Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-06-2019
$~ * % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:12. h September,2019 Judgment pronounced on:6. h November,2019 CRL.A. 379/2019 & Crl.M.(BAIL) 574/2019 AKASH @ BHOLE ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Ritu Gauba, Advocate. versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State. SI Vijay Kumar, PS Sadar Bazar ..... Respondent CRL.A. 619/2019 & Crl.M.(BAIL) 851/2019 MANOJ STATE Through: Dr.Mohd. Nasir, with Mr.Tabrez and ..... Appellant Mr.Junid Alam, Advocates. versus Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State. SI Vijay Kumar, PS Sadar Bazar. ..... Respondent CRL.A. 642/2019 & Crl.M.(BAIL) 897/2019 MANOJ @ KALE ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Adit S. Pujari with Ms.Tusharika Mattoo, Mr. Chaitanya Sundriyal and Mr. Viren Bansal, Advocates (DHCLSC) versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State. SI Vijay Kumar, PS Sadar Bazar. CRL.A. 379/2019 & other connected matters Page 1 of 83 + CRL.A. 606/2019 & Crl.M.(BAIL) 83...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-19-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31. t January, 2019 Decided on:19. h August, 2019 W.P.(CRL) 2397/2018 & Crl.M.A.29851/2018 MR. MUNISH KUMAR BHUNSALI ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Rajeev Mehra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Pallav Saxena, Ms.Bindu Das and Mr.Abhilash Attri, Advocates versus KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. .. Respondent Represented by: Mr.Ravi Gupta, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Mahip Dutta, Mr.Sachin Jain and Ms.Diya Kapoor, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 M/s. KEW Precision Parts Private Limited (in short the company) approached the respondent/ Bank for availing financial facilities which were sanctioned vide letter dated 23rd November, 2012. For the said facilities Munish Kumar Bhunsali, the petitioner herein besides Kumud Jain and Mohit Kumar Bhunsali executed several security documents to secure the facilities. The company again approached the respondent/ Bank for renewal of existing financial facilities in March, 2013 which were renewed vide...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-09-2019
$~ * + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1244/2018 NIKHIL SAXENA ..... Appellant Through Mr. Jai Khanduja, Advocate. versus STATE (N.C.T OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp. Anil Kumar and ASI Ajit Kumar, PS Adarsh Nagar. CRL.A. 1249/2018 WITH VISHAL SONKAR ..... Appellant Through Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp. Anil Kumar and ASI Ajit Kumar, PS Adarsh Nagar. AND CRL.A. 95/2019 PUNIT @ RAJU Through Mr. Sahil Talwar, Advocate with Mr. Chander Kant and Mr. Nikhil Garg, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus CRL. A. Nos.1244/2018, 1249/2018, 95/2019 Page 1 of 33 THE STATE GOVT. OF N.C.T OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp. Anil Kumar and ASI Ajit Kumar, PS Adarsh Nagar. % Reserved On :02. d November, 2019 Date of Decision:09. h December, 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE...
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 : 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 : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-25-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP (C) 1288/2012 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish K. Bishnoi, Adv. with Ms. Tanvi Sapra, Adv. versus AJAY TIWARI UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT2511.2019 ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Beenashaw N. Soni, Adv. for R-1 Ms. Tanya Agarwal, Adv. for R-2 % 1. These proceedings emanate from a complaint, dated 9th September, 2008, submitted by Ms. M (whose name is being withheld, for the sake of propriety), an M. Phil. Student in the Department of Hindi, University of Delhi, wherein she alleged that she had been sexually harassed by the petitioner who, at the time, was a Professor in the said Department. The complaint was referred to the Apex Complaints Committee (hereinafter referred to as ACC), under Ordinance XV-D of the Ordinances governing the University of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the University). The ACC found the allegation of sexual harassment, against the petitioner, to b...
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 : 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 : Jul-30-2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO.4430 OF2009ZENITH DRUGS & ALLIED AGENCIES PVT. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRI UDAY KRISHNA PAUL Appellant VERSUS M/S. NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD. ...Respondent JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the order dated 26.03.2007 passed by the Guwahati High Court in Civil Revision (P) No.31 of 2005 in and by which the High Court allowed the revision 1 petition preferred by the respondent and referred the parties to arbitration.2. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are as follows:- The appellant is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is involved with various types of agency businesses including that of clearing and forwarding agents, freight contractors, etc. M/s Rhone Poulene India Limited (RPIL) vide agreement dated 01.05.1997 appointed the appellant Company as its clearing and forwarding agent for a period of three years. Clause 17 of the agree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-07-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1856 OF2013STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ... APPELLANT VERSUS DARSHAN SINGH ... RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1857 OF2013JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J.1. Since these appeals involve the same impugned judgment of the High Court acquitting the respondents of offences under Section 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC, for short), we deem it fit to dispose of the same by a common judgment. 1 PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF2 The complaint in this case, which led to the trial, was lodged by one Swarn Singh-PW1. The complaint in brief is as follows: On 22.08.1992, when he, along with his father, mother and maternal uncle, were going on a tractor from Nanakmatta to their village and his father was driving the tractor, when the tractor reached one kilometre from their house, they found that a bullock cart has blocked their passage. The tractor stopped near the bullock...
Tag this Judgment!