Skip to content

Filter by :

Latest Judgments Judgments > Court:Supreme Year:2014

Sep 26 2014

Anup Lal Yadav and Anr. Vs. State of Bihar

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.775 of 2007 ANUP LAL YADAV & ANR. APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR . RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1163 of 2007 SURANG LAL YADAV APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR . RESPONDENT JUDGMENT N.V. RAMANA, J.These appeals are preferred by the appellants/accused aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal No.566 of 1993 whereby the High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia, Bihar in Sessions Trial No.28 of 1978 under Sections 302/149, 436/149, 380/149, 323/149, 145 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code against them.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that in the early hours of 25th September, 1974 appellant Surang Lal Yadav (Accused No.5), a member of Santhala community, riding on a horse and carrying a sword in his hand entered the village Singhimari leading a mob of about 300 to 400 persons, all armed with various kinds of deadly weapons such as bows, arrows, ballams, bhalas, kulharis, dandas and with burning flames in their hands. The mob led by accused Surang Lal Yadav attacked ruthlessly the Badhyas, a Muslim minority community, most of them were migrants from Bangladesh. The mob went on looting movable properties of the villagers, setting their houses on fire, injuring and killing innocent persons indiscriminately. In the said incident, 14 persons ...

Sep 26 2014

Liyakat & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2079 OF2009Liyakat and Another .Appellants Versus State of Rajasthan .Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 4th February, 2009 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Criminal Appeal No.304 of 2003 whereby the High Court partly allowed the appeal of the appellants and remanded the matter to the Trial Court for further trial.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on 25.07.1999 at 2.00 P.M., one Mustaq Khan resident of Rajpura submitted a written typed report at Police Station Dudwakhara alleging inter alia that his two daughters Jumila and Bulkesh were married to two brothers Liyakat and Jakir of village Jhariya on 11.6.1993. After marriage, his daughters told that their father- in-law Ajeem Khan and mother-in-law Jannat harassed them for dowry, and therefore, as and when they used to come, the informant was giving necessary articles of dowry. It was further alleged that some three years ago, when Liyakat had gone abroad, a demand of Rs.40,000/- was made and the informant arranged to give the money after mortgaging his household articles. Still daughters were treated with cruelty, inasmuch as, they were not even given food. It is also alleged in his report that some two months ago, Liyakat, (husband of deceased daughter Jumila) returned back from abroad (Dubai) and raised a demand of she- ...

Sep 26 2014

City Indl.Devept. Th:mng Director Vs. Platinum Entertainment & Ors.

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.9264 of 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.1117 of 2010) City Industrial Development Thr. its Managing Director Appellant (s) Versus Platinum Entertainment and others Respondent(s) WITH Civil Appeal No.9265 of 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.1215 of 2010) City Industrial Development Thr. its Managing Director Appellant (s) Versus Platinum Square Trust and Anr. Respondent(s) Civil Appeal No.9266 of 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.1290 of 2010) City Industrial Development Thr. its Managing Director Appellant (s) Versus Popcorn Entertainment Corporation and others Respondent(s) JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.Leave granted.2. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and final order dated 01.09.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay whereby Division Bench of the High Court has allowed three Writ Petitions being W.P.Nos. 9467, 9468 of 2005 and 3423 of 2006 preferred respectively by M/s. Popcorn Entertainment Corporation (in short, M/s. Popcorn), M/s. Platinum Entertainment (in short, M/s. Platinum) and M/s. Platinum Square Trust (in short, M/s. Platinum Square). By way of these writ petitions, the writ petitioners had challenged orders of appellant- The City & Industrial Development Corporation (in short CIDCO) by which allotment of plot of lands to M/s. Popcorn and M/s. Platinum Entertainment for erecting entertainment ...

