Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Constitution

Illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor – State of Punjab is directed to continue the steps to stop the illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor and to stop the illegal Bhatthis

Bysclaw

Apr 20, 2023

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

TARSEM JODHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant

Vs.

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — Respondent

( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. )

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 3764 of 2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10-09-2020 in CWP-(PIL) No. 115 of 2020 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh)

Decided on : 27-03-2023

Illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor – State of Punjab is directed to continue the steps to stop the illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor and to stop the illegal Bhatthis – As reported earlier, the local police shall be held responsible if any illegal Bhatthi in their area is found – Earlier incidents of the death of innocent persons, who died because of consumption of spurious liquor, it is pointed out in the latest counter affidavit that 7 FIRs were filed with respect to three incidents in three districts and in all those cases, after the investigation, the accused were arrested and charge-sheeted and the trial is going on.

Counsel for Appearing Parties

Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate, Mr. Rahul Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Alice Raj, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ajay Pal, Advocate, Mr. Mayank Dahiya, Advocate, Ms. Sugandh Rathor, Advocate, Ms. Priyanka C., Advocate, for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Earlier, this Court considered the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Punjab on the steps taken to stop the illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor and to stop the illegal Bhatthis. Taking into consideration the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Punjab, this Court passed the following order on 15.12.2022 –

“Considering the reply filed on behalf of the State of Punjab, it appears that some further steps are taken to stop the illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor and to stop the illegal Bhatthis. It is reported that now the local police shall be held responsible if any illegal Bhatthi in their area is found. It is also reported that even awareness programmes shall also be held and conducted.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, however, has submitted that so far as the earlier incidents are concerned, in which number of persons died, the investigation is not in the right direction and the real culprit who actually manufactured and supplied the spurious liquor, no further steps are taken.

The aforesaid shall be considered on the next date of hearing.

The State to file further counter affidavit on the investigation carried out so far on the earlier incidents in which number of persons died due to spurious liquor.

Put up on 10.02.2023.”

2. The State of Punjab is directed to continue the steps to stop the illegal manufacture and transportation of spurious liquor and to stop the illegal Bhatthis. As reported earlier, the local police shall be held responsible if any illegal Bhatthi in their area is found. The State is directed to act accordingly.

3. Now, so far as the earlier incidents of the death of innocent persons, who died because of consumption of spurious liquor, it is pointed out in the latest counter affidavit that 7 FIRs were filed with respect to three incidents in three districts and in all those cases, after the investigation, the accused were arrested and charge-sheeted and the trial is going on.

4. In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed except, as observed hereinabove.

5. With this, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.

6. Pending application(s) shall also stand disposed of.

By sclaw

Related Post

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
Constitution

Child Marriages — Restraint of — The petitioner, an NGO, argues that despite the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, child marriages remain prevalent in India —They seek stronger enforcement and support systems for child brides —The main issue is the failure of authorities to prevent child marriages and the need for effective guidelines and enforcement mechanisms — The petitioner highlights the high rate of child marriages, the ineffectiveness of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers (CMPOs), and the need for comprehensive support for child brides — The Union of India attributes child marriages to societal perceptions and economic pressures, and outlines various government programs aimed at reducing child marriages —The court acknowledges the persistence of child marriages and the need for stronger enforcement and support systems — The court emphasizes the socio-economic determinants of child marriage and the need for a multi-faceted approach to address the issue — The court refers to various laws and international conventions that recognize child marriage as a violation of human rights — The court calls for comprehensive measures, including legal enforcement, judicial measures, community involvement, awareness campaigns, and support systems for child brides.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Sections 5(1)(b) and 8(2) — Grant of Indian Citizenship — Respondent born in Singapore in 1999 to Indian parents who later renounced their Indian citizenship, applied to resume Indian citizenship in 2017 —Whether respondent is entitled to resume Indian citizenship under Section 8(2) and if he qualifies as a person of Indian origin under Section 5(1)(b) — Petitioner argued he is entitled to Indian citizenship based on his grandparents’ birth in undivided India and his parents’ birth in independent India — The Union of India contended that respondent’s parents lost Indian citizenship upon acquiring Singapore citizenship, making respondent ineligible under the cited sections — The Supreme Court ruled that respondent is not entitled to resume Indian citizenship under Section 8(2) or Section 5(1)(b) — The court found that respondent’s parents ceased to be Indian citizens by operation of law when they acquired Singapore citizenship, and thus Section 8(2) does not apply — The court emphasized the plain language of the Citizenship Act, stating that equitable considerations cannot override statutory provisions — The appeal by the Union of India was allowed — However respondent may apply for citizenship under Section 5(1)(f).

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw

Leave a Reply

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