Month: February 2024

Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 – Section 8(2) – Right to pre-emption – It has been issued in exercise of powers conferred under Section 8(2) of the 1913 Act, which enables the State Government to declare by notification either no right of pre-emption or only limited right will exist in any local area or with respect to any land or property or class of land or property – it is abundantly clear that the land and the immovable property are two different terms. The immovable property is more than the land on which certain construction has been made. Guidance can also be taken from the definition of immovable property, as provided in Section 3(26) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which includes land, means something more than the land.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAGMOHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. BADRI NATH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Deposition would reveal that after the other accused assaulted the deceased with sword, A-3 came thereafter and assaulted the deceased with stone lying there – Prosecution has not been in a position to establish that A-3 shared the common intention with the other accused to cause the murder of the deceased – Appeal of A-3 is allowed by altering the conviction under Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VELTHEPU SRINIVAS AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF TELANGANA) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai…

Rape with a 7 year old girl in temple – Petitioner-convict was aged 40 years on the date of occurrence and he took the victim to a temple, unmindful of the holiness of the place disrobed her and himself and then committed the crime – in terms of the provisions under Section 376 AB, IPC when a sentence of imprisonment for a term not less than 20 years which may extend upto life imprisonment is imposed, the convict is also liable to suffer a sentence of fine which shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim – Conviction under Section 376 AB, IPC was upheld with the sentence modified to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment – Petition partly allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHAGGI @ BHAGIRATH @ NARAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, JJ.…

Under sub-section (1) of Section 75A of the Customs Act, where duty drawback is not paid within a period of three months from the date of filing of claim, the claimant would be entitled to interest in addition to the amount of drawback -Since there was belated refund of the duty drawback to the respondent, it was entitled to interest at the rate which was fixed by the Central Government at the relevant point of time being fifteen percent.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. B. T. PATIL AND SONS BELGAUM (CONSTRUCTION) PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay…

Accused-appellant also providing for the day-to-day expenses of the victim and her child and therefore, further imprisonment will impact not only his family but also the victim’s – Ends of justice would be met if the period of imprisonment awarded against the accused-appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him – Conviction u/s. u/S. 3(a) r/w Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 is hereby confirmed – Sentence imposed by the Sessions Court and confirmed by the High Court is hereby modified and reduced to the period already undergone – Appeal allowed in part.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJASEKAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323 and 325 – Grievous injury – Reduction of sentence – Taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, coupled with the fact that underlying incident occurred in 2010, the appeal is allowed in part and the Impugned Order is modified to the extent that the Appellants’ sentence is reduced to the period already undergone i.e., 1 (one) month; and 3 (three) days.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABDUL JABBAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 498A and 506 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Sections 3 and 4 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Phenomenon of false implication by way of general omnibus allegations in the course of matrimonial disputes is not unknown to this Court – A bare perusal of the complaint, statement of witnesses’ and the charge-sheet shows that the allegations against the Appellants are wholly general and omnibus in nature; even if they are taken in their entirety, they do not prima facie make out a case against the Appellants

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAMIDI ANIL KUMAR REDDY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra…

Service Matters

Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2022 – Rule 25 – Pension – It is well settled that pension scheme(s) floated by the State Government form a part of delegated beneficial legislation; and ought to be interpreted widely subject to such interpretation not running contrary to the express provisions of the Pension Rules – Furthermore, it would be relevant to underscore that the State Government is a model employer; and ought to uphold principles of fairness and clarity.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KANJIBHAI BHAGORA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Service Matters

Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service (Recruitment, Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2001 – Rules 11, 14 and 30 – Judicial Service – Change of Selection criteria – Selection process of District Judge Cadre – Part of the Full Court Resolution of the Jharkhand High Court dated 23.03.2023 by which it was decided that only those candidates who have secured at least 50% marks in aggregate shall be qualified for appointment to the post of District Judge is quashed – Writ petitions allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUSHIL KUMAR PANDEY AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 – Murder – Unlawful Assembly with Common Object – An overt act of some of the accused persons of an unlawful assembly with the common object to kill the deceased and to cause grievous hurt to the other family members is enough to rope in all of them for an offence under Section 302 IPC in aid with Section 149 IPC

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HAALESH @ HALESHI @ KURUBARA HALESHI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.…

You missed