Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC3125; 1999(4)ARBLR502(SC); 1999(3)BLJR2191; JT1999(5)SC422; 1999(4)SCALE516; (1999)9SCC620; [1999]Supp1SCR146
ORDERS.B. Majmudar, J.1. Leave granted in the Special Leave Petitions.2. These appeals and writ petitions mainly raise the question regarding the legality of the levy of market fee under the provisions of Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Market Act' for short). The grievance made by the appellants/writ petitioners pertained to the following commodities with which the respective proceedings are concerned.1. Sugarcane, Sugar and Molasses (briefly referred to as 'Sugar matters');2. Wheat products Atta, Maida, Suzi, Bran etc.;3. Vegetable Oil;4. Rice milling;5. Milk and milk products;6. Tea.It will, therefore, be appropriate to deal seriatim the grievances centering round the levy of market fee on transactions concerning the aforesaid commodities.GRIEVANCES IN CONNECTION WITH MARKET FEE CONCERNING SUGAR MATTERS3. So far as this group of matters is concerned, first two Civil Appeal Nos. 398 and 399 of 1977 arise out of certificates of fitness gra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2008)7MLJ64(SC); 2008(10)SCALE567; (2008)9SCC243; 2009(1)SLJ1(SC); 2008AIRSCW6564; 2008(4)LH(SC)2993
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Whether the policy of reservation of posts for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes can be applied at the stage of giving effect to cadre restructuring exercise undertaken pursuant to letter No. PC-III/2003/CRC/6 dated 9.10.2003 issued by the Railway Board is the question which arises for determination in the above noted appeals filed against the orders of Punjab & Haryana High Court which upheld the decision of Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal') to quash para 14 of the said letter and the direction given for making appointments de hors the policy of reservation. The special leave petition filed by the Union of India against the order of Allahabad High Court is being disposed of along with appeals because the issue arising therein is similar.2. For the sake of convenience, we have taken the facts from the record of Civil Appeal Nos. 6934-6946 of 2005. The same are:(i) Respondents Pushpa Rani and six other...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(56)BLJR2254; 2008AIRSCW5964; 2008(4)LH(SC)2896
S.B. Sinha, J 1. Leave granted.INTRODUCTION2. Several questions of grave importance including the constitutional validity of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act'), the standard and extent of burden of proof on the prosecution vis-`-vis accused are in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 9.06.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No. 810-SB of 2000 whereby and whereunder an appeal filed by the applicant against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 7.6.2000 under Section 22 and 23 of the Act has been dismissed.PROSECUTION CASE3. Appellant is an Afghan national.4. He was arrested and later on prosecuted under Sections 22 and 23 of the Act allegedly for carrying 1 kg 400 grams of heroin as a member of crew of Ariana Afghan Airlines.5. Appellant arrived at Raja Sansi Airport at about 6 p.m. on 1.08.1997. He presented himself before the authorities under the Customs Act, 1962 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1918; JT1994(2)SC215; 1994(2)SCALE37; (1994)3SCC1; [1994]2SCR644
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J.1. On behalf of Kuldip Singh, J. and himself. Article 356 has a vital bearing on the democratic parliamentary form of government and the autonomy of the States under the federal Constitution that we have adopted. The interpretation of the Article has, therefore, once again engaged the attention of this Court in the background of the removal of the governments and the dissolution of the legislative assemblies in six States with which we are concerned here, on different occasions and in different situations by the exercise of power under the Article. The crucial question that falls for consideration in all these matters is whether the President has unfettered powers to issue Proclamation under Article 356(1) of the Constitution. The answer to this question depends upon the answers to the following questions: (a) Is the Proclamation amenable to judicial review? (b) If yes, what is the scope of the judicial review in this respect? and (c) What is the meaning of the expr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)9SCC1; JT2012(8)SC4; 2012(4)KCCR271(SN); 2012AIRSCW4942; AIR2012SC3565; 2012(7)SCALE553
Aftab Alam, J.1. The appellant, Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant’ or as ‘Kasab’), who is a Pakistani national, has earned for himself five death penalties and an equal number of life terms in prison for committing multiple crimes of a horrendous kind in this country. Some of the major charges against him were: conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India; collecting arms with the intention of waging war against the Government of India; waging and abetting the waging of war against the Government of India; commission of terrorist acts; criminal conspiracy to commit murder; criminal conspiracy, common intention and abetment to commit murder; committing murder of a number of persons; attempt to murder with common intention; criminal conspiracy and abetment; abduction for murder; robbery/dacoity with an attempt to cause death or grievous hurt; and causing explosions punishable under the Explosive S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC862; 2005(3)BomCR139; JT2005(1)SC370; 2005(2)MhLj392; 2005(1)MPHT497; 2005MPLJ181(SC); (2005)2SCC591; 2005(2)LC812(SC)
