Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2004(2)JCR294b(SC)]
ORDER1. The appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of the division Bench of High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi, either the Tourism Minister of the Secretary. Tourism to file an affidavit indicating the details of the travelling expenses incurred thereon. The public interest litigation which the High Court is in seisin of, is in relation to de-silting of the Kanke Dam project and several allied projects. In disposing of that matter the informations required by order dated 20th December, 2001 calling upon the Minister of Secretary, Tourism to file affidavit as to what way travelling allowances have been taken, does not appear to us to be germane, inasmuch as the High Court is not exercising the functions of the Accountant General, and more-over that was not a matter in issue before it. In that view of the matter we set aside that part of the order dated 20th December, 2001 of the High Court.2. Needless to mention, the High Court shall proceed with the pending public interest litig...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2002SC3094; 2002(2)ALD(Cri)484; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)63; 2002CriLJ4299; 2002(4)Crimes86(SC); 99(2002)DLT508(SC); 2002(83)ECC281; 2002LC918(SC); JT2002(6)SC331; 2002(6)SCALE14
Ruma Pal, J.1. Leave granted2. The appellant has challenged his detention pursuant to an order dated 28th September 2001 passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').3. Prior to his detention under the impugned order, the appellant has been arrested on 5th July 2001 by the Customs officers at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi on the allegation that he had smuggled 40 mobile telephones. The mobile phones were found hidden in a microwave oven. The microwave oven as well as the mobile telephones were seized and the collective value of the seized goods has been stated by the respondents to be Rs. 5,16,000/-4. At the time of his arrest, the appellant handed over his passport to the customs authorities. In the appellant's statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, it was stated by the appellant that the appellant was an employee of M/s. B.D. Denim. The appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2002SC3088; 2002(2)ALD(Cri)560; 2002CriLJ4295; 2002(4)Crimes122(SC); 99(2002)DLT480(SC); 2002(65)DRJ158; JT2002(6)SC325; 2003(1)KLT653(SC); 2002(6)SCALE147; (2002)7SCC22
D. Raju, J. 1. Leave granted.2. The respondent has been convicted for an offence under Section 16 read with Section 7 for the violation of Section 2(ia)(a), (j) of the Prevention of Good Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, on 9.5.2000 in case No. 42 of 1994. Thereupon, on 12.5.2000 he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year, in addition to a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of which to undergo a further sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. Thereafter, the respondent went on appeal and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, by his judgment dated 20.3.2001 in Crl. Appeal No. 11 of 2000 affirmed the findings of the trial court that the offence has been properly proved on the basis of proper and sufficient materials and consequently sustained the conviction. So far as the question of sentence is concerned, adverting to the claim made for the benefit of Section 433(d) of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2002SC3119; 2002(4)Crimes113(SC); JT2002(6)SC392; 2002(6)SCALE152; (2002)7SCC198; [2002]SUPP1SCR733
Y.K. Sabharwal, J. 1. The first information report (FIR) was recorded on the statement of Sitaram father of deceased Ratan and Uncle of deceased Ramesh. Therein the names of accused Roshan and his four sons Lakshmi, Brahma, Kishan Chand and Shyam Sunder are mentioned. The 6th accused mentioned in the FIR is by description viz. - brother-in-law of Ishwar Chand.2. The FIR, inter alia, records that Ishwar Chand of the same village asthe informant had been murdered. The murder had taken place in different village, namely, Sondha, Police Station Modi Nagar, District Ghaziabad. Deceased Ratan, Moolchand who is brother of Sitaram and other men accompanied Brahma and Roshan to bring back the body of Ishwar. Ishwar was son of Roshan. After the body of Ishwar had been brought back to the village, when the villagers asked Roshan and his sons to perform the funeral rights of Ishwar, they said that it would be performed the next day in the morning. Brahma told Ratan that along with the body of Ishw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(1)AWC568(SC); [2003(96)FLR178]; JT2002(10)SC207; 2002(4)MPHT494; (2002)7SCC719; (2003)1UPLBEC808
V.N. Khare and; Ashok Bhan, JJ.1. The respondent herein passed his matriculation examination in the year 1955. The certificate for having passed matriculation examination indicated that the date of birth of the respondent is 19-4-1935. On the strength of the said matriculation certificate, the respondent secured appointment in government service as Lower Division Clerk. The date of birth recorded in the service-book was 19-4-1935. In the year 1975, the respondent joined subordinate accounts service. It is not disputed that on the basis of the date of birth as 19-4-1935, the respondent was to retire on 30-4-1993. It appears that six months before the retirement, the respondent filed an original application before the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, alleging that his correct date of birth is 3-2-1937 and not 19-4-1935. In support of his case, the respondent furnished his horoscope and a certificate from the retired headmaster of the school to the effect that his correct dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2002(8)SC515; (2003)1UPLBEC294
