|
 Supreme
Court Judgments - year 2009 |
Neel Kumar @ Anil Kumar v The State of Haryana
7/5/2012.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860, sections 302/376(2)(f), 201
- punishment of murder, rape and destroying evidence relating to the
offence - imposition of death sentence to the appellant for committing
rape on his daughter, murdering her and cancealing her dead body - the
Supreme Court found no reason to disbelieve the evidence circumstances
nor any reason to doubt the commission of offence by the appellant and
the recovery of incriminating material on his disclosure statement.
However, set aside the death sentence and awarded life imprisonment to
the appellant -
appeal disposed |
M/s DSR Steel (P) Ltd. v State of Rajasthan &
others
1/5/2012.
Electricity
Act, 2003, section 125
- appeals filed under - the correctness of an order, passed by the
Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appeals against the order passed by
the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission - in question - sections
62, 64 - applications filed for revision of tariff to be effective from
December 1, 2004 - the Commission by its order directed that the revised
tariff determined by it will become effective from 1st January, 2005 and
remain in force till the same is amended by the Commission by a separate
order passed by it - the Supreme Court held that findings of fact
recorded by the Courts below, which imply the Regulatory Commission as
the Court of first instance and the Appellate Tribunal as the Court
hearing the first appeal, cannot be re-opened before this Court in an
appeal under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003 - appeals filed
beyond the period stipulated for the purpose under Section 125 of the
Electricity Act, 2003 - no material produced on record to support the
contention that the appellants had indeed made any investment or changed
their position to their detriment so as to attract the doctrine of
promissory estoppel -
appeals dismissed
with cost. |
C.M. Girish Babu
v C.B.I., Cochin, High Court of Kerala 24/2/2009.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - section
- and 13(2)
read with 13(1)(d) - conviction under - was acquitted of the charge
under Section 120B of the IPC -the appellant preferred an appeal to the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam, which dismissed the appeal by its
judgment dated 28th November, 2007. However, the Appellate Court reduced
the substantive sentence to that of one year only. The High Court
acquitted the first accused of all the charges against which State
preferred no appeal. This appeal is brought, by special leave against
the judgment of the High Court -
Leave granted |
Anand Kumar Appellant versus State of M.P. 20/2/2009.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 306 and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 -
section 4 - conviction under - appeal under an abetment of suicide as
visualized by Section 306 of the IPC but in Section 113-B which is
relatable to Section 304-B the word `may' has been substituted by
`shall' and there is no reference to the circumstances of the case.
Admittedly, the conviction of the appellant has been recorded under
Section 306 which is relatable to Section 113-A and though the
presumption against an accused has to be raised therein as well, the
onus is not as heavy as in the case of a dowry death -
Leave granted |
Krishan Gopal
and another v Sandhya Devi and others 18/2/2009.
Motor accident - negligent driving - compensation
- High
Court held that respondent's son died due to the rash and negligent
driving of the Appellant No.2 herein, while he was driving the scooter
owned by the Appellant No.1 (father of Appellant No.2) and that both of
them were jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs,
together with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum w.e.f. 6th
October, 1999, till deposit of the amount - the appellants have filed
the instant appeal against the said decision of the High Court -the reversal of the
Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by the High Court cannot be
said to be perverse or without any basis -
Leave granted |
Usha Rajkhowa and others
v M/s. Paramount Industries and
others 17/2/2009.
Motor accident - contributory negligence - compensation
-
the Tribunal limited the appellants' entitlement to 50% of assessed
claim amount and granted compensation of Rs.6,56,300/- on the ground
that there was contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the
Car, who lost his life in accident. He was the husband of appellant No.
1 and the father of appellant No. 2. The Car was insured by respondent
No. 3 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. -the compensation was correctly assessed
- would
not confirm the theory that the accident took place because of the
contributory negligence and would choose to award full compensation to
the appellants. -
Leave granted |
Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board
& others v P. Satyanarayana Rao 16/2/2009.
Regularisation of the services of the workmen
- stay -
granting of - the Division Bench of the High Court, however, granted
stay of payment of arrears till the disposal of the appeal. That being
the position, this Court grants the stay against the regularization of
the services of the workmen till the disposal of the appeal as well -
refusal to stay against regularisation of the services of the workmen
stands set aside and interim order is granted in the manner indicated
till the disposal of the appeal. |
State of M.P.
v Abdul Kadir and another 13/2/2009.
