Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC474; (1970)3SCC768; [1971]2SCR871; 1971(III)LC87(SC)
Grover, J.1. The points involved in the writ petition and the appeals by special leave relate to the Constitutionality and validity of the provisions of three Control Orders issued under Section 3(2)(d) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Act 10 of 1955) hereinafter called the 'act..' The validity of Section 3(2)(d) of the act itself has also been assailed.2. The Control Orders which were promulgated under Section 3(2)(d) of the Act were the following :(i) The Rice (Southern Zone) Movement Control Order, 1957.(ii) The Southern States (Regulation of Exports of Rice) Order, 1964; and(iii) The Andhra Pradesh Rice and Paddy (Restriction of Movement) Order, 1965.In the appeals the appellants had moved the High Court of Andhra Pradesh under Article 226 of the Constitution. There the petitioners were dealers in rice and rice products such as puffed, parched and beaten rice (beaten rice is known as 'powa' while, parched and puffed rice is known as 'Murmura'). Some of the petitioners had ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC472; 1971CriLJ509; (1970)3SCC498; 1971(III)LC91(SC)
A.N. Ray, J.1. This appeal is by certificate under Article 132(i) and Article 134(i)(c) of the Constitution against the judgment dated 2nd August, 1965 of the Circuit Bench of the Punjab High Court at Delhi. The certificate was given on the principal ground whether the respondent had migrated to Pakistan or was a citizen of India.2. The respondent Mohd. Iqbal was convicted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Delhi on 22 July, 1964 Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act and sentenced to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment. The order was upheld on appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge on 15th April, 1965. The Circuit Bench of the Punjab High Court set aside the conviction and relying on the decision of this Court in Shanno Devi v. Mangal Sen : [1961]1SCR576 held that Mohd. Iqbal had not migrated from India.3. The respondent being treated as a foreigner and a Pakistani national was charged with having entered India on the authority of a Pakistani passport on 31 May, 1956 and having ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC500; 1971CriLJ511; (1971)3SCC86; [1971]2SCR857
Vaidialingam J.1. In this appeal, on certificate issued by the Delhi High Court, the appellant who is governed by the Army Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) challenges the legality of his trial and conviction for an offence under Section 376 I.P.C. by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nahan.2. The main attack leveled against the proceedings is that the material provisions of the Army Act read with the Criminal Courts and Court-Martial Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred to a the Rules) framed by the Central Government under Section 549(1) Cr.P.C. have not been complied with by the Assistant Sessions Judge. The prosecution case is briefly as follows :3. The appellant was a military personnel attached to Punjab Regiment No. 24, which moved to Nahan on March 3, 1967. The appellant was a lance Naik and was appointed as a temporary Granthi of the Kaccha-Johar temple used by the military personnel. One Jiwa Nand with his wife and children was living close b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC508; 1971CriLJ519; (1970)3SCC513; 1971(III)LC83(SC)
G.K. Milter, J.1. The appellant was convicted of an offence Under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of (he Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine to further simple imprisonment for six months by the Special Judge, Bidar in Special Case No. 1/2 of 1963. He appealed to the High Court against the conviction and on the admission of the appeal, the High Court suo Motu gave him notice for enhancement of the sentence. Subsequently the State also filed Criminal Petition No. 126 of 1965 for enhancement of the sentence on the ground that Under Section 5(2) of the Act the minimum punishment was to be not less than one year unless the Court for special reasons thought fit to do otherwise. The reasons given by the Special Judge did not appeal to the High Court which dismissed the appeal of the appellant and confirmed the conviction Under Section 5(1)(d). It reduced the fine of Rs. 1,000/-to one of R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC477; (1970)3SCC697; [1971]2SCR849; [1971]27STC127(SC)
Hegde, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave. It arises from the judgment of the High Court of Patna in a Reference under Section 25(3) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947. That reference was called for by the High Court at the instance of the assessee company (the respondent herein). The questions referred for the opinion of the High Court by the Board of Revenue were :(1) With regard to the sales which took place in the period from 1st of April, 1955 to the 6th September 1955, whether the assessee is entitled, upon the facts found by the Board of Revenue with regard to these categories of sales, to exemption from liability under the Bihar Sales-Tax Act because of the provision of Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution as it stood at the relevant date read with the explanation to that article.(2) With regard to the sales which took place in the period from 7th September, 1955, to 31st March, 1956 whether the assessee is entitled, upon the facts found by the Board of Revenue with regard ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC2540; (1970)3SCC831; [1971]2SCR836; 1970(3)WLN43
