Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC185; 1983CriLJ346; 1982(2)SCALE1337; (1983)1SCC193
PATHAK, J.— 1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment dated February 24, 1975 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissing an appeal by the appellant against his conviction under Section 302, Section 325 read with Section 149, Section 323 read with Section 149 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence of life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302, and of six months' rigorous imprisonment for each of the remaining offences, the sentences to run concurrently. 2. It appears that on June 2, 1971, as the deceased Ran Singh was pushing his cart through the chowk in village Mundakhera (situated in the district of Rohtak) it struck against the platform belonging to a resident Hukam Chand. Hukam Chand, the appellant Hari Ram and some others were sitting at some distance from the platform and an altercation ensued between them and Ram Singh. It is said that the appellant Hari Ram shouted that Ram Singh would not behave unl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC181; 1983CriLJ342; 1982(2)SCALE1332; (1983)1SCC382
1. The facts of these two writ petitions are common and inter-connected. The contentions raised before us by Mr. Jethmalani, counsel for the petitioner, Suresh Bhojraj Chelani, in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 1210 of 1982 have been endorsed by Dr. Chitale, counsel appearing for the petitioner, Narain Tarchand Mlrchandani (hereinafter 'Mirchandani') who has additionally filed some written arguments.The petitioners have been detained under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, (hereinafter 'the COFEPOSA Act') by two separate orders, both dated 16th of April, 1982. The allegations against them are these :2. The petitioners arrived at the Bombay Airport on 30th December, 1981 from Singapore by Singapore Airlines flight No. SQ. 022. The unaccompanied baggage of the petitioners was weighed together. The luggage consisted of two bags and one zipper bag with claim tags bearing Nos. 10-17-95, 10-17-96 and 10-17-97. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC179; 1982(2)SCALE1325; (1983)1SCC431
1. The first of nine accused, who were tried by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur is the appellant in this appeal by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution. All the nine were charged with offences under sees. 120(B), 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149, 201 read with Section 149 and 341 read with Section 149. Four, out of them, A-1, 6, 7 and 9 were further charged with an offence Under Section 303 read with Section 149 while the remaining five accused were charged Under Section 302 read with Section 149. The learned Sessions Judge convicted all the nine accused of the various offences. He convicted A-1, 6, 7 and 9 of the offence Under Section 303 read with Section 149 and sentenced them to death. He convicted A-2, 3, 4, 5, and 8 under Section 302 with Section 149 and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life. On appeal, the High Court of Maharashtra found that there was no unlawful assembly and therefore, acquitted all the accused of the various cha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC188; [1983]53CompCas163(SC); 1982(2)SCALE1317; (1983)1SCC538; [1983]2SCR211
1. The short question which arises for decision in this appeal by special leave is whether the proceedings initiated against a director of a company under Section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') can be continued after his death against his legal representatives and whether any amount declared to be due in such proceedings can be realized from the estate of the deceased in the hands of his legal representatives.2. The facts of the present case may be briefly stated thus : Ballygunge Real Property and Building Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company in liquidation') was ordered to be wound up by the High Court of Calcutta on January 8, 1958. On January 2, 1963, the Official Liquidator took out summons under Section 543(1) of the Act against its directors including Dr. S.N. Sinha for a declaration that the said directors were guilty of misfeasance and breach of trust and also for an order directing them to repay or restore the money or p...