1. The appellant in this appeal was a student in B.Ed. course for the academic session 1996-1997 in the institution run by Chauhan Education Society in Bhopal. The aforesaid institution had got affiliation from the university permitting the institute to have 120 seats for the B.Ed. course. The National Council for Teachers Education which is the premier organisation dealing with the B.Ed. education in the country issued a letter to the institution reducing the strength from 120 to40. Notwithstanding such reduction of strength the institute, however, admitted 140 students, one of them being the present appellant. The institution assailed the order issued by N.C.T.E. by filing a writ petition in the High Court which was registered as writ petition No. 5127 of 1996. The learned single judge of the High Court quashed the order/notice issued by the N.C.T.E. and directed that a fresh inspection of the college of the society be held and the college should be allowed to have equal number of se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2002(7)SC635
ORDER1. It is said that human lust knows no bounds if there is any truth in it, the instant matter is a glaring instance of such lust. A young girl of 16 years of age has fallen a victim to the lust of another young person though, however, eventually with an unfortunate incident of death being followed thereby caused by the young boy by suffocation. The nature of injuries amply describe such a situation and it will be convenient at this stage to note the same;'1. A contusion of 3.5 cms. x 2cms is present on right side of neck 21/2 cms. below right angle of mandible 4 cms. away from midline oblique in nature. Bluish black in colour. 2. Two contusions of 3 cms. x 2 cms., and 2.5 x 1.5 cms. are present on left side of the neck with a gap of 1 cm. obliquely placed up and down 2 cms. below left angle of mandible. 5.5. cms. away from midline, bluish black.3. Two crescent marks are present on left side of the neck at posterior aspect of contusions mentioned in injury no.2, concavity anterior....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2002(8)SC497
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the division bench of the High Court convicting and sentencing the appellant under Sections 302 & 201 IPC. Admittedly, and as the learned advocate in support of the appeal very strongly contended, the entire matter hinges on circumstantial evidence since there is no direct evidence available on record.2. Before however, proceeding further in the matter the observations of this Court in Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana, : 2001CriLJ1679 seems to be rather apposite and the same is stated herein below :Incidentally, success of the prosecution on the basis of circumstantial evidence will however depend on the availability of a complete chain of events so as not to leave any doubt for the conclusion that the act must have been done by the accused person. While, however, it is true that there should be no missing links, in the chain of events so far as the prosecution is concerned, but it is not that every one of the links must ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2002SC2980; 2002(2)ALD(Cri)592; 2002CriLJ4102; 2002(4)Crimes54(SC); JT2002(6)SC262; 2002(6)SCALE106; (2002)7SCC210; [2002]SUPP1SCR718; [2003]130STC41(SC)
B.P. Singh, J. 1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 17.04.2001 in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1992. There are four appellants in this appeal. Appellant No. 1, Subramani is the father of the remaining appellants namely, Venkatesan (appellant No. 2), Ganesan (appellant No. 3) and Govindaraj (appellant No. 4). They have impugned the judgment and order of the High Court whereby while setting aside their conviction under Sections 302 and 302/34 I.P.C., the High Court found them guilty of having exceeded their right of self-defence and found them guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 I.P.C. The High Court also found the appellants guilty variously of the offences under Section 324 and Section 326 I.P.C. However, the High Court acquitted them of the charge under Section 447 I.P.C. on a finding that the land in question was in their cultivating possession as tenants and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2002)10SCC752
B.N. Kirpal, C.J.,; K.G. Balakrishnan and; Arijit Pasayat, JJ.1. We have heard the counsel for the parties. In the instant case, the emphasis by the learned counsel for the appellant was on the alleged violation of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short the NDPS Act). It was submitted that the said provisions are mandatory and there is nothing on the record to show that the search which was conducted on the person of the accused was before a gazetted officer.2. It is not in dispute that at the time when the accused was apprehended he was informed of his right under Section 50 to be searched either in the presence of a gazetted officer or the Magistrate. The accused accepted the offer and required that he should be searched before a gazetted officer. Thereupon the Police Inspector of Gomtipur Police Station was called and the search was conducted in his presence and the incriminating substance, namely, “charas” contained in a plastic bag w...
Tag this Judgment!