Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-25-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. 04.2019 Pronounced on:25. 04.2019 LPA1842019 & CM APPL. No.12369/2019 UNION OF INDIA & ORS .... Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG with Ms. Maninder Acharya, ASG, Mr.Ripu Daman Singh Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Hina Bhargava, Mr.N.K. Singh (Joint Secretary) & Ms. Veena Kumari, Director for Ministry of Mines. versus M/S RVG METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aman Vachher, Mr. Yashraj, Mr.Saket Sikri, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Mr. Shyam Agarwal & Mr. Arun Nagar, Advs. LPA1852019 & CM APPL. Nos. 12384/2019 & 18118/2019 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Appellants Acharya, Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG with Ms.Maninder ASG, Mr.Ripu Daman Singh Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Hina Bhargava, Mr.N.K. Singh (Joint Secretary) & Ms. Veena Kumari, Director for Ministry of Mines. versus M/S STANDARD METALLOYS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aman V...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-25-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. 04.2019 Pronounced on:25. 04.2019 LPA1842019 & CM APPL. No.12369/2019 UNION OF INDIA & ORS .... Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG with Ms. Maninder Acharya, ASG, Mr.Ripu Daman Singh Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Hina Bhargava, Mr.N.K. Singh (Joint Secretary) & Ms. Veena Kumari, Director for Ministry of Mines. versus M/S RVG METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aman Vachher, Mr. Yashraj, Mr.Saket Sikri, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Mr. Shyam Agarwal & Mr. Arun Nagar, Advs. LPA1852019 & CM APPL. Nos. 12384/2019 & 18118/2019 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Appellants Acharya, Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG with Ms.Maninder ASG, Mr.Ripu Daman Singh Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Hina Bhargava, Mr.N.K. Singh (Joint Secretary) & Ms. Veena Kumari, Director for Ministry of Mines. versus M/S STANDARD METALLOYS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aman V...
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 : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-16-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:26. h March, 2019 Pronounced on:16. h April, 2019 + RC.REV. 309/2018, CM Appl. No.27327/2018 RAMESH CHAND ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Rajat Aneja, Ms.Chandrika Gupta, Advocates. versus SHYAMA ARORA Through Mr.Gaurav Advocate. ..... Respondent Singh, Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition challenges the impugned order dated 07.04.2018 whereby the eviction petition filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed after evidence. Before coming to the issues raised it would be appropriate to state few facts.2. The petitioner herein filed an eviction petition in respect of a shop at No.97, Block-D, Gali No.6, Shashi Garden, Patparganj, Delhi. The said premises is required by the petitioner for his daughter in law to start a garment business.3. Admittedly the petitioner has two sons and three daughters; all are since married. The petitioner is a senior citizen of 65 years of age and has a meag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-11-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No 306 of 2019 Indibility Creative Pvt Ltd & Ors ...Petitioners Versus Govt of West Bengal & Ors ...Respondents JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J1Motivated by a mission to support meaningful Bengali cinema, the petitioners produced a film titled Bhobishyoter Bhoot. Their grievance, while invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution is that the State of West Bengal, its Department of Home and the Kolkata Police have caused an utterly unlawful obstruction of the public exhibition of their Bengali feature film. Simply put, their grievance is summarized in the extract which we reproduce from the first paragraph of the petition: The State of West Bengal is misusing police power and acting as a super-censor sitting atop the CBFC and is violating the Petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14,19(1)(a), 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution thro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.46 OF2019IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.298 OF2018YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIECTOR & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH M.A.No.58/2019 in W.P. (CRL.) 225/2018 R.P. (CRL.) No.122/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) 297/2018 M.A. No.403/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) No.298/2018 R.P.(C) No.719/2019 in W.P.(C) 1205/2018 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, CJI1 A preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the review petition has been raised by the Attorney General on behalf of the respondents. The learned Attorney General contends 2 that the review petition lacks in bona fides inasmuch as three documents unauthorizedly removed from the office of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, have been appended to the review petition and relied upon by the review petitioners. The three documents in question are: (a) An eightpage note written by three members of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.46 OF2019IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.298 OF2018YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIECTOR & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH M.A.No.58/2019 in W.P. (CRL.) 225/2018 R.P. (CRL.) No.122/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) 297/2018 M.A. No.403/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) No.298/2018 R.P.(C) No.719/2019 in W.P.(C) 1205/2018 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, CJI1 A preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the review petition has been raised by the Attorney General on behalf of the respondents. The learned Attorney General contends 2 that the review petition lacks in bona fides inasmuch as three documents unauthorizedly removed from the office of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, have been appended to the review petition and relied upon by the review petitioners. The three documents in question are: (a) An eightpage note written by three members of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.46 OF2019IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.298 OF2018YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIECTOR & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH M.A.No.58/2019 in W.P. (CRL.) 225/2018 R.P. (CRL.) No.122/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) 297/2018 M.A. No.403/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) No.298/2018 R.P.(C) No.719/2019 in W.P.(C) 1205/2018 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, CJI1 A preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the review petition has been raised by the Attorney General on behalf of the respondents. The learned Attorney General contends 2 that the review petition lacks in bona fides inasmuch as three documents unauthorizedly removed from the office of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, have been appended to the review petition and relied upon by the review petitioners. The three documents in question are: (a) An eightpage note written by three members of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.46 OF2019IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.298 OF2018YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIECTOR & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH M.A.No.58/2019 in W.P. (CRL.) 225/2018 R.P. (CRL.) No.122/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) 297/2018 M.A. No.403/2019 IN W.P. (CRL.) No.298/2018 R.P.(C) No.719/2019 in W.P.(C) 1205/2018 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, CJI1 A preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the review petition has been raised by the Attorney General on behalf of the respondents. The learned Attorney General contends 2 that the review petition lacks in bona fides inasmuch as three documents unauthorizedly removed from the office of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, have been appended to the review petition and relied upon by the review petitioners. The three documents in question are: (a) An eightpage note written by three members of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
$ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. L.P. 153/2019 Judgment reserved on:28. h March, 2019 Judgment pronounced on:10. h April, 2019 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ....Appellant Through: Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP for State with SI Suresh Chand, PS Kirti Nagar Versus JEEVAN SINGH ....Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL1 By this petition under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter as Cr.P.C), the appellant/State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - 01, Special Court, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi whereby the respondent was acquitted of the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter as IPC) in FIR No.248/2012, Police Station Kirti Nagar. CRL.L.P. 153/2019 Page 1 of 24 2. Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Learned Trial Court, are as under:-"i.Prosecution case unveils with DD No.37A dated 20.08.2012 being recorded regard...
Tag this Judgment!