Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)345; 1997(1)ALD(Cri)631; 1997(1)Crimes170(SC); JT1996(10)SC141; 1996(7)SCALE920; (1997)1SCC682; [1996]Supp8SCR243
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order of the Principal Sessions Judge and Designated Court, Coimbatore, in C.C. No. 61 of 1992. As the learned Judge acquitted the accused, the State has filed this appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (herein after referred to as the 'TADA Act').2. The prosecution case is that Shivarajan alias Raghu (Respondent/Accused No. 1) and Vigneswaran alias Vicky (Respondent/Accused No. 2) who were Sri Lankan nationals and members of LTTE came to India sometime in 1989 without any traveling documents. So also, Guna and Dixon who were Sri Lankan nationals and members of LTTE had come to India in the like manner. Since then they were engaged in obtaining explosive substances, manufacturing bombs and sending them to LTTE in Sri Lanka. In the said clandestine activity they were helped and assisted by Respondent Nos. 3 to 9 (Accused Nos. 3 to 9) who are Indian nationals. Till the assas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2007CriLJ1584; (2007)2GLR1165
R.P. Dholakia, J1. The appellants, original accused No. 1-Jaman Haji Mahmad Jat, original accused No. 3-Sachu Haji Ibrahim Jat, original accused No. 4-Osman Ali Mahmad Jat and original accused No. 5-Navaj Ali Jat of Sessions Case No. 85 of 1999(original accused Nos. 1 to 4 respectively of Sessions Case No. 1 of 2002), were tried along with other accused by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bhuj-Kutch, for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 121, 121(A), 122, 123 and 124(A), 489-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(d), 25(1)(AA), 25(1)(B)(C)(F) of Arms Act, Sections 4(b), 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 3 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Sections 3 and 6 of Indian Passport Rules (Entry Into India), Section 13(2) of Foreigners Act amended Section 14 and Section 6(1-A) of Indian Wireless and Telegraphic Act.2. The accused Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 were held guilty by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge and Fast Track ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2001SC746; 2001(1)ALD(Cri)266; 2001ALLMR(Cri)1038(SC); 2001(1)ALT(Cri)304; (2001)2CALLT8(SC); 2001CriLJ978; (2001)3GLR2341; JT2001(1)SC410; 2001(1)SCALE284; (2001)3SCC22
Shah, J.1. After trial in TADA Case Nos.2/93, 7/93 and 2/94, by judgment and order dated 8th January, 1997, the Designated Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur, Ahmedabad, acquitted 16 accused and convicted 5 accused, appellants herein, namely, A1 Lal Singh, A2 Mohd. Sharief, A3 Tahir Jamal, A4 Mohd. Saquib Nachan and A20 Shoaib Mukhtiar. The appellants were convicted for the offences punishable (1) under Section 3(3) of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act. 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'TADA Act') and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default to suffer R.I. for 6 months; (2) under Section 120B(1) of IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months. They were further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3(3) of TADA Act read with Sec. 120B IPC but no separate sentence was awarded. Accused No.1 was additionally convicted for the offen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ALT346; 2007CriLJ2031
J. Chelameswar, J.1. This writ petition is filed by five petitioners with the prayer as follows:For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus or any other writ, order or direction more in the nature of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the petitioners before this Hon'ble Court and set them at liberty and pass such other order or orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and necessary in the circumstances of the case.2. There are fifteen respondents who are officers of the State of Andhra Pradesh in the Police Department. The 1st petitioner claims to be the General Secretary of a political party known as CPI (ML) Janashakti party. The others are the followers of the 1st petitioner. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners are the natives of Andhra Pradesh, 4th and 5th petitioners are claimed to be the residents of Mumbai and Ranipur in Uttar Pradesh respectively. Admittedly all the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(1)ALD(Cri)808
Crl. R.C. No. 1329 of 1999R.M. Bapat, J.1. This Criminal revision case is filed by the de facto complainant in S.C. No. 331 of 1996 against the order of acquittal dated 27.7.1999 recorded by II Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah. Since, Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2000 is also filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh against the same order, in our considered opinion, the Criminal R.C. No. 1329 of 1999 does not survive. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2000 R.M. Bapat, J.2. This appeal is filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Public Prosecutor aggrieved by the order of acquittal recorded by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah in Sessions Case No. 331 of 1996 acquitting the accused 1 to 7 of all the charges.3. The prosecution has framed, in all, 7 charges against the accused-respondents herein. The first charge was under Section 148 IPC against A-1 to A7. The Second Charge was under Section 302 IPC against A-1 to A-7. The third charg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1986]158ITR742(Bom)
