Pulin Das @ Panna Koch with Mahendra Saikia @
Dilip Saikia v State of Assam
22/2/2008.
Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
- section 19 -appeals against - the common judgment dated 19.04.2007 of
the Designated Judge at Assam, Gauhati in TADA Sessions Case No. 1 of
1996 whereby the Designated Judge convicted Pulin Das @ Panna Koch
-appellant in Criminal Appeal No.706 of 2007 and Mahendra Saikia @ Dilip
Saikia
Sunil @ Balo Das and others v Rajesh Das and
others 21/2/2008.
Acquittal order - set aside by a learned
Single Judge of the High Court of Jharkand - the High Court without even
pointing out as to what infirmity existed, in a mechanical manner
directed the matter to be re-heard. Abrupt conclusion was arrived at
that the trial Court had not appreciated the evidence on record in its
right perspective and by misappropriation of evidence, directed
acquittal-
Leave granted
Shaik Nagoor v State of A.P. rep. by its Public
Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad
20/2/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 — sections 354 and 448 and 306
- by the impugned judgment conviction of the appellant for offences
punishable under Sections 354 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was
upheld, but the conviction for offence punishable under Section 306 IPC
was set aside. However the sentence of three years imprisonment for
offence punishable under Section 354 IPC which was imposed by the trial
court was reduced to two years.-
Leave granted
Babu Ram & others v State of Punjab
15/2/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - sections 302 and 34
-
conviction under - confirmed by Division Bench - appeal - in view of
the improbabilities, the serious omissions and infirmities, the
interested nature of the evidence and other circumstances, it was clear
that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellants
beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court was in error in brushing aside
serious infirmity in the prosecution case regarding non-explanation of
the injuries sustained by the accused Indraj and his wife DW-Smt. Maya
and also not accepting the plea of the right of defence of the accused
on unconvincing premises - appellants acquitted.
S. Anand v Vasumathi Chandrasekar
14/2/2008.
Negotiable
Instruments Act - section 138
- trial under - application for cross-examination filed by the
complainant rejected — in revision complainant remained absent -
acquittal by MM under section 256(1) of Cr. P.C. - this court does not
approve the manner in which the appeal has been disposed of by the High
Court - however, keeping in view of the fact that the complaint petition
was filed as far back on 10.01.2002, the learned Trial Judge should
proceed with the matter in accordance with law and dispose of the case
as expeditiously as possible.
- Leave granted
B. Vishwanath v State of Karnataka
13/2/2008.
Order of the
High Court - challenged
- certain disturbing features highlighted - the appeal filed by the
appellant was disposed of on 1.7.2006. There was no indication in the
order as to whether the appeal was dismissed or allowed. Only certain
directions were given to the Secretary, Home Department and Director
General of Police to strictly comply with the observations that the
Investigating Officers were to refer the blood stained articles and
blood samples of the victim/accused, as the case may be, to the Medical
College Hospital in the District or in the neighbouring District which
have Forensic Science Laboratory to give report regarding the blood
group.
- Leave granted
Samita Bhattacharjee v Kulashekar Bhattacharjee
12/2/2008.
Transfer of
divorce suit
- inspite of prayer for adjournment having been granted, no one appears
to oppose the prayer for transfer on behalf of the respondent -
considering the facts that the wife - petitioner herein - is staying at
Andul Purba Para, P.O. Andul Mouri, P.S. Sankrail, District Howrah with
a minor child in her paternal home, court is of the view that the Title
Suit (Divorce) No.98 of 2006 titled as Dr. Kulashekhar Bhattacharjee Vs.
Smt. Samita Bhattacharjee pending before the Family Court West Tripura,
Agartala, be transferred to the Court of learned District Judge, Howrah,
West Bengal.
State of
U.P. v Jagram & other 12/2/2008.
Indian Penal code, 1860 - sections 302, 324 read
with section 34 - conviction by trial court - set aside by the
Division Bench - several discrepancies in the evidence of the witnesses
and the prosecution version did not inspire confidence. -
Leave granted
Sirisia
Sthal, Imli Chati, Muzaffarpur & others v State of Bihar & others
211/2/2008.
Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of ceiling Area and
Acquisition of surplus Land) Act, 1961 - vires of certain
provisions challenged - writ - dismissed appeal - Since the High
Court has not applied its mind to the challenge raised and has
erroneously referred to the 9th Schedule to the Constitution, it would
be appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the High Court and
remit the matter to it for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
B.K. Sri
Harsha (D) By L.R. and another v M/s Bharath Heavy Electricals Ltd
8/2/2008.
Code of civil Procedure, 1908 - section 96
- Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of the learned Single
Judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the First Appeals filed
under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Union of India and others v Rajesh Vyas 7/2/2008.
Rajasthan High Court ordinance, 1949 - section 18
- appeals under -
order of discharge - show cause notice - the learned Single Judge and
the Division Bench were wrong in holding that the reply given to the
show cause notice was not considered.
