Court : Mumbai
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1 In the light of the earlier orders passed by this Court at the stage of issuance of notice, this Writ Petition is disposed of finally at the stage of admission. 2 Hence, RULE. The Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 3 By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioner is challenging the grant of sanction vide order dated 09.10.2012. This order is passed by the Respondent No.1. 4 The Petitioner before us is a citizen of India. He is an Indian Revenue Service Officer of 1992 batch (for short IRS officer). Presently, he is the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai. 5 It is stated that a case of Disproportionate Assets bearing RC No.BA1/2005/A0017 was registered by the Respondent No.4 on 4th April, 2005 against the Petitioner who is the original accused, under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per V.M. Kanade, J.) 1. By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner is seeking a writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside FIR no. 26(A)/2010 which is registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation for the offences punishable under section 120B read with section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (For short "PC Act") 2. Brief facts are as under:- FACTS 3. Petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner in the year 1997 and was later on promoted to the post of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on 03/02/2005 with effect from 23/10/2003. 4. Sometime in 2008, one Mr. Vijay Patil, President, Maharashtra Kamgar Ekta Union made a complaint to the Petitioner regarding evasion of employees provident fund contribution of 2000 employees of M/s Pratibha Industries Limited. An inquiry was initiated by the Petitioner on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1974]94ITR276(Bom); 1973MhLJ443
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is a revision application filed by the original plaintiff against an order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, in Civil Suit No. 97 of 1966, rejecting his application dated August 5, 1968, objecting to issuance of summons to the income-tax and estate authorities at the instance of the defendant. 2. The applicant plaintiff filed a suit for ejectment and possession of the suit premises as well as the arrears of rent and mesne profits against the defendant. The defendant raised a plea that, though he is the tenant of the suit premises, the plaintiff is not entitled to file the proceedings or recover the rent from him, because the property in question belongs to the trust and the plaintiff is merely a trustee and cannot claim the rent or the property in his individual capacity. The plaintiff adduced his evidence and the defendant had also examined himself and thereafter applied for issuing summons to the income-tax authority as well as estate duty a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1954CriLJ366
ORDER1. This order shall govern the disposal of the following Miscellaneous Criminal Cases:No. 35/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Dr. S.M. Hasan and Ors.No. 36/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Shri Abhilas-Chandra.No. 37/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Dr. N.B. Khare and Ors.No. 38/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Swami K.N. Sokhta and Anr.No. 39/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Shri R.K. Shukla and Ors.No. 50/53: Shri M. V. Rajwade v. Thakur Pyarelal Singh and Anr.No. 48/53: In re Shri Ramgopal Maheshwari and Anr.2. Shri M. V. Rajwade, I.A.S., who is the petitioner in the first six cases is the Deputy Commissioner, Durg. The last case was registered on a petition filed by the Deputy Registrar, High Court of Judicature at Nagpur. These petitions were filed under Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, for taking action against the alleged contemners in respect of certain publications.3. Respondents in these cases are the authors and/or publishers of the impugned articles.(A) The authors concerned are-(1) Dr. S....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1990(47)ELT352(Bom)
1. By this Petition under Section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the original accused Nos. 4 and 5 in case No. 433/S of 1987 of the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bombay, seek a direction quashing the process issued against them along with the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 6 to 12 upon a complaint lodged by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, for offences punishable under Sections 120B of the Indian Penal Code r/w. Sections 9(1)(b), 9(1)(bb), 9(1)(bbb), 9(1)(c) read with Section 9(1)(d) and 9(1)(i) and 9-AA of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 as well as offences punishable under Sections 193 r/w. 192 I.P.C.2. Respondent No. 1 - Assistant Collector of Central Excises filed a complaint alleging that he was authorised to file a complaint for offences under the Central Excises and Salt Act and that he was a public servant. The accused No. 1 - M/s. Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. was a company manufacturing aerated water falling under Chapter No. 22 of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1937)39BOMLR699
