carping, in the coming days, about a lack of revolutionary upgrades in the new iPhone. At its media event in San Francisco on Wednesday, Apple added just a handful of features to its latest smartphones, the 6S and 6S Plus, including a pressure-sensitive screen, better cameras and a new colour — pink, or "Rose Gold," in Apple's marketing argot.

It's the same kind of carping that happens every year. The iPhone is by far Apple's most important product — it is, by most accounts, the single most profitable product on the planet — and for many analysts, that very significance highlights a vulnerability.

So tech observers are once again wondering how much longer Apple can sustain the magic. Has Apple done enough to maintain its outsize lead in the industry? Can the iPhone still expect to vacuum up virtually all of the profits in the global smartphone business?

It's time to ease off from the ritualized annual fretting about the iPhone's future. After several years of uncertainty about the iPhone's long-term prospects, it's clear that Apple has maneuvered the device into an enviable position, whatever the merits of its latest features. The iPhone's continuing dominance may not be a sure thing, but in the tech industry, it's as sure a thing as you can find right now.

If this doesn't surprise you, it should. In many fundamental ways, the iPhone breaks the rules of business, especially the rules of the tech business. Those rules have more or less always held that hardware devices keep getting cheaper and less profitable over time. That happens because hardware is easy to commoditize; what seems magical today is widely copied and becomes commonplace tomorrow. It happened in personal computers; it happened in servers; it happened in cameras, music players, and — despite Apple's best efforts — it may be happening in tablets.

In fact, commoditization has wreaked havoc in the smartphone business — just not for Apple. In the last half-decade, sales of devices running Google's Android operating system have far surpassed sales of Apple's devices, and now account for the vast majority of smartphones in use.

For years, observers predicted that Android's rising market share would in turn lead to lower profits for Apple (profits, not market share, being the point of business). If that had happened, it would have roughly approximated the way the Windows PC industry eclipsed Apple's Mac business.

"Hey, Apple, wake up — it's happening again," Henry Blodget, of Business Insider, warned in 2010. And again in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.

None of those predictions came true. While the iPhone's sales growth slowed in 2013 and 2014, it rebounded to near-record levels later last year, and its profits have remained lofty.

Instead of killing Apple, commoditization caused something stranger: It hobbled Apple's main competitor in the smartphone business — Samsung, which until last year was gaining a creeping share of the profits in the smartphone business. At its peak in mid-2013, Samsung was making close to half of every dollar in the smartphone business, according to research firm Canaccord. (Apple was making the other half.)



But the rise of low-end, pretty great Android phones made by Chinese upstarts like Xiaomi — and the surging popularity of Apple's large-screen iPhones — put Samsung in a bind. In July, Samsung reported its seventh straight quarter of declining profits. Canaccord's latest estimate shows Samsung making 15 percent of profits in smartphones, with Apple making 92 percent. (The numbers add up to more than 100 because everyone else in the smartphone industry loses money, so their share of the profits is negative.)

You can expect Apple's proportion to grow. As analysts at Credit Suisse explained in a note last week, only about 30 percent of the world's 400 million iPhone users have upgraded to the large-screen models Apple introduced last year. Apple is bound to reap more money as the majority of its users inevitably jump to big phones over the next few years. In other words, for the foreseeable future, Apple stands virtually alone: It may be the only company making any money selling phones.


What's driving the iPhone's escape from the trap of commodity hardware is that it is more than a hardware device. Instead, an iPhone is a tightly integrated mix of hardware, great software and several pretty good services rolled into a single gadget.

Apple's suite of services is far from perfect; as I've argued before, for many people, Google offers a better range of cloud services to run on an iPhone. Still, Apple's services are good enough for most people, and as the company keeps expanding its ecosystem — covering payments and home and health devices — it will continue to build in different kinds of lock-ins for different kinds of users.

Some people stay with the iPhone for its better App Store, others for iMessage, and many grandparents for FaceTime video calling and iCloud photo sharing. Just about everyone stays because they find Apple's iOS mobile operating system simpler to navigate, and easier to maintain, than the fragmented Android landscape. Put it all together and you get a package that few of Apple's rivals can replicate.

But the iPhone is not just what it does, but what it means to its users — which is directly a product of the savvy way Apple has designed and marketed the device to produce global lust. As writer Ben Thompson has argued, the iPhone is in many ways a "Veblen good," the economic term for a product whose high price actually increases its desirability. Apple's resistance to selling low-end phones may thus feed into its success. IPhone resellers in Asia, for example, say that for many people, lower-end iPhones — even used ones — are seen as more desirable than more powerful, brand-new, but cheaper Android devices.

Across large swaths of the globe, in other words, the iPhone is a status symbol, which is not to say that it's frivolous — unlike a Prada suit, the iPhone is one status symbol that you'll still find extremely useful.

Of course, Apple's strategy is vulnerable to unpredictable shocks. Apple is betting on rising affluence across the globe to keep it in the black. If there's a slowdown in this rise — if the Chinese economy plunges, for instance, or, in the longer term, stagnant wages in Western countries push down consumers' desires to spend as freely on their phones — the iPhone will suffer. This explains why Timothy D Cook, Apple's chief executive, rushed to reassure investors about the company's position in China during the recent Chinese market crisis.

For now, though, it's difficult to conceive of a particular way in which Apple's phone could fall to its rivals. Eight years after its introduction, the iPhone has won the biggest game in the world — and it will keep winning.

About GTG India

GTG India

GTG India
Logo