Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(3)SCC361
ORDER The short question that arises for our consideration in this case is whether ‘Raskat’ which is an inferior quality of ‘Gur’ could be held to be an agricultural produce within the meaning of Section 2(a) U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. Having regard to the fact that it is nothing more than an inferior quality of ‘Gur’ applying Rathi Khandsari Udyog v. State of U.P.1 and Kishan Lal v. State of Rajasthan2 we hold it as an agricultural produce. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No order as to costs. 1 (1985) 2 SCC 485 2 1990 Supp SCC 742 : (1990) 2 SCR 142: (1990) 183 ITR 433...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1993]202ITR584(SC); 1995Supp(4)SCC523
ORDER1. I.A. Nos. 1-105..' Issue notice to the respondent returnable in eight weeks.2. Pending further orders, we suspend the operation of the High Court's judgment under appeal with the result that the Department will be free to complete assessments of the various assessees concerned without being bound by the High Court's observations regarding the limited operation of that section.3. S.L.P. (C) Nos. 3944-4087 of 1992 and I.A. No. 1-74 of 1992 in S.L.P. (C)...of 1992 :It has been mentioned on behalf of the Union of India that these S.L.Ps. have been filed by the Union of India against the judgments of the Orissa and Punjab and Haryana High Courts following the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in A. Sanyasi Rao v. Government of A.P. : [1989]178ITR31(AP) , which is the subject-matter of C.A. Nos. 4290-4394 of 1989. These S.L.Ps. have not yet been listed and one batch is also out of time. 4. These S.L.Ps. are taken on board. Issue notice to the respondents returnable in eight w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1121; 1992CriLJ1429; 1992(2)Crimes14(SC); JT1992(2)SC513; 1992(1)KLT760(SC); 1992(1)SCALE753; (1992)3SCC100; [1992]2SCR371
ORDERK.Ramaswamy, J.1. The respondent was convicted for an offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 37 of 1954, for short 'the Act', and was sentenced to undergo 6 months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 with usual default clause. On appeal the Sessions Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. But on revision the High Court set aside the conviction solely on the ground that Dr. B.S. Singh, Public Analyst, had no jurisdiction to analyse the food article. It was B.S. Garg, Public Analyst, Varanasi and Allahabad region, alone had the power. Consequently the conviction on the basis of the report of Dr. S.B. Singh that the milk was adulterated was held without jurisdiction and authority of law. Accordingly the High Court acquitted the respondent by judgment dated February 2, 1981. This appeal by special leave arises against this judgment.2. The main question is whether Dr. S.B. Singh had jurisdiction over the Allahabad area to analyse th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1360; (1992)2CompLJ36(SC); (1992)103CTR(SC)400; [1992]195ITR607(SC); JT1992(2)SC429; 1992(1)SCALE760; (1992)2SCC672; [1992]2SCR440
ORDERKuldip singh, J.1. Special leave granted.2. Whether the Central Board of Direct Taxes, (the Board) under Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1962 (the Act) can issue instructions to control the discretion of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 279(2) of the Act, to compound the offences is the short question for our consideration.3. M.P. Tiwari and M.L. Passi are the respondents before us in these appeals. M.P. Tiwari is the Secretary and principal officer of M/s. Hans Raj Gupta and Co. Pvt. Ltd. He along with other Directors of the said Company was prosecuted under Section 276-B of the Act on the charge that he committed defaults in depositing the income tax deducted from the salaries of the employees of the Company during the assessment years 1979-80 to 1982-83, M.L. Passi was the Managing Director of M/s. Inspi Auto Industry Pvt. Ltd. He was also prosecuted under Section 276-B of the Act for committing defaults in depositing the tax deducted at the source by the company...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1191; 1992(2)BLJR1288; JT1992(2)SC520; 1992(1)SCALE768; (1992)2SCC631; [1992]2SCR408; 1992(1)LC577(SC)
ORDERKasliwal, J.1. Special leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Patna High Court dated 6th September, 1991. Initially Mohd. Fida Karim and Dasrath Das had filed special leave petition challenging the dismissal of their writ petition, C.W.J.C. No. 2102 of 1991 by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court by order dated 6th September, 1991. In view of the fact that by a common decision, the Patna High Court had dismissed many other identical writ petitions, the petitioners in those other writ petitions also submitted intervention applications before this Court and such intervention applications have been allowed. 35 applicants/interveners are also supporting the present appeal filed by Mohd. Fida Karim and Dasrath Das.3. The controversy in this case relates to the mode of settlement of the right of vend of country liquor, Indian made foreign liquor and spiced country liquor under the provisions of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1579; 1992CriLJ2325; 1993Supp(1)SCC558