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!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC162; 1982(2)SCALE1339; (1983)1SCC196; [1983]2SCR159
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in Letters Patent Appeal No. 208 of 1974 by the respondent in that appeal. The appellant who filed the Writ Petition, has its head office at Kanpur and is running two woollen mills, one at Dhariwal, in the name and style of New Egerton Woollen Mills (hereinafter referred to as 'Dhariwal Mills') and another at Kanpur in the name and style of 'Lal-Imli Cawnpore Woollen Mills' (hereinafter referred to as 'Kanpur Mills'). The case of the appellant-company was that after the purchase of raw material made by its head office at Kanpur the raw material is sent from various centers in India as well as from abroad to both the mills in accordance with their requirements and no raw material used in the Dhariwal Mills is purchased locally or within the area of the Market Committee, Dhariwal excepting that during the years 1969 and 1970 two contracts for the purchas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC1125; AIR1983SC194; 1983(0)BLJR645; 1983CriLJ348; 1984(1)Crimes147(SC); 1982(2)SCALE1241; 1983(2)SCALE126; (1983)1SCC438; (1983)4SCC104; [1983]2SCR61
1. By this appeal, preferred on the basis of the special leave granted to him, the appellant is challenging the withdrawal from the prosecution of Respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in a criminal case under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1073.2. After obtaining the requisite sanction from the Governor on 19th February, 1979 a charge-sheet in Vigilance P.S. Case 9(2) 78 was filed by the State of Bihar against Respondent No. 2 (Dr. Jagannath Misra), Respondent No. 3 (Nawal Kishore Sinha), Respondent No. 4 (Jiwanand Jha) and three other (K.P. Gupta, since deceased, N.A. Haidari and A.K. Singh, who later became approvers) for offences under Sections 420/466/471/109/120-B Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(1)(a), 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Inter alia, the gravamen of the charge against the respondent No. 2 was that at all times material he was either a Minister or the Chief Minister of Bihar and in that capacity by corrupt ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1982(2)SCALE1397; 1984Supp(1)SCC619a
Baharul Islam and; V.D. Tulzapurkar, JJ.1. There is no substance in this appeal which has been preferred at the instance of the private complainant who happens to be the brother of the deceased against the acquittal recorded in favour of original accused 1 Sadaya Gounder.2. The alleged incident during the course of which Annamalai, the deceased, received injuries as a result of which he died, is said to have taken place on 25-3-1973, and prosecution case is that the accused persons numbering five participated in the incident and actual assault on the deceased. The trial court accepted the prosecution evidence and convicted all the accused and sentenced accused 1 (Respondent 1 before us) to death and others to life imprisonment. In the appeal which was preferred to the High Court and the confirmation case, the High Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond any reasonable doubt and, therefore, acquitted all the accused persons. At the instance ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1982(2)SCALE1395; (1986)2SCC411
V.D. TULZAPURKAR, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State against the acquittal of the respondent-accused recorded by the High Court in respect of a double murder and theft said to have been committed by him on the night between January 27 and 28, 1974.2. The prosecution case was that on January 28, 1974 at about 4.30 a.m. the respondent-accused accompanied by his brother-in-law Daniel (acquitted by the trial court) went in a taxi to the tea shop of one Joy and stabbed Joy as well as his wife Ammini by means of a knife and after committing theft of gold chain and other ornaments worn by Ammini on her person made good his escape in the same taxi and after going to the house of one Smt Sarasamma (PW 15) sold the gold ornaments to her.3. Admittedly, the prosecution case rested on circumstantial evidence, there being no direct evidence of any eyewitness to the crime. In addition to the circumstantial evidence an extra-judicial confession (Ex. P-12) said to have been made by the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC526; (1983)IILLJ274SC; 1983MhLJ806(SC); 1982(2)SCALE1344; (1983)1SCC200
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and decree passed by Mysore High Court at Bangalore on 25th June, 1973 in Second Appeal No. 674 of 1971.2. The appellant-plaintiff is a Girls High School run by a registered Educational Society. The school has been recognised and is receiving aid under the Grant-in-Aid Code framed by the Mysore Government. One Srnt. Radha L. Rao, permanent Headmistress, went on leave from 1st June, 1963; in this leave vacancy Smt. Jalajakshi (3rd respondent) was appointed as temporary acting Headmistress; her tenure was continued until further orders as Smt. Radha Rao extended her leave due to serious illness of her husband at Bombay. Since her method of work was found to be unsatisfactory the Management by its order dated 22nd July, 1964 relieved 3rd respondent of her duties as temporary acting Headmistress and she was directed to hand over charge to Smt. Manorama Rao who was appointed to officiate as temporary Headmistress until further...
Tag this Judgment!