Skip to content

Filter by :

Latest Judgments Judgments > Court:Supreme Year:2014

Jul 18 2014

Hussein Ghadially @ M.H.G.A.Shaikh & Ors Vs. State of Gujarat

  • Decided on : 18-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.92 OF2009Hussein Ghadially @ M.H.G.A Shaikh & Ors. Appellants Versus State of Gujarat Respondent With Criminal Appeals No.110 of 2009, 303-304 of 2009, 305 of 2009, 432-433 of 2009, 658-659 of 2009 JUDGMENT T.S. THAKUR, J.1. Common questions of law arise for consideration in these appeals which were heard together and shall stand disposed of by this common order. The appeals arise out of two separate judgments delivered by the Designated Court at Surat both dated 4th October, 2008 whereby the Designated Court has while acquitting some of the accused persons convicted the rest and sentenced them to imprisonment for different periods ranging between 10 to 20 years. In Criminal (TADA) case No.41 of 1995 disposed of with Criminal (TADA) case No.1 of 2000 arising out of C.R. No.70 of 1993 relevant to Criminal Appeals No.92 of 2009 and 658 of 2009, the Designated Court has convicted the appellants in those appeals while respondents in Criminal Appeal No.305 of 2009 filed by the State of Gujarat against the very same judgment have been acquitted. In Criminal Appeals No.432-33 of 2009 the State has sought enhancement of the sentence awarded to those convicted by the Trial Court.2. In Criminal (TADA) case No.59 of 1995 and 2 of 2000 arising out of C.R. No.32 of 1993 the Designated Court has similarly convicted some of the accused persons who are (appellants before us in Criminal Appeals No.110 ...

Jul 17 2014

Renikuntla Rajamma (D) by Lr. Vs. K.Sarwanamma

  • Decided on : 17-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

ITEM No.1A Court No.3 SECTION XIIA (For Judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL No.4195 OF2008RENIKUNTLA RAJAMMA (D) BY LRS.. Appellant (s) VERSUS K.SARWANAMMA Respondent (s) Date :17. 07.2014 This Petition was called on for judgment today. For Appellant (s) Mr. Nitin S.Tambwekar, Adv. Mr. B.S.Sai, Adv. Mr. K.Rajeev, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. V.R.Anumolu, Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur pronounced Judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.Gopala Gowda and Hon'ble Mr. Justice C.Naggapan The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed judgment. There shall be no order as to costs. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master Signed Reportable judgment is placed on the file. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4195 OF2008Renikuntla Rajamma (d) by LRs. Appellants Versus K. Sarwanamma Respondent JUDGMENT T.S. THAKUR, J.1. An apparent conflict between two earlier decisions rendered by this Court one in Naramadaben Maganlal Thakker v. Pranjivandas Maganlal Thakker & Ors. (1997) 2 SCC255and the other in K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam & Ors. (2004) 1 SCC581has led to this reference to a larger bench for an authoritative pronouncement as to the true and correct interpretation of Sections 122 and 123 of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Before we deal with the precise area in which the two decisions take divergent views, we may briefly set out the ...

Jul 15 2014

Rajesh Valel Puthuvalil & Anr Vs. Inland Waterways Auth.Of India & Anr ...

  • Decided on : 15-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6396 OF2014[Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.31619 of 2012]. Rajesh Valel Puthuvalil & Anr. .. Appellant(s) -vs- Inland Waterways Authority of India & Anr. .. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and final order dated 30.3.2012 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in L.A.A. no.995 of 2010.3. The property of the appellants herein, both land and structures situated at Alappad Village at Karunagappally Taluk of Kollam District was acquired at the instance of respondent no.1 herein, for the purpose of widening the narrow stretches of National Waterways no.3 and award came to be passed. Dissatisfied with the award the appellants/claimants preferred reference and the Reference Court re-determined the land value and the value of the building, by enhancing it. Challenging the same, respondent no.1 herein preferred appeal and the High Court confirmed the land value re- determined by the Reference Court and at the same time reduced the value of the structures from a sum of Rs.4,45,000/- to a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-. Aggrieved by the same the appellants/claimants have preferred the present appeal.4. The learned counsel for the appellants strenuously contended that the High Court committed an error in reducing the compensation for the building on the basis of guess estimate discarding the objective material in ...