Sep 26 2014

Patel Maheshbhai Ranchobhai & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 1973-1974 OF2008Patel Maheshbhai Ranchodbhai and others .. Appellants Versus State of Gujarat .Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.This is an exceptional case where this Court has taken serious note, the way the Sessions Judge disposed of the Sessions case within a period of nine days, which can be briefly narrated herein-below: |29.12.2004: |Charges were framed and the case was adjourned | | |to 1.1.2005. | |1.1.2005: |Prosecution produced list of 12 witnesses | |7.1.2005: |The prosecution produced 5 witnesses, who were | | |examined, and remaining dropped. On the same | | |day, accused were examined under Section 313, | | |Cr.P.C., arguments heard and judgment was | | |delivered acquitting all the accused. | All accused were acquitted, except the main accused (husband), who was convicted under section 498A, IPC to the period already undergone since he remained in jail for three days. In the appeal arising out of said judgment at the instance of the State, the High Court in the impugned judgment dated 16.6.2008 has also taken note of this fact and finally reversed trial courts findings of acquittal against all the accused and convicted the present appellants-accused of the charges under Section 306 read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code, as also convicted appellant- accused no.2 (father-in-law of the deceased) and appellant-accused No.3 (mother-in-law of the deceased) for the offence ...

Sep 26 2014

Sultan Singh Vs. State of Haryana

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1422 OF2009Prem Kumar Gulati .Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOL.1423 OF2009Mahender Singh alias Mahender Gulati Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another ..Respondents JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 06.09.2008 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No.342-DB of 2006, whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal of the accused persons and upheld the judgment dated 25.04.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani (Haryana) in Sessions Case No.8 RBT of 18.3.2004, inflicting sentence with rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/498-A read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and imposed fine with default clause.2. The facts leading to the prosecution story are that on 16.1.1995, Rajni-deceased was married with Mahender Singh alias Mahender Gulati and out of this wedlock, three children were born. Both the appellants, namely Mahender Gulati and Prem Kumar Gulati (brother in-law (jeth) of deceased) are the brothers. The prosecution case is that on receipt of V.T. message on 10.12.2003, ASI Ram Singh rushed to PGIMS, Rohtak with regard to admission of Rajni in burnt condition. After obtaining Doctors certificate regarding fitness of the victim to give statement, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak recorded her statement (dying declaration) to ...

Sep 26 2014

Nirmal Singh & Etc.Etc. Vs. State of Haryana Tr.Collector

  • Decided on : 26-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 1973-1974 OF2008Patel Maheshbhai Ranchodbhai and others .. Appellants Versus State of Gujarat .Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.This is an exceptional case where this Court has taken serious note, the way the Sessions Judge disposed of the Sessions case within a period of nine days, which can be briefly narrated herein-below: |29.12.2004: |Charges were framed and the case was adjourned | | |to 1.1.2005. | |1.1.2005: |Prosecution produced list of 12 witnesses | |7.1.2005: |The prosecution produced 5 witnesses, who were | | |examined, and remaining dropped. On the same | | |day, accused were examined under Section 313, | | |Cr.P.C., arguments heard and judgment was | | |delivered acquitting all the accused. | All accused were acquitted, except the main accused (husband), who was convicted under section 498A, IPC to the period already undergone since he remained in jail for three days. In the appeal arising out of said judgment at the instance of the State, the High Court in the impugned judgment dated 16.6.2008 has also taken note of this fact and finally reversed trial courts findings of acquittal against all the accused and convicted the present appellants-accused of the charges under Section 306 read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code, as also convicted appellant- accused no.2 (father-in-law of the deceased) and appellant-accused No.3 (mother-in-law of the deceased) for the offence ...

Sep 25 2014

Rungta Engineering College, Bhilai and Anr Vs. Chhattisgarh Swami Vivi ...

