Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.67 OF2017NIKESH TARACHAND SHAH PETITIONER UNION OF INDIA & ANR. RESPONDENTS VERSUS WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.103 OF2017WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.144 OF2017WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.152 OF2017WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2012 OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL) NO.7326 OF2017 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2013 OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL) NO.7786 OF2017 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2014 OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL) NO.7789 OF2017 1 JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present writ petitions and appeals raise the question of the constitutional validity of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Section 45(1) imposes two conditions for grant of bail where an offence punishable for a term of imprisonment of more than 3 years under Part A of the Schedule to the Act is involved. The conditions are that the Public Prosecutor must be given an oppo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1927Mad1; (1926)51MLJ529
C.V. Kumaraswami Sastri, Kt., Officiating C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Devadoss, J., in S.A. No. 100 of 1923. The 2nd defendant applied to the District Court of Kistna to be adjudicated an insolvent on the 24th of January, 1918. On the 31st of January, 1918 the District Court transferred the petition to the Official Receiver, the 1st defendant. The adjudication order was made on the 15th of July, 1918 and the Official Receiver put the property in dispute to sale at an auction held on the 25th of August 1918, and executed a sale deed on the 12th of September, 1919. Defendants 3 to 5 are the purchasers under the sale deed. The plaintiff who is the son of the 2nd defendant sued for a declaration that the sale by the Official Receiver is invalid, and for a partition and delivery to him of his share. He alleged that the debts contracted by his father were for illegal and immoral purposes not binding on him and that even if the sale is valid his interest would not be affe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. The petitioners in these petitions have been arrayed as accused 1 to 4 Thereinafter referred to as 'accused 1 to 4' respectively in P.C.No. 1/2011, initiated by Il-respondent, alleging offences punishable under section 13(l)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. sections 409. 420 & 120B IPC and section 3A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The learned Special Judge on receipt of complaint referred the complaint under section 156(3) Cr.P.C, to I respondent/Deputy Superintendent of Lokayukta Police, Madikeri and it was registered in Crime No.8/2011 on 08.12.2011. These petitions are filed to quash entire proceedings in P.C.No. 1/2011 and first information registered in prime No.8/2011 by I-respondent. 2. I have heard Sri S.Vijay Shankar, learned senior counsel for accused no. 1. Sri Murthy Dayanand Naik. learned counsel for accused 2 to 4, Smt.T.M.Gayathri, learned counsel for I-respondent and Sri A.K.Subbaiah, learned counsel for Il-respondent. 3. The brief facts as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.15639 o1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.15639 of 2013 Date of Decision :23. 7.2013 Dharamvir Malik .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents ..CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ..Present : Mr.V.K.Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner..RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 3.4.2013 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Lokayukta, Haryana-respondent no.2 and consequential proceedings initiated by the Director General, Secondary Education, Haryana-respondent no.3. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was received by the Lokayukta, Haryana against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner, while working as Principal, Govt. Senior Secondary School, misappropriated an amount of ` 2,77,112/- on account of electricity bills, whereas the said amount had already been paid by his predecessORS.An enquiry was stated to be conducted against the petitioner. Forwarding a c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1916Bom265; (1916)ILR40Bom529
Macleod, J.1. The defendant Steamer Company entered into an agreement, on the 1st April 1915, with the firm of Chhagandas & Co. whereby the latter chartered the steamer Hejaz for a voyage, Bombay to Naples, Genoa and or Marseilles, any two discharging ports at charterer's option. On the 14th April, the Jeddah was substituted for the Hejaz. The plaintiffs procured from Chhagandas & Co. freight for 2,500 bales of cotton on the said steamer and were given the shipping orders which they presented to the defendants. The 2,500 bales were put on board the Jeddah and twenty-five bills of lading relating to them were issued by the defendants, who were paid Rs. 32,610-6-2 for freight. Owing, however, to the import of cotton into Genoa being prohibited by orders of Government, the Jeddah did not leave the harbour and the voyage had to be abandoned. Negotiations were entered into with the various shippers of cotton, which are set out in the correspondence-annexed to the pleadings, but eventually t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 33Ind.Cas.536
