Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC600IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.520 OF2012MAHENDRA KUMAR SONKER APPELLANT(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH RESPONDENT(s) JUDGMENT K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. The present appeal calls in question the judgment dated 14.10.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1949 of 2007. By the said judgment, the appellants conviction under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short the IPC) and sentence of six months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/- imposed by the Special Judge, Sagar has been confirmed. Aggrieved, the appellant is in Appeal. 12. Originally, the appellant along with his wife Mamta stood trial. While the appellant was charged for offences under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short the Act) as well as Sections 201 and 353 of the IPC, his wife Mamta was charged under Section 353 and 201 of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2024 INSC592REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8546-8549 OF2024[ @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.12773-76 OF2021]. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. APPELLANTS A1: THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN A2: DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL A3: REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JAIPUR VERSUS BHUPENDRA SINGH RESPONDENT JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Leave granted. 23. The present appeals are directed against the common Final Judgment and Order dated 28.01.2021 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Judgment) passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench (hereinafter referred to as the High Court) by which D.B. Special Appeal Writs No.1695/2008, 14/2009, 15/2009 and 65/2009 were dismissed. BRIEF FACTUAL OVERVIEW:4. The sole respondent was appointed as Inspector (Executive) in the year 1960 and later appointed as Assistant Registrar on 05.04.1973 on sele...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC593IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7702 OF2019DLF LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DLF UNIVERSAL LTD) AND ANR. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KONCAR GENERATORS AND MOTORS LTD. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.1. The issue arising in the present appeal relates to enforcement of an arbitral award expressed in foreign currency. In this context, two questions arise for consideration. First, what is the correct and appropriate date to determine the foreign exchange rate for converting the award amount expressed in foreign currency to Indian rupees. Second, what would be the date of such conversion, when the award debtor deposits some amount before the court during the pendency of proceedings challenging the award. Two uncertainties have a direct bearing on the question to be answered, the time lapse between the date of the award and its enforceability- 1 a local factor, and the ever-fluctuating exchange rates- a global factor....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC588IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA INHERENT/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION(CIVIL) NO(S). OF2024(D. No.1106 OF2024 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CRL.) NO(S). 14489 OF2023TUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAH ..PETITIONER(S) VERSUS KAMAL DAYANI & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)/ ALLEGED CONTEMNOR(S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CRL.) NO(S). 14489 OF2023SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CRL.) NO(S). 537 OF2024SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CRL.) NO(S). 1116 OF20241 JUDGMENT By the Court Contempt Petition(Civil) No(s). .of 2024(D.No.1106 of 2024) in SLP(Crl.) No(s). 14489 of 2023 1. The instant petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 129 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner alleging wilful disobedience by the respondents-contemnors of the order dated 8th December, 2023 passed by this Court in SLP(Crl.) No.14489 of 2023. Brief facts: - 2. The petitioner, along with other co-accused, was arraigned as an accused in FIR No.11210068230266 d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable 2024 INSC562IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE / ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.2317 of 2011 The State of Punjab & Ors. Appellants Versus Davinder Singh & Ors. Respondents With C.A. No.6936 of 2015 With C.A. No.5597 of 2010 With W.P.(C) No.21 of 2023 With C.A. No.5593 of 2010 With S.L.P.(C) No.30766 of 2010 With S.L.P.(C) No.8701 of 2011 With S.L.P.(C) Nos.36500-36501 of 2011 With T.C.(C) No.38 of 2011 1 With T.P.(C) No.464 of 2015 With W.P.(C) No.1477 of 2019 With C.A. No.5586 of 2010 With C.A. No.5598 of 2010 With C.A. Nos. 5595-5596 of 2010 With C.A. No.2324 of 2011 With T.C.(C) No.37 of 2011 With C.A. No.5589 of 2010 With C.A. No.5600 of 2010 With C.A. No.5587 of 2010 With S.L.P.(C) Nos.5454-5459 of 2011 With C.A. No.2318 of 2011 With C.A. No.289 of 2014 And With W.P.(C) No.562 of 2022 2 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI A. Background ................................................................................................ 5 i. Relevant c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC563IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4434-4437 OF2014UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PROHLAD GUHA ETC. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.4445 OF2014JUDGMENT SANJAY KAROL, J.CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4434-4437 OF2014:1. The extant appeals filed by the Union of India1 take exception to a common judgment and order dated 2nd August 20122 passed in WPCT Nos.207, 213, 214, 1 Appellant-Employer 2 Impugned Judgment 1|CA Nos.4434-4437 of 2014 and 215 of 2012, by the High Court of Calcutta whereby the common order passed in Original Application Nos.794, 797, 795, and 796 of 2008, respectively, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, was reversed and relief claimed by the respondents were allowed.2. A brief review of facts giving rise to the present appeals, is necessary. 2.1 Respondent-employees were appointed on compassionate ground with the Engineering Department, Howrah Division, Eastern Railway. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2024@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.25631 OF2019REPORTABLE2024INSC550IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7933 OF2024ARISING OUT OF PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) No.25631 of 2019 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..APPELLANTS Versus SHISHU PAL @ SHIV PAL ..RESPONDENT JUDGMENT HIMA KOHLI, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellants Director General, Central Reserve Police Force1 and others have preferred the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 7th February, 2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gauhati in a writ appeal2 upholding the order dated 27th March, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition3 setting aside the order of termination of services of the respondent by the 1 For short the CRPF 2 Writ Appeal No.248 of 2018 3 WP(C) No.5986/2014 Page 1 of 25 CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2024@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.25631 OF2019Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 24th June, 20...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC544IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. ___________ OF2024[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NOS. 19647-48 OF2022 S. TIRUPATHI RAO APPELLANT VERSUS M. LINGAMAIAH & ORS RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. ___________ OF2024[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NOS. 19748-19749 OF2022 JUDGMENT DIPANKAR DATTA, J.CIVIL APPEAL NOS. ___________ OF2024[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NOS. 19647-48 OF2022 Leave granted.2. These appeals assail the common judgment and order dated 27th April, 20221 of the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad2 allowing 1 impugned order, hereafter 2 High Court, hereafter 1 Review I.A. No.1/2020 in LPA12018 and Review I.A. No.3/2020 in CA3320173 preferred by the first respondent. The impugned order of the High Court recalled the order under review and dismissed a contempt appeal as well as a letters patent appeal of the appellant.3. The present dispute emerges from a complex and interwoven set of legal proceedings, i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC532IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7821 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.3792 OF2024 SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS KRISH SPINNING RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7822 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) No.7220 OF2024 JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: - INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX ............................................................................................. 3 B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT ................................... 14 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT ............................... 16 D. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION .................................................................... 18 E. ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 19 i. Whether the execution of a discharge voucher towards the full and final settlement betw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC512IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2493 OF2024ARVIND KEJRIWAL ..... APPELLANT VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.This appeal filed by the appellant Arvind Kejriwal assails the judgment and order dated 09.04.2024 passed by the single Judge of the High Court of Delhi whereby the Criminal Writ Petition filed by Arvind Kejriwal under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731, challenging his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement2, vide the arrest order dated 21.03.2024, on the ground of violation of Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 20023, and the proceedings pursuant thereto including the order of remand dated 22.03.2024 to the custody of DoE passed by the Special Judge, has been rejected.2. At the outset, we must clarify that this is not an appeal against refusal or grant of bail. Instea...
Tag this Judgment!