![Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 [BNSS Section 528] — Quashing of FIR — Abuse of process — Factual matrix for all offences arose from a single transaction — Compromise accepted as genuine for some offences should equally dilute the foundation of other charges based on the same allegations — Continued prosecution for dacoity after settlement for other offences held unjustified and quashed.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Code-of-Criminal-Procedure.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
It is deemed appropriate to direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4/Corporation to return the land acquired by it to the appellants within four weeks. Once the possession is restored, the appellants shall be permitted to use it for residential purposes. Further, the respondents are directed to compensate the appellants @ Rs.1 crore per year for the loss caused
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH RAJHAN NARENDRA ROUT AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Sections 36(1)(vii) and 37 – Where the claim of bad and doubtful debt was disallowed -Section 37 applies only to items which do not fall in Section 30 to 36 – If a provision for doubtful debt is expressly excluded from Section 36 (1) (vii) then such a provision cannot claim deduction under Section 37 of the IT Act even on the basis of “real income theory”.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 — Appellant Vs. KHYATI REALTORS PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat…
Ceiling limit on iron ore mining – Relaxation – Ceiling limit of iron ore mining may be raised from 28 MMT to 35 MMT for District Bellary, and from 7 MMT to 15 MMT for Chitradurga and Tumkur Districts collectively.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI., Hima Kohli and…
Prosecution for offences against the State and for criminal conspiracy – Words “No Court shall take cognizance” employed in Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the consequential bar created under the said provision would undoubtedly show that the bar is against ‘taking of cognizance by the Court’ and not against registration of a crime or investigation
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PARVEZ PARWAZ AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI., Hima Kohli and…
Insolvency process – Limitation – Burden of prima facie proving occurrence of the default and that the application filed under Section 7 of the Code is within the period of limitation, is entirely on the financial creditor
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJENDRA NAROTTAMDAS SHETH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and…
HELD to exempt M. Phil. / Ph.D. holders from qualifying in the NET was perhaps premised on the understanding that such a doctorate in one’s chosen subject, involving years of study, would render a greater understanding of the subject compared to most other candidates taking the NET who have only obtained a Master’s degree. Such qualification (M. Phil. or Ph. D.) is undoubtedly awarded for a proven proficiency of the candidate in the concerned subject or discipline
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNIVERSITY OF KERALA AND OTHERS ETC. — Appellant Vs. MERLIN J.N. AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S.…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 304B – Dowry death – On the basis of very same evidence, the trial court, by giving benefit of doubt, has acquitted the father and mother of the appellant – Conviction of appellant on very same evidence was improper
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH MAKHAN SINGH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 8 Rule 6A – Counter claim – A counter claim can be made by the defendant, even on a separate or independent cause of action.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SATYENDER AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SAROJ AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ.…
(CPC) – Order 7 Rule 11 – Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Section 12A – Rejection of Plaint – Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement – Section 12A of the Act is mandatory – Any suit instituted violating the mandate of Section 12A must be visited with rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 – This power can be exercised even suo moto by the court – Section 12A cannot be described as a mere procedural law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RAKHEJA ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy,…
(CrPC) – Section 311 – Power to summon – Section 311 provides that the Court may summon any person as a witness or to examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness and Recall and re-examine any person who has already been examined – This power can be exercised at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under the CrPC
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH VARSHA GARG — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and AS Bopanna,…