Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Month: January 2022

C P C

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 227 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 9 Rule 13 – Setting aside of exparte decree – Power under Article 227 is exercised sparingly in appropriate cases, like when there is no evidence at all to justify, or the finding is so perverse that no reasonable person can possibly come to such a conclusion that the court or tribunal has come to – It is axiomatic that such discretionary relief must be exercised to ensure there is no miscarriage of justice.

Jan 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S GARMENT CRAFT — Appellant Vs. PRAKASH CHAND GOEL — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 – Sections 3(17) and 9(3) – Government Grants Act, 1895 – Transfer of land — Terms of the lease deed though provide for sub-lease for agricultural purposes but sub-lessees can claim no independent rights as a tenure holder – High Court rightly observed that appellants herein being sub-lessees would be tenure holder as per sub-Section 9(3) of the Ceiling Act – Appeal dismissed.

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARDEV SINGH — Appellant Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, KASHIPUR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil…

Bail Declined

Cancellation of bail – Director of Prosecution in the administration of justice is crucial – He is appointed by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 25A of the Code of Criminal Procedure – That his is a crucial role is evident from conditions such as in Section 25A (2) of the Code, which stipulates a minimum legal experience of not less than ten years for a person to be eligible to be Directorate of Prosecution and that such an appointment shall be made with the concurrence of the C J of the High Court – Appeal allowed.

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAYABEN — Appellant Vs. TEJAS KANUBHAI ZALA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Electricity Act

Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016 – Section 3(2) – Levy of electricity duty on educational charitable institutions- Other than the State Government, Central Government and the local bodies and the Government hostels, no exemption from payment of electricity duty has been provided – Charitable education institutions registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act and/or under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, are not entitled to any exemption

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Appellant Vs. SHRI VILE PARLE KELVANI MANDAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna,…

Service Matters
Service

Uttar Pradesh Sub-Inspector and Inspector (Civil Police) Service Rules, 2015 – Rules 15(b) and 15(e) — Rule 15(b) of Recruitment Rules requires every candidate to obtain minimum 50% marks in each of the subjects and states, “candidates failing to obtain 50% marks in each of the above subjects shall not be eligible for recruitment”.

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ATUL KUMAR DWIVEDI AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Vineet…

Cr P C

Ordinarily, this Court is cautious in interfering with an order of acquittal, especially when the order of acquittal has been confirmed upto the High Court. It is only in rarest of rare cases, where the High Court, on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case, ignoring some of the most vital facts, has acquitted the accused, that the same may be reversed by this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJESH PRASAD — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER ETC — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V.…

Service Matters
Service

Patna High Court holding NCCF to be “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India was thus accepted by the NCCF and the appeals were consciously withdrawn. Mr. Dhingra, therefore, submits that in view of the change in the circumstances, especially in the light of withdrawal of the appeal by NCCF, liberty be granted to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to agitate and claim reliefs prayed by way of substantive prayer (b) in the instant petition. Allowed

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH N.C.C.F. EMPLOYEES UNION (REGD) (RECOGNIZED) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and…

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