Roche, J.1. This is an appeal against a decree dated December 19, 1933, of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in its appellate jurisdiction affirming a judgment of the High Court in its original jurisdiction dismissing the action of the present appellant, the plaintiff in the action. The action was one claiming damages for wrongful dismissal from Government service and the questions involved were whether the dismissal was in fact wrongful and in breach of the material rules of the service and, if so, whether the suit for damages was maintainable.2. The facts of the case were these : The appellant in May, 1924, was a reader in the Government Press, Madras, and as such reader held office: in the civil service of the Crown in India. In May, 1924, he fell under suspicion of being concerned in a leakage of information in respect of the charge. The matter was investigated and at first the appellant was directed to vindicate his character in a Court of law. He proceeded to do so by action...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1994CriLJ1813; 1994(1)MhLj452
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. Being unable to see eye to eye with a view expressed by several learned single Judges of this Court namely Rele, J. in the case of 'Rama Niwrutti Shinde v. The State of Maharashtra' in Criminal Revn. Application No. 24 of 1980, Salve, J. in the case of 'Ramrao Patil v. Vasant Ahirrao' (Criminal Application No. 360 of 1987) and Tated, J. in the case of 'Pralhad Shamburao Newale v. State of Maharashtra' '1988 MLJ 161' (All Judges of this Court as they then were), another learned single Judge Chaudhari (a sitting Judge of this Court), in the present proceedings, has referred a question to a larger Bench, and that is how the present proceedings are taken up for hearing by us. 2. The present proceedings arise out of prosecutions filed against the respondents under various offences such as Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 471 and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code, Section 7 and 9 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sections 5(1)(c) and 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1993(2)BomCR286; 1993CriLJ3042; 1993(1)MhLj511
1. Faced with a situation wherein the administration of Co-operative Societies was so deeply infected with dishonest and corrupt practices which were being fostered by a set of official who, in law, were otherwise supposed to be in-charge of curbing them, the State Legislature introduced in 1986, Section 161 in the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. This was a drastic provision which was essential if the rot to be curbed. The office-bearers and members of the Managing Committee of a Co-operative Society were deemed to be public servants and the State was empowered to prosecute them for offences of corruption by treating them on par with other public servants. 2. The chronic disease that has permeated into the life-blood of the co-operative system, is the almost universal belief that whatever available funds the society possesses should be misappropriated. At times directly, but invariable through indirect and sometimes subtle means, this activity continues with impunity and, as th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1971(21)FLR101]; (1970)IILLJ336Bom
1. These two appeals arise out of almost identical facts and raise a common question of law for decision. They arise out of two applications filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') before the Employees' Insurance Court, Bombay (hereinafter referred to the 'E.I. Court'), under S. 75(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (Act XXXIV of 1948, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The application leading to A.O. No. 5 of 1968 was against Messrs. Popular Process Studio and its proprietor Mukund Kashalkar for the recovery of Rs. 1,567.63 as employees' contribution for the period from August 19, 1959 to August 31, 1964, and was filed on January 25, 1965, while the application leading to A.O. No. 6 of 1968 was against Messrs. Dawn Mills Co. (Ltd.) and its Director Ramniwas Ramnarain for the recovery of Rs. 7,252.13 as employees' contribution for the period from October 3, 1954 to March 31, 1960, and was filed on June 23, 1964....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1995)97BOMLR839
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. Heard learned Counsel on both sides. There is no merit in the petition. The petition is summarily dismissed.2. The petitioner herein, is a former Judicial Officer. At the relevant time, the petitioner was working as Civil Judge (J. D.) and Judicial Magistrate, First Class in the State of Maharashtra as indicated in later part of this order.3. By this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned order dated 2nd March, 1993 passed by the Government of Maharashtra dismissing him from service on recommendation of the High Court on Administrative side as contemplated under Article 235 of the Constitution of India after holding of a detailed disciplinary enquiry relating to alleged misconduct of the petitioner by the 4th Additional District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur.4. It is as universally accepted norm that Judges and Judicial Officers must act with dignity and must not indulge in a conduct or behaviour which is...
Tag this Judgment!