Macleod, J.1. The defendant Steamer Company entered into an agreement, on the 1st April 1915, with the firm of Chhagandas and Company whereby the latter chartered the steamer 'Hejaz' for a voyage, Bombay to Naples, Genoa and or Marseilles, any two discharging ports at charterer's option. On the 14th April, the 'Jeddah' was substituted for the 'Hejaz.' The plaintiffs procured from Chhagandas and Company freight for 2,500 bales of cotton on the said steamer and were given the shipping orders which they presented to the defendants. The 2,500 bales were put on board the 'Jeddah' and twenty-five bills of lading relating to them were issued by the defendants, who were paid Rs. 32,610-6-2 for freight. Owing, however, to the import of cotton into Genoa being prohibited by orders of Government, the 'Jeddah' did not leave the harbour and the voyage had to be abandoned. Negotiations were entered info with the various shippers of cotton, which are set out in the correspondence annexed to the plead...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1970P& H40
Mehar Singh, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of two petitions Nos. 2847 and 2399 of 1967 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. In both the petitions Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar, is the petitioner, but in petition No. 2847 of 1967 the second petitioner is Mr. Sajjan Singh Giani. To the two petitions the first three respondents are the same, that is to sav, Mr. Lachhman Singh Gill, Chief Minister, Punjab, the State of Punjab, and Mr. Kartar Singh Giani, who is a member of the Judicial Commission; and in petition No. 2899 of 1967 the fourth respondent is Mr. Sardul Singh, who was appointed a member of the Judicial Commission by Punjab Government Notification No. 462 Gurdwaras, of December 12, 1967.2. There were three members of the Judicial Commission appointed under Section 70 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act. 1925 (Punjab Act 8 of 1925) -- hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' --, namely, Mr. Sajjan Singh Giani petitioner, who was also its president, Mr. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2002Raj33; 2001(3)WLC199; 2001(3)WLN632
Lakshmanan, C.J. (1). The petitioners in the instant writ petition are the practicing advocates at Jodhpur. They filed the writ petition with the followingprayers:-'It is, therefore, prayed that a writ, direction or order or in the nature of mandamus be issued and respondents be directed to advertise the post and appointments of Advocate General, Additional AdvocateGeneral, Government Advocates, Panel lawyers etc. to deal with cases of State of Rajasthan in High Court and various other courts in Rajasthan and selections be made.That all persons holding these posts at present be held ab initio void'.(2). According to the writ petitioners, the appointments to the post of Advocate General, Government Advocates, Public Prosecutors and Panel lawyers are made in a very arbitrary manner simply on likes and dislikes theory and that few lawyers got monopoly in representing the State. According to the petitioners, India being a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic, there must be equa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1074; JT1993(6)SC1; (1994)ILLJ162SC; 1993(3)SCALE952; (1993)4SCC727; [1993]Supp2SCR576; 1993(3)SLJ193(SC)
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J.1. This group of matters is at the instance of various parties, viz., Union of India, Public Sector Corporations, Public Sector banks, State Governments and two private parties. By an order dated 5th August, 1991 in Managing Director, Electronic Corporation of India v. B.Karunakar : (1992)1SCC709 , a three Judge Bench of this Court referred that matter to the Chief Justice for being placed before a Larger Bench, for the Bench found a conflict in the two decisions of this Court, viz., Kailash Chander Asthana etc. etc. v. State of U.P. and Ors. etc. etc. : (1988)IILLJ219SC , and Union of India and Ors. etc. etc. v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan : (1991)ILLJ29SC both delivered by the Benches of three learned Judges. Civil Appeal No. 3056 of 1991 arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 12103 of 1991 along with the other matters in which the same question of law is in issue, has therefore, been referred to this Bench.2. The basis question of law which arises in these matters is whether the r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC130; 1983(31)BLJR122; (1983)ILLJ104SC; 1982(2)SCALE1213; (1983)1SCC305; [1983]2SCR165; 1983(1)SLJ131(SC)
1. With a slight variation to suit the context Woolesey's prayer : 'had I served my God as reverently as I did my king, I would not have fallen on these days of penury' is chanted by petitioners in this group of petitions in the Shellian tune : 'I fall on the thorns of life I bleed.' Old age, ebbing, mental and physical prowess, atrophy of both muscle and brain powers permeating these petitions, the petitioners in the fall of life yearn for equality of treatment which is being meted out to those who are soon going to join and swell their own ranks,2. Do pensioners entitled to receive superannuation or retiring pension under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 ('1972 Rules' for short) form a class as a whole? Is the date of retirement a relevant consideration for eligibility when a revised formula for computation of pension is ushered in and made effective from a specified date? Would differential treatment to pensioners related to the date of retirement qua the revised formula...
Tag this Judgment!