Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2024INSC681IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE/INHERENT JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2764 OF2024(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.3419 OF2024 RAGHUVEER SHARAN ... APPELLANT VERSUS DISTRICT SAHAKARI KRISHI GRAMIN VIKAS BANK & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (C) No.508 OF2024IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2764 OF2024@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.3419 OF2024 JUDGMENT PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2764 OF20241. The appellant seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Revision No.1925 of 2023 whereby the High Court has dismissed the appellants revision application affirming the order passed by the Special Court MP/MLA) Gwalior on 17.04.2023 in exercise of power under 2 Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 to summon the appellant as an accused.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that in the year 1998, one Rajendra Bharti ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC668IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 2221-2222 OF2023ABHISHEK BANERJEE & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT BELA M. TRIVEDI, J.1. Both these Appeals are arising out of the Common Impugned Order dated 11.03.2022 passed by the High Court of Delhi in W.P (Crl.) No.1808 of 2021 and Crl. M.C. No.2442 of 2021, filed by the Appellants (Original Petitioners), whereby the High Court has dismissed the same.2. The Writ Petition (Crl.) No.1808 of 2021 was filed by the Appellants - Abhishek Banerjee and Rujira Banerjee seeking quashing of the Summons dated 10.09.2021 issued to them by the Respondent ED under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the PMLA), and seeking further direction 1 against the Respondent not to issue any Summons under Section 50 of the said Act to the Appellants for their appearance in New Delhi, rather than their homet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC658IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.20817 OF2022KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY & ANR. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS T.P. MURALI @ MURALI THAVARA PANEN & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT PANKAJ MITHAL, J.1. Heard Shri R. Basant, senior counsel for the petitioner and Shri Gaurav Agrawal, senior counsel for the respondent.2. Kerala Agricultural University has preferred this Special Leave Petition challenging the judgment and order dated 26.08.2022 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala in Writ Appeal No.298 of 2022, T.P. Murali vs. Kerala Agricultural University. The Division Bench 1 after setting aside the judgment dated 21.12.2021 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.17803 of 2021, quashed the order dated 30.07.2021 passed by the Vice Chancellor of the university terminating the services of the respondent T.P. Murali.3. The Division Bench in allowing the writ appeal, though quashed the termination order pass...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC665IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1556 OF2013CHABI KARMAKAR & ORS. .....Appellant(s) Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL .....Respondent(s) ORDER1 The appellants have been convicted under Sections 498A, 304B and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court had convicted sister-in-law (appellant no.1), husband (appellant no.2) and mother-in-law of the deceased and sentenced them to suffer life imprisonment, 3 years R.I and 10 years R.I for offences under Sections 304B, 498A and 306 of IPC respectively, along with fine and other default stipulations. Both the conviction and the sentence of the present appellants have been upheld in appeal and the High Court has dismissed the appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, one of the appellants i.e. appellant No.3 (Sova Rani Karmakar, the mother-in-law of the deceased) had passed away and the case against her stands abated.2. The brief case of the prosecution is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC637IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024(@ SLP (Crl.) No.5416/2024) PREM PRAKASH APPELLANT(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT RESPONDENT(s) JUDGMENT K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present appeal challenges the judgment dated 22.03.2024 of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in B.A. No.9863 of 2023. By the said judgment, the High Court dismissed the bail application of the appellant. The appellant sought for regular bail in connection with ECIR Case No.5 of 2023 in ECIR-RNZO/10/2023 (hereinafter referred to as ECIR Case No.5 of 2023) registered for the offence 1 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as PMLA) and pending before the Court of Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi. Brief Facts 3. The predicate offence on the basis of which ECIR No.5 of 2023 was recorded on 07.03.2023 is an FIR bearing Sadar P.S. Case No.399 of 2022 r...
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
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
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
REPORTABLE2024INSC621IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 30976 of 2017) RAJKARAN SINGH & ORS. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. Heard.2. Leave granted.3. The present appeal by special leave, is preferred on behalf of the appellants, assailing the judgment dated 25th April, 2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (Civil) No.3543 of 2017, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellants and upholding the judgment dated 4th October, 2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter being referred to as the Tribunal) in Original Application Nos. 60 of 2013 and 459 of 2013. The Tribunal had 1 rejected the appellants claim for benefits of the replacement scales of the Revised Pay Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as RP Rules) in accordance with the 6th Pay Commission Report, with effect from 1st Januar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC614REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION SUO MOTU WRIT PETITION (C) No.3 OF2023IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS with CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1451 OF2024JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.FACTUAL ASPECTS1 Criminal Appeal no.1451 of 2024 has been preferred by the State of West Bengal, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 18th October 2023, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The learned Special Judge appointed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the POCSO Act), Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC). For the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four and five ye...
Tag this Judgment!