Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC1851; 2004(2)ALD(Cri)258; (2004)3CALLT55(SC); [2004(4)JCR137(SC)]; JT2004(5)SC157; 2004(1)SCALE641; (2004)4SCC129
S.B. Sinha, J.INTRODUCTION:1. Applicability of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing a proceeding for confiscation of forest-produce etc. under the provisions of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as amended by the State of West Bengal is in question in these appeals which arise out of a common judgment and order dated 27.6.1996 passed by the Calcutta High Court.BACKGROUND FACTShortly stated the fact of the matter is that the forest-produce belonging to the State and/or the vehicles carrying the same were seized by the Forest Officer. The report of such seizure was made to the authorized officer.2. Except Criminal Appeal No. 453 of 1997 - State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Sujit Kumar Rana, show cause notices issued by the forest authority purported to be issued under the provision of Section 59-B of the Act, as amended by the State of west Bengal or the seizure of the forest-produce of the vehicle carrying the same, came to be quest...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.420 OF2012SURESH & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ..... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.1. This appeal has been preferred against conviction and sentence of the appellants under Sections 302 read with Sections 34, 364-A, 201 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.2. Case of the prosecution is that on 18th December, 2000, the deceased Devender Chopra and his son deceased Abhishek Chopra had left their factory for their house in D.L.F., Gurgaon but did not reach their house. At about 9.41 P.M., PW-12 Pooja Chopra, daughter of Devender Chopra gave a call to her father to find out as to why he was late. She learnt that her father and brother had been kidnapped and ransom of rupees fifty lacs was demanded for their release. She contacted her father's business partner informing him that Devender Chopra and Abhishek Chopra were kidnapped and the kidnappers had demanded a ransom a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.420 OF2012SURESH & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ..... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.1. This appeal has been preferred against conviction and sentence of the appellants under Sections 302 read with Sections 34, 364-A, 201 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.2. Case of the prosecution is that on 18th December, 2000, the deceased Devender Chopra and his son deceased Abhishek Chopra had left their factory for their house in D.L.F., Gurgaon but did not reach their house. At about 9.41 P.M., PW-12 Pooja Chopra, daughter of Devender Chopra gave a call to her father to find out as to why he was late. She learnt that her father and brother had been kidnapped and ransom of rupees fifty lacs was demanded for their release. She contacted her father's business partner informing him that Devender Chopra and Abhishek Chopra were kidnapped and the kidnappers had demanded a ransom a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
W.P.(Crl.) No.409 of 2020, etc. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.409 OF2020STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ...Petitioner versus JAIL SUPERINTENDENT (ROPAR) & Ors. ...Respondent(s) WITH [Transfer Petition (Criminal) NO.104-114 of 2021]. JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J.(Writ Petition (Crl.) No.409/2020) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) by the State of Uttar Pradesh, seeking Writ of Mandamus, seeking appropriate directions, directing the respondent-State of Punjab and the Learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Mohali, 1 W.P.(Crl.) No.409 of 2020, etc. State of Punjab, to transfer the criminal proceedings and trial in the Case Crime No.05 of 2019, titled as State of Punjab v. Mukhtar Ansari, pending before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Mohali, State of Punjab, to the Court of Special Judge (MP/MLA), Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh and with a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC3800; JT2004(Suppl1)SC443; 2004(5)SCALE1; (2004)4SCC714; 2004(3)SLJ175(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J.INTRODUCTION:1. A short but interesting question as regard interpretation of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the relevant provisions of Legal Remembrancer's Manual relating to appointment and renewal of term of the District Government Counsel is in question in this batch of appeals which arise out of various judgments and orders passed by the Allahabad High Court in C.M.W.P. Nos. 34064, 19513, 34074, 26613, 40945, 41178, 5665, 41180, 5667 of 1998, 9809 of 1992, 9203 of 1998, 3100, 3102 of 1999 and 6754 of 1998.FACTUAL BACKDROP:2. The State of Uttar Pradesh appoints District Government Counsel (DGC) for civil, criminal and revenue courts in terms of the Legal Remembrancer Manual.3. Appointment of Public Prosecutor is governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The State of Uttar Pradesh, however, amended Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in terms whereof the requirements to consult the High Court for appointment of Public Prosecutions for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC876; [1962]Supp2SCR297
