Skip to content

Filter by :

Latest Judgments Judgments > Court:Supreme Year:2014

Sep 19 2014

Yogendra Pratap Singh Vs. Savitri Pandey & Anr

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.605 OF2012Yogendra Pratap Singh Appellant Versus Savitri Pandey & Anr. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1924 OF2014CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1925 OF2014JUDGMENT R.M. LODHA, CJI. In the order of 03.04.2012, a two-Judge Bench of this Court granted leave in SLP (Crl.) No.5761 of 2010. The Court formulated the following two questions for consideration: (i) Can cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 be taken on the basis of a complaint filed before the expiry of the period of 15 days stipulated in the notice required to be served upon the drawer of the cheque in terms of Section 138 (c) of the Act aforementioned?. And, (ii) If answer to question No.1 is in the negative, can the complainant be permitted to present the complaint again notwithstanding the fact that the period of one month stipulated under Section 142 (b) for the filing of such a complaint has expired?.2. The two-Judge Bench in that order noticed Section 138 and Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) and also referred to the two decisions of this Court, namely, (1) Narsingh Das Tapadia[1]. and (2) Sarav Investment & Financial Consultancy[2].. The Bench also noticed the judgments of High Courts of Calcutta, Orissa, Bombay, Punjab and Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Allahabad, Gauhati, Rajasthan, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Madras, Jammu and Kashmir ...

Sep 19 2014

Sri Chand and Anr. Vs. State of Punjab

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1816 OF2009Sri Chand and Another .Appellants Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 24.09.2008 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No.1044 of 1998, whereby the High Court allowed appeal of one of the four accused persons and dismissed appeal of the other three accused persons (viz. husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased lady). The appellants- accused persons were convicted by the trial court on the charges under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) and directed each of the accused persons to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years with fine of Rs.2000/- each for the former offence and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the latter offence with fine of Rs.1000/- each with default clause. Prima facie, it will be appropriate to notice that on the appeal preferred by the aforesaid three accused persons under Article 136 of the Constitution, this Court on 12.5.2009, while directing issuance of notice in the matter, confined the appeal to accused nos.2 & 3 and dismissed the appeal preferred by the husband-accused no.1.2. The facts leading to the prosecution story are that on 18.2.1997, Tarsem Ram alias Tarsem Lal, resident of Village Durgapur, made a statement before the S.H.O. of Police Station ...

Sep 19 2014

Sita Ram Paliwal Vs. Rajasthan State Agro Inds.Corpn.Ltd.&Anr

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.605 OF2012Yogendra Pratap Singh Appellant Versus Savitri Pandey & Anr. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1924 OF2014CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1925 OF2014JUDGMENT R.M. LODHA, CJI. In the order of 03.04.2012, a two-Judge Bench of this Court granted leave in SLP (Crl.) No.5761 of 2010. The Court formulated the following two questions for consideration: (i) Can cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 be taken on the basis of a complaint filed before the expiry of the period of 15 days stipulated in the notice required to be served upon the drawer of the cheque in terms of Section 138 (c) of the Act aforementioned?. And, (ii) If answer to question No.1 is in the negative, can the complainant be permitted to present the complaint again notwithstanding the fact that the period of one month stipulated under Section 142 (b) for the filing of such a complaint has expired?.2. The two-Judge Bench in that order noticed Section 138 and Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) and also referred to the two decisions of this Court, namely, (1) Narsingh Das Tapadia[1]. and (2) Sarav Investment & Financial Consultancy[2].. The Bench also noticed the judgments of High Courts of Calcutta, Orissa, Bombay, Punjab and Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Allahabad, Gauhati, Rajasthan, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Madras, Jammu and Kashmir ...

Sep 19 2014

Institute of Law & Ors. Vs. Neeraj Sharma & Ors.

