Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC525IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) No.546 OF2023Balasaheb Keshawrao Bhapkar & Ors. .Petitioner(s) Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. .Respondent(s) ORDER SURYA KANT, J.1. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are husband and wife, whereas Petitioner No.3 is their son. They have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking the following directions: - (a) To issue appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any direction or order directing the Respondent No.1 to liquidate the attached assets within a period of 6 months and/or, in the alternative, allow the Petitioners to assist Respondent No.1 in liquidating the attached assets; (b) Direct Respondent No.1 to distribute the amount lying within it to genuine investors as early as possible; Page 1 of 21 (c) Direct Respondent No.1 to allow the Petitioners to assist them in identifying genuine investors and also the amount deposit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... code of criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or any other provision of this act, no police officer shall investigate into an offence under this act unless specifically authorised, by the central government by a general or special order, and, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. (2) the limitation on granting of bail specified in sub-section (1) is in addition to the limitations under the code of criminal procedure, 1973 ..... between section 19 of the pml act and section 167 of the code. the magistrate is expected to ..... section 26 of the ipc, defines the expression reason to believe as sufficient cause to believe a thing and not otherwise. joti parshad v. state of haryana31, referring to section 26 of the ipc, has ..... and considering the complexity of the inquiry/ investigation both for the ..... section 437(1) of the code. section 437(1)(i) applies at the stage of initial investigation where a person has been arrested for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. section ..... criminal proceedings/prosecution complaint. it cannot be said that the courts would exceed their power, when they examine the validity of arrest under section 19(1) of the pml act, once the accused is produced in court in terms of section 19(3) of the pml act.22. before we examine the scope and width of the jurisdiction of the court when it examines validity of arrest under section 19(1) of the pml act, we must take on record and deal with the argument of the doe relying on the paragraphs 176 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF July 12, 2024 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5479 OF2020C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4818 OF2020WRIT PETITION NO.7470 OF2021(GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.7539 OF2021(GM-RES) IN CRL.P No.5479/2020 BETWEEN:1. . BALASAHEB PATIL S/O. LATE. BABAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT72YEARS RETD. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE2. SMT. CHANNAMMA PATIL W/O. BALASHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT63YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.004, GROUND FLOOR PYRAMID TEMPLE BELL APARTMENT KENCHENAHALLI, RAJARAJESWARINAGAR BANGALORE-560 098. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AJAY J.N., ADVOCATE) 2 AND:1. SMT. SONI @ SONIA PATIL W/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT38YEARS2 CHI. ANSH PATIL S/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT8YEARS3 KUM. AKIRA D/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT4YEARS (RESPONDENT2AND3ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN).4. ANIL KUMAR S/O BALASAHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT43YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.73, KPA BLOCK I MAIN, CHANDRA LAYOUT B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF July 12, 2024 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5479 OF2020C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4818 OF2020WRIT PETITION NO.7470 OF2021(GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.7539 OF2021(GM-RES) IN CRL.P No.5479/2020 BETWEEN:1. . BALASAHEB PATIL S/O. LATE. BABAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT72YEARS RETD. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE2. SMT. CHANNAMMA PATIL W/O. BALASHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT63YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.004, GROUND FLOOR PYRAMID TEMPLE BELL APARTMENT KENCHENAHALLI, RAJARAJESWARINAGAR BANGALORE-560 098. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AJAY J.N., ADVOCATE) 2 AND:1. SMT. SONI @ SONIA PATIL W/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT38YEARS2 CHI. ANSH PATIL S/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT8YEARS3 KUM. AKIRA D/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT4YEARS (RESPONDENT2AND3ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN).4. ANIL KUMAR S/O BALASAHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT43YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.73, KPA BLOCK I MAIN, CHANDRA LAYOUT B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF July 12, 2024 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5479 OF2020C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4818 OF2020WRIT PETITION NO.7470 OF2021(GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.7539 OF2021(GM-RES) IN CRL.P No.5479/2020 BETWEEN:1. . BALASAHEB PATIL S/O. LATE. BABAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT72YEARS RETD. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE2. SMT. CHANNAMMA PATIL W/O. BALASHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT63YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.004, GROUND FLOOR PYRAMID TEMPLE BELL APARTMENT KENCHENAHALLI, RAJARAJESWARINAGAR BANGALORE-560 098. