Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC564; 1994(3)Crimes806(SC); JT1994(7)SC173; 1994(4)SCALE746; 1995Supp(1)SCC262; 1995(1)LC36(SC)
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act read with Section 379 Cr.P.C. The five appellants (original accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) were tried alongwith four others for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302/149, 324 and 323 read with 149 I.P.C. for the alleged murder of one Vinod Sagar, the deceased in the case and for causing injuries to P.Ws.l and 4 during the same occurrence. The trial Court acquitted all of them. The State preferred an appeal and the High Court allowed the same in respect of these appellants and convicted and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and other lesser terms of imprisonment for other offences and confirmed the acquittal of the remaining four accused, the prosecution case is as follows:2. The deceased, Vinod Sagar, was an Excise Contractor. For the year 1978-79 the deceased alongwith P.W.4 and two others had obtained the licence in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1995(70)FLR352]; JT1995(1)SC270; (1995)IILLJ625SC; 1994(4)SCALE1082; (1995)1SCC404; [1994]Supp5SCR269; 1995(1)SLJ156(SC); (1995)1UPLBEC217
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Admittedly, the respondent acted as a principal of the appellant's Institution. The charge leveled against the respondent was that he had misappropriated certain funds belonging to the Institution. Therefore, on March 22,1991 a charge-sheet was given to the respondent, after appointing an enquiry officer. The respondent had given the reply on April 13, 1981 to the charge sheet At the earliest, he wanted inspection of the documents mentioned in the charge sheet. Admittedly, neither the documents had been supplied nor an opportunity of inspection had been given to the respondent. Instead, the enquiry officer in his letter dated 18.5.1981 had given the reply stating that since the respondent had already given the reply to the charge sheet item-wise, he was at liberty to inspect the documents at the time of final arguments on June 7, 1981. From time to time, the enquiry was postponed. Ultimately, the respondent did not participate in the enquiry. Consequently, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(1)ALT(Cri)106; 1994(3)Crimes809(SC); JT1994(7)SC279; 1994(4)SCALE736; (1995)2SCC25; [1994]Supp5SCR241
M.K. Mukherjee, J.1. Mahabir Biswas and Shiba @ Bijoy Krishna Dutta, the two appellants herein, along with six others, including one Amit Haldar @ Pagla, were arraigned before the Court of Session for offences punishable under Sections 364/34, 302/34, 201/34 and 379 I.P.C. On conclusion of the trial the Court, while recording an order of acquittal in favour of four, convicted the other four including the two appellants and Amit Haldar under Section 302/34 I.P.C. but acquitted them of the charge under Section 201/34 I.P.C. As regards the charge under Sections 364/34 I.P.C. and 379 I.P.C. the Court recorded a finding that those were redundant in the facts and circumstances of the case and, as such, did not pass any formal order of conviction and sentence in respect of the same. For the conviction under Section 302/34 I.P.C. the two appellants were sentenced to death and the other two to imprisonment for life. The reference made to the High Court under Section 366 Cr.P.C. for confirmation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1995(70)FLR822]; JT1995(2)SC69; 1994(5)SCALE81; 1995Supp(1)SCC434; [1994]Supp5SCR223; 1995(2)SLJ56(SC)
ORDER1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. Heard the learned Counsel While the appellants and respondents-Biswajit Patnaik and Jagannath Prasad Mishra were continuing as Drug Inspectors, four vacancies for the post of Asstt. Drugs Controller, (Junior Class-I) have arisen. Preceding regular appointment, the Government constituted a Departmental Promotion Committee which had considered and recommended the cases of respondents for adhoc promotion to the posts and the Government had appointed the respondents and referred the matter to the Public Service Commission for recommendation for regular appointments. Before recommending to the PSC, since no rules or the criteria for consideration was prescribed, the Government had decided to adopt 'merit-cum-suitability with due regard to seniority' as principle to consider the case of the persons for promotion. The names of 12 candidates, including adhoc promotees were sent to the P.S.C. for consideration. We are informed that since two of them we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(3)Crimes850(SC); 1994(4)SCALE740; (1995)1SCC142
K. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. In Sessions Case No. 35 of 1987 on the file of the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, four accused were tried for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 323, 326, 302 and 201 I.P.C, The trial Court acquitted A-4 and convicted A-1 under Sectoin 120B read with 302 I.P.C. and also convicted A-2 and A-3 under Sections 302 read with 120B I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. On appeal, the High Court acquitted A-3 but confirmed the convictions and sentences of A-1, P.K. Narayanan and A-2, V.V. Salim @ Sasi. Hence, A-1 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 315/90 and A-2 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 316/90 in this Court. The prosecution case is as follows:2. A-1 is the owner and proprietor of Polakulath Tourist Home at Palarivattom, Ernakulam and two such other tourist homes in other places in addition to being an abkari contractor. V.V. Salim @ Sasi, A-2, was his driver and personal body-guard. A-3 was a room boy in the tourist ho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC840; 1995(1)ALT1(SC); JT1994(7)SC275; 1994(4)SCALE782; (1995)2SCC168; 1995Supp(2)SCC168; [1994]Supp5SCR207
ORDERN. Venkatachala, J.1. These appeals by special leave preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board and the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board are directed against judgments and decrees of the High Court of Karnataka rendered in their appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - 'the LA Act'. Since the appeals filed in the High Court were directed against the judgments and decrees of the Court of Civil Judge. Belgaum rendered on references made to it under Section 18 of the LA Act based on common evidence adduced in them, these appeals could conveniently be disposed of by this common judgment.2. Lands comprised in various survey numbers of Yamunapur, Kakati, Kangrali, B.K., Kanbargi villages of Belgaum Taluka were proposed to be acquired for the purpose of industries under Section 28(1) of the Kamataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 - 'the KIAD Act' by a notification published in the Karnataka Ga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(1)ALT37(SC); JT1995(2)SC339; 1994(5)SCALE75; (1995)1SCC717; [1994]Supp5SCR232
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. In disposal of the throe appeals by this common judgment, we shall refer to SLP(C) No. 12300/94 as first case and to SLP(C) Nos. 3528-29 as second case.3. Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the first case was published on June 16, 1983 for acquiring 9.47 acres near Eluru town of West Godavari Dist. of Andhra Pradesh to provide house sites to the poor. Again, 14.10 acres of land was acquired in the second case for the same purpose by publishing the Notification under Section 4(1) on March 23, 1985. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation under Section 11 at Rs. 40,000/- per Order dated October 27, 1994 in C.A. Nos. 8743-44 of 1994 (Arising out of SLl'(C) Nos. 3528-29/94 & 12300/94)' acre in both the cases. On reference, the Sub-ordinate Judge, Eluru, enhanced the market value in the first case to Rs. 105/- per sq. yard by deducting 30% for developmental charges out of Rs. 150/- per sq. yard fixed as its value, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(48)ECC189; 1995LC13(SC); 1994(74)ELT488(SC); JT1995(1)SC129; 1994(4)SCALE734; (1995)1SCC55; [1994]Supp5SCR202
N.P. Singh, J.1. M/s. Punjab Footwear Limited, the appellant, have been manufacturing footwears. It appears that the process of manufacturing of footwears is partly done by the appellant and partly by M/s. Step well Industries Limited on behalf of the appellant on the basis of an agreement entered into between the appellant and the said M/s. Step well Industries Limited. 2. In respect of the claim for benefit under Notification No. 88 of 1977 CE dated 9.5.1977, the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh by his order dated 21.8.1980 held that the number of workmen directly employed by the appellant as well as the number of workmen employed by M/s. Step well Industries Limited are to be counted and as the number of workmen in both the factories exceeded 49, the appellant was not entitled to the,benefit of aforesaid Notification.3. The Custom, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') affirmed the aforesaid finding of the Collector saying that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC543; 1994LC420(SC); 1994(74)ELT481(SC); JT1994(7)SC284; (1995)IILLJ648SC; 1994(4)SCALE701; (1995)1SCC77; [1994]Supp5SCR168
ORDERM.K. Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal under Section 35L of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 ('Act' for short) is directed against the order dated June 7, 1985 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal' for short) in Appeal No. ED (SB) A 104/84.C. Facts leading to and relevant for disposal of the appeal are as under.2. On January 30, 1983 a team of Central Excise (Preventive Officers of Bulsar Division paid a surprise visit to the factory premises of M/s. Grovel Chromates, a division of M/s. Grauer and Weil (India) Ltd., Bombay, the appellants herein, situated in Plot No. 407, G.I.D.C, Vapi. They found that the appellants, who are engaged in the manufacture of Sodium Bichromate (Falling under Item No. 14AA of the First Schedule to the Act) under a valid license, had removed their product, on payment of central excise duty and under gate passes, for captive consumption to their Chromic Acid Section situated adjoining to their manufacturing premis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC430; JT1994(7)SC159; 1994(4)SCALE695; (1995)1SCC47; [1994]Supp5SCR180
R. M. SAHAI, J.1. The question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') in absence of any provision in the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was entitled to sanction the plan for building activities with condition that the open space for parks and schools be transferred to the Corporation free of cost.2. Facts in brief are that one Pt. Amin Chand was owner of a colony named 'Ganga Ram Vatika' situated on Najafgarh Road, Village Chaukhandi, near Tilak Nagar, New Delhi. In 1957 he submitted a lay out plan of the colony to the Delhi Development Provisional Authority. It was rejected. The Town Planning Organisation of the Corporation sent him a copy of the revised lay out plan and intimated him that if he submitted the plan as proposed by them they might consider his request. Amin Chand, therefore, submitted fresh proposal in accordance with pro...
Tag this Judgment!