Balwant Singh and others v State of Punjab 6/2/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — section 302 - conviction under by Additional
Session Judge - appeal - dismissal by High Court appeal - there is
strong circumstantial evidence that they were caused by the accused -
this circumstantial evidence is sufficient to uphold the conviction
because it contains all the links in the chain which connect the accused
with the incident
V. Subbulakshmi & others v S. Lakshmi & another 5/2/2008.
Motor accident claim - by the owner of the vehicle
- maintainability -
in the instant case, the owner of the bus was an aggrieved person. He
could maintain an appeal of his own. Section 173 of the Act confers a
right on any aggrieved person to prefer an appeal from an award - as to
compensation -
Leave granted
Anand Sharad Chandra Oka v University of Mumbai and others 4/2/2008.
Words and Phrases - aggrieved party - meaning of
- electoral roll for
electing members of the Senate - university calling for applications
from graduates - the writ-petitioner obtained B.A. Degree from Bombay
University. Thus, the writ-petitioner was graduated from the
respondent-University. His name, therefore, can be registered in the
electoral roll for electing members of Senate. He was not, therefore, an
'aggrieved party'.-
Leave granted
State of Orissa and another v M/s. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and other
4/2/2008.
Writ Petition -- Technical bids of VISA and TISCO could not have been
rejected at the threshold without proper evaluation in terms of
eligibility condition set out in the concerned advertisement - it would
be desirable for the State Government to ensure that the technical bids
and the revised financial bids to be submitted within three weeks as
directed earlier, be evaluated and informed
Shfaq Khan and another v State of U.P. and other 1/2/2008.
Indian Penal code, 1860 - section 420 and 424
- U P Gangsters and Anti -
Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1980 - writ Petition filed for
quashing the FIR - The stand in the writ petition was that even if the
FIR is taken at its face value, there is no scope for holding that the
appellants committed cheating or an offence punishable under the
Prevention Act -
Leave granted
Bijoy Das v State
of West Bengal
28/1/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - section 302
- conviction under - upheld by the High Court - appeal - if a dying
declaration is found to be reliable then there is no need for
corroboration by any witness, and conviction can be sustained on its
basis alone.- Leave granted
Shanti Devi v
State of Sikkim and another
25/1/2008.
Decision
impugned -
this is one of those rare cases in which the decision impugned in the
appeal not only merits intervention but also calls for certain
observations to be made in respect of the order itself - Leave granted
Balasaheb
Dayandeo Naik (Dead) through LRs and others v Appasaheb Dattatraya Pawar
24/1/2008.
Specific
performance -
this appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.01.2005
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in First Appeal No. 743
of 1993 in and by which the High Court set aside the decree for specific
performance granted by the trial Court and consequently dismissed the
suit of the plaintiffs - Leave granted
Vishnu Dev Sharma
v State of U.P. & others
23/1/2008.
Seniority -
fixation - writ petition - seniority challenged
- seniority
has been given from the date if confirmation - learned counsel for the
appellant submitted that such summary dismissal of writ petition was not
warranted as several issues of considerable importance were involved,
more particularly whether the norms for fixing seniority in the
background facts of the case were to be considered - Leave granted
Shaikh Ratiq and
another v State of Maharashtra
22/1/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 -
sections 302 read with section 34 - conviction under - appeal -
considering the dying declaration and the manner in which it was
recorded, court cannot rely upon the dying declaration recorded by PW 1.
Apart from this fact, there is no other evidence on record to implicate
the appellants in the incident
Vidyadhari &
others v Sukhrana Bai & others
22/1/2008.
Indian
Succession Act
- section 372 - 2 separate applications filed for obtaining succession
certificate - Merely because Sukhrana Bai was the legally wedded wife
that by itself did not entitle her to a Succession Certificate in
comparison to Vidhyadhari who all through had stayed as the wife of
Sheetaldeen, had born his four children and had claimed a Succession
Certificate on behalf children also - Leave granted
Ramesh Singh & another v Satbir Singh & another
21/1/2008.
Motor accident - compensation - multiplier
-- applicability - choice of multiplier is determined by the age of the
deceased or claimants whichever is higher. Admittedly, the age of the
father was 55 years. The question of mother's age never cropped up
because that was not the contention raised even before the Trial Court
or before this Court.- Leave granted
State of
Maharashtra v Devahari Devasingh Pawar & others
18/1/2008.
Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 - section 197
- proceedings pending before ACJM quashed by the High Court as no
sanction as required - was there employees of the blood bank were
prosecuted under IPC and Drugs Act - HIV contaminated blood was supplied
to the Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur by its blood bank
and as a result, some patients who were given blood transfusion had
tested HIV positive - Leave granted
S.Raju v C.
Sathammai
17/1/2008.
Code of Civil
Procedure - order 39
- leave to defend the suit - denial by the city Civil Court and the High
Court - appeal - the trial court and High Court have taken a rather
technical view of the matter - in the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, the petitioner ought to have at least been allowed to defend
the suit, subject to the condition of depositing a part of the
plaintiff's claim.-
Leave granted
Kunju @
Balachandran v State of Tamil Nadu16/1/2008
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 -
conviction under - appeal - it is not the number, the quantity, but the
quality that is material. The time-honoured principle is that evidence
has to be weighed and not counted. On this principle stands the edifice
of Section 134 of the Evidence Act. The test is whether the evidence has
a ring of truth, is cogent, credible and trustworthy, or otherwise - Leave granted
Gaudiya
Mission v Shobha Bose & another15/1/2008.
