Government contracts – Understanding of public interest – – It is pertinent to remember that, by merely using grounds of public interest or loss to the treasury, the successor public authority cannot undo the work undertaken by the previous authority – Such a claim must be proven using material facts, evidence and figures – If it were otherwise, then there will remain no sanctity in the words and undertaking of the Government – Businessmen will be hesitant to enter Government contract or make any investment in furtherance of the same – Such a practice is counterproductive to the economy and the business environment in general.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE VICE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SHISHIR REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED AND…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 209 and 465 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 409 and 420 read with Section 120B – Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 – Sections 21 and 23 read with Sections 4(1) and 4(1)(A) – Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 – Rule 165 read with Rule 144 – Unauthorized mining – Quashing of criminal proceedings – If the order taking cognizance is irregular, it would not vitiate the proceedings in view of Section 465 CrPC – No “failure of justice” under Section 465 CrPC is proved
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PRADEEP S. WODEYAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and B V…
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 – Section 2 – Felling of trees for Delhi Mass Rapid Transit System-Phase-IV project – Direction – DMRC to file applications under the FC Act, 1980 to the Chief Conservator (Forest) and Nodal Officer (FCI), GNCTD, seeking permission for diversion of the following extents of land for the construction of Metro, Phase-IV of MRTS Project with a request to forward the said documents to the MoEF&CC, GoI, for its consideration under Section 2 of the FC Act, 1980.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and…
(IPC) – Ss 302 and 149 – Murder – Injuries on vital parts – From the evidence of doctor, it can be gathered that the injuries on the vital parts like right lung and liver which resulted into bleeding and shock were sufficient to cause the death in the ordinary cause of nature – Once the prosecution establishes the existence of the three ingredients forming a part of “thirdly” in Section 300, it is irrelevant whether there was an intention on the part of the accused to cause death – It does not matter that there was no intention even to cause the injury of a kind that is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KUMAR — Appellant Vs. AMRITPAL @ CHHOTU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Criminal…
(CPC)- S 100 – Dismissal of second appeal without assigning any reasons for conclusion – Court must display its conscious application of mind even while dismissing the appeal at the admission stage – Giving reasons for the conclusion is necessary as it helps the adversely affected party to understand why his submissions were not accepted – High Court cannot dismiss the second appeal in limine without assigning any reasons for its conclusion HELD An appeal under Section 100 of the CPC could be filed both against the ‘concurrent findings’ or ‘divergent findings’ of the courts below.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HASMAT ALI — Appellant Vs. AMINA BIBI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 – Section 22 – Further construction – Environmental Clearance – Project of the appellant comprises six buildings of which three were constructed in full, and the super structure of the fourth building is completed and only the internal works remains to be done – Further construction cannot be made without environment impact assessment – If the Project Proponent wishes to construct the remaining buildings, they must secure fresh clearance from the competent authority, as per the currently applicable framework –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. SAI BABA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 307 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 27 – Attempt to murder – Using arms – Appellant-accused was admittedly a police official – Illegal use of a licensed or sanctioned weapon per se does not constitute an offence under Section 27, without proving the misdemeanour under Section 5 or 7 of the Arms Act. At best, it could be a ‘misconduct’ under the service rules, the determination of which was not the subject of the trial – No motive or element of planning has been proved by the Prosecution –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SURINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE (UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH) — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, Surya Kant and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…
Service Law – Back-wages – In the case of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back-wages is normal rule and the adjudicating authority to take into consideration the length of service of the employee, nature of misconduct, financial condition of the employer and similar other factors – High Court has correctly granted 50% of the back wages to the respondent.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RAM BAHADUR YADAV — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 449 read with Section 34 – Murder of five persons – Death sentence – Review Petition – Possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the convict is an important factor which has to be taken into account as a mitigating circumstance before sentencing him to death – There is a bounden duty cast on the Courts to elicit information of all the relevant factors and consider those regarding the possibility of reformation, even if the accused remains silent – Court convert the sentence imposed on the Petitioners from death to life
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MOFIL KHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna,…
(SARFAESI) – Section 34 – Civil suit is attracted allegations of ‘fraud’ are made without any particulars – Suit was not maintainable in view of the bar contained under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act – Except the words used ‘fraud’/’fraudulent’ there are no specific particulars pleaded with respect to the ‘fraud’. It appears that by a clever drafting and using the words ‘fraud’/’fraudulent’ without any specific particulars with respect to the ‘fraud’,. Suit not maintainable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UV ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.…