Jul 15 2014

Rohtas Bhankhar & Ors Vs. U.O.I. & Anr

  • Decided on : 15-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 6046-6047 OF2004| ROHTAS BHANKHAR & OTHERS |...|APPELLANT(s) | | Versus | | UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER |.. |RESPONDENT(s) | JUDGMENT R.M.LODHA, CJI. On 23.12.1970 (1970 O.M.), the Department of Personnel issued Office Memorandum being O.M. No.8/12/69-Estt.(SCT) relaxing standards in the case of Scheduled Castes/Tribes candidates in departmental competitive examinations and in departmental confirmation examinations. The said O.M. remained operative for about 17 years until O.M. No.36012/23/96-Estt.(Res) dated 22.7.1997 was issued whereby the instructions contained in 1970 O.M. were withdrawn. Thereafter by Notification dated 30.11.1998, the Central Secretariat Service Section Officers' Grade/Stenographers' Grade 'B (Limited Departmental Competitive Examination) Regulations, 1964 (for short 1964 Regulations) were amended by Central Secretariat Service Section Officers' Grade/Stenographers' Grade 'B (Limited Departmental Competitive Examination) Amendment Regulations, 1998 (for short 1998 Regulations). The result of this amendment was that in 1964 Regulations, Regulation 7, sub-regulation (3) was omitted on and from 22.7.1997. The explanatory note appended to the above Notification reads as follows: In compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of S. Vinod Kumar vs. Union of India (JT19968) SC643, the Central Government decided to omit the provisions of regulation 7(3) of the ...

Jul 15 2014

Bhuwan Mohan Singh Vs. Meena & Ors.

  • Decided on : 15-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1331 OF2014(Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.1565 of 2013) Bhuwan Mohan Singh Appellant Versus Meena & Ors. Respondent JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.Leave granted. The two issues that pronouncedly emanate in this appeal by special leave are whether the Family Court while deciding an application under Section 7 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (for brevity, the Act) which includes determination of grant of maintenance to the persons as entitled under that provision, should allow adjournments in an extremely liberal manner remaining oblivious of objects and reasons of the Act and also keeping the windows of wisdom closed and the sense of judicial responsiveness suspended to the manifest perceptibility of vagrancy, destitution, impecuniosity, struggle for survival and the emotional fracture, a wife likely to face under these circumstances and further exhibiting absolute insensitivity to her condition, who, after loosing support of the husband who has failed to husband the marital status denies the wife to have maintenance for almost nine years as that much time is consumed to decide the lis and, in addition, to restrict the grant of maintenance to the date of order on some kind of individual notion. Both the approaches, as we perceive, not only defeat the command of the legislature but also frustrate the hope of wife and children who are deprived of adequate livelihood and whose aspirations perish like ...

Jul 15 2014

C.K. Dasegowda & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka

  • Decided on : 15-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1381 of 2014 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.)NO.4018 OF2012 C.K. DASEGOWDA & ORS. .....APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA .....RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.This appeal is filed by the appellants questioning the correctness of the judgment and final order dated 11.08.2010 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No.1256 of 2005 in setting aside the order of acquittal of the appellants passed by the trial court thereby imposing sentence of conviction on the accused for offences punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of IPC for causing injuries on separate count.2. Necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case of the appellants and also to find out whether they are entitled to the relief as prayed for in this appeal.3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 11.8.1999, at about 7:00 a.m., PW-3 Kempanna had gone to the house of the complainant on a bicycle to take milk for his children. When the complainant and PW-3 were coming back, accused nos. 1 to 10 (A-1 to A-10) attacked them with deadly weapons. It is alleged by the prosecution that A-1 assaulted PW-3 with iron blade of a plough on his head. A-3 assualted PW-3 on his back and thigh. A-4 assualted PW-3 on both his legs with iron blade of plough. A-2 assaulted PW- 1 with iron rod on his left shoulder. A-6, A-8 and A-10 kicked PW-1. A-5 and A-7 assaulted ...

Jul 09 2014

State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Singh & Ors.

