Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-24-2022
..... r/o village koteshwar, district kathmandu, nepal, aged about 15 years. the investigation was carried out by maintaining all decency through meera sauda, who was well conversant with hindi and nepali languages. she disclosed to the police party that on 10.04.2015, she came all alone to see her uncle namely arjun sharma, who was a teacher in lamki (nepal .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-20-2022
..... than economic or pecuniary... 33 14.4. we have no hesitation in endorsing the views of full bench decision of bombay high court in the case of jagan gagansingh nepali @ jagya (supra). looking to the object and purpose of this enactment, the expression other advantage cannot be read in a restrictive manner and is required to be ..... or other advantage apart from pecuniary benefit. 14.3. this aspect has gone into consideration of the full bench of bombay high court in the case of jagan gagansingh nepali @ jagya (supra), wherein the court examined precisely the connotations of the expression other advantage occurring in section 2(1)(d) of the act. the question formulated had ..... learned counsel for the respondent-state has referred to the decision of the full bench of the bombay high court in the case of state of maharashtra v. jagan gagansingh nepali @ jagya & anr.: (2011) scc online bombay 1049 to submit that therein, the bombay high court has held that crimes of bodily offence could be the crimes .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-07-2022
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.111113 OF2015RAJESH PRASAD ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. ETC. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAGARATHNA J.These appeals have been filed by the appellant informant (PW7 Rajesh Prasad) assailing the judgment and order dated 5th August, 2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal Nos.714, 747 and 814 of 2008 by which the judgment of conviction dated 26th June, 2008 and order of sentence dated 30th June, 2008 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track CourtV, Munger, has been set aside by allowing the aforesaid appeals and by accordingly answering the Death Reference No.13/2008 and consequently acquitting all the accused. 22. The Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track CourtV, Munger, (hereinafter referred to as the Fast Track Court) vide its judgment dated 26thJune,2008 convicted the respondents herein viz., Upendra ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-14-2022
R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE14H DAY OF JANUARY, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA AND THE HONBLE Mrs. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CRL.CCC No.9/2021 BETWEEN:1. . HASHAM INVESTMENT AND TRADING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.134, NEXT TO WIPRO CORPORATE OFFICE DODDAKANNELLI, SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 035, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. PAGALTHIVARTHI SRINIVASAN. 2 . WIPRO LIMITED76 AND80, DODDAKANNELLI, SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 035. REPRSENTED HEREIN BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT CORPORATE TAX, MR. BALASUBRAMANIAN K., 3 . MR. AZIM HASHAM PREMJI, FOUNDER CHAIRMAN, WIPRO GROUP, S/O SHRI MOHD. HASHAM PREMJI, AGED ABOUT74YEARS NO.574, DODDAKANNELLI, 2 SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 035. ...COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI GANESH S., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT No.1; SRI C.V. NAGESH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADV., FOR COMPLAINANT Nos.2 &3) AND:1. . INDIA AWAKE FOR TRANSPARENCY PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY INDIA ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-01-2022
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No 158 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No 1691 of 2020) Subhash Appellant Versus State of Uttar Pradesh Respondent W I T H Criminal Appeal No 159 of 2022 [Arising out of SLP (Crl) No 876 of 2022 @ SLP (Crl) Diary No 28864 of 2020]. 1 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J A Facts .............................................................................................................. 2 B Submissions ................................................................................................. 5 C Analysis ........................................................................................................ 9 1 Leave granted. A Facts 2 These appeals arise from a judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 11 January 2019 in Criminal Appeal No 5307 of 2008. 3 The appeal before the High Court arose from a judgment of the Sessions Judge, Badaun dated 30 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-08-2022
