Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: December 2020

I P C

(IPC) – Sections 148 and 307 – ideal that independent witnesses come forward to substantiate the prosecution case but it would be unfair to expect the presence of third parties in every case at the time of incident, for most violent crimes are seldom anticipated. Any adverse inference against the non – examination of independent witnesses thus needs to be assessed upon the facts and circumstances of each case

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ROHTAS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal…

Service Matters
Service

Respondent could not be treated to be part of Category ‘C’ from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 1.8.1985 as he was neither a graduate nor a trained teacher when he was appointed. Also, Respondent was not even a trained teacher on the date of his appointment and thus cannot claim seniority on such ground from the date of his initial appointment – Appeal allowed.

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MADHAVI — Appellant Vs. CHAGAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Election Laws

Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Section 8(3) – Disqualification- petitioner was disqualified from contesting the elections in terms of Section 8(3) of the Act. In such circumstances, she could not have maintained an election petition as “a candidate at such election” in terms of Section 81(1). Therefore, the High Court was right in not venturing into an exercise in futility, by taking up the election petition for trial, though the High Court was wrong in rejecting the election petition on the ground of existence of incurable of defects – Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SARITHA S. NAIR — Appellant Vs. HIBI EDEN — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI., A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special…

Acquittal

Possession of Indian Flap Shell Turtle — the Turtle which has been seized is not that which is included in Part II of Schedule I. In the facts of the present case, on the face of it, the Turtle seized is not included in Schedule I Part II and the Turtle having already been freed on the second day of its seizure, the High Court did not commit any error in quashing the criminal proceedings

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TITTY ALIAS GEORGE KURIAN — Appellant Vs. THE DEPUTY RANGE FOREST OFFICER — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Indu Malhotra, JJ. )…

Environment

Prior environmental clearance – It is not necessary for the Central Government or for that matter, NHAI, to apply for prior environmental/forest clearances or permissions, as the case may be, at the stage of planning or taking an in principle decision to formalize the Project of constructing a new national highway manifested in notification under Section 2(2), including until the stage of issuing notification under Section 3A of the 1956 Act.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT — Appellant Vs. P.V. KRISHNAMOORTHY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai and Krishna…

Matrimonial

Temporary custody of son – Mother shall be allowed every year, one more trip for a week financed by the father, coinciding with the Birthday of son (which falls on 2nd of December) – Thus, the Mother will have the benefit of two trips to Kenya in a year, out of which one will be with her mother as well.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SMRITI MADAN KANSAGRA — Appellant Vs. PERRY KANSAGRA — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra and Hemant Gupta, JJ. ) Miscellaneous…

Property Matters

Every transfer of land not exceeding thirty standard acres made by a person upto the thirty first day of December, 1969 in favour of an agriculturist domiciled in Rajasthan- transfer was executed way before the cutoff date stipulated under Section 30DD i.e. 31.12.1969. Therefore, the registered gift deed dated 19.12.1963 was a bona fide transfer squarely covered within the ambits of Section 30DD, which intended to protect the rights of agriculturalists.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DAULAT SINGH (D) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, S. Abdul Nazeer…

Corporate

Construction of Elevated Corridor (Flyover) – Rejection of bid on ground that bidder suppressed information required under paragraph 13 of Appendix IA – State of Madhya Pradesh is directed to issue a LOI as soon as is practically possible to “R” insofar as the present tender is concerned at the same financial bid as that of UPSBC.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. U.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali…

Constitution

Convenience note – Presentation made by learned Standing Counsel for the State in the Convenience Note extracted is an illustration how a case can be presented on behalf of the State – This Court may suggest that Convenience Note may be taken as the Standard Format by all the learned counsel appearing for various State Governments in this Court – Registry may circulate copies of this Order to all the learned Standing Counsel for the States.

Dec 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KAUSHAL VERMA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran and S. Ravindra Bhat,…

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