Month: March 2024

Service Matters

The Court reasons that the service as a High Court Judge should be cumulated with district judiciary service for pension calculation, and the break in service should not adversely affect the pension – The Court analyzes the constitutional and statutory provisions, emphasizing the importance of non-discrimination in pension computation for Judges, regardless of their service origin – The Court concludes that Justice Garg is entitled to pension calculated on the basis of her last drawn salary as a High Court Judge, including arrears with interest – The appeal by the Union of India is disposed of accordingly.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE — Appellant Vs. JUSTICE (RETD) RAJ RAHUL GARG (RAJ RANI JAIN) AND OTHERS — Respondent (…

Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999 – Sections 3 and 4 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 341, 323, 354, 354 (B), 379, 504, 506 and 149 – – The respondent opposes anticipatory bail, asserting that the petitioner’s involvement is established – They contend that the seriousness of the charges warrants denial of bail – The court acknowledges that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy – It emphasizes that such relief should be granted sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances – The court considers the petitioner’s status as an absconder and weighs the evidence against them – After thorough consideration, the court rules on the anticipatory bail application – Appeal Dismissed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRIKANT UPADHYAY AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. )…

Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 Sections 5, 11, 11A and 77- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 32 – Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Offices) Act, 1962 – The Tenancy Act’s provisions were still applicable to the subject lands, and the legal heirs of the original Watandar could not have taken lawful possession of the lands – The revisionary order dated 03.05.1982 was invalid, and the Bombay High Court justified it – The tenancy was lawfully subsisting on 01.04.1957, and tenants were entitled to exercise their right of statutory purchase under Section 32 of the Tenancy Act – This right became operational on 27.11.1964, when the Watan lands were regranted to the original Watandar’s heirs.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BABAN BALAJI MORE (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BABAJI HARI SHELAR (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

Court reasons that transfers are an administrative matter and judicial intervention is limited to cases of statutory violation or proven malafide intent – The Court analyzes precedents stating that transfers should not be interfered with unless they are prejudicial to public interest or violate norms – The Court concludes by setting aside the Division Bench’s judgment, reinstating the Single Judge’s order, and dismissing the writ petition.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI PUBI LOMBI Vs. THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Civil…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Inherent Powers – Where a dispute which is essentially of a civil nature, is given a cloak of a criminal offence, then such disputes can be quashed, by exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code – High Court must not hesitate in quashing such criminal proceedings which are essentially of a civil nature.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B. Varale,…

Court directs that police reports must comply with Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C, detailing the investigation’s findings and ensuring all required documents and witness statements are included – Mandatory Compliance – The document underscores the importance of strict adherence to the procedural requirements for police reports, with non-compliance to be viewed seriously by the courts

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DABLU KUJUR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

You missed

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.