Mohta, J.1. Though the notices under sections 139(2) and 148 of the Income-tax Act and so also certain assessment orders passed by the income-tax authorities are challenged in this batch of petitions, the real controversy centres round a point whether the Market Committee as defined under section 2(j) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 (APMC Act), is a local authority as contemplated under section 10(20) of the Income-tax Act (I.T. Act).2. Section 10 which falls in Chapter III of the Income-tax Act gives a long list of incomes not included in total income. One such category is to be found in section 10(20) which reads thus :'the income of a local authority which is chargeable under the head 'Interest on securities', 'Income from house property', 'Capital gains' or 'Income from other sources' or from a trade or business carried on by it which accrues or arises from the supply of a commodity or service (not being water or electricity) within its own ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)MPLJ648
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 11th September 1997 in Writ Petition Nos. 3616/95, 3981/95, 4099/95, 169/96, 430/96, 4104/95, 431/96, 507/96 and 4711/96 to reconsider the decision given by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Gwalior Steels Private Limited v. M.P. Electricity Board, AIR 1993 MP 118, that an obligation is on the consumer to pay 40% load factor of the contract demand every month as the minimum charge irrespective of the fact whether the M.P. Electricity Board (for short the Board) supplies 40% of the load factor every month or not.2. In order to dispose of this reference, facts of Writ Petition No. 3616 of 1995 (Raymond Limited and Anr. v. State of M.P. and Ors.) are taken into consideration.The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Ratnagiri in the State of Maharashtra. Its cement manufacturing division is situated at Gopalnagar, Tahsi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC17; (1974)2SCC777; [1975]2SCR138
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. These appeals raise a common question as to whether Dumpers, Rockers and Tractors are motor vehicles within the meaning of the relevant State Motor Vehicles Taxation Acts, and are accordingly taxable thereunder. Apart from these appeals, Bolani Ores Ltd.-Appellant in Civil Appeal No. 1816 of 1968-has filed a writ petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930. The question raised in the writ petition will only arise for determination, if the judgment of the High Court of Orissa is held to be valid otherwise the question of the Constitutional validity of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Taxation Act') does not fall for determination as that would be purely academic.2. The two Civil Appeals Nos. 1816 of 1968 and 1817 of 1968 arise out of two suits-one filed by Bolani Ores Ltd. and the other by Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd., respectively, for a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC2935; 2003(5)ALD83(SC); 105(2003)DLT645(SC); 2003(70)DRJ287; JT2003(6)SC130; 2003(5)SCALE515; (2003)7SCC151
Srikrishna, J.1. These appeals, though arising under different factual backgrounds, raise a common question of law and challenge the correctness of a judgment of the full bench of the Delhi High Court. The questions involved in all these appeals are:(i) 'Whether the cost of the plant and machinery installed in or upon a building is includible for the purpose of arriving at the rate able value of the building and(ii) Whether Section 116(3) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the DMC Act') Vests arbitrary and uncanalised discretion in Commissioner and is, therefore, invalid for excessive delegation of legislative powers ?'2. Civil Appeal Nos. 3313-3333/2000 & 3335 /2000The appellant company owned land in Delhi on which it constructed a cinema complex known as Delite Cinema Complex. The construction was completed in or about the year 1954. The company had installed certain plant and machinery, furniture and fixtures in the said construction of cinema ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(2)ALT15(SC); JT1995(1)SC593; 1995(1)SCALE332a; (1995)2SCC305; [1995]1SCR584
N. Venkatachala, J.1. Having granted leave to appeal sought for in the above Special Leave Petitions directed against the common judgment and decree dated 19.4.1993 rendered in Appeal Nos. 1565 and 2087/91 by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad and heard arguments of learned Counsel appearing for the contesting parties in the appeals, we propose to dispose of all these appeals by this common judgment.2. Sri P. Ram Reddy, the appellant in appeals arising out of S.L.P.'s Nos. 13362-63/93 and respondent in appeal arising out of S.L.P. No.. 18202/93, to be referred to hereinafter as the 'claimant', was the owner in possession of dry land of, as large an extent as, 10 acres 17 guntas comprised in survey Nos. 48/24 and 48/26 of Katedhan village lying in the outskirts of Hyderabad. One acre 25 guntas of land out of 5 acres 22 guntas of land in Survey No. 48/24 and 2 acres 15 guntas of land out of 4 acres 35 guntas of land in survey no. 48/26 were the lands included in the total exte...
Tag this Judgment!