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

|REPORTABLE | IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2143 OF2007INSTITUTE OF LAW & ORS. .APPELLANTS Vs. NEERAJ SHARMA & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.This appeal is directed against the two separate impugned orders dated 14.2.2005 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.6916 of 2004 by both the members of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh and against the order dated 26.04.2006 passed in Civil Misc. No.5016 of 2005 and Civil Misc. No.6173 of 2005. The brief facts of the case are stated hereunder:- 2. The appellant-Institute of law was allotted the land measuring 28,376.23 sq. yards (5.75 acres) in Sector 38-A in the Union Territory of Chandigarh at the rate of Rs.900/- per sq. yard by the administration of Union Territory of Chandigarh. The rate was fixed by the Chandigarh Administration vide its Notification No.31/1/100-UTFI (4-2002/1823) dated 7.3.2002 issued under the Punjab Development Regulation Act, 1952 fixing the land rates for allotment to educational institutions in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. The allotment of land was made in favour of appellant-Institute for 99 years on lease hold basis with the condition that the initial lease period will be 33 years and renewable for two like periods only if the lessee continues to fulfil all conditions of allotment.3. The respondent No.1, Neeraj Sharma, filed a Writ Petition No.6916 of 2004 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at ...

Sep 19 2014

Vijay Thakur Vs. State of H.P.

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.632 OF2011|VIJAY THAKUR |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH |.....RESPONDENT(S) | W I T H CRIMINAL APPEAL No.633 OF2011JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.These two appeals arise out of concurrent order of conviction passed by the courts below convicting these two appellants, viz. Vijay Thakur and Surjeet Khachi, along with third accused, namely, Rajinder Thakur under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing all of them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of ?.5,000, etc. The appellants are also convicted for the offence under Section 392 read with Section 34 IPC and are given the sentence of five years and fine of ?.2,000 each with a default clause in case fine is not paid. As correctness of the narration of this prosecution case recorded by the High Court is not in dispute, we may state the prosecution version by borrowing from the said judgment. It is as under: (a) Deceased Santosh Kumar, son of Bir Chand (PW-1), was employed as a driver by Ganga Ram (PW-2) to drive his Maruti van, which he had purchased only few days prior to the date of occurrence, i.e. August 21, 2004. The van had yet not been registered with the Registration Authority, though application for registration had been moved. On August 21, 2004, all the three appellants were looking for a taxi as they wanted to escort a truck carrying timber. They got ...

Sep 19 2014

State of Maharashtra Trhu Cbi Vs. Vikram Anantrai Doshi & Ors.

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2048 OF2014(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.6461 of 2011) State of Maharashtra Through CBI Appellant Versus Vikram Anantrai Doshi and Others Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.The centripodal issue that strikingly emerges, commanding the judicial conscience to ponder and cogitate with reasonable yard-stick of precision, for consideration how far a superior court should proceed to analyse the factual score in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction bestowed upon it under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to quash the criminal proceeding solely on the ground that the parties have entered into a settlement and, therefore, the continuance of the criminal proceeding would be an exercise in futility, or the substantial cause of justice warrants such quashment to make the parties free from unnecessary litigation with the assumed motto of not loading the system with unfruitful prosecution, of course with certain riders, one of which, as regards the cases pertaining to commercial litigations, appreciation of predominant nature of civil propensity involved in the lis or social impact in the backdrop of the facts of the case. The primary question that we have posed has a substantial supplementary issue; i.e. should the courts totally remain oblivious to the prism of fiscal purity and wholly brush aside the modus operandi maladroitly adopted, as ...

Sep 18 2014

Hind Charitable Trust Shekhar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & ...

  • Decided on : 18-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.469 OF2014HIND CHARITABLE TRUST SHEKHAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. PETITIONER(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(s) WITH W.P.(C) No.700/2014 W.P.(C) No.705/2014 W.P.(C) No.706/2014 W.P.(C) No.707/2014 SLP(C) No.21765/2014 SLP(C) No.22755/2014 SLP(C) No.22756/2014 SLP(C) No.22757/2014 SLP(C) No.22758-22759/2014 SLP(C) No.22974/2014 W.P.(C) No.784/2014 SLP(C) No.23512/2014 SLP(C) No.23777/2014 W.P.(C) No.757/2014 W.P.(C) No.799/2014 SLP(C) No.22785/2014 SLP(C) No.23476/2014 SLP(C) No.23547/2014 SLP(C) No.24150-24151/2014 SLP(C) No.24154/2014 T.P.(C) No.1217/2014 SLP(C) No.24665/2014 SLP(C) No.24913/2014 W.P.(C) No.819/2014 SLP(C) No.24686/2014 SLP(C) No.25763/2014 ORDER Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for both the sides. Looking at the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and, especially, when several seats for medical admission are likely to remain vacant for the academic year 2014-15, we are of the view that these matters require urgent consideration and we are giving these interim directions under the provisions of Article 142 of the Constitution of India. There is one more reason for passing this interim order. We are conscious of the fact that number of physicians in our country is much less than what is required and because of non-renewal of recognition of several medical colleges, our citizens would be deprived of a good number of physicians and ...

