Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-12-2019
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 1890 OF2011PRATAP SINGH @ PIKKI ..Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ..Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Rastogi, J.1. The appellant(accused No.1) along with three others tried for an offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code(hereinafter being referred to as IPC). The appellant and one Vikas Kirola were convicted under Section 304 Part II/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and other two persons Manoj Singh Rautela and 1 Deepak Pathak were acquitted vide judgment dated 12th January, 1998.2. Both the unsuccessful convicted persons preferred criminal appeal against the judgment dated 12th January, 1998 before the High Court of Uttarakhand. In the case of appellant, the High Court observed that according to his marksheet of Secondary School Certificate Examination 1993, his date of birth is 13th June, 1977 while the incident was o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-05-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE/ ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.140151 OF2012CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. APPELLANTS VERSUS MOHD. PARVEZ ABDUL KAYUUM ETC. RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 981982 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition Nos.90289029 of 2016) CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.8394 OF2012CRIMINAL APPEAL No.983 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition No.5530 of 2017) AND WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.26 OF2019JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The facts, in short, envisage that initially two separate cases were registered by local Police relating to the murder of Mr. Haren Pandya, exHome Minister for the State of Gujarat on 26.3.2003 and an attempt on the life of Mr. Jagdish Tiwari, a Viswa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leader of Ahmedabad on 11.3.2003. The case of murder was 2 initially registered on the basis of a complaint brought by Mr. Janak Singh Parmar, vide FIR bearing IC.R. No.272/2003 at Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad, on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-02-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11133 OF2011M/S ADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LTD. .... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS GUJARAT ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ORS. ....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. The appellant has approached this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (the Appellate Tribunal for short) in Appeal No.184 of 2010 dated 07.09.2011 thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the present appellant and confirming the judgment and order passed by the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (the Commission for short) dated 31.08.2010.2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal are as under. 2 Respondent No.2, namely, Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the procurer) is a holding company engaged in the business of bulk purchases from the power generators and supply to the distribution companies in the State of Gujarat. On 01.02.2006, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1223 OF2015RAKESH TIWARI, ADVOCATE APPELLANT VERSUS ALOK PANDEY, C.J.M. RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The appellant, advocate, has been convicted for his undesirable conduct by the High Court vide impugned judgment and order under the Contempt of Courts Act and has been sentenced to simple imprisonment of six months and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in case of non-payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 15 days. He has also been directed not to enter the premises of the District Judgeship, Allahabad for a period of six months w.e.f. 15.7.2015 and the contemnor shall remain under constant watch of the District Judge, Allahabad, for a period of two years; and in case of any objectionable conduct, causing interference in peaceful and smooth functioning of the court, the District Judge has been asked to report the matter to the High Court.2. The contemnor has be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3934 OF2017RAM PARSHOTAM MITTAL & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS HOTEL QUEEN ROAD PVT. LTD. & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3935 OF2017JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The appeal arises out of the judgment dated 31.5.2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi, setting aside an order dated 31.1.2006 passed by the Company Law Board in Company Petition No.64/2005.2. The backdrop facts indicate that the Government of India took a policy decision on 5.7.2002 to disinvest its shares in the Indian Tourism Development Corporation (in short, the ITDC) which owns various hotel properties; one of them being Indraprastha Hotel, formerly known as Hotel Ashok Yatri Niwas, (hereinafter referred to as the hotel).3. In terms of an approved scheme of Arrangement of Demerger the hotel was transferred to the Respondent No.1 Hotel Queen Road Pvt. 2 Ltd. (in short, HQRL) which was created as a Special Purpose Vehicle to enable ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-07-2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1123 OF2010ASHOKSINH JAYENDRASINH ..Appellant STATE OF GUJARAT ..Respondent VERSUS JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 05.03.2009 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2001 in and by which the High Court affirmed the conviction of appellant-accused No.1 under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon him. The High Court also affirmed the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 25(c) of the Arms Act and the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. The High Court acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 1 2. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are:- On 23.11.1997 at about 09.00 PM, accused Nos.1 to 5 along wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-03-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.129 OF2017Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India (FOGSI) ..Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ..Respondents JUDGMENT Arun Mishra, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI) (hereinafter referred to as the Society) highlighting the issues and problems affecting the practice of obstetricians and gynaecologists across the country under the Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 23(1) and 23(2) of the Act and seeking direction in the nature of certiorari/mandamus for decriminalising anomalies in paperwork/record keeping/clerical errors in regard of the provisions of the Act for being violative of 2 Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-24-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.714 OF2019(@ SLP(Criminal) No.5415 of 2017) DIPAKBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATEL ... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J.1. This appeal by special leave granted by this Court is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dismissing the Special Criminal Application No.1230 of 2009 filed by the appellant under Section 482 of the 1 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.PC for short).2. The petition under Section 482 Cr.PC. was filed challenging the complaint and the Order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting the request of the appellant to discharge him of the offences under Sections 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC for short).3. The contents of the FIR dated 10.04.1996 are as follows: The facts of my complaint are that today ie., on 10.04.199...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-09-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3588 OF2019[Arising out of SLP(C) No.46 of 2019]. CARETEL INFOTECH LTD. .APPELLANT Versus HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS. .RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. 2. Leave granted. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (respondent No.1) floated an e-public tender on 4.12.2017 for setting up call centres for receiving, recording and replying to information enquiries and complaints from LPG customers of IOC/HPC/BPC. The appellant participated in the tender. Clause 20 of the tender reads as under:1. 20. Black List/Ban/Holiday List i. Bids received from parties who have been banned/blacklisted/put on holiday list or parties in respect of whom the action for blacklisting and holiday listing has been initiated by HPCL/any Government/Quasi Government Agencies or PSUs, shall not be considered for either evaluation or for award of work. Offer of Vendor who has not submitted declaration o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-07-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2530 OF2012Birla Institute of Technology .Appellant(s) VERSUS The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. On 07.01.2019, this Court placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Ahmadabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association vs. Administrative Officer and Others (2004) 1 SCC755 which was brought to the 1 Courts notice by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court.2. However, after the pronouncement of the order in this appeal, it came to the notice of this Court that consequent upon the decision of this Court rendered in Ahmadabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association (supra), the Parliament amended the definition of the word employee as defined in Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by Amending Act No.47 of 2009 on 31.12.2009 with retrospective effect from 03.04.1997. This amendment was no...
Tag this Judgment!