Testamentary case - great many questions
were involved in the
Testamentary Suit instituted by the respondent No. 1. Several issues
were framed by the trial Court and the suit was decided by a detailed
judgment entering into merits of the matter - the learned counsel
for the appellants is right in submitting that the Division Bench of the
High Court ought to have admitted the appeal. - Leave granted
Brijendra
Singh v State of M.P. & another 11/1/2008.
Adoption - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - section 100 - challenge in this
appeal is to the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur
in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code - the present appeal
involves a very simple issue but when the background facts are
considered it projects some highly emotional and sensitive aspects of
human life
Puran Singh
v State of Uttaranchal10/1/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 -
conviction order and sentence recorded by High Court - acquittal by
Session Court - appeal - as per Ballistic Expert's opinion, cartridge
E.C.1 was not fired from the single barrel 12 bore No. 1319 said to have
been used by the accused - therefore, the appellant accused is entitled
to benefit of doub
State of
M.P. & others v Madhukar Rao 9/1/2008.
Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 - section 50(1)(c) - Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 - section 451 - whether a vehicle or vessel etc. seized
under Section 50(1)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is put
beyond the power of the Magistrate to direct its release during the pendency of trial in exercise of powers under Section 451 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973
Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd. v Rajvir Industries Ltd. & others
9/1/2008.
Investigation - interference - by statutory authority - Blank cheques -
handed over for business purposes during 2000-2004 - fraudulently used -
dispute arose in 2005 - a bare perusal of Section 415 read with Section
420 of the Indian Penal Code would clearly lead to the conclusion that
fraudulent or dishonest inducement on the part of the accused must be at
the inception and not at a subsequent stage - Leave granted
M/s. Sify
Ltd. v M/s. First Flight Couriers Ltd. 8/1/2008
Civil Procedure Code - order 37 rules 2 and 3 - the appellant
company is engaged in the business of providing service in setting up of
Networks and other value added services in the field of information and
technology. The respondent company is engaged in the business of
providing Courier services. - Leave granted
Bhadrappa
(D) By Lrs. v Tolacha Naik8/1/2008.
Karnataka High Court Act - section 4 - writ appeal filed under -
dismissal - challenged - proceedings were initiated on the basis of an
application that the alienation was hit by Section 4 of Karnataka
Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of
Certain Lands) Act, 1978
Ramesh
Krishna Madhusudan Nayar v The State of Maharashtra 7/1/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 - applicability of - appellant
sentenced to life imprisonment - appeal - for the application of
Exception 4, it is not sufficient to show that there was a sudden
quarrel and there was no premeditation. It must further be shown that
the offender has not taken undue advantage or acted in cruel or unusual
manner. The expression undue advantage as used in the provision means
'unfair advantage' - Leave granted
Bhagwan
Dass & another v Punjab State Electricity Board 4/1/2008
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and
Full Participation) Act, 1995 - section 47 - protection under -
the appellant protested against the action of the Board in relieving him
from service - Leave granted
State of
Rajasthan v Jaggu Ram 4/1/2008
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 304-B and 201- acquittal by High Court
- appeal - if the learned Single Judge of the High Court had adverted to
Section 106 of the Evidence Act and correctly applied the principles of
law, he would not have committed the grave error of acquitting the
respondent - the impugned judgment is set aside and the conviction of
the respondent under Section 304-B read with 201, IPC is restored. He is
sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment.
Kaliyamma & others v Deputy Commnr. Chitradurga
Distt. & others 3/1/2008.
Karnataka High Court Act 1979 - section 4 -
writ appeal filed under - dismissal - challenged - the stand taken before
the High Court essentially was that the land was granted under the
non-depressed class category and, therefore, the period is 12 years to
substantiate the plea about adverse possession
Cause
list
Cause
lists
are scheduling of cases to be heard by the courts on the following day.
The Cause lists of
Supreme Court and 16 High Courts are available on the Web. An advocate can generate
his/her own Cause list. more...
INDIA CODE - Bare Acts All acts of
Parliament from 1834 onwards, as applicable today are available on the Web in retrievable
form.
Click here`
Daily Orders The daily
orders of Supreme Court of India and Delhi High Court are available on the web within 24
hours of their delivery in the court.
more...
COURTNIC Provides
Supreme Court of India's case status information. It also provides the text of the latest
order of the court.
Click Here
JUDIS
The
Judgement Information System (JUDIS) consists of complete
text of all reported judgements of Supreme Court of India
from 1950 to till date. It is available on subscription
basis. The Judgements of the High Courts of Delhi, A.P, J
& K and Orissa are also available on free of charge basis
on the web.
more...
Latest
Updates - Supreme Court Judgments 
