Latest Post

An unregistered agreement of sale is admissible as evidence of the contract in a specific performance suit, under the proviso to Section 49, Registration Act. Prosecution for obstructing public servant (S.186 IPC) requires mens rea and compliance with S.195 Cr.PC; absence renders proceedings an abuse of process. Freedom of Speech and Expression — Open Justice — Subjudice Principle — Contempt of Court – Such a direction, being a form of prior restraint, must satisfy twin tests of necessity and proportionality, applicable only in cases of real and substantial risk of prejudice to fairness of trial or proper administration of justice — Courts must be open to public observations, debates, and constructive criticism, even on subjudice matters, as open justice instills faith and checks judicial caprice Hostile witnesses — Effect — When a large number of witnesses, including eyewitnesses, turn hostile, prosecution case often collapses for want of evidence — While reasons for hostility can be varied (coercion, fear, monetary consideration, etc.), it cannot automatically lead to conviction based on prior S. 161 statements or IO’s testimony about such statements, as these are not substantive evidence — Court’s consternation at collapse of a serious case due to witness hostility cannot be a reason to convict on insufficient or inadmissible evidence, amounting to a moral conviction anathema to criminal jurisprudence. Sales Tax — Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Kerala Act) — Section 5A — Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act) — Section 7A — Purchase Tax — Liability of assessee purchasing goods from dealers exempt from sales tax — Where goods are purchased from dealers who are exempt from payment of sales tax by virtue of notifications or exemptions under the Kerala Act or Tamil Nadu Act, such a purchase is considered a purchase of “goods, the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax” within the meaning of Section 5A of the Kerala Act or Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu Act
Service Matters

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section – 33(1)(a), 33A – Order of dismissal – The respondent filed an application under Section 33(1)(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 contending that since the dispute relating to an employee in Bhadrak zone was pending adjudication in the Industrial Tribunal, without the leave of the Tribunal under Section 33A his service could not be terminated

(1997) 84 CLT 531 : (1997) 2 LLJ 382 : (1996) 9 SCALE 277 : (1997) 9 SCC 296 : (1997) SCC(L&S) 1297 : (1996) 9 SCR 380 Supp SUPREME…

Dishonour of Cheque—Offence by Company—Liability of Director— Any restriction on their power or existence of any special circumstance that makes them not liable is something that is peculiarly within their knowledge and it is for them to establish at the trial such a restriction or to show that at the relevant time they were not incharge of the affairs of the company

  2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1379 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan Criminal Appeal No. 592 of…

You missed