Court : Mumbai
Decided on : May-05-2008
Reported in : (2008)110BOMLR1595
Bilal Nazki, J.1. Special Case No. 1 of 2000 was tried by the Sessions Judge, Pune, who was also a Special Judge for the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act. Seven accused persons faced trial for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 324 read with Sections 149 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They also faced trial for the offences punishable under Section 4 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(i), 3(5) and 3(2) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act. By his judgment and order dated 30th April, 2002 of the learned Sessions Judge, all of them were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each. They were also convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 200/- each. They were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4 read with Section 25 o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : May-05-2008
Reported in : 2008(4)ALLMR133; (2008)110BOMLR1819
A.A. Kumbhakoni, J.1. Lord Siva in Guru Gita (Skanda Puranam) praises the Universal Guru thus:Gurur Brahma, Gurur Vishnu Gurur Devo Maheshwara Guru Saakshaat Parabrahma Tasmai Sree Gurave Namah.(Guru is Brahma, Guru is Vishnu and Guru is the God Siva. Guru verily is the Param Brahma -- the Supreme Being. I (Siva) salute that auspicious Guru). This is the reason why we Indians bow to Guru -- a TEACHER and place a teacher on a pedestal just below the parents. The character and conduct of a teacher is expected to be more like a `Rishi' and as loco-perentis. We will shortly refer to two Supreme Court judgements in this regard. 2. This occasion to remind ourselves of these expectations as to 'the status and dignity of a teacher' has arisen in view of this petition which is filed by a male teacher against whom such charges are held proved which allege Moral Turpitude and Misconduct by such teacher involving exhibition of immoral sexual behaviour towards girl students of the 1st respondent co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-05-2008
Reported in : 2008(4)AWC3705
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. These two writ petitions raise similar questions, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.In view of the order, which is being passed in the writ petition no notices have been issued to respondents No. 4 and 5.Writ Petition No. 13548 of 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the first writ petition) has been filed praying for quashing the order dated 30th April, 2007 passed by the Additional Collector holding that application under Section 198(4) of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 filed by respondent No. 4 is maintainable and the date was fixed for hearing the parties on merits. Against the order dated 30th April, 2007 a revision was filed by the petitioners, which has been dismissed by the order dated 29th February, 2008.In Writ Petition No. 14110 of 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the second w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-06-2008
Reported in : RLW2008(3)Raj2352
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.Where can one go?This city has become a jungle,Hither serpants,Thither Mongooses dwell1. Uchchav Lal (since deceased) while subjected Khaju and Pappu, appellants in appeals No. 201/2004 and 401/2007, were indicted for having looted a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs and killing Uchchav Lal, before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Tonk, although Badri Lal and Smt.Kesanta, appellants in appeals No. 930/2003 and 931/2003, were charged under Sections 201 and 412 IPC. Learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants vide judgment dated June 2, 2003 thus:Rajendra, Bhanwar Pal, Pyare Lal, Rafeeq, and Khaju: Under Section 302/120B/149 & 396 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 307/149 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 326/149 IPC:Each to su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-08-2008
Reported in : 2008CriLJ4107
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. Pablo Picasso, a renowned artist said, 'Art is never chaste. It ought to be forbidden to ignorant innocents, never allowed into contact with those not sufficiently prepared. Yes, art is dangerous. Where it is chaste, it is not art.'2. Art, to every artist, is a vehicle for personal expression. An aesthetic work of art has the vigour to connect to an individual sensory, emotionally, mentally and spiritually. With a 5000-year-old culture, Indian Art has been rich in its tapestry of ancient heritage right from the medieval times to the contemporary art adorned today with each painting having a story to narrate.3. Ancient Indian art has been never devoid of eroticism where sex worship and graphical representation of the union between man and woman has been a recurring feature.1 The sculpture on the earliest temples of 'Mithuna' image or the erotic couple in Bhubeneshwar, Konarak and Puri in Orissa (150-1250 AD); Khajuraho in Madhya Pradesh (900-1050 AD); Limbojimat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-13-2008
Reported in : 2008(4)CHN386,2008CriLJ3725
