Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1953; 1979CriLJ1314; 1980Supp(1)SCC391
D.A. Desai, J.1. This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for a writ of habeas corpus is filed by Smt. Pushpa describing herself as the wife of Shri Pala Singh, son of Shri Sarwan who has been detained by an order made by the third respondent, Chief Secretary, Delhi Administration, on 27th January 1979 under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, ('COFEPOSA' for short).2. Validity of the detention of the detenu has been questioned inter alia on the following grounds:1. Two representations dated 23rd February and 27th March 1979 made by the detenu have been dealt with and rejected by Chief Secretary who was not competent to reject the same as the representations, if any, by the detenu have to be dealt with and decided by the appropriate Government which in the instant case would imply the Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi, viz, Lt. Governor.2. The order confirming the detention of the detenu after obta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1501; 1979CriLJ1131; 1979CENCUS351D; (1979)4SCC401; [1979]3SCR1007; 1979(11)LC814(SC)
1. This petition is directed against the validity of an order of detention dated 31st November, 1978 made by the first respondent who is the Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department in exercise of the power conferred under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (herein after referred to as the Act). The petitioner has urged several grounds before us but it is not necessary to refer to them since there is one ground which is in our opinion sufficient to dispose of the petition in favour of the petitioner. To appreciate this ground, it is necessary to state a few facts.2. On 13th November, 1978, an order was made by the 1st respondent in exercise of the power conferred on him under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act directing the detention of the petitioner' Pursuant to the order of detention, the petitioner was arrested and he was immediately served with the grounds of detention which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1628; (1979)IILLJ217SC; (1979)3SCC489; [1979]3SCR1014
1. This appeal by special leave raises interesting questions of law in the area of public law. What are the constitutional obligations on the State when it takes action in exercise of its statutory or executive power? Is the State entitled to deal with its property in any manner it likes or award a contract to any person it chooses without any constitutional limitations upon it? What are the parameters of its statutory or executive power in the matter of awarding a contract or dealing with its propery? These questions fell in the sphere of both administrative law and constitutional law and they assume special significance in a modern welfare State which is committed to egalitarian values and dedicated to the rule of law. But these questions cannot be decided in the abstract. They can be determined only against the back-ground of facts and hence we shall proceed to State the facts giving rise to the appeal.2. On or about 3rd January, 1977 a notice inviting tenders for putting up and fun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1475; (1979)3SCC616; [1979]3SCR952; [1979]44STC159(SC); 1979(11)LC605(SC)
Venkataramiah, J.1. In these appeals by special leave, we are called upon to pronounce on the validity of Section 31 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Notification dated the 13th January, 1968 issued thereunder by the Government of Punjab and the liability of the appellants to pay purchase tax under the Act in respect of the turnover relating to the purchases of paddy made by them during the relevant period.2. The appellants are dealers in paddy and engaged in the business of millers in the State of Punjab. They buy paddy from growers or katcha adatias, convert it into rice and sell rice. Most of the rice manufactured by them is purchased by the State Government under food procurement orders.3. A brief history of the relevant provisions of the Act is as follows:Under the Act as it was originally enacted, there was no provision levying tax on the purchase turnover of the goods dealt with by' a dealer as defined in the Act. The Act was ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1109; 1979LabIC818; (1979)3SCC458; [1979]3SCR972
Bhagwati, J.1. This petition for special leave to appeal is directed against an order made by a Full Bench of the Rajasthan High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside an order of reversion passed against him by the 4th respondent in his capacity as the Acting Vice-Chancellor of the University of Rajasthan. The order of reversion was challenged on several grounds, but they were all negatived by the Full Bench and the writ petition was dismissed on a preliminary hearing. The petitioner has raised the same grounds of challenge in this special leave petition, but barring one ground, which calls for a reasoned judgment, we do not think there are any other grounds which require detailed consideration and we reject them in limine. The only ground which needs to be considered and which we propose to dispose of by this judgment is a constitutional one, namely, whether the appointment of the 1st respondent as Governor of Rajasthan is valid. Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC24; 19831SCR145;