1. These two appeals under Section 379 of the Cr.P.C. are against the judgment and order of the Orissa High Court whereby the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Puri were upset and in place of acquittal convictions were recorded of seven accused including the five appellants.2. To begin with, thirty three persons were arraigned before the Court of Session as accused for being members of an unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to cause rioting, simple hurts to Bachha Naik P.W. 3 and his wife Sushila Devi P.W. 8 and also causing the death of Smt. Nihali Bewa, the maternal grand-mother of P.W. 3. The incident is of a brief description. The accused persons suspected Bachha Naik P.W. 3 for having committed theft of paddy sheaves belonging to one Matia Patra. They went to the house of P.W. 3, dragged him out and took him to the house of P.W. 2. There they gave him some beating. When his wife Sushila Devi P.W. 8 intervened, they pushed her and some of them assau...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1161; 73(1992)CLT715(SC); 1992CriLJ1537; 1992(2)Crimes77(SC); JT1992(2)SC517; 1992(I)OLR(SC)512; 1992(1)SCALE752; (1992)2SCC522; [1992]2SCR393
ORDERK.Ramaswamy, J.1. The two respondent Dambru Naiko (A 1) and B. Sankara Rao (A 2) and two others were charged in Sessions Case No. 6/78 of Asst. Sessions Judge, Jeypore for offences under Section 366/34 and 376 read with Section 34 I.P.C. kidnapping and committing rape of Manguri Bhotruni, PW. 1 on October 21,1978 at about 4.00 p.m. By judgment dated November 26, 1978 the trial court convicted the respondents and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years on each count and the sentences were directed to run concurrently. He acquitted the other two which became final. On appeal it was confirmed by the Sessions Court. In Crl. Revision No. 152 of 1981 by judgment dated April 19, 1982, the High Court acquitted them of the charges. Thus this appeal by special leave.2. The case of prosecution is that on the fateful day the victim Bhotruni alongwith other girls, PWs. 2 to 4 went to Papadahandi to witness Dasahara festival. At about 4.00 p.m., while they we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992CriLJ1539; 1992(2)Crimes7(SC); JT1992(2)SC376; 1992(1)SCALE741; 1993Supp(2)SCC714; [1992]2SCR425
M. Fathima Beevi, J.1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment and order dated 20.4.1979 of the Allahabad High Court passed in Criminal Appeals Nos.1851 of 1974, 1850 of 1974 and 1852 of 1974 whereby the High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the conviction of the respondents.2. Kashmiri Lal, Madan Lal, Babu Ram and Jagdish Singh Bedi and Prem Pal were tried in Sessions Trial No. 133 of 1973 by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge on the charges under Sections 120B, 302, 307, 324 read with Section 149, IPC, Babu Ram and Kashmiri Lal were separately charged under Section 147, IPC., as well.3. The charges are that the accused persons on 17.11.1972 entered into a criminal conspiracy to commit murder of Ramesh Chand and others. Babu Ram and Kashmiri Lal armed with guns along with the other three formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object of murdering Ramesh Chand. Amrit Lal and Subhash Chander and causing injuries to them. In prosecution of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1163; 1992(1)LC773(SC)
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Special leave granted. 2. The appellant was declared on November 27, 1989 to have been elected as a member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from 23 Manvi Assembly Constituency from Raichur Dist. The respondent is the nearest unsuccessful candidate who called it in question in Election Petition No. 11 of 1990 in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. He sought to declare that the election of the appellant as void under Section 100(1)(a), (b) and (d) of the Representation of the People Act 43 of 1951 for short 'the Act'. One of the grounds alleged is corrupt practices stated in paragraphs IV(6) to (12) that the appellant had indulged in booth capturing and rigging of booths in Polling Booths Nos. 5, 6, 7, 68, 73, 74, 88, 91 to 96, 100,102 and 103, most of which are said to be situated in Bagarwad Mandal Panchayat to which the appellant was the erstwhile Pradhan. According to the pleadings, the Modus operandi adopted was that the appellant and his supporter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC1163b; JT1992(2)SC484; 1992(1)SCALE770; (1992)2SCC612; [1992]2SCR397
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. Special Leave granted.2. The appellant was declared on November 27, 1989 to have been elected as a member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from 23 Manavi Assembly Constituency from Raichur Dist. The respondent is the nearest unsuccessful candidate who called it in question in Election Petition No. 11 of 1990 in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. He sought to declare that the election of the appellant as void under Section 100(1)(a)(b) and (d) of the Representation of the People Act 43 of 1951 for short 'the Act'. One of the grounds alleged is corrupt practices stated in paragraphs IV(6) to (12) that the appellant had indulged in booth capturing and rigging of booths in Polling Booth Nos. 5, 6, 7, 68, 73, 74, 88, 91 to 96,100, 102 & 103, most of which are said to be situated in Bagalwad Mandal Panchayat to which the appellant was the erstwhile Pradhan. According to the pleading, the Modus operandi adopted was that the appellant and his supporters 'threate...
Tag this Judgment!