Sep 18 2014

Shalu Ojha Vs. Prashant Ojha

  • Decided on : 18-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2070 OF2014(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.6220 OF2014 Shalu Ojha Appellant Versus Prashant Ojha Respondent JUDGMENT Chelameswar, J.1. Leave granted.2. This is an unfortunate case where the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are rendered simply a pious hope of the Parliament and a teasing illusion for the appellant.3. The appellant is a young woman who got married to the respondent on 20.04.2007 in Delhi according to Hindu rites and customs, pursuant to certain information placed by the respondent on the website known as Sycorian Matrimonial Services Ltd.. 4. According to the appellant, she was thrown out of the matrimonial home within four months of the marriage on 14.8.2007. Thereafter, the respondent started pressurizing the appellant to agree for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. As the appellant did not agree for the same, the respondent filed a petition for divorce being H.M.A. No.637 of 2007 under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 17.10.2007 before the Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The said petition was dismissed by an order dated 03.10.2008. Within four months, the respondent filed another petition on 08.04.2009 once again invoking Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Additional District Judge, Patiala House Courts, Delhi being H.M.A. No.215 of 2009 and ...

Sep 18 2014

Chairman Cum Md Iocl & Ors. Vs. Sunita Kumari & Anr.

  • Decided on : 18-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8980 OF2014(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.313 of 2012) Chairman cum Managing Director Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors. .Appellants Vs. Sunita Kumari & Anr. .Respondents WITH S.L.P. (Civil) No.31006 of 2012 Rajesh Kumar Tiwary Petitioner Vs. The Union of India & Ors. .Respondents JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J.Leave granted in S.L.P. (Civil) No.313 of 2012. The question for consideration is whether, on the cancellation of the allotment of a dealership or distributorship for petroleum products in favour of the first ranked or first empanelled candidate, there is an automatic allotment in favour of the second ranked or second empanelled candidate, subject to fulfillment of the conditions of allotment. In our opinion, in view of the decisions of this Court, if the allotment is tainted due to political connections or patronage or other extraneous considerations, the entire selection process is vitiated and, therefore the second ranked or second empanelled candidate is not entitled to an automatic allotment of a dealership or distributorship in his or her favour. The facts 3. On 10th July 2000, an advertisement was issued by the appellants, that is, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (for short IOC) for the appointment of dealers for superior kerosene oil and light diesel oil (SKO-LDO). The appointment was reserved for women belonging to Scheduled Castes and was for Warisnagar, District Samastipur ( ...

Sep 18 2014

Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K.Basheer & Ors.

  • Decided on : 18-Sep-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4226 OF2012Anvar P.V. Appellant (s) Versus P.K. Basheer and others Respondent (s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.: Construction by plaintiff, destruction by defendant. Construction by pleadings, proof by evidence; proof only by relevant and admissible evidence. Genuineness, veracity or reliability of the evidence is seen by the court only after the stage of relevancy and admissibility. These are some of the first principles of evidence. What is the nature and manner of admission of electronic records, is one of the principal issues arising for consideration in this appeal. In the general election to the Kerala Legislative Assembly held on 13.04.2011, the first respondent was declared elected to 034 Eranad Legislative Assembly Constituency. He was a candidate supported by United Democratic Front. The appellant contested the election as an independent candidate, allegedly supported by the Left Democratic Front. Sixth respondent was the chief election agent of the first respondent. There were five candidates. Appellant was second in terms of votes; others secured only marginal votes. He sought to set aside the election under Section 100(1)(b) read with Section 123(2)(ii) and (4) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the RP Act) and also sought for a declaration in favour of the appellant. By order dated 16.11.2011, the High Court held that the election petition to set aside the ...

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