Madhya Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act, 1954
and the Rules made thereunder - writ petition by life convict - plea in
the writ petition was that his case had been recommended by the District
Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police but the Probation Board in
its meeting held on 24.1.2001 did not recommend his case for release on
probation - order passed in writ petition challenged in Letters Patent
Appeal - dismissal - appeal by State - since the High Court has not
considered the issues in the proper perspective, this Court sets aside
the impugned order of the Division Bench and direct it to re-hear the LPA on condonation of delay, keeping in view the parameters indicated by
this court in Arvind Yadav's case 2003(6) sec 144. |
Vinodan v Vishwanathan
12/2/2009.
Partition of a building constructed on a small
piece of land between brothers - a serious endeavour has been
made by this Court to amicably settle the matter - this Court is
granting long time to the appellant to vacate the portion of the
building in his possession to avoid any inconvenience to the appellant.
In case the appellant after one year of receiving the entire amount of
Rs.5,50,000/- does not vacate the portion of the building in his
possession, in that event, the Subordinate Court is directed to ensure
that the possession is taken from the appellant and handed over to the
respondent. Perhaps this solution may lead to ultimate peace between the
families of two brothers. |
State of Maharashtra Etc. v Dhanendra Shriram Bhurle Etc. 11/2/2009.
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967
- sections 10,
13, 18 and 29, Arms Act, 1959 - section 3 and 4 - Indian Penal Code,
1860 - sections 34 and 120B - trial under - challenge in these appeals
is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High
Court, Nagpur Bench, granting bail to the respondents - since the High
Court had not kept the relevant parameters in view, while granting bail,
the impugned order is set aside - the trial court to complete the trial
as early as practicable preferably within six months from the date of
receipt of this court's order. -
Leave granted |
Prasad @ Hari Prasad Acharya v State of Karnataka
9/2/2009.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - sections 447, 376(2)(g) and 506
read with section 34 - conviction under - challenge in this appeal is to
the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court
upholding the conviction of the appellant - impugned judgment set aside
and matter remitted to the High Court. -
Leave granted |
State of Maharashtra v Krishnarao Dudhappa Shinde
5/2/2009.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 -
section 5(1)(e) - conviction under - respondent a government servant was
Inspector of Police when raid was conducted in his house - was sentenced
to undergo minimum sentence of one year and was directed to pay a fine
of Rs.2,50,000/- - the High Court did
not examine the other aspects and only dealt with the applicability of
Section 5(1)(e) of the Act on the factual position - matter remitted to
the High Court. |
Ajab Singh and others v Antram and others
3/2/2009.
Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms
Act, 1950 - consolidation proceedings under - revision
application under - one of the grievances which has been raised by
the appellants herein is that the order of Consolidation Officer dated
23.12.1981 and that of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated
29.11.1982, have been upset by the Deputy Director, Consolidation while
entertaining a revision filed by the contesting respondents on
10.8.1993, which according to the appellant, is barred by limitation -
Leave granted |
Jagdish
Bagri v Rajendra Kumar Luhariwala and another 21/1/2009.
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - section
138 - cheque of Rs. 1 lakh dishonoured - cheque issued as security - the
High Court noticed that the appellant failed to pay Rs.2,30,000/- in
instalments as agreed to and therefore because of default of payment
cheque of Rupees one lakh was presented. In that sense there is no
question of any security - It is
true that the lawyers are expected to be vigilant once they accept a
brief. But on the peculiar facts of the case this Court sets aside the
impugned order and remit the matter to the High Court for a fresh
consideration on merits.-
Leave granted |
Suzanne
Lousie Martin v State of Rajasthan and another 16/1/2009.
Bail - granting of - and suspension of
sentence - appeal - without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
dispute and culpability of the accused, this Court is certainly of the
opinion that this was not a fit case where the sentence awarded should
have been suspended and the accused released on bail. The High Court
was, thus, totally unjustified in granting bail to the accused, or in
suspending the sentence.-
Leave granted |
Huchamma
(D) By Lrs. v State of Karnataka and others 14/1/2009.
Inordinate Delay in filing appeal - dismissal
- the High Court has rightly dismissed the writ appeal on the ground of
inordinate delay holding that the preliminary notification acquiring the
land in question including the lands of the appellants was issued on
15th July, 1982 and the final notification was issued on 16th August,
1985 and the award was passed on 12th May, 1998 and possession of the
land in question was taken over on 30th June, 1998, and subsequent to
that the writ petition was filed in the year 2000 - the High Court was
justified in dismissing the writ appeal on the ground of inordinate
delay in filing the appeal — interim order stands vacated.-
Leave granted |
Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. v Ram Prasad Varma and others 13/1/2009.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - section 166 -
respondent suffered permanent disability as both legs amputated due to
rash and negligent driving of the lorry - no case has been made out for
interference with the rate of interest. The appeal is dismissed subject
to the modification that from the gross income of the respondent, the
amount of income tax as was applicable at the relevant time should be
deducted. The Tribunal is directed to re-determine the amount of
compensation in the light of this judgment. |
Buddu Khan v State of Uttarkhand
12/1/2009.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 -
conviction under - upheld by the judgment of Division Bench - challenged
in this appeal - exception 4 to Section 300 applies to the facts of the
case. The appropriate conviction would be under Section 304 Part I IPC.
