Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.1288 OF 200.Hiraman ... Appellant (s) Versus State of Maharashtra ... Respondent (s) J U D G E M E N T H.L. Gokhale J.This Criminal Appeal raises the question about the relevance of dying declarations, and the approach to be adopted by the Courts with respect thereto. The appellants wife, Chandrakala Hiraman Murkute, died an unnatural and a very painful death at about 2 a.m. on 7.4.2000 in a village in Jamkhed Taluka of District Ahmednagar, State of Maharashtra, having suffered 91% burn injuries in the previous night leading to cardio- respiratory failure. The First Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar held the appellant responsible for the same, principally on the basis of her dying declarations, and convicted him for cruelty and murder under Sections 498-A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C. for short) by his judgment and order dated 16.8.2004 in Sessions Case No.103 of 2000. The convic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
H.L. Gokhale J.1. This Criminal Appeal raises the question about the relevance of dying declarations, and the approach to be adopted by the Courts with respect thereto. The appellant’s wife, Chandrakala Hiraman Murkute, died an unnatural and a very painful death at about 2 a.m. on 7.4.2000 in a village in Jamkhed Taluka of District Ahmednagar, State of Maharashtra, having suffered 91% burn injuries in the previous night leading to cardio-respiratory failure. The First Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar held the appellant responsible for the same, principally on the basis of her dying declarations, and convicted him for cruelty and murder under Sections 498-A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C. for short) by his judgment and order dated 16.8.2004 in Sessions Case No.103 of 2000. The conviction U/s 302 of IPC was confirmed by the Aurangabad Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.31 of 2005, though the one under Section 498-A of I.P.C wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8415 OF 200.Asst. Engineer, Rajasthan Dev. Corp. & Anr. Appellants Vs. Gitam Singh Respondent JUDGMENT R.M. LODHA, J.The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, by special leave, is where the workman had worked for only eight months as daily wager and his termination has been held to be in contravention of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ID Act), whether the direction to the employer for reinstatement with continuity of service and 25 per cent back wages is legally sustainable.2. We were not disposed to undertake the detailed exercise but the same has become necessary in view of very vehement contention of Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the respondent (workman), that reinstatement must follow where termination of a workman has been found to be in breach of Section 25-F of ID Act. He heavily relied upon three decisions of this Court i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2013(1)LLN318; 2013(1)KLT114(SN)
R.M. LODHA, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, by special leave, is where the workman had worked for only eight months as daily wager and his termination has been held to be in contravention of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘ID Act’), whether the direction to the employer for reinstatement with continuity of service and 25 per cent back wages is legally sustainable.2. We were not disposed to undertake the detailed exercise but the same has become necessary in view of very vehement contention of Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the respondent (workman), that reinstatement must follow where termination of a workman has been found to be in breach of Section 25-F of ID Act. He heavily relied upon three decisions of this Court in L. Robert D’Souza v. Executive Engineer, Southern Railway and Another, Harjinder Singh v. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and Devinder Singh v. Municipal Council, Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.801 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.23286/2012) RAJ.GHOSH & ORS. Appellant(s) :VERSUS: STATE OF TRIPURA & ORS. Respondent(s) ORDER Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. Application for deletion of the names of Respondent Nos.4 to 8 is allowed. This appeal, by special leave, has been filed against the interim order dated 3.7.2012 passed by the Gauhati High Court, Agartala Bench in Writ Appeal No.23 of 2012. At the time of issuing notice in the special leave petition, this Court had stayed the operation of the impugned order passed by the High Court. It is brought to our notice by Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Tripura that the elections are due to be held in February, 2013. There is acute shortage of police personnel in the State of Tripura. Therefore, it is necessary that the proceedings in this matter are finalized with utmost expediti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.943 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18510/2012) HARI KISHAN Appellant(s) :VERSUS: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.944 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18511/2012) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 945-948 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.18512--18515/2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.949 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18516/2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.950 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18517/2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.951 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18518/2012) ORDER 1. Leave is granted in all the matters.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.3. By our order dated 16.1.2013, we had expressed the opinion that all candidates, who were shown to have passed the preliminary examination in the initial (original) declaration of result as also those declared successful on the basis of the revised result, ought to be permitted to sit in the written examination. We had also made it clear th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
R.M. Lodha, J.This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 31.05.2007, in allowing the Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) preferred by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) against the decision of the Single Judge dated 09.08.2002. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 13.07.2009.2. The facts which form the background of the appeal can be briefly stated as follows : The controversy relates to a piece of land admeasuring 5 Bighas 19 Biswas comprised in Khasra No. 368 situate in the revenue village Masjid Moth, New Delhi. The above property was an evacuee property which was acquired by the central government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (for short, ‘1954 Act’). On acquisition of that property under Section 12, it became part of the compensation pool under Section 14. By exercise of the power conferred under Section 20, the above property was notified to b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4373 OF 200.Saraswati Devi (D) By LR. Appellant Vs. Delhi Devt. Authority & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT R.M. LODHA, J.This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 31.05.2007, in allowing the Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) preferred by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) against the decision of the Single Judge dated 09.08.2002. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 13.07.2009.2. The facts which form the background of the appeal can be briefly stated as follows : The controversy relates to a piece of land admeasuring 5 Bighas 19 Biswas comprised in Khasra No.368 situate in the revenue village Masjid Moth, New Delhi. The above property was an evacuee property which was acquired by the central government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (for short, 1954 Act). On acquisition of that p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1935 OF 201.MOHAMMAD BIN BEERANKUTTI APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA RESPONDENT ORDER 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal appeal No.569/2009 with Criminal Referred Case No.03 of 2009 dated 06.09.2010. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court while answering the reference has confirmed the conviction and death sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur in Sessions Case No.127 of 2007.2. The facts in extenso need not be noticed by us as the same have been comprehensively noted by the courts below. The background of the facts goes to explain the genesis of the incident that took place on 18.06.2007, when Vyjananthi (the deceased for short) was standing alone waiting for the bus near the Kadur check post in order to go to Chikmagalur. On the day of the incident, the appellant- Mohammad Bin Beerankutti, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.644 OF 200.STATE OF RAJASTHAN ...APPELLANT VERSUS NATHI SINGH ...RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.645/2008 NATHI SINGH ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN ...RESPONDENT ORDER CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.644/2008:1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order in D.B. Criminal Appeal No.119 of 2004 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur, dated 24.11.2005, whereby and whereunder the High Court has allowed the appeal of the respondent-Nathi Singh.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. We have carefully perused the records and analysed the evidence on record and in our considered view, the High Court and the trial court have not committed any error which would call for our interference. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.645/2008:1. Mr. Abhishek, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would inform us, that, since the accused did not get bail from this Court, he mu...
Tag this Judgment!