Court : Supreme Court of India
1 Criminal Appeal Nos. 660-662 of 2020 (@ SLP (Crl.)Nos. 3083-3085 of 2020) Ankita Kailash Khandelwal & Ors. vs State of Maharashtra & Ors. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.660-662 OF2020[Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos.3083-3085 of 2020]. ANKITA KAILASH KHANDELWAL AND ORS. Appellants VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS Respondents JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 21.02.2020 passed by the High Court1 in Interim Application Nos.2, 3 and 4 of 2019 (preferred by Dr. Ankita Kailash Khandelwal, Dr. Hema Suresh Ahuja and Dr. Bhakti Arvind Mehare respectively; who are collectively referred to as the Appellants hereafter) in Criminal Appeal No.911 of 2019. 1 The High Court of Judicature at Bombay. 2 Criminal Appeal Nos. 660-662 of 2020 (@ SLP (Crl.)Nos. 3083-3085 of 2020) Ankita Kailash Khandelwal & Ors. vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.3....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.659 OF2020@ SLP (CRL.)No.10401 OF2019MISS A VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.659 OF2020(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.10401 of 2019) MISS A Appellant Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. Respondents JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal arises out of order dated 07.11.2019 passed by the High Court1 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.39538 of 2019.3. On 25.08.2019, the father of the Appellant lodged a Complaint with Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur that he had seen a video of the Appellant on her Facebook account alleging that Respondent No.2 and some others had sexually exploited the Appellant and many other girls; 1 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 2 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.659 OF2020@ SLP (CRL.)No.10401 OF2019MISS A VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. that the Appellant was not contactable; that he was appreh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3282 OF2020AMIT SAHNI APPELLANT Versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. Our country made tryst with destiny on the midnight hour of 15th August 1947, shedding the colonial yoke. Despite the pain and turbulence of the partition, the best of the legal and political minds assembled together in the Constituent Assembly to give us one of the most elaborate and modern Constitutions.2. One of the bedrocks of the Constitution of India is the separation of powers between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. It is the function of the Legislature to legislate, of the Executive to implement the legislation, and of the 1 Judiciary to test the constitutional validity of the legislation, if a challenge is so laid.3. The Legislature, in its wisdom, enacted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, which has its share of supporters and opponents. The Legislature per...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.3334 of 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.3335 of 2019) Commissioner of Police and Anr Appellants Vs. Umesh Kumar Respondent And With Civil Appeal No.3335 of 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.5545 of 2019) 1 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J1On 27 January 2013, a notice was published in the newspapers for filling up 523 vacancies for the post of Constable (Executive) Male in the Delhi Police. The break-up of vacancies indicated 262 to be unreserved, 142 for OBC candidates, 79 for Scheduled Caste candidates and 40 for those belonging to the Scheduled Tribes. The candidates appeared for a physical endurance and measurement test on 4 October 2013. Upon qualifying at the test, the candidates were allotted roll numbers for appearing in the written examination. Of a total of 50,422 candidates, 39,597 appeared in the written examination which was held on 8 March 2014....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.860 OF2019SATYA DEO @ BHOOREY ..... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ..... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.By the order dated 17.08.2018, the Special Leave Petition, challenging the judgment dated 20.4.2018 of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, filed by Keshav Ram and Ram Kuber was dismissed, albeit in the case of co-accused Satya Deo@ Bhoorey notice was issued on the plea of juvenility. The impugned judgment had confirmed the conviction of Keshav Ram, Ram Kuber and Satya Deo by the trial court in FIR No.156/1981 dated 11.12.1981 Police Station Gilaula, Distt. Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh for the offence under Section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) and the order of sentence directing them to undergo imprisonment for life. Criminal Appeal No.860 of 2019 Page 1 of 24 By order dated 02.05.2019 leave was granted in the case of Satya 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)NO.10482 OF2020T.K. DAVID ...PETITIONER (S) VERSUS KURUPPAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This special leave to appeal has been filed against the Division Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court dated 06.02.2020 rejecting the Review Petition No.805 of 2018 filed by the petitioner in Writ Appeal No.399 of 2014.2. Brief facts necessary to consider this special leave petition need to be noted.3. The petitioner was an employee of Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank. Petitioner was suspended 2 and disciplinary inquiry was conducted by the Bank. The Bank vide order dated 20.03.2003 dismissed the petitioner consequent to domestic enquiry. There has been series of litigation between the petitioner and the Bank and thereafter Cooperative Arbitration Court by order dated 18.08.2010 gave award by which punishment of dismissal was modified as r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)NO.10482 OF2020T.K. DAVID ...PETITIONER (S) VERSUS KURUPPAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This special leave to appeal has been filed against the Division Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court dated 06.02.2020 rejecting the Review Petition No.805 of 2018 filed by the petitioner in Writ Appeal No.399 of 2014.2. Brief facts necessary to consider this special leave petition need to be noted.3. The petitioner was an employee of Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank. Petitioner was suspended 2 and disciplinary inquiry was conducted by the Bank. The Bank vide order dated 20.03.2003 dismissed the petitioner consequent to domestic enquiry. There has been series of litigation between the petitioner and the Bank and thereafter Cooperative Arbitration Court by order dated 18.08.2010 gave award by which punishment of dismissal was modified as r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
W.P.(C)D.No.10966 of 2020 etc. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) No.OF2020[DIARY NO.10966/2020]. Pravasi Legal Cell & Ors. ..Petitioners Versus Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents W I T H WRIT PETITION (C) NO.570 OF2020 WRIT PETITION (C) NO.595 OF2020 AND WRIT PETITION (C) NO.952 OF2020JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. Background facts, and relief sought for, in this batch of cases is similar, as such all these cases are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The pandemic situation of COVID19, has adversely affected the economy globally, in several sectors. Our country India and civil aviation sector is not an exception to the same. 1 W.P.(C)D.No.10966 of 2020 etc. To contain the pandemic situation of COVID19, first lockdown was imposed by the Government of India, from 25th March 2020 to 14th April 2020. In view of such lockdown, a ban on operation of all domestic and international flights was imposed. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8980 OF2017M/S ARUN KUMAR KAMAL KUMAR & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S SELECTED MARBLE HOME & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.1. In this appeal, the appellants have questioned the legality and correctness of the final judgment and order dated 11.02.2010 passed by the High Court of Delhi in FAO(OS)No.450/2009 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed against the judgment of the Learned Single Judge of the High Court dated 24.07.2009 passed in C.S.(OS)NO(s).647A/1998 and 715 A/1998 whereby the Learned Single Judge had rejected the 2 objections of the appellants and made the Award dated 16.03.1998 the rule of the court. However, vide the impugned judgment the Division Bench reduced the rate of interest from 16% per annum to 9% per annum as applicable to future interest i.e. from the date of the Award, 16.03.1998, till the date of the judgment. This reduct...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
[REPORTABLE]. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.40 OF2011Gurcharan Singh Appellant Versus The State of Punjab Respondent JUDGMENT Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. This Appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 4.3.2010 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana whereunder, the Criminal Appeal No.408-SB of 1999 of the convicted appellant was dismissed and the judgment of conviction under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short the IPC) and the consequential sentence of 4 years RI and fine of Rs. 5000/- imposed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, was upheld. Page 1 of 17 2. The appellant along with his parents was charged under sections 304B and 498A read with section 34 of the IPC. The learned Trial Court ordered acquittal of the appellants parents Dulla Singh and Karnail Kaur. However, even while declaring that there is insufficient material to convict anyone under section 304B & 498A IPC, the trial Court opined that alt...
Tag this Judgment!