Custodial sentence of 10 years would meet the ends of justice.-
Leave granted |
Rajender Singh and another with Suraj Bhan with
Ram Niwas v State of Haryana 9/1/2009.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 read
with section 34 and section 342 read with section 34 - the accused filed
three sets of appeals before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at
Chandigarh - The occurrence as spoken by the eyewitnesses is fully
established, therefore, all the appellants will be constructively liable
under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for the commission of the
crime, though the fatal injury was inflicted by A-1, only as the other
appellants participated in giving beatings to the deceased which caused
injuries on other part of his body - no merit and substance in any of
the submission made on behalf of the appellants. |
Prem Kumar
v State of Rajasthan 7/1/2009.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - sections 306 and
304 part B and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - faced
trial - acquittal - appeal - challanged - the principles which would
govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by the High Court against an
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court have been set out in
innumerable cases of this Court - the evidence of PWs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
clearly shows the greed of the accused who was persistently taunting and
harassing the deceased for not having brought sufficient dowry.
Therefore, the High Court was justified in upsetting the order of
acquittal passed by the trial Court and directing her conviction. |
Syed
Basheer Ahamed and others v Mohd. Jameel and another
6/1/2009.
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 - compensation with
interest - entitlement - judgment of the High Court - challenged
in this appeal - petition under section 166 of the Act - a bare argument
by learned counsel for the appellants that the deceased had a potential
of expanding his business, cannot be accepted as sufficient material to
determine the future prospects of the deceased - ends of justice would
be met if the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.5,500/- per month or
Rs.66,000/- per annum - in the absence of any evidence to the contrary,
the practice is to deduct towards personal and living expenses of the
deceased, one-third of the income in case he was married and one-half
(50%) if he was a bachelor-
Leave granted |
State of Karnataka v Bantara
Sudhakara @ Sudha and another
18/7/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 376 -
acquittal under - appeal against - The High Court observed that
there was possibility of two years variation and therefore it was to be
taken that the victims were more than 16 years of age. The High Court
accepted that there was sexual intercourse and rejected the plea of
false implication - the High Court's conclusions in this regard are not
only fallacious but contrary to the evidence on record. |
Shivappa Mallappa Pujar and others v Guddappa and
others 17/7/2008.
Land - occupancy rights - conferment - the
impugned order of the High Court cannot be sustained simply for two
reasons. First, the admission made by the respondent before the Tribunal
on the basis of which the application was rejected by the Tribunal was
not considered in proper manner. Secondly, after the order was passed by
the Land Tribunal, a writ petition was filed challenging the aforesaid
order of the Tribunal about seven to eight years thereafter. Appellate
Authority while deciding the appeal in favour of the respondent did not
at all consider the aforesaid admission from the respondent and also did
not consider whether sufficient explanation was given for delay in
filing the writ petition - impugned judgment set aside — matter sent
back for re-hearing. |
Harijan Mangri Siddakka & others v
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & another
16/7/2008.
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1928 - section 30(1)
- appeal under - disposed by learned single Judge
- order challenged in appeal - there is
practically no discussion on the factual scenario as to whether there
was any connection between the death and the use of the vehicle. It
would depend upon the factual scenario in each case and there cannot be
any strait jacket formula to be applied - the expression "use" in the
Statute is with reference to "use of the motor vehicle". Whether there
was a use of the motor vehicle has to be factually analyzed.-
Leave granted |
Shashi Mohan Appellant versus State of M.P.
15/7/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 read with
section 34 - conviction under - under the provisions of Section
34 IPC the essence of the liability is to be found in the existence of a
common intention animating the accused leading to the doing of a
criminal act in furtherance of such intention. As a result of the
application of principles enunciated in Section 34, when an accused is
convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, in law it means that
the accused is liable for the act which caused death of the deceased in
the same manner as if it was done by him alone..-
Leave granted |
Bharat Parikh v C.B.I. and another
14/7/2008
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - sections 207 and
238 - whether having framed charges against an accused, a
Magistrate has the jurisdiction in law to recall such order on the
ground that the prosecution had failed to comply with the provisions of
Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. -
Leave granted |
Pankaj Kumar v State of Maharashtra and others
11/7/2008.