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The victim aged 16 years belonging to a poor family under Pathar Pratima police station was offered a Job of maidservant at Delhi by the appellant against monthly remuneration of Rs. 1,000/-. Accordingly, with the consent of her parents she was taken by the appellant to Delhi on or about 14th December 2003 but at Delhi she was not given any job in the house of the appellant and after she had spent a few days in the house of the appellant the appellant told the victim to go to different men and if she could please them she would be given handsome amount in return. She was not agreeable to the proposal but she was forced to go to different men so as to fulfill their carnal desire. Things went like this for months but she could not bear It any more and the appellant was compelled to take her to her mother on 15-2-04. Thus allegedly the appellant took the victim to Delhi with the temptation to find out a job for her but tortured her physically and mentally and ruin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-16-2008
Reported in : 2008CriLJ4185
ORDERS.C. Parija, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order of cognizance dated 29-8-2003 passed by the learned S. D. J. M., Bhubaneswar, in G.R. Case No. 3572 of 2000, taking cognizance of offences under Sections 294/506/384/504/34, I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20-10-2000, the informant, opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint/report to the effect that on 14-10-2000 morning at 10.30 a.m. Sri Pradip Mohanty, Secretary, Dr. Moses Sukumar Das, Principal and three other teachers namely, Sri Rupa Kamal Mandal, Sri Milu Chandra Tripathy and Sri Ronald Baren, committed house trespass in his absence and abused his wife Smt. Rama Jena insulted her and threatened as to why her brothers were staying in the school campus to which she politely replied that since all of them are her own brother-in-laws, they can stay with her. But Pradip Mohanty abused her in obscene language which were witnessed by other Class-IV emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-16-2008
Reported in : 2008(3)MPHT485
Abhay M. Naik, J.1. Story of prosecution is that on 3-11-1986 complainant Hukumchand accompanied by wife Sheela Devi visited the house of his sister situated at Kharifatak Road, Vidisha for performing 'Teeka' on the occasion of 'Bhaidooj'. His sister Keshar Bai and her husband Mishrilal were residing as tenant in the property belonging to Chandra Kumar Jain, father of the accused. They reached in the house of Mishrilal at about 10:30 p.m. when Rajesh and Dilip (both sons of Mishrilal) came back from their business of 'Chat'. They used to run their business of 'Chat' on Thela. While coming back, they collected up one fused mercury tube light from road which was broken by Pradeep who also gave beatings to Rajesh. This was informed on coming back to home to Mishrilal. Mishrilal told them that he will apprise Chandra Kumar of the incident, who will further persuade his sons to behave properly. Chandra Kumar was residing with his family on the lower floor. Mishrilal came downstairs and appr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-16-2008
Reported in : AIR2009SC218; JT2008(8)SC184
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Validity of orders of recession of allotment of industrial plots and resumption thereof by the appellants herein is in question in this batch of appeals.3. With a view to appreciate the questions involved herein, the factual matrix of the matter, however, would be noticed from Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 14074 of 2006.4. Appellant - Corporation is a public sector undertaking. Its principal function is allotment of industrial plots belonging to the State of Haryana. It was set up as a catalyst for promoting economic growth and accelerating the pace of industrialization. It not only provides financial assistance to the industrial concerns by way of term loans; it also develops infrastructure for setting up of industrial units. The Corporation also invests money in developing the industrial estates at strategic locations. In exercise of its functions, it also allots industrial plots to entrepreneurs for setting up their industries on 'no profi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : House of Lords
Decided on : May-21-2008
LORD BINGHAM OF CORNHILL My Lords, 1. The Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers CJ, McCombe and Gross JJ: [2006] EWCA Crim 707) certified the following point of law of general public importance as involved in its decision now under appeal: “If a defendant is charged with an offence not specified in section 31(3) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, to what extent is he entitled to rely on the protections afforded by article 31 of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees?” Differently expressed, the question is whether, to the extent that the protection given to a defendant by section 31(3) of the 1999 Act does not match that which the United Kingdom is bound in international law to give by article 31 of the Refugee Convention, our domestic law gives a defendant any remedy. The formulation of the question clearly assumes that the offence charged against the defendant is not within the scope of section 31(3)...
Tag this Judgment!