Shivaraj V. Patil, J.1. The Constitutional validity of the Bombay City Civil Court and Bombay Court of Small Causes (Enhancement of Pecuniary Jurisdiction & Amendment) Act, 1986 (Maharashtra Act No. XV of 1987) (for short 'the 1987 Act), which received assent of the President on 4.5.1987, Maharashtra High Court (Hearing of Writ Petitions by Division Bench and Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals) Act, 1986 (Maharashtra Act XVII of 1986) (for short 'the 1986 Act'), which received the assent of the President on 28.2.1986, and the correctness of the Full Bench decision of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh striking down the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Letters Patent Appeals Samapti) Adhiniyam, 1981 (for short 'the Adhiniyam) abolishing Letters Patent appeals as invalid are under challenge in these matters.Civil Appeal No. 2452/19922. This appeal is directed against the order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Maharashtra made in Writ Petition No. 738 of 1992. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. Leave granted in SLP (Crl.) Nos. 10 of 2006 and 6711 of 2007. 1. The legal questions in this batch of criminal appeals relate to the involuntary administration of certain scientific techniques, namely narcoanalysis, polygraph examination and the Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) test for the purpose of improving investigation efforts in criminal cases. This issue has received considerable attention since it involves tensions between the desirability of efficient investigation and the preservation of individual liberties. Ordinarily the judicial task is that of evaluating the rival contentions in order to arrive at a sound conclusion. However, the present case is not an ordinary dispute between private parties. It raises pertinent questions about the meaning and scope of fundamental rights which are available to all citizens. Therefore, we must examine the implications of permitting the use of the impugned techniques in a variety of settings.2. Objecti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1260; 1991(2)BLJR767; (1991)2CompLJ197(SC); 1991CriLJ1438; 1991(2)Crimes113(SC); JT1991(2)SC147; 1992Supp(1)SCC222; [1991]2SCR1; 1992SCC(Cri)192
Kuldip Singh, J. 1. The Bihar State cooperative Marketing Union Limited (BISCOMAUN) (hereinafter called 'BISCO') is an apex body operating in the State of Bihar. It is a federation of Cooperative Societies and its primary function is to supply fertiliser to farmers through its depots and godowns numbering about 550, spread-over the State of Bihar.2. Shri P.P. Sharma, IAS took over as Managing Director of BISCO on May 26, 1986 and continued to hold the said office till June 14, 1987. From December, 31, 1986 to June 14, 1987 he was also Secretary, Department of Cooperative, Government of Bihar and Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State of Bihar. G.D. Mishra was working as Advisor to BISCO during 1986-88. He resigned from the said post on August 3, 1988. It may be mentioned that one Tapeshwar Singh was the Chairman of BISCO during the above said period.3. M/s. Rajasthan Multi Fertiliser Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur, Rajasthan (hereinafter called the 'firm') was holding a Certificate of Registratio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992(60)ELT674(SC); JT1994(4)SC655; (1995)2MLJ2(SC); 1994(3)SCALE575; (1994)5SCC509; [1994]Supp2SCR281
ORDERThe Government have decided to discontinue the granting/renewal of licences for bars attached to the Indian Made Liquor retail vending shops under the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Retail Vending in Bar) Rules, 1992 with effect from the excise year commencing from the 1st June, 1993.2. The following Notification will be published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette.NotificationIn exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 17C, 17D, 21 and 54 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 (Tamil Nadu Act X of 1937). The Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby rescinds the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Retail Vending in Bar) Rules, 1992, with effect on and from the 1st June, 1993.(By Order of the Governor)K. MalaisamySecretary to Govt.45. The effect of the above GO. is, on and from 1st June, 1993 the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Retail Vending in Bar) Rules, 1992 came to be rescinded. Both the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court under the impugned judgment have upheld the validity of G.O.Ms. No. 44 dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. We are in these appeals concerned with an issue of considerable national and international importance, pertaining to the setting up of a nuclear power plant in the South-Eastern tip of India, at Kudankulam in the State of Tamil Nadu. The incidents occurred in Three Miles Island Power Plant USA, Chernobyl, Ukraine, USSR, Fukoshima, Japan, Union Carbide, Bhopal might be haunting the memory of the people living in and around Kudankulam, leading to large-scale agitation and emotional reaction to the setting up of the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) and its commissioning. The nature of potential adverse effect of ionizing radiation, adds to fears and unrest which might not have even thought of by Enrico Fermi a noble laureate in physics in 1938, who was responsible for the setting up of the first Nuclear reactor in a Doubles quash Court at Slagg Field, at the Chicago University, USA. Since then, it is history, India has now 20 Nuclear Reactors, in place...
Tag this Judgment!