S.K. Das, J. 1. I regret that I have come to a conclusion different from that of my learned brethren in these appeals. I proceed now to state the necessary facts, the arguments advanced before us and my conclusions on the various questions urged. 2. By an order dated April 10, 1961 this Court granted special leave asked for by the two appellants herein, Pramatha Nath Talukdar and Saurindra Mohan Basu, to appeal to this Court from two orders made by the High Court Calcutta, one dated December 22/23, 1960 and the other dated March 17, 1961. By the first order a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court dismissed two applications in revision which the appellants had made to the said High Court against an order of the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta dated April 11, 1959 by which the said Magistrate issued processes against the two appellants for offences alleged to have been committed by them under Sections 467 and 471 read with s. 109 of the Indian penal Code on a complaint made by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC434REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2608 OF2024(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.121 of 2024) TARSEM LAL APPELLANT VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2609 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.191 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2610 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.698 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2611 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.330 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEALNO.2612 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.743 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2613 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.728 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2614 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.969 of 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2615 OF2024@ SLP (Crl.) No.3928 of 2024 JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.1. Leave granted. Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.) 121 of 2024 Page 1 of 37 FACTUAL ASPECTS2 Since the issues involved are common and very little turns on facts, we broadly refer to the factual aspects. The appellants are the accused in complaints under Section 44 (1) (b) of the Prevention of Money Lau...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.1068 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.6564 of 2019) M/s Gimpex Private Limited ... Appellant Versus Manoj Goel ... Respondent With Criminal Appeal Nos. 1069-1075 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) Nos. 7632-7638 of 2019) 1 JUDGMENT Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J A Factual Background ...........................................................................................3 B Submissions of parties .................................................................................... 12 C Analysis .............................................................................................................1 5 C.1 Parallel prosecutions ................................................................................. 15 C.2 Liability arising from the settlement agreement ..................................... 33 D Conclusion .................................................................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF2022(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s).39 of 2022) RAMESH CHANDRA GUPTA .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF2022(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s).4813 of 2022) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF2022(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s).7052 of 2022) JUDGMENT Rastogi, J.1. Leave granted.2. The instant appeals have been filed against the judgment dated 3rd February, 2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at 1 Allahabad dismissing the criminal miscellaneous application filed at the instance of the present appellants.3. The dispute relates to House No.189, Mohalla Madia, Kanpur Road, Jhansi, which as per the complainant, was purchased in the name of Shravan Kumar Gupta, who was minor at that time, by means of a registered sale deed dated 4th May, 1977 and through the ostensible owner, the de-facto complainant purchased the property by registered sale dee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. The Central Bureau of Investigation [Hereinafter `CBI'] has approached this Court by way of Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 219-220 of 2009 as contemplated under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [Hereinafter `CrPC'], seeking transfer of cases RC IMPH 2009/S0002 and RC IMPH 2009/S0003, both dated 02-04-09, from the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ukhrul, Manipur to a competent Criminal court in Delhi.2. In these cases, the respondent has been accused of the kidnapping and murder of three government employees in the State of Manipur. It would be useful to provide an overview of the fact-situation leading up to the present litigation. On 13-2-2009, Dr. Thingnam Kishan Singh (S.D.O., Kasom Khullen, Distt. Ukhrul) along with five staff members was abducted by militants while on their way from Ukhrul to Kasom Khullen. On 14-2-2009, three of the abducted persons, namely Sh. Ram Singh Siro, Sh. Ramthing Singlai and Sh. Kapangkhui Jajo were released. Following this...
Tag this Judgment!