Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(1)BLJR63; 1999(7)SCALE222
ORDER1. Learned Amicus Curiae has filed an application for directions in connection with the report, which appeared in the 'Times of India', Calcutta Edition of 20th July, 1999. Copy of the Petition has been furnished to learned counsel for the State of West Bengal, who prays for a short adjournment to seek instructions and response from the concerned authorities and the State of West Bengal. He is granted ten days time for the purpose.1. STATE OF GOA2. We have examined the affidavit filed on behalf of State of Goa. According to that affidavit, the various directions, given by this Court in D.K. Basu's case have been and are being complied with by the concerned authorities in the State of Goa. In the affidavit, however, there is no indication as to whether the directions, which were required to be broadcast/telecast with a view to create awareness about the rights of the arrestee among the public, in general, were actually broadcast/telecast? Learned counsel prays for two weeks time to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC4915; (1999)6SCC551
K.T. Thomas and; M.B. Shah, JJ.1. The only grievance of the petitioners is that the High Court has disallowed interest on solatium. Learned counsel submits that the question whether interest on solatium can be granted is now pending before the Constitution Bench of this Court. We do not think that it would be worthwhile to grant special leave in this case solely on the ground that a question of law on that aspect is pending before a Constitution Bench of this Court. In case the Constitution Bench upholds the contention that interest on solatium is to be granted we permit the petitioners to move the High Court to amend the judgment and decree for carrying out the legal position declared by the Constitution Bench in that regard. If any such motion is made for amendment after the Constitution Bench renders the decision the High Court will pass appropriate orders to make the judgment in tune with the law so declared by the Court. This rider is enough to safeguard the interests of the petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1999(10)SC329; 1999(4)SCALE300; (1999)8SCC541
ORDER1. These special leave petitions are directed against the interim order of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court while letters Patent Appeals are pending before the High Court.2. Normally this Court does not interfere with the interim orders but this being in relation to admission to several technical institutions in the State and in view of the controversy raised by the parties we think (sic) appropriate to deal with the matter particularly when (sic) this Court has entertained such matters and issued directions from time to time. The writ petitions were filed in the High Court of Madras assailing the legality of the Government Order G.O. Ms. No. 220 which was issued by the Department of Higher Education on 1.6.1998 just at the threshold of the academic session.3. During the pendency of the writ petitions before the learned Single Judge. Govt. of Tamil Nadu modified the said order and issued another Govt. Order i.e. G.O. Ms. 172 dated 26.4.1999. The learned Single Judge has...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2554; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)390; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)270; 1999CriLJ3964; 1999(3)CTC281; JT1999(4)SC634; RLW1999(2)SC310; 1999(4)SCALE185; (1999)6SCC146; [1999]3SCR1060; 1999(2
ORDERM.B. Shah, J. 1. Leave granted.2. It appears that unfortunately the High Court by exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'the Code') has prevented the flow of justice on the alleged contention of the convicted accused that it was polluted by so called misconduct of the judicial officer. It is true that under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent powers to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code or to prevent the abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. But the expressions 'abuse of the process of law' or 'to secure the ends of justice' do not confer unlimited jurisdiction on the High Court and the alleged abuse of the process of law or the ends of justice could only be secured in accordance with law including procedural law and not otherwise. Further, inherent powers are in the nature of extraordinary powers to be used sparingly for achi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1998(6)SC416; 1999(5)SCALE437
1. By our order dated 7th May, 1999, we had directed this case, along with the suit filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh, to be put up for directions and orders today and that, in case the Bench was not sitting, it would be specially constituted. This Bench has now been specially constituted for these cases by order of the Chief Justice.2. At the outset, our attention has been drawn to certain statements, press releases, interviews, etc. given by the petitioners themselves or by some others under the aegis of the petitioner - Narmada Bachao Andolan. Copies of some of those statements, etc. have been filed along with LA. No. 14 by the State of Gujarat.3. Our attention has also been drawn to an article in the weekly news magazine 'Outlook' dated May 24, 1999 under the title. 'The Greater Common Good' by Ms. Arundhati Roy. A book under the same title, i.e., 'The Greater Common Good' by Arundhati Roy, which appears to have been dedicated to 'The Narmada, and all the life she sustains and S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2367a; JT1999(5)SC18; 1999(3)SCALE10a; 1999(2)LC1243(SC)
ORDERS. Saghir Ahmad, J. 1.Hot Mix Plants which were treated as hazardous industries have since been closed with effect from 20th of February, 1997 in pursuance of the Order dated 10-10-1996 passed by this Court in LA. No. 22 in Writ Petition (C) No. 4677 of 1985 (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors.) since reported in : AIR1997SC734 .2. The Airports Authority of India at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi has filed this application for permission to install Hot Mix Plants in the vicinity of IGI airport for a periodof one year for resurfacing of the runways for the safe landing and take off of domestic and international aircrafts and for smooth handling of aircraft traffic. It is indicated in this application that the resurfacing of the main runway was last done in the year 1990-91 while the resurfacing of the secondary runways was carried out in 1998. It is further stated that due to the constant use of these runways by the ever-increasing traffic, both domestic and i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2515; 1999(3)ALLMR(SC)739; 1999(65)ECC727; 1999LC63(SC); 1999(112)ELT3(SC); JT1999(5)SC161; 1999(4)SCALE313; (1999)6SCC117; [1999]3SCR1056; 2000(1)LC233(SC)
ORDER1. The judgment of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court reported in : 1985(22)ELT644(Bom) is called in question in these appeals by special leave before us. The question which arose for consideration before the Bombay High Court related to the levy of Customs duty under the provisions of the Sea Customs Act.2. The brief facts on which the Bombay High Court proceeded were that when the goods of the respondents entered the territorial waters of India from the foreign country as also on the day they were stored in the bonded warehouse, they were wholly exempt from payment of basic Customs duty under a notification issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. When these goods were sought to be removed from the bonded warehouse, the exemption notification had been rescinded and the exemption granted thereunder was withdrawn.3. The case of the respondents was that on the day when the goods entered the territorial waters, tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2000)10SCC179
Sujata V. Manohar,; A.P. Mishra and; U.C. Banerjee, JJ.1. Civil Appeals Nos. 16699-712 of 1996 are filed by Karnataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Ltd. while Civil Appeals Nos. 16713-26 of 1996 are filed by the Clerks employed in the said Bank. All these appeals challenge the judgment of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court under which the High Court has given a direction to absorb 12 respondents who were initially appointed by the appellant Bank as mobile trainers and had been recruited in the years 1985-86 and 1986-87.2. At the material time the National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC) had undertaken a project financed by World Bank called NCDC III Project. The implementation of the said Project in the State of Karnataka was to be done by Karnataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the appellant Bank. For implementing the said project, the appellant Bank issued two advertisements, one dated 25-11-1985 and the other dated 21-2-1987 for ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2571; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)371; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)375; 1999CriLJ4055; 1998(3)Crimes57(SC); II(1999)DMC169SC; JT1999(5)SC317; 1999(II)OLR(SC)313; 1999(4)SCALE447; (1999)6SCC
ORDERNanavati, J.1. The three appellants, in these two appeals, have been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. for causing death of Parminder Kaur. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 822 of 1997 is Harjit Kaur, the Mother-in-law of Parminder Kaur. The two appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 823 of 1997 are Charan Singh and Sukhjeet Singh, the Father-in-law and Husband of Parminder Kaur.2. What has been held proved against them is, that they were not satisfied with the dowry brought by Parminder Kaur and, therefore, they used to ill-treat her and beat her also. Ultimately on 30.4.92 at about 2.00 a.m. they killed her by pouring kerosene over the body and then applying a lighted match stick to her clothes.3. The trial Court convicted the three appellants and one Gurjit Singh, Brother-in-law of Parminder Kaur, mainly relying upon the Dying Declaration made by Parminder Kaur on 3.5.92. The High Court has also believed the Dying Declaration and confirmed the conviction of the appellants, but ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2367; 1999(4)SCALE196; (1999)7SCC522; [1999]3SCR1031
S. Saghir Ahmad, J.1. Hot Mix Plants which were treated as hazardous industries have since been closed with effect from 20th of February, 1997 in pursuance of the Order dated 10.10.1996 passed by this Court in I.A. No. 22 in Writ Petition(C) No. 4677 of 1985 (M.C. Mehta vs . Union of India and Ors.) since reported in : (1997)8SCC770 .2. The Airports Authority of India at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi has filed this application for permission to install Hot Mix Plants in the vicinity of IGI Airport for a period of one year for resurfacing of the runways for the safe landing and take off of domestic and international aircrafts and for smooth handling of aircraft traffic. It is indicated in this application that the resurfacing of the main runway was last done in the year 1990-91 while the resurfacing of the secondary runways was carried out in 1998. It is further stated that due to the constant use of these runways by the ever-increasing traffic, both domestic and in...
Tag this Judgment!