Supreme Court of India Judgements

46650 Judgements hosted as on 11/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: January 2019

Property Matters

Land and Property Law–Allotment of Plot–Cancellation of–Predecessor-in-interest of appellant not eligible for allotment of plot under scheme for rehabilitation of locally displaced persons–Notwithstanding the fact that transfer of plot in favour of appellant is duly approved by Trust, appellant did not acquire any independent right in the plot and be only acquired whatever rights the transferor or original allottee had therein–Defect in allotment made in original allottee’s favour on account of her ineligibility to avail scheme was inherited by appellant as her transferee

Jan 17, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 228 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Altamas Kabir The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2009…

C P C

Agreement to Sell—Increase in Price—Mere escalation of price is no ground for interference with concurrent findings of court below granting the decree. Abatement of Appeal—Omission to implead legal representatives of a deceased defendant, would not lead to abatement of appeal as a whole by itself.

Jan 13, 2019 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 3095 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1860 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Hon’ble Mr. Justice…

Acquittal

Murder—Death Penalty—The conduct of the convict in prison cannot be lost sight of and is a relevant mitigating factor Duty of Court—It is duty of Court to be constitutionally correct even when its view is counter-majoritarian  the public opinion Murder—Death Sentence—Possibility of Reform—Probability and possibility of reform of a criminal can be done properly only through psychological/psychiatric evaluation–Media Trial-It has almost become a trend for the investigating agency to present their version and create a cloud in the collective conscience of the society regarding the crime and the criminal

Jan 13, 2019 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 3078 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1858 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta Criminal Appeal No(S). 1482-1483…

I P C

Criminal Complaint–Preliminary Inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C.–Although an accused has no right to participate unless the process is issued, he may remain present either in person or through a counsel or a agent with a view to be informed of what is going on. Cognizable Offence–Information to police–Even in a case where no action is taken by police, the informant’s remedy lies under Section 190 and 200 of the Cr.P.C.

Jan 12, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 219 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Criminal Appeal No. 2054 of 2008…

Service Matters
Service

Appointment of Judge–Once the Government on being satisfied that a suitable candidate who was earlier appointed as an Additional Judge is suitable for appointment as a permanent Judge, the elaborate consultation has not been considered necessary–Chief Justice of High Court not required to consult collegium of High Court.

Jan 12, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 204 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Writ Petition (Civil) No.…

Contempt

Contempt–When the court either suo motu or on a motion or a reference, decides to take action and initiate proceedings for contempt, it assumes jurisdiction to punish for contempt–The exercise of jurisdiction to punish for contempt commences with the initiation of a proceeding for contempt and if the order is passed not discharging the rule issued in contempt proceedings, it would be an order or decision in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt–Against such order, appeal would be maintainable.

Jan 12, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 197 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Civil Appeal No. 7317 of 2008…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw