Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. No.455/2001 INDUL SHAH STATE Date of Decision :7. h MARCH, 2017 ..... APPELLANT Through Mr.M.L. Yadav, Adv. with appellant in person. versus ..... RESPONDENT Through Mr.Ashish Dutta, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 25th April, 1. 2001 convicting the appellant finding him guilty under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act, 1985) and order on sentence dated 28th April, 2001 vide which the sentence was passed against the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, in default of payment of fine, convict was ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, the present appeal has been filed.2. The facts in brief are that a secret infor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1998)66ITD450(Delhi)
1. These two appeals, by the assessee, are directed against the orders passed under ss. 154 and 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') for asst. yr. 1989-90. As both are interconnected, they are disposed of by a single order after consolidating them.2. Shri R. Ganesan appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri M. S.Syali, standing counsel, represented the Department.3. Briefly put, the facts are that the assessee filed its return declaring an income of Rs. 30,95,450. The return was processed under s.143(1)(a) of the Act and the income determined was at Rs. 31,14,600.This was after including an amount of Rs. 19,150 the depreciation claimed at hundred per cent on the machinery. Subsequently, the AO modified the income under s. 154 of the Act by restricting deduction under s. 80HHC of the Act to Rs. 13,83,30,602 as against Rs. 15,06,77,328 claimed by the assessee. In appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. The assessee is aggrieved against the order on the ground that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1969Delhi91; ILR1968Delhi193
S.K. Kapur, J. (1) It will nto be an unfaithful summary of the history to say that for ages searches and seizures of documents and objects alleged to be incriminating have been responsible for many a battle at the bar. The safeguards of liberty of the subjects in this behalf have been forged out of conflicts between overzealous prosecutors on the one hand and nto very nice people on the toher. In preserving this liberty of the subjects the Courts always bear in mind that under our Constitution the concept of liberty is wider and the prisoner's dream of freedom from custody alone is nto liberty. The present writ petition is directed against searches conducted on 10/8/1966 at the residence of the petitioners at 35, Rajpur Road, Delhi, and toher places occupied by the petitioners in connection with their business by a group of officers headed by Shri Rajendra Mohan, Income-tax Officer, respondent No. 2. The search was held in pursuance of the various authorization issued by the Director o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1968Delhi225
S.K. Kapur, J. (1) It will nto be an unfaithful summary of the history to say that for ages searches and seizures of documents and objects alleged to be incriminating have been responsible for many a battle at the bar. The safeguards of liberty of the subjects in this behalf have been forged out of conflicts between overzealous prosecutors on the one hand and nto very nice people on the toher. In preserving this liberty of the subjects the Courts always bear in mind that under our Constitution the concept of liberty is wider and the prisoner's dream of freedom from custody alone is nto liberty. The present writ petition is directed against searches conducted on 10/8/1966 at the residence of the petitioners at 35, Rajpur Road, Delhi, and toher places occupied by the petitioners in connection with their business by a group of officers headed by Shri Rajendra Mohan, Income-tax Officer, respondent No. 2. The search was held in pursuance of the various authorization issued by the Director o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 50(1993)DLT458
ORDERWhereas, the Election Commission in its Notification No. 464/91(1) dated 19/04/1991, issued under Section 30 of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 (43 of 1951) had(i) fixed the 20/05/1991, as the date on which poll shall betaken in the Parliament Constituency of 35 Patna of Bihar and(ii) specified the 31/05/1991, as the date before which the election shall be completed in the above constituency:andWhereas, the Election Commission has received information based on the reports of the State Government, the Chief Electoral Officer of the State, the Returning Officer, the Observers and other relevant sources of information that on the date of polling, i.e.,20.5.1991 there had been large scale incidents of electoral malpractice involving booth capturing by seizure of polling stations, making polling authorities surrender the ballot papers, making forcible possession of polling stations and prevention of free access to for the purpose of voting, threatening electors and preventi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h February, 2018 Date of Decision:27. h August, 2018 W.P.(C) 13770/2009 ALLIED ICD SERVICES LTD. ........ Petitioner Through Mr. K.K.Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Gunjan Kumar and Mr. Anshul Rai, Advs. versus UOI AND ORS. Through Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Mr.Mukesh ........ RESPONDENTS Kumar Tiwari and Mr.Abhishek Rana, Advs. for R-1/UOI. Mr.Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr.Swesh Choudhary and Mr.Bhavya Dubey, Advs. for Deptt. of Customs. + W.P.(C) 3912/2010 THAR DRY PORT ........ Petitioner Through Mr.K.K.Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Gunjan Kumar and Mr.Anshul Rai, Advs. versus UOI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ruchir Mishra, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari and Mr. Abhishek Rana, Advs. for R-1/UOI. WP(C) No.13770/2009 and connected matters Page 1 of 29 + W.P.(C) 6543/2010 THAR DRY PORT ........ Petitioner Through Mr.K.K.Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Gunjan Kumar and Mr.Anshul Rai, Advs. versus UOI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 104(2003)DLT147; I(2003)DMC755; 2003(67)DRJ695; 2003(2)JCC639
R.C. Chopra, J.1. This Revision under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' only) is directed against an order dated 26.5.2001 by which learned Additional Sessions Judge had directed framing of charges under Sections 306/498-A read with Section 34, IPC against the petitioners.2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are that the deceased Ritu Sharma was married to petitioner No. 3 in the year 1987. On 20.5.2000, she suffered burn injuries in her matrimonial home. She was taken to the hospital where she succumbed to her injuries on 23.5.2000. While making a statement before the doctor at the time of admission as well as in her dying declaration recorded by the Investing Officer on 21.5.2000, she had stated that the burn injuries suffered by her were accidental. However, on 1.6.2000 Padam Sharma, brother of the deceased lodged an FIR alleging that since her marriage the deceased Ritu Sharma was being har...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1991Delhi97
ORDERB. N. Kirpal, J.1. The challenge in this bunch of writ petitions, which are being decided by this common judgment, is to the resolution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi whereby it approved the proposal of the Delhi Electricity Supply Committee to enhance minimum consumption guarantee charges from Rs. 40/ - per KVA to Rs. 340/ -per KVA in respect of Arc/Induction furnaces.2. The petitioners have set up/installed furnaces for the manufacture of castings and have their factories in Delhi. These furnaces have been set up after having obtained valid licenses from the respondent-Corporation for the manufacture of castings.3. One of the important raw-materials for the petitioners is electricity. Each of the petitioner has obtained electricity from the respondents and the sanctioned load is more than 100 KWS. The exact sanctioned load varies, depending upon the size and capacity of the furnaces set up by the different petitioners, but each one of them has a sanctioned load of more th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 150(2008)DLT769; 2008(105)DRJ721
S. Muralidhar, J.Introduction1.1 Over three and a half years ago, an internet website carried a listing which offered for sale a video clip, shot on a mobile phone, of two children of a school in Delhi indulging in an explicitly sexual act. The petitioner, who was the Managing Director (MD) of the company that owned the website at the relevant point in time, asks this Court to annul his criminal prosecution for the offences of making available for sale and causing to be published an obscene product within the meaning of Section 292 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act). This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 ('CrPC') also raises questions concerning the criminal liability of directors for the offences attributable to a company, both under the IPC as well as the IT Act, particularly when such company is not arraigned as an accused. 1.2 Before discussing the background and the sequence of events leading to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Keeping in view the similitude of the question involved in this batch of writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts of WP(C) 12859/2009 are enumerated herein.2. The petitioner company was awarded four contracts encompassing Onshore supply, Onshore services and Offshore supply, one each for Northern and North Eastern regions and two for Eastern region by Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. (PGCIL). The contracts were awarded on 29.1.1998, 15.5.2000, 16.1.2001 and 20.1.2002. The contracts for Onshore supply and Onshore services were given on sub contract to Areva T&D; Systems India Ltd. at the same price at which the said contracts were awarded to the petitioner by PGCIL.3. The PGCIL had moved an application under Section 195(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity the Act') with regard to the payments to be made to the petitioners. The revenue, vide orders dated 6.6.2000, 23.5.2001 and 28.12....
Tag this Judgment!