  • Decided on : 09-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1615 OF2013STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS ASHOK KUMAR SINGH & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.This appeal has been preferred by the State of Bihar and others against the judgment dated 7th May, 2007 passed by the High Court Judicature at Patna in Cr.W.J.C. No.352 of 2002. By the impugned judgment the High Court giving reference to the provisions of Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000 held that the impugned FIR instituted on 20th August, 2002 by State of Bihar, much after the appointed day is not maintainable and quashed the FIR.2. The factual matrix of the case is as follows: The 1st respondent Ashok Kumar Singh belongs to Indian Administrative Service. He was an officer for the cadre of unified Bihar and was posted as the Managing Director of the Bihar State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ".BSFC) (between 12th May, 1994 and 19 June, 1998). On 1st June, 1996 complaints were received against the 1st respondent and some others alleging that as the Managing Director of the BSFC he and ten other persons including six public servants floated two NGOs and received illegal gratification by forcing the BSFC beneficiaries/loanees to deposit money in the NGOs in return of financial favours shown to them by waving off outstanding loan recoveries. They were also alleged of tampering with records. The Vigilance Department, Government of Bihar ...

Jul 08 2014

Sobaran Singh & Ors. Vs. State of M.P.

  • Decided on : 08-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1466 OF2012Sobaran Singh & Ors. .. Appellant(s) versus State of M.P. .. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 16.3.2012 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No.353 of 2004. The appellants herein are accused nos.1 to 3 in the case in Sessions Trial No.8/97, on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad, District-Bhind (M.P.) and they were tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and the Trial Court convicted them for the said offence and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month. Challenging the conviction and sentence, the accused preferred appeal in Criminal Appeal No.353 of 2004 in the High Court and the same came to be dismissed by the impugned judgment and that is now under challenge in this appeal. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is as follows : PW5 Satyendra Singh, PW16 Brijendra Singh and deceased Narendra Singh are sons of PW7 Hanumant Singh. PW6 Uday Singh and PW10 Om Prakash are brothers of PW7 Hanumant Singh. On 6.9.1994 at 8.00 a.m. PW5 Satyendra Singh and PW16 Brijendra Singh had gone to attend call of nature in the drain (Nalah) and they heard the sound of weeping and alarm raised by PW10 Om Prakash and they went there and saw ...

Jul 08 2014

Khim Singh Vs. State of Uttrakhand

  • Decided on : 08-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1986 OF2009KHIM SINGH APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24th August, 2005 passed by the High Court of Uttaranchal(now Uttarakhand) at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.1388 of 2001 (Old No.-Criminal Appeal No.1165 of 1988). By the impugned judgment the High Court upheld the judgment and order of conviction dated 30th March, 1988, passed by the Sessions Judge, Almora in Sessions Trial No.54 of 1987, State vs. Khim Singh, whereby the accused- appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal as emerging from the material on record, are that the accused Khim Singh was residing with his wife Himuli Devi in his residential house at village Simgari. He has a son, named Mohan Singh, who was also residing with them, but sometimes, he resided with his grandmother, who resides in the adjacent house of Laccham Singh, brother of accused-Khim singh. Earlier accused-Khim Singh was in service outside his village, but for the last 4-5 years he had come back and was working as labourer. His wife, Himuli Devi, was a short- tempered woman and she often quarrelled with Khim Singh. It was suspected in the village that she was a woman of loose character and on account of this, ...

Jul 08 2014

State of Maharashtra Vs. Rajendra & Ors.

  • Decided on : 08-Jul-2014

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.719 OF2010STATE OF MAHARASHTRA APPELLANT VERSUS RAJENDRA & ORS. RESPONDENTS With Criminal Appeal No.720 of 2010 (Chandrakanta vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) JUDGMENT SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 18th August, 2005 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No.388 of 2005. By the impugned judgment the High Court held that unless the prosecution proves that death was suicidal and that the deceased was treated with cruelty and was harassed by direct evidence, the presumption under Section 113-A does not apply in the case and acquitted all the accused-respondents from the charges under Section 498-A, Section 304-B and Section 306 IPC all read with Section 34 IPC, thereby reversing the finding of the Trial Court.2. Respondents accused No.1, Shivpujan and accused No.3, Malti Devi are husband and wife. Accused No.2, Rajendra, accused No.5, Surendra and accused No.6, Virendra are their sons. Accused No.4, Anita is the daughter of accused Nos.1 and 3 and is married to one Satyam Mishra who is in Police service. Accused Nos.1 and 5 are also in Police service. Accused Nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6 reside together in Plot No.96, Adarsha Colony, behind Police Line Takli at Nagpur. Accused No.4 resides in Police Line, Pathrigad Quarter, Sadar at Nagpur. Accused No.2-Rajendra is the youngest son of accused ...

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