Forging a power of attorney and a sale deed – High Court erred in assuming that there was no criminality involved in the alleged offences and that the matter was purely civil in nature – The Supreme Court also clarifies that the Sub-Registrar had the authority to initiate prosecution under the Registration Act, 1908, and that the quashing of the circular on which the Sub-Registrar relied did not affect the merits of the case.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAVIN KUMAR RAI — Appellant Vs. SURENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Respondent appears to have been hurt in view of the statements made by the petitioner generally about Gujarati people – Now, after the petitioner has explained the context in which he made the statements and after withdrawal of those statements, in the facts of the case, it is unjust to continue the prosecution – No purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution – Defamation complaint quashed – Appeal
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TEJASHWI PRASAD YADAV — Appellant Vs. HARESHBHAI PRANSHANKAR MEHTA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Transfer Petition…
By passing such orders of staying the investigations and restraining the investigating agencies from taking any coercive measure against the accused pending the petitions under Section 482 Cr.PC, the High Court has granted blanket orders restraining the arrest without the accused applying for the anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.PC
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT — Appellant Vs. NIRAJ TYAGI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. )…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 31(1) and 60 – National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 – Rule 11 – Inherent Powers – Recall of Resolution Plan approval order passed under Sec. 31(1) of IBC – Recall application was maintainable notwithstanding that an appeal lay before the NCLAT against the order of approval passed by the Adjudicating Authority – A Court or a Tribunal, in absence of any provision to the contrary, has inherent power to recall an order to secure the ends of justice and/or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. PRABHJIT SINGH SONI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., J.…
Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Sections 80, 81, 83, 84, 100, 101 and 123 – Corrupt practice – Use of picture of Lord Ayyappa in voting slips – Maintainability of election petition – Non-compliance with the requirements of Section 83 of the Act of 1951 is not fatal, as Section 86(1) thereof only speaks of non-compliance with Sections 81, 82 or 117 being the basis for dismissal of an election petition at the outset
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. BABU — Appellant Vs. M. SWARAJ AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…
Court is not expected to reject the testimony of an interested witness, however, when the testimony is full of contradictions and fails to match evenly with the supporting evidence (the wound certificate, for instance), a Court is bound to sift and weigh the evidence to test its true weight and credibility – High Court had erred in reversing the decision of acquittal – Acquittal order passed by Trial Court restored – Appellants are acquitted from all the charges – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MALLAPPA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Criminal…
No finding has been recorded by the authorities that the army personnel had as of fact, produced such certificates or that their explanation claiming that no such certificates were furnished by them is completely false – In effect, the authorities have not dealt with the explanations/claims of army personnel – Army personnel shall be reinstated with all consequential benefits – Appeals allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NO.2809759H EX-RECRUIT BABANNA MACHCHED — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.…
Refer a complaint for misconduct to the Disciplinary Committee – Rule 9(3)(b) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigation of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007 falls within the scope of the general delegation of power under Section 29A(1).
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL — Appellant Vs. THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and…
Disqualification of Candidate as a Member of Panchayat – Candidate stood automatically disqualified as a Member since he failed to produce the Validity Certificate within 12 months from the date of his election – The protective umbrella of Section 3 of the Temporary Extension Act, 2023 will not be available to candidate since he is hit by Section 3(2)(b), for the reason that there was no valid application pending on the date of the commencement of the said Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUDHIR VILAS KALEL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BAPU RAJARAM KALEL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.…
It is very difficult to connect any accused with the injuries sustained by the deceased in the absence of any cogent evidence – Therefore, it is not possible to uphold the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC – Conviction and sentence set-aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KISHORE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…