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AJAY J.N., ADVOCATE) 2 AND:1. SMT. SONI @ SONIA PATIL W/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT38YEARS2 CHI. ANSH PATIL S/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT8YEARS3 KUM. AKIRA D/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT4YEARS (RESPONDENT2AND3ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN).4. ANIL KUMAR S/O BALASAHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT43YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.73, KPA BLOCK I MAIN, CHANDRA LAYOUT B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF July 12, 2024 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5479 OF2020C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4818 OF2020WRIT PETITION NO.7470 OF2021(GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.7539 OF2021(GM-RES) IN CRL.P No.5479/2020 BETWEEN:1. . BALASAHEB PATIL S/O. LATE. BABAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT72YEARS RETD. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE2. SMT. CHANNAMMA PATIL W/O. BALASHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT63YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.004, GROUND FLOOR PYRAMID TEMPLE BELL APARTMENT KENCHENAHALLI, RAJARAJESWARINAGAR BANGALORE-560 098. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AJAY J.N., ADVOCATE) 2 AND:1. SMT. SONI @ SONIA PATIL W/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT38YEARS2 CHI. ANSH PATIL S/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT8YEARS3 KUM. AKIRA D/O. ANILKUMAR PATIL AGED ABOUT4YEARS (RESPONDENT2AND3ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN).4. ANIL KUMAR S/O BALASAHEB PATIL AGED ABOUT43YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.73, KPA BLOCK I MAIN, CHANDRA LAYOUT B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2024INSC535CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2948 OF2024(Arising out of SLP (CRL.) NO.9033 OF2024@ Dy. No.6463/2024) M/S. NEW WIN EXPORT & ANR. APPELLANT (S) VERSUS A. SUBRAMANIAM RESPONDENT(S) ORDER Leave granted.2. This case arises from a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act filed by the respondent/complainant. In the year 2006, appellant no.2 had borrowed a loan of Rs.5,25,000 from the respondent but did not repay as promised. To discharge the said debt, the appellant no.2 gave a cheque of Rs.5,25,000 which was issued in the name of his partnership firm i.e., appellant no.1 (M/s New Win Export). Since the cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 NI Act against the 1 appellants where the Trial Court vide order dated 16.10.2012 convicted the appellants and imposed a sentence of 1 year of simple imprisonment each. The appellants challenged their conviction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2024 INSC511REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2024 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.O F2024]. [@ DIARY NO.20674 OF2017 MD. RAHIM ALI @ ABDUR RAHIM APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS. RESPONDENTS RESPONDENT No.PARTICULARS1The State of Assam 2 Union of India represented by Secretary, Home Affairs 3 Superintendent of Police, Nalbari 2 JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.I.A. No.58315 of 2017 [Condonation of Delay]. is allowed, keeping in mind the peculiar facts and circumstances herein. I.A. No.58325 of 2017 [Exemption from filing Certified Copy of the Impugned Judgment]., being formal in nature, is also allowed.2. Leave granted.3. The present appeal arises out of the Final Judgment and Order passed by a Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court at Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the High Court) in Writ Petition (Civil) No.2668 of 2012 dated 23.11.2015 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Judgment) by which the Writ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC506REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2842 OF2024[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) No.1614 OF2024 MOHD. ABDUL SAMAD APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal challenges the Order dated 13.12.2023 passed in Criminal Petition No.12222 of 2023 moved Criminal Appeal No.2842 of 2024 Page 1 of 43 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as CrPC1973), whereby the High Court of Telangana modified the Order dated 09.06.2023 passed by the Family Court in M.C No.171 of 2019. By virtue of disposing of the said petition, the High Court decreased the quantum of interim maintenance payable by the Appellant herein from INR20000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) per month to INR10000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) per month.3. As per the Appellant, the brief facts leading to the instant appeal are that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC502IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SUIT No.4 OF2021THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL ...PLAINTIFF(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ...DEFENDANT(S) INDEX Sl. No.Particulars Para Nos. I. INTRODUCTION13 II. SUBMISSIONS OF DEFENDANT414 III. SUBMISSIONS OF PLAINTIFF1521 IV. LEGAL FRAMEWORK2231 a. Supreme Court Rules, 2013 22-29 b. Article 131 of the Constitution 30-31 V. JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS3243 a. State of Bihar v. Union of India 32-33 b. State of Rajasthan v. Union of 34-43 India VI. CONSIDERATION4483 a. Reading of the Plaint 44-51 b. Scheme of the DSPE Act 52-66 c. Power of superintendence of the Central Government 67 d. Interpretation of the term 68-77 subject to the provisions of this Constitution e. Suppression of material fact 78-79 80-83 f. Cause of action of the suit VII. CONCLUSION841 JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.I. INTRODUCTION:1. The present suit has been filed by the State of West Bengal against Union of India seeking the following reliefs: i. Pass ...
Tag this Judgment!