Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2024INSC636IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.3573 OF2024 [ @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.3945 OF2022]. MANIK MADHUKAR SARVE & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS VITTHAL DAMUJI MEHER & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.Leave granted.2. The present appeal arises from the final judgment and order dated 13.10.20211 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Order), passed by 1 Operative portion pronounced in Open Court on 13.10.2021, however the detailed Order was uploaded on the High Courts official website on 30.10.2021. 2 a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench (hereinafter referred to as the High Court) in Criminal Application (BA) No.867/2021, whereby and whereunder respondent no.1 was released on bail in connection with Crime No.217/2019 registered with Police Station Kotwali, Nagpur for offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC634REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 13484-13488 of 2019) K. NIRMALA & ORS. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS CANARA BANK & ANR. .RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 19877 of 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 23500-23501 of 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 13453 of 2019) JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. Heard.2. Leave granted. 13. This batch of appeals, which involves identical questions of fact and law, arises from the judgments delivered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, as listed in the table below. Given the similarities, the appeals have been heard together and are being decided collectively. SLP No(s). Writ Date of Concerned Community Appeal Impugned Respondents/ (Scheduled No(s). Judgement Employer Caste/Scheduled Tribe) Special Writ Appeal 24th April, The Canara Kotegara (S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC632IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024[Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.10778 of 2024]. KALVAKUNTLA KAVITHA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024[Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.10785 of 2024]. JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 01.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Bail Application Nos.1675 and 1739 of 2024, vide which the learned Single Judge has refused to grant bail to the appellant herein.3. Though the matter has been argued at length by Shri Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Counsel along with Shri D.S. Naidu and Shri Vikram Chaudhri, learned Senior Counsel 1 appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Shri S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General of India (for short, ASG) for the respondent(s), at length; learned ASG has suggested that this Court ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC626REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.3114 OF2024Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. Appellant(s) Versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.:1. This appeal arises from the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 03.04.2024 in Application No.15453 of 2023 filed by the appellant herein by which, the High Court rejected the same and thereby declined to quash and set aside the summoning order dated 28.02.2023 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar in Complaint Case No.547 of 2021. Criminal Appeal No.3114 of 2024 Page 1 of 312. Facts giving rise to this appeal may be summarised as under: (i) The respondent No.2 herein is the original complainant. He lodged a private complaint in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar against the appellants herein for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 & 120...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC623IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1659-1660 OF2024M/S. KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED AND ANOTHER ..APPELLANTS Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..RESPONDENT INDEX S. No.Details Paras No.Page No.1. A. PREFACE12 1 2. B. FACTUAL BACKDROP33.10.5 2 3. 3.1 Joint Venture Agreement 3.1.1 3.1.4 3-9 4. 3.2 Correspondence 3.2.1 3.2.3 9-13 5. 3.3 Fuel Supply Agreement 3.3.1-3.3.3 13-18 6. 3.4 Memorandum of Understanding 3.4.1 3.4.2 18-21 7. 3.5 Washability Report of the Central 3.5.1 21-22 Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, Nagpur 8. 3.6 Revised Mining Plan 3.6.1 3.6.2 22-23 9. 3.7 Information submitted by KECML to 3.7.1 3.7.2 23-25 the Coal Controller 10. 3.8 Audit Objection raised by the CAG38.1 3.8.3 25-29 11. 3.9 Preliminary Enquiry registered by 3.9.1 3.9.2 29-31 respondent CBI12 3.10 Litigation between KPCL and 3.10.1 -3.10.6 31-33 KECML13 C. SUBMISSIONS14 4. Arguments by Counsel for the 4.1 4.17 33-42 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC625IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2622 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) No.8081 OF2023 SHAJAN SKARIA APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF KERALA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: - A. FACTUAL MATRIX ...................................................................................2 B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT ....................... 10 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT ................. 13 D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE STATE................................... 15 E. RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS .......................................... 16 F. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION ......................................................... 20 G. ANALYSIS ................................................................................................. 21 i. Evolution of the concept of anticipatory bail ................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC618IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos. _________ of 2024 (@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 12344-12345/2022) CBI BS AND FC MUMBAI APPELLANT (s) VERSUS MANOJDEV GOKULCHAND SEKSARIA AND ANR. RESPONDENT(s) K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present appeals arise out of the judgement and order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the Learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.245 of 2020 and Writ Petition No.730 of 2020. In view of the fact that we propose to set aside the judgement and remand the Writ Petitions to be heard a Division Bench of the High Court, only a brief reference to the facts of the case is being made hereinbelow. 13. The appellant-Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the CBI), on 20.02.2006, registered a Criminal Case No.RC3(E)/2006/BS&FC/Mumbai against 19 accused persons on the basis of a written complaint made by R. Ravichandran, Chief ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC617IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.149 OF2024GIRISH GANDHI PETITIONER (s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(s) JUDGMENT K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. The present Writ Petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner-Girish Gandhi seeking an appropriate Writ or Direction to the effect that the personal bonds and sureties executed by the petitioner in connection with FIR No.0030 of 2021 dated 21.01.2021 registered at P.S. Sadar, District Gurugram, shall hold good for eleven other bail orders passed in his favour from the Courts of different States. Details of the bail orders in different FIRs have been elaborated hereinbelow. 12. The question that arises for consideration is, is the petitioner entitled to the relief of treating the personal bond and one set of sureties already furnished as holding good for the other bail orders also?. Brief Facts:- 3. Very broadl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC619NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.878 OF2019AJAY KUMAR GUPTA APPELLANT VERSUS UNION OF INDIA RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.FACTUAL ASPECTS1 The appellant is accused no.2. Along with other co- accused, he was prosecuted for the offences punishable under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act). The case of the prosecution is that the Narcotics Control Bureau (for short, NCB) received secret information on 21st December 2013 that a consignment of pentazocine, a psychotropic substance, was being transported illegally from Hajipur to Lucknow by train for being sold in the market as an intoxicating item. The NCB team mounted surveillance near the parcel house of Hajipur station. When accused no.1 - Jasvinder Singh reached there, he was intercepted. According to the prosecution case, accused no.1 identified the consignment he had booked from the railway parcel house. Du...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC646REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).4887-4888/2024 UNION OF INDIA Appellant VERSUS BAHAREH BAKSHI Respondent JUDGMENT1 Heard Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant Union of India. Also heard Mr. Ankur Mahindro, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.2. The consideration to be made in this matter is whether the presence of the estranged husband is mandatory to process an application for Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) Card, under Section 7-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. The respondent had filed the WP(C) No.10807/2020 in the High Court of Delhi for dispensing with the presence of the husband of the respondent. The learned Single Judge Page 1 of 17 dispensed with the presence of the husband of respondent and this view was affirmed by the learned Division Bench under the impugned order dated 25.03.2022. Hence the Civil Appeal at the instance of Union of India.3. In the W...
Tag this Judgment!