Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 106(2008)CLT600(SC); 2008(8)SCALE270; (2008)7SCC770; 2008(3)ICC762; 2008(4)Supreme281; 2008AIRSCW3925
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 20.11.2006 passed by the High Court of Uttranchal at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 581 of 2005 affirming the judgment and order dated 4.6.2005 passed by the District Judge, Nainital allowing an appeal from a judgment and order dated 22.11.2004 whereby and whereunder an application for release filed by the respondent on the ground of his bona fide requirement was dismissed.3. Respondents 1 and 2 are the joint owners of a shop situated in H. No. 110 Durga Cottage Annexy Safak Suffock Hall Compound, Tallital, Nainital.Khyali Ram, the husband of the appellant, was a tenant therein. He died leaving behind the appellant (his wife) and two daughters Smt. Hema Tiwari and Smt. Deepa Joshi. They are married. They have no concern with the shop in question. Respondent No. 3 was in military service. He retired from army. He was living at Nainital with his wife and children. He draws a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Ru...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008ACJ2144; AIR2008SC2252; 2009(1)MhLj561; (2008)152PLR375; (2008)8SCC246; 2008(3)ShimLC238; 2008AIRSCW4025; AIR2008SC2252; 2008(8)SCC246; (2008)3SCC(Cri)467; 2008ACJ2144; 2008(4)Supreme441
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Kishan Lal (deceased) was traveling in a truck bearing registration No. HP-11-1448 on 16.3.2000. He was aged about 27 years. He was unmarried. The said truck met with an accident.First respondent being the mother of the deceased filed an application for payment of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (The Act). Appellant was served with a notice. One of the objections taken by it was that the driver of the truck did not possess any valid or effective driving licence and that the deceased was travelling as an unauthorized passenger on the truck which was a goods carriage.3. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,18,000/- by way of compensation. An appeal was preferred thereagainst before the High Court.By reason of the impugned judgment, whereas the contention of the appellant-insurance company was upheld, having regard to the fact that the amount awarded in favour of the first respondent had already been deposited, it was directe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(2)ALD(Cri)415; 2008CriLJ3533; JT2008(7)SC66; 2008AIRSCW4805; 2008(7)SCC550; (2008)3SCC(Cri)183; 2008CriLJ3533; 2008(3)Crimes35; 2008(3)AICLR546; 2008(4)Supreme508; 2008(4)LH(SC)2630
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. In our judicial system, we have not been able to develop legal principles as regards sentencing.The superior courts except making observations with regard to the purport and object for which punishment is imposed upon an offender, had not issued any guidelines. Other developed countries have done so. At some quarters, serious concerns have been expressed in this behalf. Some Committees as for example Madhava Menon Committee and Malimath Committee have advocated introduction of sentencing guidelines.3. Before, however, we delve into the said question, we may notice the fact of the matter.Respondents herein were convicted for commission of an offence under Section 61(1) of the Punjab Excise Act for carrying 2000 litres of rectified spirit. They were sentenced to undergo an imprisonment for a period of one year.4. The High Court, however, by reason of the impugned judgment purported to be upon taking into consideration the fact that the offence was commit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC2255; 2008(6)BomCR504; [2008]144CompCas55(SC); 2008CriLJ3178; JT2008(6)SC609; 2008(2)KLT762(SC); 2009(1)MhLj650; 2008(8)SCALE54; (2008)8SCC1; 2008AIRSCW4034; AIR2008SC2255; 2008(8)SCC1; (2008)3SCC(Cri)401; 2008CriLJ3178; 2008(3)AICLR500; 2008(3)ICC808; 2008(11)SCALE330;
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. What would be the effect of a post dated cheque vis-`a-vis prosecution in terms of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short the Act) is the question involved in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 31st January, 2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Revision No. 777 of 2003 dismissing the Criminal Revision Application preferred from an order dated 5th July, 2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, discharging the 1st respondent No. 1 herein.3. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute.First Respondent herein was a Director of a Company known as M/s. International Agro Allied Products Ltd. (the Company). It had purchased certain agricultural equipments on hire purchase/lease from on 3rd April, 1995. As a part of the said transaction some post dated cheques were issued in favour of the appellant herein towards the payment of monthly hire/rental.First Respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2008)7SCC259; 2008AIRSCW4814; 2008(7)SCC259
S.B. Sinha, J.Leave granted.1. Whether rule of perpetuity would be applicable in respect of a member of a Sikh Judicial Commission (for short 'Commission') constituted under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (for short 'the Act') is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 13.09.2002 passed by a Five-Judge Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 371 of 1999.2. The Act was applicable to the entire territories of the undivided State of Punjab including PEPSU. By reason of the provisions of the State Reorganisation Act, 1956, the State of Himachal Pradesh was constituted, having been carved out from the State of Punjab.3. Another Parliamentary Act, being Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 (for short 'the 1966 Act') was enacted in terms whereof the State of Punjab was divided into the State of Punjab, the State of Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh.4. The Central Government admittedly is the appropriate authority for passing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008ACJ2126; (2008)4CALLT64(SC); JT2008(6)SC568; 2008(5)KarLJ157; RLW2008(3)SC2281; 2008(7)SCALE716; (2008)5SCC730; 2008AIRSCW3573; AIR2008SC2557; (2008)3SCC(Cri)61; 2008ACJ2126; 2008(3)AICLR331; 2008(4)Supreme314; 2008(4)LH(SC)2487; 2008(4)KCCR1750; 2008(4)AIRKarR110.
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Appellant was the driver of a bus bearing registration No. AP-10-Z- 5260. He was driving the said bus on Bangalore-Hindupur road. On 10.1.1999, at about 2:00 p.m. when the bus was passing through a village commonly known as Kamalapura, it dashed against a child by name Shantha, as a result whereof she died. Shantha was about 7 years old at that time. A criminal prosecution under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code was initiated against him. He was found guilty of the said offences. He was sentenced to one year's simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- for commission of the offence punishable under Section 304A and simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal preferred thereagainst by him was dismissed. The High Court, however, by reason of the impugned judgment modified the sentence directing:The order of sentence passed against...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC2398; 2008(5)ALD1(SC); 2008(2)ARBLR425(SC); JT2008(6)SC517; 2008MhLJ329; (2008)6MLJ832(SC); 2008(8)SCALE509; (2008)7SCC454
S.B. Sinha, J.Leave granted.1. Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (the Act) was enacted to constitute Legal Services Authorities to provide for free and competent legal service to the weaker sections of the society, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities, and to organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity.2. The Act was enacted with a view to give effect to the provisions of Article 39A of the Constitution of India which mandates that State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disability.3. If we are to look at the history of grant of legal aid, it ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2008(6)SC537; 2008(8)SCALE142
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chanchoda, District Guna on February 22, 2000 in Sessions Case No. 587 of 1997 and confirmed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur (Gwalior Bench) on December 11, 2006 in Criminal Appeal No. 210 of 2000.3. The short facts of the case are that First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by one Ram Singh (PW7), son of Ram Prashad Meena resident of Kulakheda on October 1, 1997. According to the prosecution, on October 1, 1997, one Ramesh Singh was going from Anjali to Kumbhraj on motor-cycle of one Govind Singh along with Raghuveer Singh and Hukum Singh. When they reached near Khatakiya Tiraha, all accused persons who were hiding themselves in the shadow of a Mini Bus and armed with lethal weapons, like lathi, farsa and luhangi appeared, stopped the motor-cycle driven by Ramesh Singh and started beating him by inflicting blows...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(8)SCALE491; (2008)6SCC797; 2008AIRSCW4029
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Inter se seniority amongst the teachers of Kumaon University is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 21.3.2006 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 71 of 2004).Before adverting to the aforementioned question, we may notice the factual matrix involved in the matter.3. First Respondent was appointed on an ad hoc basis as a Lecturer in Government P.G. College, Almora by the State of Utter Pradesh through Vice-Chancellor, Kumaon University on or about 22.9.1975. The said College was declared as the Campus College of the University. All Lecturers including the first respondent were continued and treated on deputation with the University; the cut off date wherefor was fixed 16.8.1977. The State of Utter Pradesh framed U.P. Regularization Rules, 1979, the relevant provisions whereof reads as under:4.(i) Any person who (i) was directly appointed on ad hoc basis before ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC2377; II(2008)DMC232SC; JT2008(6)SC466; 2008(6)KarLJ177; 2008(7)SCALE673; 2008AIRSCW3931; 2008(3)AICLR263; 2008(4)Supreme228; 2008(4)LH(SC)2566; 2008(3)KCCRSN190; 2008(4)AIRKarR314
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Leave granted.2. Appellant-Narayanamurthy (A-1) has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 05.12.2006 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No.903/2000, whereby and whereunder appeal filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 19.04.2000 passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, in S.C. No.178/1995 acquitting the appellant and Shivabhushanamma (A-3), for the offences under Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code [for short `IPC'] and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, has been allowed in part and A-1 has been convicted and sentenced under Section 498A and Section 304B, IPC.3. In all, three accused persons, namely, Narayanamurthy (A-1), his father Kannappa (A-2) and mother Shivabhushanamma (A-3), were tried by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, under Sections 498A and 304B of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of t...
Tag this Judgment!