Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(1)ALD(Cri)1029; 2004CriLJ2100; JT2004(Suppl1)SC37; RLW2004(2)SC293; 2004(4)SCALE580; (2004)5SCC721; 2004(2)LC1155(SC)
B.P. Singh, J.1. The appellant herein was tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, Rajasthan charged of the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 since the sample of hard boiled sugar confectionary taken from the appellant was found to be adulterated in view of the presence of mineral oil, as also on account of its having a very unpleasant smell and taste. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by his judgment and order of April 25, 1986 found the appellant guilty of the offence charged and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. The appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jodhpur by his order dated August 4, 1988 who upheld the conviction but modified the sentence and reduced it to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004CriLJ2547; JT2004(Suppl1)SC69; 2004(4)SCALE587; (2005)9SCC94
B.P. Singh, J.1. The State of Punjab has preferred this appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 24th September, 1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 627-DB of 1995 and Murder Reference No. 7 of 1995 whereby the High Court while allowing the appeal of the respondents herein acquitted them of the charges under Sections 148, 302, 302/34 IPC. Accordingly the High Court set aside the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda, who by his judgment and order dated 13th November, 1995 in Sessions Case No. 54 of 14.12.1190 had found the respondents guilty of offences under Sections 302 and 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to death. Three other accused persons who were tried alongwith the respondents herein were, however, acquitted by the trial court.2. The occurrence giving rise to the instant appeal occurred on the night intervening 26th and 27th July, 1990. The case of the prosecution is that in the said occurrence five p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004CriLJ2544; 2004(4)SCALE551; (2004)10SCC689
B.P. Singh, J. 1. The appellants herein have impugned the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated March 23, 1997 in Criminal Appeal No.177 of 1988 whereby their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentence of life imprisonment, as well as their conviction under Section 147 and sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment has been affirmed by the High Court. We may observe that apart from these two appellants, two other persons who were convicted by the same judgment and order had also preferred a Special Leave Petition before this Court alongwith the appellants herein, but the Special Leave Petition in so far as it related to them, was rejected by this Court by order dated 12.12.1997.2. In all eight persons were put up for trial before the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Madras, charged variously of offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 302/149 IPC. The appellants herein were A-1 and A-6 before the trial court. The learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2445; (SCSuppl)2004(4)CHN40; JT2004(5)SC448; 2004(6)KarLJ528; 2004(4)SCALE761; (2004)7SCC391
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. A suit was filed by the first respondent for declaration that he and third Respondent Fakirawwa are the owners of the suit land and for possession from the original Appellant (Laxmappa) and for other incidental reliefs. He had impleaded his father as second defendant in the suit and his mother as third defendant. It is claimed that his father was a spend thrift; that since he and his younger brother did not want to continue to be joint and on receiving a sum of Rupees One thousand relinquished his interest in the joint family property by executing a registered deed dated 26.4.1960; that thereafter he and his younger brother became owners in possession of the said properties; that about 4 or 5 years later his younger brother died and in terms of the Hindu Succession Act their mother succeeded to his share; that thus the said properties came under his and his mother's ownership and possession; when the matter stood thus even though his father had relinquished his r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(4)ALD15(SC); 2004(52)BLJR1187; JT2004(Suppl1)SC49; 2004(4)SCALE434; (2004)6SCC76; (2004)3UPLBEC2278
S. Rajendra Babu, J.SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS (C) NOS. 21390- 21442 21390- 21442 OF 2003, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS Nos. 21464-21552/20031. A writ petition bearing No. 39772/2002 is filed before the High Court of Karnataka for a direction that the Union of India should be directed to grant renewal of permission to the institution run by the first and second respondents. They also sought for direction to make selection for admissions into the institution for the academic session 2002-03 and to allocate students to enable continuation of imparting education in the said institution.2. A permission has been granted to the first and second respondent's institution in terms of Section 10-A of the Medical Council Act and also renewed for the subsequent year. As it was not renewed in time for the academic year 2002-03, they filed writ petition No. 39772/2002. The High Court by an interim order dated 4.11.2002 directed the Medical Council of India (for short 'Council') to complete the inspection by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2336; III(2004)BC424; [2004]120CompCas505(SC); (2004)2CompLJ409(SC); [2004(101)FLR627]; [2004(4)JCR186(SC)]; JT2004(Suppl1)SC1; (2004)IILLJ760SC; 2004(4)SCALE414;
S. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. This Court in a set of appeals arising out of certain orders made in a batch of writ petitions by a Division Bench of High Court of Gujarat in Association of Natural Gas Consuming Industries & Ors. vs. Oil and Natural Gas Commission & Anr., (1983) 24 (2) Gujarat Law Reports 1437, examined various aspects of the matter in relation to price fixation and upheld the prices fixed by the appellant and allowed the appeals. However, during the pendency of the appeals in this Court, the interim orders granted by the High Court continued to be in operation and the respondents received gas at Rs.1000/- per 1000M3. 2. In I.A. No. 168-178 of 1997 filed by the Official Liquidator appointed in respect of Ambica Mills Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 8540-40 of 1983, this Court on 17.10.1997 held as under :-'All that is necessary to be said is that out of the assets of the company under liquidation, the dues of ONGC Ltd., are required to be paid off first and the question of making any...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC346; 2004(3)BLJR1971; 2004CriLJ2050; (2004)2GLR1078; JT2004(Suppl1)SC94; 2004(4)SCALE375; (2004)4SCC158; 2004(2)LC1041(SC)
Arijit Pasayat, J. 1. Leave granted.2. The present appeals have several unusual features and some of them pose very serious questions of far reaching consequences. The case is commonly to be known as ''best Bakery Case''. One of the appeals is by Zahira who claims to be an eye-witness to macabre killings allegedly as a result of communal frenzy. She made statements and filed affidavits after completion of trial and judgment by the trial Court, alleging that during trial she was forced to depose falsely and turn hostile on account of threats and coercion. That raises an important issue regarding witness protection besides the quality and credibility of the evidence before Court. The other rather unusual question interestingly raised by the State of Gujarat itself relates to improper conduct of trial by the public prosecutor. Last, but not the least that the role of the investigating agency itself was perfunctory and not impartial. Though its role is perceived differently by the parties,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC3625; JT2004(4)SC495; 2004(4)SCALE452; (2004)4SCC766
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. There are two cases relating to two premises, both being part of the same building, owned by the same owners but held on tenancy by two tenants. The two premises are described as Door Nos.11-45-60 and 11-45-60/A situated at Thavvavari Street of Vijayawada. The tenants in the twopremises were holding each at a monthly rent of Rs.250/- under the appellant-landlords. For convenience sake we would refer to the parties only as 'landlord' and 'tenant'.2. The landlord initiated proceedings for recovery of possession over the tenancy premises lleging that the same were required bona fide by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing and such demolition was to be made for the purpose of erecting new building on the site of the building sought to be demolished, a ground contemplated under Clause (b) of sub-Section (1) of Section 12 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter 'the Act', for short). The landlord was successful in bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC1979; 2004CriLJ2022; (2004)2GLR1582; JT2004(4)SC490; 2004(4)SCALE409; (2004)10SCC88; 2004(2)LC923(SC)
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Leave granted.2. In these three appeals, certain observations made by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Crl.A. No. 956/2003 with Crl. Misc. Appln. Nos. 7677/2003 and 9825/2003 are questioned by the appellants.3. According to them, the High Court has directly and/or at any rate indirectly cast aspersions on their credibility and bonafides in helping certain persons to approach this Court for redressal of their grievances. The case before the Gujarat High Court related to an alleged communal carnage on 27th February, 2002.4. According to the appellants, being human rights activists, they wanted to find out what is the truth and in the process, though after conclusion of the trial, it was reliably felt by them on the basis of verifications made that truth has been the resultant casualty. They had made detailed study of the situation and also met the riot-affected persons. They helped the victims in lodging FIRs, and setting up legal aid clinics for the affecte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC1983; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)707; 2004(2)ARBLR81(SC); 2004(3)AWC2499(SC); 111(2004)DLT52(SC); 2004(77)DRJ306; JT2004(4)SC519; 2004(4)SCALE443; (2004)5SCC304
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. M/s Banwari Lal & Sons (P) Ltd. -- respondent herein is the owner of the property situated at 6, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi bearing municipal Nos. 4407-4412 admeasuring total area of 50328 square facts on which there are two bhawans named as Gopal Krishna Bhawan and Radha Krishna Bhawan along with garages, pump-house, godowns, store-room etc. The covered area is 20426.80 square feets whereas the balance area is an open area admeasuring 29901.20 square feets. (See: Legend at page 52 of the paper-book). Four flats on the first floor in Gopal Krishna Bhawan were requisitioned by Delhi Administration 27.9.1950 under Requisition and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). On 13.3.1959, the remaining property was requisitioned under the said Act. Before the said Act lapsed on 10.3.1987, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 6.3.1987 for acquisition of the entire properly. On 10.3.1...
Tag this Judgment!