Constitution of India -Article 227 read with section 482 Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 - petition under - seeking quashing of the chargesheet and the consequential proceedings initiated against them in
Special Case No.3 of 1991 pending in the court of Special Judge, Latur -
the scope and ambit of powers of the High Court under Section 482, CrPC
or Article 227 of the Constitution has been enunciated and reiterated by
this Court in a series of decisions and several circumstances under
which the High Court can exercise jurisdiction in quashing proceedings
have been enumerated - though the powers possessed by the High Courts
under the said provisions are very wide but these should be exercised in
appropriate cases, ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial
justice for the administration of which alone the courts exist. The
inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the High
Court to act according to whim or caprice.-
Leave granted |
Satish Sitole v Ganga 10/7/2008.
Hindu Marriage Act - section 13(1)(1a)(1b) - appellant filed matrimonial
case - on grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(1a)(1b)
of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage. Despite
holding that the respondent had proved his case on grounds of cruelty
and desertion, the trial court did not grant a decree - for divorce, but
thought it appropriate to pass a decree of judicial separation instead -
whether a marriage which is otherwise dead emotionally and practically
should be continued for name sake. |
Seema v Ashwani Kumar 9/7/2008.
Marriages - compulsory registration -
directions were given to the States and the Union Territories in the
matter of framing necessary statutes regarding compulsory registration
of marriages - different States and Union Territories have placed on
record details of the compliance made - let all the States and Union
Territories who have not given specific details, file affidavits within
four months from today. |
Balwant Singh Narwal and others v State of Haryana and others
8/7/2008.
Seniority - the appellants, appointed as
Principals between 1995 and 2000 (either by direct recruitment or
promotion) are aggrieved by the seniority given to respondents 4 to 16
appointed as Principals on 26.5.2000, with retrospective effect from
2.6.1994 - the State Government was justified in giving them only
notional seniority and placing them immediately below the other 16
candidates selected in the common merit list (published on 1.10.1993)
and appointed on 2.6.1994. |
Kusuma Ankama Rao v State of Andhra
Pradesh 7/7/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 - conviction under - an
extra-judicial confession, if voluntary and true and made in a fit state
of mind, can be relied upon by the court. The confession will have to be
proved like any other fact. The value of the evidence as to confession,
like any other evidence, depends upon the veracity of the witness to
whom it has been made |
M.Saravana Porselvi
v A.R. Chandrashekar @ Parthiban & others 27/5/2008.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - section 13(1)(e) - petition under - customary
divorce - registered - permanent alimony received by the wife - there
does not exist any period of limitation in respect of an offence under
Section 494, as the maximum period of punishment which can be imposed
therefore is seven years-
Leave granted |
Illa Roy Chowdhury V Shyamali Das and others
16/5/2008.
Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 - sections 30 and 31
- an application for reference under - an attempt on the part of the
First Respondent to get herself imp leaded as party in the Reference
Petition did not fructify. The said order attained finality. It does not
appear that the said respondent was not sure as to whether such an
application had been filed or not - what would be the effect of the
order of the Calcutta High Court allowing the First Respondent to file
an appropriate application before the Collector for reference in terms
of Sections 30 and 31 of the Act which was a conditional order - no
fruitful purpose would be served in allowing the matter to proceed
pursuant to the observations made by the learned Single Judge. -
Leave granted |
Amol Singh v State of M.P. 15/15/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302
and 34 - conviction and sentence - the discrepancies, make
the last declaration doubtful. The nature of the inconsistencies is such
that there are certainly material. That being so, it would be unsafe to
convict the appellant. The conviction is set aside and appellant is
acquitted of the charges. -
Leave granted |
Ramachandran v R. Udhayakumar & others
13/5/2008.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 -
section 482 - prayer for directory the respondent to withdraw the
litigation - and to entrust the same to the file of Central Bureau of
Investigation - the direction of the High Court for
re-investigation or fresh investigation are clearly indefensible.-
Leave granted |
Dadu Dayalu Mahasabha, Jaipur (Trust) v Mahant
Ram Niwas & another 12/5/2008.
Code of Civil Procedure - order II
Rule 2 - Res Judicata - principals - applicability of.
-
Leave granted |
T.Thimmaiah (D) By Lrs. v Venkatachala Raju (D) BY
Lrs. 9/5/2008.