  • Decided on : 25-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.653 OF2014Rungta Engineering College, Bhilai & Another Petitioners Versus Chhattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical University & Another Respondents JUDGMENT CHELAMESWAR, J.1. A Society called GDR Educational Society claims to be running a number of colleges. It is claimed in the writ petition that the first petitioner is one of such colleges and the second petitioner is a Secretary of the said Educational Society.2. The All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter referred to as AICTE) is a body constituted under Section 3 of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 1987 Act). The AICTE was established for proper planning and co-ordinated development of the technical education system throughout the country, the promotion of qualitative improvement of such education in relation to planned quantitative growth and the regulation and proper maintenance of norms and standards in the technical education system and for matters connected therewith.3. One of the functions of the AICTE under Section 10(k)[1]. of the said Act is to grant approval for starting new technical institutions and for introduction of new courses or programmes in consultation with technical agencies.4. Technical Institution is defined under Section 2(h) as follows:2(h) technical institution means an institution, not being a University which offers courses or ...

Sep 25 2014

Mukesh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

  • Decided on : 25-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1114 of 2011 MUKESH APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 10.08.2010, passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, in Criminal Appeal No.342 of 1996 dismissing the appeal of the appellant and upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Trial No.79 of 1995, whereby the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default, to undergo further simple imprisonment for 5 months.2. For the purpose of considering the rival legal contentions urged in this appeal and with a view to find out whether this Court is required to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court, the necessary facts are briefly stated hereunder: On 18.4.1994, at about 12.00 to 12.30 a.m. at night, the prosecutrix, Kumari Bai, had come out of her house to answer the call of nature near the mango tree in the courtyard, and the accused came from behind and caught hold of her hands and started dragging her in a bid to commit sexual intercourse with her. When she tried to run away in order to get out of his clutches, he again caught hold of her hair and threw her on the ground and caught hold of her legs, as a result of which the prosecutrix suffered ...

Sep 25 2014

Stock Exchange, Bombay Vs. V.S. Kandalgaonkar & Ors.

  • Decided on : 25-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4354 of 2003 The Stock Exchange, Bombay .Appellant Versus V.S. Kandalgaonkar & Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT R.F.Nariman, J.1. The present matter arises as the result of a member of a Stock Exchange being declared a defaulter. The Income Tax Department claims that it has priority over all debts owed by the defaulter member, whereas the Stock Exchange, Bombay claims otherwise.2. The facts necessary to appreciate the controversy are as follows: By a notice dated 29th June 1994, the Stock Exchange, Bombay declared Shri Suresh Damji Shah as a defaulter with immediate effect as he had failed to meet his obligations and discharge his liabilities. By a notice dated 5th October 1995 issued under Section 226 (3) of the Income Tax Act, the Income Tax Department wrote to the Stock Exchange and told them that Shri Shahs membership card being liable to be auctioned, the amount realized at such auction should be paid towards Income Tax dues of Assessment Year 1989-90 and 1990-91 amounting to Rs.25.43 Lakhs. The Stock Exchange, Bombay by its letter dated 11th October 1995 replied to the said notice and stated that under Rules 5 and 6 of the Stock Exchange the membership right is a personal privilege and is inalienable. Further, under Rule 9 on death or default of a member his right of nomination shall cease and vest in the Exchange and accordingly the membership right of Shri Shah has vested with the ...

Sep 25 2014

Murlidhar Shivram Patekar & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

  • Decided on : 25-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.111 of 2008 MURLIDHAR SHIVRAM PATEKAR & ANR. APPELLANTS VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.This appeal is filed by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No.255 of 1999 by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, whereby the High Court upheld the Trial Courts decision of convicting the appellants under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) on the charge of murder of one Asaram and sentencing them to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year. The present appeal is filed by the appellants praying to set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court, urging various grounds.2. The necessary relevant facts are briefly stated hereunder: The accused-appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are husband and wife respectively, who are the residents of Village Motigavan in Jalgaon District in Maharashtra. They have been charged with the murder of one Asaram, as a result of a scuffle that took place between the accused and the deceased. An FIR was originally lodged by Madhav Gore, the complainant, who had witnessed the incident. Initially, the crime was registered under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. However, after the death of Asaram, the crime was registered under Section 302 read with ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //