Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(2)ALD(Cri)122; [2000]101CompCas271(SC); 2000(3)CTC251; JT2000(6)SC588; 2000(4)SCALE567; (2000)6SCC133; [2000]Supp1SCR252; 2001(1)LC33(SC)
Ruma Pal, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal has been preferred from the decision of the High Court of Madras dated 17th March, 1998. The appeal was filed on 26th July, 1999 after a delay of 406 days. The application for condonation of delay filed by the appellant shows that the Department of Legal Affairs took up the matter only on 16th December, 1998. No explanation whatsoever has been given for the appellant's inaction during this period of nine months. The observation of this Court in State of U.P. v. Bahadur Singh and Ors. : 1983ECR1556D(SC) regarding the latitude to be shown to the Government in deciding questions of delay, does not give a licence to the Officers of the Government to shirk their responsibility to act with reasonable expedition. However, since the matter has been permitted to be argued on merits, it would not be appropriate to dismiss the appeal on the ground of delay, but our disapproval of the conduct of the appellant in this regard will be reflected in the costs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC2245; 2000(2)ALD(Cri)10; 2000(3)BLJR1730; 2000CriLJ2978; JT2000(7)SC30; 2000(4)SCALE595; (2000)5SCC623; [2000]Supp1SCR222
Umesh C. Banerjee, J.1. Leave granted.2. This Appeal directed against the judgment and order of the Patna High Court pertains to refusal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr. P.C. in the matter of discharge of the complaint against the petitioner under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 468, 471, 477A, IPC read with diverse provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act in RC No. 35/85 before the Special Judge, Patna. On the factual score it appears that the First Information Report was lodged against one S.K. Roy, Branch Manager, Birpur Branch of Central Bank of India alleging inter alia that in connivance with some other named accused he has cheated the Bank to the tune of Rs. 7,47,000/- by misusing his official position, and thus, wrongful loss to the Bank to the above extent and wrongful gain to himself and others having entered into a criminal conspiracy with Ved Prakash Agrawal, Satya Narain Agrawal and M/s. Arun Khadya Tel Udyog. During the course of investigation by Central Bureau ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC2619a; 91(2001)CLT1(SC); 2000(2)CTC555; JT2000(7)SC77; RLW2000(2)SC293; 2000(4)SCALE529; (2000)6SCC326; (2000)3UPLBEC1984
ORDERR.C. Lahoti, J.1. In the early eighties large tracts of land were acquired in the State of Orissa by invoking the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1984 for establishing an aluminium smelter plant and other ancillary industries, civil township and supporting services. For the purpose of assessing the compensation to be awarded to several landowners whose land was acquired an assessment report was called by the Land Acquisition Officer. The land consists of two kinds: (i) Sarad-I Dofasali, and (ii) Taila. During the course of hearing we were told by the learned Counsel for the parties that in the local language a fertile or cultivated land is called Sarad and Sarad-I Dofasali land is one on which two crops can be taken. Taila is a barren land. The assessment report appointed the value of cultivable land at Rs. 12,500/-per acre and of barren land at Rs. 7,500/- per acre. On 27.5.1982 the Collector of District Dhenkanal, where the land is situated, addressed a letter to the Divisio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(2)ALD(Cri)261; 2000CriLJ2966; JT2000(6)SC230; 2000(4)SCALE532; (2000)9SCC130
ORDERS.N. Variava, J. 1. These two Criminal Appeals can be disposed of by this common Judgment. Both the Appeals are filed against a Judgment dated 11th September, 1997 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The High Court has convicted both the Appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The High Court has enhanced the fine from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 2,000/ - each and in default of payment thereof the Appellants are to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 6 months.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows: The case of the prosecution is that on the evening of 18th August, 1993, one Subhash and one Raj Pal, both residents of village Babail had a quarrel. On 19th August, 1993; as the said Subhash was returning from the fields, carrying a bundle of jowar, Raj Pal with two other persons intercepted him and gave him a beating. Subhash then complained to Ex-Serpent of the village, who in-turn complained to the father of the Raj ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(70)ECC1; 2000LC414(SC); 2000(118)ELT311(SC); (2001)1GLR877; JT2000(7)SC99; 2000(4)SCALE732; (2000)5SCC299; [2000]Supp1SCR236
Doraiswamy Raju, J.1. This Reference under Section 35H of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') came to be directly made at the instance of the Revenue to this Court by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, North Regional Bench, on account of conflict of views expressed in the decisions of the High Court of Gujarat reported in Torrent Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India : 1991(55)ELT25(Guj) , and that of the Karnataka High Court reported in Thungabhadra Steel Products Ltd. v. Supdt. of Central Excise : 1992ECR87(Karnataka) .2. The factual details necessary to understand and appreciate the disputes between parties may be noticed, before adverting to the area and nature of dispute. The respondent is a holder of licence in Form L-4 and a manufacturer of vegetable products falling under Chapter 15-04 of the Central Excise Tariff, at the relevant point of time. The respondent, admittedly, filed a declaration under Rule 57G of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2001(1)BLJR659; JT2000(6)SC597; RLW2000(2)SC289; 2000(4)SCALE692; (2000)6SCC120