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This Appeal by Special Leave of this Court is against the Judgment of a Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court affirming the Judgment and decree of the District Court with certain variations.2. Respondents 1 to 9 filed a suit against the Appellants and Respondents 10 and 11 and two others for a declaration that they have been carrying on and are entitled to carry on Darshan, Prakshal and Poojan etc. of the idol of Adeshwarji, the first Tirthankar in the Temple named after him at Paroli without interference according to the tenets observed by the Digamberi Sect of the Jain religion. The said Temple of Shri Adeshwarji is said to have been in existence for 200 years while the Respondents aver that the inscriptions on it bear Vikram Samvat 1510 (1454 AD).3. The Plaintiffs further alleged that the Temple was constructed and the idol was consecrated according to and by the followers of the tenets of the Digamber sect; that the Plaintiffs and the other followers of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC512; (1970)3SCC284
J.M. Shelat, J.1. This appeal, by special leave, arises out of a writ petition filed by the appellant under Article 227 of the Constitution in the High Court of Calcutta for quashing an Arbitrator's award for compensation in respect of certain premises belonging to him which were requisitioned for the period between March 1942 to November 1947 under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules, 1939. The award granted compensation to the appellant at the rate of Rs. 475/- per month for the said period during which the premises remained under requisition as against the appellant's claim for Rs. 6 lacs and odd.2. Certain disputes having arisen as early as 1944, the appellant entered into an agreement, dated January 27, 1944, with the Governor- General in Council. Under Clause (1) of the said agreement the appellant agreed to accept Rs. 475/- per month 'for the said property in full settle merit of the construction for structure' from March 15, 1942 till the Government remained in possession a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC191; (1970)IILLJ683SC; (1970)3SCC545; [1971]2SCR831
Mitter, J.1. The State of Mysore has come up in appeal from a common judgment of the High Court at Bangalore disposing of a number of writ petitions and holding void the compulsory transfer of the respondents herein to the Agricultural University under the provisions of the University of Agricultural Sciences Act, 1963.2. As the same question arises in all these appeals it will be sufficient to state the facts in Civil Appeal No. 1868 of 1969 in which one H. Papanna Gowda is the respondent. The said respondent was appointed on January 7, 1959 as an agricultural demonstrator in the Mysore Civil Service. His appointment was as a 'local candidate' which under the Mysore Civil Service Rules means a person appointed not in accordance with the rules of recruitment. His services were however regularised when he was selected by the Public Service Commission for appointment to that post on August 27, 1959. By an order dated April 4, 1964 he was transferred and posted as a Chemical Assistant of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC186; 1971CriLJ253; (1971)IIMLJ92(SC); (1970)3SCC501; [1971]2SCR822
Dua, J.1. The petitioner, A. Lakshmanarao, an Advocate practising at Narasipatnam in the district of Visakhapatnam in the State of Andhra Pradesh has applied under Article 32 of the Constitution for a writ of habeas corpus on the following averments :2. The petitioner, while going home from the court, was arrested on 17th July, 1970 at about 12.30 in the afternoon. He was not shown any warrant at the time of his arrest. He was produced before a Judicial Magistrate, First Class, on 18th July and remanded to judicial custody under Section 167(2), Cr.P.C. for 15 days. At the time of remand he was informed by the Magistrate that he was accused of offences under Sections 120-B, 121-A, 122 read with 302 and 395, I.P.C. in Crime No. 3 of 1970 (known as Parvatipuram Naxalite Conspiracy Case). This crime had been registered in January, 1970 in which more than 148 persons were sought to be proceeded against. The names of only 148 accused persons were specifically mentioned. The petitioner and on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC792; (1971)IIMLJ89(SC); (1970)3SCC355; [1971]2SCR817; [1971]27STC1(SC)
Shah, J.1. Motor Lorry No. K.L.R. 3919 driven along a highway from Coimbatore in the State of Madras towards the border of the State of Kerala was when searched by the Check Post Officer found to carry 85 bags of foodstuffs-45 bags of maida, 20 bags of flour and 20 bags of Khandsari sugar. The driver of the motor lorry was found to carry with him a bill of sale and a delivery note which covered 85 bags of flour. On the ground that without a bill of sale or delivery note maida and Khandsari sugar were attempted to be transported, and suspecting that there was an attempt at evasion of sales-tax, the Check Post Officer by order dated March 2, 1965, confiscated the goods and gave an option to M/s. K.P. Abdulla & Bros. the owners of the goods to pay Rs. 1,000 as penalty in lieu of confiscation.2. The owners of the goods then moved a petition in the High Court of Madras challenging the validity of Section 42(3)(a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and for an order quashing the penal...
Tag this Judgment!