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.195 OF2022(arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No.6545 OF2020 KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM & ORS. APPELLANT (S) VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KRISHNA MURARI, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.11.2019 passed by the High Court of Patna in Criminal Writ Petition No.1492 of 2019, filed by the Appellants under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CrPC) challenging the FIR No.248/2019 dated 01.04.2019 implicating the Appellants for offences under Sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC). The High Court vide order impugned herein dismissed the same. 1 Factual Matrix 3. The Complainant (Respondent No.5 herein) Tarannum Akhtar @ Soni, was married to Md. Ikram on 18.09.17. The appellants herein are the in-laws of Respondent No.5. On 11.12...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-28-2022
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.10425 OF2010ESTEEM PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS CHETAN KAMBLE & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.10764 OF2010CORAL GONSALVES & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS CHETAN KAMBLE & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT N. V. RAMANA, CJI1 The present appeals have been preferred against the judgment dated 07.05.2010 passed by the Bombay High Court in a Public Interest Litigation, being PIL No.47 of 2008.2. The matter pertains to rights and ownership over the subject land admeasuring 5 acres and 20 gunthas in CTS1No.229 (in short subject land). The dispute regarding title was originally between one Gonsalves family (appellants in C.A. No.10764 of 2010) and the State of Maharashtra (respondent no.3). Esteem Properties Pvt. Ltd. (appellant in C.A. No.10425 of 2010) is the successorininterest to the Gonsalves family.3. Before we analyze the case, the facts necessary for the disposal of the case are as follows: From ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-02-2022
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.1627-1628 of 2022 (@ Diary No.19961 of 2020) Binay Kumar Dalei & Ors. .... Appellant(s) Versus State of Odisha & Ors. . Respondent(s) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.1. Rural Organisation for Social Empowerment - Respondent No.8 herein, filed Original Application No.02 of 2019 before the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter, the NGT) for a direction to the opposite parties therein to cancel the stone quarry leases granted pursuant to an advertisement dated 17.08.2017. Respondent No.8 also sought for a direction that no further lease shall be granted in the Kuldiha Wildlife Sanctuary and the eco-sensitive zone lined to it, 1 | Pag e as were notified in the notification dated 09.08.2017. It was further prayed that an enquiry should be conducted into the illegal and unlawful advertisement for long term leases in the wildlife sanctuary. During the pendency of the Original App...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on : Mar-14-2022
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE14H DAY OF MARCH, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.100704 OF2021BETWEEN:1. VARALAKSHMI W/O CHANDRASHEKHARA GOUDA AGED ABOUT60YEARS, OCC.: HOUSE WIFE, R/O.1/134, G.C. COLONY, UNDABANDA, VIDAPANAKAL MANDAL ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH DISTRICT 515 870.2. CHANDRASHEKHAR GOUDA S/O.LATE BASAVANNA GOUDA AGED ABOUT67YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURIST, R/O.1/134, G.C.COLONY, UNDABANDA, VIDAPANAKAL MANDAL ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH DISTRICT 515 870.3. PRATHYUSHA D/O.CHANDRASHEKHAR GOUDA AGED ABOUT24YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O.1/134, G.C. COLONY, UNDABANDA VILLAGE, VIDAPANAKAL MANDALAM, 2 URURAKONDA, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 515 870, ANDHRA PRADESH DISTRICT.4. SMT.SHWETHA W/O.C.DEVA GOUDA AGED ABOUT28YEARS, OCC.: HOUSE WIFE, YELUBENCHI VILLAGE, BALLARI, NOW R/AT.R/O.FLAT NO,.105, ADITYA BLUE MOON APARTMENTS, WHITE FIELD, BENGALURU 560 066. ... PETITIONERS (BY KUM.ARCHANA A.MAGADUM, ADVOCATE)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-15-2022
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE15H DAY OF MARCH, 2022 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT AND THE HONBLE MS. JUSTICE J.M. KHAZI WRIT PETITION No.2347/2022 (GM-RES) C/w WRIT PETITION No.2146/2022 (GM-RES), WRIT PETITION No.2880/2022 (GM-RES), WRIT PETITION No.3038/2022 (GM-RES), WRIT PETITION No.3424/2022 (GM-RES-PIL), WRIT PETITION No.4309/2022 (GM-RES), WRIT PETITION No.4338/2022 (GM-RES-PIL) IN W.P. NO.2347 OF2022BETWEEN:1. . SMT RESHAM, D/O K FARUK, AGED ABOUT17YEARS, THROUGH NEXT FRIEND SRI MUBARAK, S/O F FARUK, AGED ABOUT21YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT NO.9-138, PERAMPALI ROAD, SANTHEKATTE, SANTHOSH NAGARA, MANIPAL ROAD, KUNJIBETTU POST, UDUPI, KARNATAKA-576105. PETITIONER (BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SHRI ABHISHEK JANARDHAN, SHRI ARNAV. A. BAGALWADI & SHRI SHATHABISH SHIVANNA, ADVOCATES) 2 AND:1. . STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PRIMAR...
Tag this Judgment!