ORDERY.K. Sabharwal, J.1. The appellant and respondent No. 4 are brothers Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are also brothers. Respondent No. 1 is the son of respondent No. 22. Respondent No. 4 came in possession of the property under rent note dated 24th December, 1968 executed in favour of respondent No. 1. His eviction was sought by respondent No. 1 on the ground of nonpayment of rent and sub-letting. The eviction petition was filed some time in the year 1970. In answer to the eviction petition, the case set-up by respondent No. 4 was that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and that had entered into an agreement with the vendors for the purchase of the property. The said agreement was brought about in the name of his elder brother because the family was joint. Respondents 2 and 3 had agreed to advance to him Rs. 15,000/- which was the balance amount payable to the vendOrs. By way of security they insisted that the conveyance deed should be in the name of resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(5)SCALE122; (2000)8SCC368
ORDER1. Pending further consideration, we direct that 125 cusecs of less of water which may be arranged by the National Capital Territory of Delhi from Bhakra Beas Management Board shall be carried through the States of Punjab and Haryana to Delhi for the purposes of treatment of the said water by the water treatment plant at Nangloi which was completed in 1998 and still remains unused. Further, it is made clear that the water so released by the Bhakra Beas Management Board shall not be out of the quota of the State of Haryana or Rajasthan. This 125 cusecs should be in addition to water which is being released now. We further direct that the Central Water Commission shall see that there is no danger to the breach of the canal which carries the said water and the said Commission will have the right to regulate the flow by reducing the same if it was of the opinion that carrying this water is likely to result in a breach of the canal. The Chief, Secretaries of the States of Punjab and Ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2001(1)ALD(Cri)366; [2000]102CompCas408(SC); JT2000(8)SC111; 2000(II)OLR(SC)359
K.T. Thomas, J.1. Leave granted.2. This is a case in which appellant was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the lower court and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,09,700/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. Though the conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Sessions Judge, the High Court reduced the sentence to imprisonment for three months and the fine to Rs. 5,000/-.3. We are now told that the dispute regarding the cheque amount has been settled between the appellant and the payee-complainant. Learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-complainant has confirmed the fact that grievance of the complainant-payee has been completely redressed and therefore, he has no objection in giving any relief to the appellant. However, as the offence has been proved, we have to maintain the conviction. In view of the subsequent development including redressal of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2000(86)FLR441]; JT2000(7)SC37; 2000(4)SCALE536; (2000)6SCC507; [2000]Supp1SCR185
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.2. These two appeals arise out of the judgment in LPA 73/91 dated 9.9.1998 rendered by the Patna High Court. The appellants in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No. 21041 of 1998 are members of the Bihar State Subordinate Industries Filed Officers' Association (hereinafter called the 'Field Employees') while the appellants in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP 1133/99 are members of the Industrial Department Statistical Employees Association (hereinafter called the 'Statistics Employees'). Both groups belong to the Non-gazetted Service in Bihar and the dispute is between these two groups on the one hand and Sri Kapildeo Prasad Singh and others who belong to the Gazetted Service on the other. The learned Single Judge of the High Court of Patna held that the Rule contained in Annexure-I and in particular in Schedule IV of the Bihar Industries Service Rules, 1987 is ultra vires inasmuch as under that rule, the ab...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(2)ALD(Cri)204; 2000(3)BLJR1766; 2000CriLJ3167; JT2000(6)SC508; 2000(II)OLR(SC)371; RLW2000(2)SC300; 2000(4)SCALE511; (2000)6SCC89; AIR2000SC2111
ORDERRajendra Babu, J.1. On a report made by Jugeshwar Singh [PW-7] alleging that the appellants herein along with several other persons numbering about 20 came to 'Khalihan' [threshing floor] of Bhola Singh where he and other members of his family were threshing paddy. They tried to take away the paddy. Upendra Singh threatened that any resistance would be met with such action which might even result in death. Thereafter Rajendra Singh hit Bhola Singh with a lathi and Upendra Singh moved backward and fired at Bhola Singh with gun as a result of which Bhola Singh was hit and fell down writhing in pain. Saryu Singh was shot at by Rajendra Singh and Bhagwat Dayal Singh, who was also inflicted a bhala blow by Arvind Singh, appellant in the connected matter, Umed Singh and Sheonandan Singh fired at Rajdeo Singh as a result of which he fell down. When Dharmshila, wife of Bhola Singh reached the threshing floor with her child aged about one and half years old in her arm named Rinku...
Tag this Judgment!