1. This reference to the Constitution Bench raises a question in regard to the constitutional validity of death penalty for murder provided in Section 302, Penal Code, and the sentencing procedure embodied in Sub-section (3) of Section 354 of the CrPC, 1973.2. The reference has arisen in these circumstances :Bachan Singh, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 1979, was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for the murders of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai by the Sessions Judge. The High Court confirmed his death sentence and dismissed his appeal.3. Bachan Singh's appeal by special leave, came up for hearing before a Bench of this Court (consisting of Sarkaria and Kailasam, JJ.). The only question for consideration in the appeal was, whether the facts found by the Courts below would be "special reasons" for awarding the death sentence as required under Section 354(3) of the CrPC 1973.4. Shri H.K. Puri, appearing as Amicus Curiae on behal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1008; (1980)1SCC416; [1979]3SCR1217
1. In these groups of Civil Appeals and Writ Petitions, broadly speaking, the question which falls for determination is the validity of certain provisions of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (Punjab Act No. 23 of 1961), hereinafter referred to as the Act, and the Rules framed by the State of Punjab and Haryana under the said Act as also the validity of the fixation of market fees from time to time by the various Market Committees in the States aforesaid under the direction of the Punjab State Agricultural Produce Marketing Board and the Haryana State Agricultural Produce Marketing Board. All these cases have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. In the erstwhile composite State of Punjab the Act was passed in the year 1961 to consolidate and amend the law relating to the better regulation of the purchase, sale, storage and processing of agricultural produce and the establishment of markets for agricultural produce in the State. Under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1106a; 1979CriLJ1058; (1979)3SCC745; [1979]3SCR1059
1. Death sentence on death sentence is Parliament's function. Interpretative non application of death sentence when legislative alternatives exist is within judicial jurisdiction. The onerous option to spare the lives of the appellants to be spent in prison or to hand them over to the hangman to be jettisoned out of terrestrial life into 'the undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveller returns' is the crucial function this Court has to exercise in the present appeal.2. Sir Winston Churchill, in his oft-quoted observation, said:The mood and temper of the public with regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilization of any country.3. Without academic aura and maukish sentimentalism the court has to rise to principled pragmatism in the choice of the penal strategy provided by the Penal Code. The level of culture is not an irrelevant factor in the punitive exercise. So we must be forwarned against deeply embedded sadism in some sec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1725; [1979]118ITR461(SC); (1979)4SCC121; [1979]3SCR1133
1. A nascent Chapter (Chapter XIXA) in the Income Tax Act, 1961, enacted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, whose beneficiaries are ordinarily those whose tax liability is astronomical and criminal culpability perilous, falls for decoding by this Court in this appeal by the C.I.T. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta, against an adverse order made by the Settlement Commission. Functionally speaking, this Chapter, engrafted in partial implementation of the Wanchoo Committee Report, provides for settlement of huge tax disputes and immunity from criminal proceedings by a Commission to be constituted by the Central Government when approached without objection from the Tax Department. It is based on the debatable policy, fraught with dubious potentialities in the context of Third World conditions of political peculium and bureaucratic abetment, that composition and collection of public revenue from tycoons is better than prosecution of their tax-related crime and litigati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1485; (1979)10CTR(SC)372; [1979]118ITR212(SC); (1979)4SCC150; [1979]3SCR1271; 1979(11)LC541(SC)
1. These six appeals have been heard together as a common question of law in relation to the assessment of the same assessee arises 'in them. Civil Appeals-2716-2718 of 1972 relate to the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. The assessee appellant is a registered firm carrying on business at several places in the State of Kerala. Apart from its regular trade in various commodities, the assessee was also carrying on a business in speculation. Apropos the speculation business of the assessee the Income-Tax Officer determined a loss of Rs. 40,510/-; a loss of Rs. 598/-and a profit of Rs. 1,36,264/- for the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67 respectively.2. In apportioning the assessee's income amongst its partners under Section 67 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, he also apportioned the losses in speculation business in the two assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. The profit in speculation business as computed for the assessment year 1...
Tag this Judgment!