Cr.P.C. Order 47 Rule 1 - order made
in review - challenged - from a bare perusal of the judgment in
review, it is clear that the principles laid down under Order 47 Rule 1
of the CPC have been completely ignored - we, however, give
liberty to the respondent herein to challenge the judgment dated 16th
February 1999, if so advised. |
Tarakanath Kar v Lipika Kar 7/5/2008.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — section 125
- application filed by respondent Lipika - case transferred
- Chandana filed application for being impleaded - in the
subsequent order dated 5.7.2006 the High Court highlighted the limited
jurisdiction for rectification/modification under Section 362 of the
Code -
Leave granted |
Madhuban v State of U.P. 5/5/2008.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - sections
302, 323 and 394 - conviction - confirmed by High Court -
appeal - it appears that the learned advocate appearing on behalf
of the appellant before the High Court could not make oral submissions
because of infection in vocal cord -
Leave granted |
Samita Bhattacharjee v Kulashekar Bhattacharjee
12/2/2008.
Transfer of
divorce suit
- inspite of prayer for adjournment having been granted, no one appears
to oppose the prayer for transfer on behalf of the respondent -
considering the facts that the wife - petitioner herein - is staying at
Andul Purba Para, P.O. Andul Mouri, P.S. Sankrail, District Howrah with
a minor child in her paternal home, court is of the view that the Title
Suit (Divorce) No.98 of 2006 titled as Dr. Kulashekhar Bhattacharjee Vs.
Smt. Samita Bhattacharjee pending before the Family Court West Tripura,
Agartala, be transferred to the Court of learned District Judge, Howrah,
West Bengal. |
State of U.P. v Jagram & other
12/2/2008.
Indian Penal code, 1860 - sections 302, 324 read
with section 34 - conviction by trial court - set aside by the
Division Bench - several discrepancies in the evidence of the witnesses
and the prosecution version did not inspire confidence.
- Leave granted |
Sirisia
Sthal, Imli Chati, Muzaffarpur & others v State of Bihar & others
11/2/2008.
Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of ceiling Area and
Acquisition of surplus Land) Act, 1961 - vires of certain
provisions challenged - writ - dismissed appeal - Since the High
Court has not applied its mind to the challenge raised and has
erroneously referred to the 9th Schedule to the Constitution, it would
be appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the High Court and
remit the matter to it for fresh consideration in accordance with law. |
B.K. Sri
Harsha (D) By L.R. and another v M/s Bharath Heavy Electricals Ltd
8/2/2008.
Code of civil Procedure, 1908 - section 96
- Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of the learned Single
Judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the First Appeals filed
under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 |
Union of India and others v Rajesh Vyas 7/2/2008.
Rajasthan High Court ordinance, 1949 - section 18
- appeals under -
order of discharge - show cause notice - the learned Single Judge and
the Division Bench were wrong in holding that the reply given to the
show cause notice was not considered. |
Balwant Singh and others v State of Punjab 6/2/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — section 302 - conviction under by Additional
Session Judge - appeal - dismissal by High Court appeal - there is
strong circumstantial evidence that they were caused by the accused -
this circumstantial evidence is sufficient to uphold the conviction
because it contains all the links in the chain which connect the accused
with the incident |
V. Subbulakshmi & others v S. Lakshmi & another 5/2/2008.
Motor accident claim - by the owner of the vehicle
- maintainability -
in the instant case, the owner of the bus was an aggrieved person. He
could maintain an appeal of his own. Section 173 of the Act confers a
right on any aggrieved person to prefer an appeal from an award - as to
compensation -
Leave granted |
Anand Sharad Chandra Oka v University of Mumbai and others 4/2/2008.
Words and Phrases - aggrieved party - meaning of
- electoral roll for
electing members of the Senate - university calling for applications
from graduates - the writ-petitioner obtained B.A. Degree from Bombay
University. Thus, the writ-petitioner was graduated from the
respondent-University. His name, therefore, can be registered in the
electoral roll for electing members of Senate. He was not, therefore, an
'aggrieved party'.-
Leave granted |
State of Orissa and another v M/s. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and other
4/2/2008.
Writ Petition -- Technical bids of VISA and TISCO could not have been
rejected at the threshold without proper evaluation in terms of
eligibility condition set out in the concerned advertisement - it would
be desirable for the State Government to ensure that the technical bids
and the revised financial bids to be submitted within three weeks as
directed earlier, be evaluated and informed |
Shfaq Khan and another v State of U.P. and other 1/2/2008.
Indian Penal code, 1860 - section 420 and 424
- U P Gangsters and Anti -
Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1980 - writ Petition filed for
quashing the FIR - The stand in the writ petition was that even if the
FIR is taken at its face value, there is no scope for holding that the
appellants committed cheating or an offence punishable under the
Prevention Act -
Leave granted |
|
|
