Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC320; JT1991(6)SC184; 1991(2)SCALE844; (1991)4SCC699; [1991]Supp2SCR1
ORDERB.C. Ray, J.These writ petitions raise certain constitutional issues of quite some importance bearing on the construction of Articles 121 and 124 of the Constitution of India and of the 'The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968' even as they in the context in which they are brought, are somewhat unfortunate.Notice was given by 108 members of the 9th Lok Sabha, the term of which came to an end upon its dissolution, of a Motion for presenting an Address to the President for the removal of Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami of this Court. On 12th March, 1991, the motion was admitted by the then Speaker of the Lok Sabha who also proceeded to constitute a Committee consisting of Mr. Justice P.B. Sawant, a sitting Judge of this Court, Mr. Justice P.D. Desai, Chief Justice of the High Court of Bombay, and Mr. Justice O. Chinappa Reddy, a distinguished jurist in terms of Section 3(2) of The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.The occasion for such controversy as is raised in these proceedings is the refusal of the Un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC775REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.10611 OF2024Omkar Ramchandra Gond Appellant (s) Versus The Union of India & Ors. ...Respondent(s) JUDGMENT K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. Omkar Ramchandra Gond (the appellant) grew up in a middle-class family in the city of Latur in Maharashtra State. His father is a government servant. The appellant had a creditable academic performance in his tenth standard scoring 97.2%. He cleared his school final in the first division. The appellant aspired to be a doctor. Nothing wrong with it, except that he had to surmount a few legal hurdles enroute. 12. Admittedly, the appellant has speech and language disability and is diagnosed with Hypernasality with Misarticulation IN K/C/O Repaired Bilateral CLEFT of palate. The appellant is certified to have 45% (in some reports, it was mentioned as 44%) permanent disability as per the Disability Certificate dated 18.05.2017.3. The appellant applied for the Nationa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC750REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.________OF2024[Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.4353 of 2018]. K. BHARTHI DEVI AND ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 1st September 2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, whereby the High Court dismissed the Criminal Petition No.5778 of 2016 filed by the accused persons, including the 1 appellants herein, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC. for short) thereby seeking quashing of the charge-sheet in C.C. No.16 of 2014 on the file of Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Nampally, Hyderabad (trial Court for short).3. Shorn of details, the case of the prosecution is as given below. 3.1 K. Suresh Kumar (Accused No.1), the Sole ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC731IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.3327 OF2024SHOYEB RAJA APPELLANT(S) Versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJAY KAROL, J.1. Assailed before us, at the insistence of the complainant, is a judgment and order dated 23rd November, 2023 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Principal Bench at Jabalpur), passed in Criminal Revision No.3125 of 2021, whereby the judgment/order dated 11th November, 2021 in Sessions Trial No.52/2019 of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Seoni, acquitting the accused- 1|SLP(CRL.16333/2023 Respondents (Nos.2 to9) of the charges under Sections 294, 323, 506, 353, 352 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code1 was confirmed. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY2 The complainant-appellant was appointed as the Chairman of the District Waqf Board, Seoni, thereby being charged with the supervision of Masjid Committees. As a result of the dispute between ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC734Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.1614-1618 of 2012 Manik & Ors. Appellant(s) Versus The State of Maharashtra. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.1. In these quintuplet appeals, the appellants- convicts who stood the trial in Sessions Trial No.21 of 1996 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia for the charge of commission of offences punishable under Section 302 and/or various other offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC) are challenging the common judgment dated 12.07.2011 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 64, 65, 71, 76, 77 and 88 of 1997 whereby and whereunder their conviction and consequential sentences, handed down by the trial Court except under Section 201 read with Section 34, IPC, were confirmed by the High Court of Bombay, Page 1 of 53 Criminal Appeal Nos.1614-1618 of 2012 Nagpur Bench. For the sake of convenience appellants are referred to hereafter in this judgment in accorda...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC738IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1389 OF2012BALJINDER SINGH @ LADOO AND OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT JUDGMENT DIPANKAR DATTA, J.THE APPEAL1 This is an appeal, by special leave, by 4 (four) appellants. They call in question the judgment and order dated 04th May, 20111 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Punjab and Haryana2 dismissing a criminal appeal3 under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19734. Such appeal was preferred by the appellants, arraigned as A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4 in the trial, and a co-accused (A-5). The judgment of conviction and the 1 impugned judgment, hereafter 2 High Court, hereafter 3 Criminal Appeal No.454-DB of 2001 4 Cr. PC, hereafter 1 of 16 order of sentence dated 04th August, 2001, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Punjab5 in a sessions case6 registered against A-1, A-2, A- 3, A-4 and A-5 was majorly upheld. While A-5 was acquitted,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC718IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO2024 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.4866 of 2023) FULESHWAR GOPE ... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJAY KAROL, J.Leave granted.2. Impugned in this appeal by special leave is a judgment of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi dated 21st March, 2023 in W.P.(Crl.) No.443 of 2022, whereby the learned Division Bench refused to quash (a) Suo motu letter No.F.No.11011/51/2017/IS-IV dated 16th January, 2018 in respect of the investigation of Bero P.S. Case No.67/2016 dated 10th 1|SLP(CRL)4866/2023 November, 2016; (b) Sanction letter No.11011/51/2017/NIA dated 22nd July, 2020 granting sanction qua prosecution of the present appellant as accused No.17 in R.C.-02/2018/NIA/DLI; and (c) Cognizance order dated 25th July, 2020 u/s 120B of the Indian Penal Code r/w Section 17, 18, 21 & 22 of U.A. (P) Act, 1967, u/S17i) & (ii) of CLA Act, 1908 and charges framed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC716IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 2161-2162 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NOS. 3665-3666 OF2024 JUST RIGHTS FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE & ANR. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. HARISH & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: - INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX ................................................................................ 4 B. IMPUGNED ORDER .............................................................................. 10 C. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES ...................................................... 16 i. Submissions on behalf of the Appellants. .................................................... 16 ii. Submissions on behalf of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR). .......................................................................................... 18 iii. Submissions...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC710IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION No.19 OF2024AJAY MADHUSUDAN PATEL & ORS. PETITIONERS VERSUS JYOTRINDRA S. PATEL & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT Arbitration Petition No.19 of 2024 Page 1 of 67 J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts: INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX .................................................................................. 3 B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER (AMP GROUP) ............................................................................................................ 25 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT (JRS GROUP) ............................................................................................................ 31 D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT (SRG GROUP) ............................................................................................................ 32 E. ANALYSIS .....................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC711IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3981-3982 OF2024(Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos.21017-21018 of 2021) OPG POWER GENERATION PRIVATE LIMITED APPELLANT(S) Versus ENEXIO POWER COOLING SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) With CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3983-3984 OF2024(Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos.21009-21010 of 2021) JUDGMENT MANOJ MISRA, J.1. These two appeals are directed against a common judgment and order of the High Court1 dated 1 September 2021 passed in OSA (CAD) Nos. 174-175 of 2021, whereby, exercising powers under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19962 read with Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 20153 and Clause 15 of Amended Letters Patent, 1865 read with Order XXXVI1High Court of Judicature at Madras 2 1996 Act 3 2015 Act Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) Nos.21017-21018 of 2021 Page 1 of 150 Rule 9 of O.S. Rules, the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeals, set aside the...
Tag this Judgment!