Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.968 OF2011CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA ... APPELLANT (S) VERSUS HUSAINY FAKHRUDDIN AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENT (S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.: Appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgement whereby the High Court has directed the appellant to release the deposits made by Respondents 1 to 4. When the request for withdrawal of the money was being processed, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI, for short), by communication dated 06.12.2005, requested the appellant-Bank not to release the deposits till you receive any reference from this office or the Special Court, Akola . Respondents 1 to 4 challenged the same before the High Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.496 of 2006. The Writ Petition was allowed by the impugned judgment dated 23.07.2010 directing the Bank to release the amounts, and hence, the appeal. Learned Counsel for the CBI, on instruction, submits that they have withdrawn their request to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 204-205 OF2017[ @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.7088-7089 OF2012]. R.ELAVAZHAGAN @ BABU Appellant(s) VERSUS PANKAJAM VILWANATHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellant has mainly two grievances- i)Though the appellant was on regular bail, the High Court, in the impugned order, has directed cancellation of the anticipatory bail and custodial interrogation; ii)There is a direction in the impugned order for further investigation.3. It is an undisputed position that the appellant has been on regular bail while the High Court passed the impugned order.4. In that view of the matter, in our view, nothing survives in this appeal since the appellant cannot, in any way, stall the further investigation, as ordered by the High Court in the impugned order.5. Therefore, these appeals are disposed of making it clear that the appellant shall cooperate with the investi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1300/2010 ISHWAR YADAV PATIL APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.The appellant was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No.77 of 1991 and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. In the impugned order the High Court has sustained the conviction. In paragraph 26, the following circumstances have been highlighted by the High Court:- i. That, it was deceased Suresh who 15 days prior to the incident informed Manohar (PW-13) that his hybrid Jawar crop was cut by the appellants and as a result, PW-13 Manohar Patil called both the appellants in presence of Suresh, questioned them and when the appellants admitted, Manohar PW-13 beat both the appellants. So, this becomes motive as because of deceased Surech, the theft committed by the appellants came to light. The appellants had to su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
[REPORTABLE]. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.3652 OF2010 STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. .APPELLANTS VERSUS RAMESH PRASAD VERMA (DEAD) THR. LRS. ...RESPONDENTS AND CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.3653 OF2010 JUDGMENT AMITAVA ROY, J.Leave Granted.2. Vexed by the determination thereby limiting the application of the Notification SS-2/MM-11/2001-2361.../M dated 26.12.2001 to the date of issuance thereof, for the purpose of realizing royalty in respect of the minerals mentioned therein @ Rs.100/- per cubic meter, otherwise prescribed by the Notification dated 24.03.2001 notifying the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2001, the State of Bihar and its concerned functionaries are in appeal seeking redress. The impugned judgment and order dated 21.08.2009 is common in both the appeals and consequently, marginal variation in the contextual facts notwithstanding, the legal issues raised ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1257 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.38558 of 2012) Mrs. Ivy C.da.Conceicao ...Appellant VERSUS State of Goa & Ors. ...Respondents J u d g m e n t Adarsh kumar goel, J.1. Leave granted. This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 14th August, 2012 passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Writ Petition NO.542 of 2008.2. The question for consideration is whether the process of appointment of a principal in minority institution is open to judicial review and on what grounds.3. The case of the appellant is that she is a Grade-I teacher, teaching Economics in Rosary Higher Secondary School, Navelim, Salcete, Goa, run by respondent No.3-Diocesan Society. She had passed her B.A. (in Economics and Commerce) and M.A. (in Economics) from Bombay University and also completed her B.Ed. She has been teaching for the last 21 years in the school run by respondent No.3-Diocesan Society. Respo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1260 OF2017(Arising out of SLP(C) No.27192 of 2015) JAGDAMBA DEVI Appellant Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...Respondent JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. The present appeal by way of special leave impugns the final judgment and order dated 01.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in LPA No.1348 of 2012 whereby the High Court allowed the LPA No.1348 of 2012 filed by the respondents herein and thereby declined appellants claim of dependent family pension under Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are as follows: The appellant is the widow of one Late Hari Kant Jha who had been accused and arrested in a criminal case emanating from freedom struggle movement of 9th August, 1942. The deceased took part in the freedom struggle and allegedly remained absconding in this context from 16.08.1942 to 14.10.1944. The deceased was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 119-122 OF2017AJAY KUMAR GHOSHAL ETC. Appellant Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ...Respondent JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.These appeals are directed against the common final order dated 28.08.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.230 of 2015, Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.275 of 2015, Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.232 of 2015 and Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.243 of 2015 setting aside the judgment of the trial court and directing the retrial of Session Trial No.14 of 2008/637 of 2008 against the appellants.2. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 15.05.2007, Asim Kumar Chatarjee (PW-5) filed a complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Tilakmanjhi, stating that his sister Bandhavi @ Bani Ghoshal was married to Raj Kumar son of Ajay Kumar Ghoshal on 03.02.2007 and at the time of her marriage, the complainant gave cash and ornaments as per his capacity and all the usu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7391-7395/2013 State of Haryana and another etc. ..Appellants versus Mohinder Singh and others etc. ..Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. OF2017(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.6159-6163/2014 civil appeal No.8993 of 2014 JUDGMENT JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, CJI The respondents before this Court were engaged as conductors and drivers under statutory rules, framed by the State of Haryana, under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Under the concerned statutory rules, even though conductors and drivers were engaged after following due process, they were paid different wages. Their initial wages were paid by treating them as daily wagers, their wages were then enhanced by treating them as contract labourers, and finally, they were paid regular wages in the regular pay scale.2. 195 of such employees preferred writ petitions before the High Court, seeking wages in the regular scale of pay, with effect from the da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1223-1224 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.3451-3452 OF2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) ...CC No.2002-2003 OF2017 KALAWATI WAMANRAO GAIKWAD (DIED) THR. LRS ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS REGIONAL OFFICER M.I.D.C. LATUR AND ORS. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.1225 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.3454 OF2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) ...CC No.2005 OF2017 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.1226-1230 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.3456-3460 OF2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) ...CC No.2039-2043 OF2017 JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. In view of the order dated 11.09.2015 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 7070-7071 of 2015, these appeals are also disposed of by directing that 50% of the enhanced compensation granted to the appellants shall be released without security whereas balance of 50% shall be released to them on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Referen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1231 OF2017[ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.18817 OF2013 STATE OF U.P. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS AYODHYA PRASAD PAL & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.2. Heard the counsel on both the sides.3. The State of U.P. is aggrieved, since it did not get an opportunity before the High Court to file their counter affidavit and argue their case.4. On going through the judgment, it is seen that the State was impleaded only for the sake of completing the procedural formality at the time of passing the final order. However, certain directions were issued to the State in the impugned order.5. In the nature of order we propose to pass, it may not be proper for us to go into the merits, since we intend to remit the matter to the High Court.6. The impugned order is hence set aside, the appellant herein is impleaded as additional respondent before the High Court. The appellant is given a peri...
Tag this Judgment!