Court : Supreme Court of India
2023INSC779 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.1457 of 2015 Abhishek .... Appellant Versus State of Madhya Pradesh .... Respondent with Criminal Appeal No.1456 of 2015 JUDGMENT Sanjay Kumar, J1 Bhawna, the second respondent in Criminal Appeal No.1456 of 2015, married Nimish Gour in the year 2007. He, however, secured a decree of divorce on 05.09.2019 dissolving their marriage. Bhawna preferred First Appeal No.1876 of 2019 against the said divorce decree and the same is stated to be pending consideration before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The appellants in the present appeals were Bhawnas in-laws. Kusum Lata was her mother-in-law while Abhishek and Sourabh were her brothers-in-law. 22. Bhawna married Nimish on 02.07.2007. Their marriage was an arranged one and was performed at Indore, Madhya Pradesh. Bhawna was a teacher by profession. Nimish was working in the film industry at Mumbai and was engaged in film editing. After thei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2023INSC777 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.31526 OF2017JAGPAL SINGH PETITIONER VERSUS THE STATE OF U.P. & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT PANKAJ MITHAL, J.1. Shri Parthiv K. Goswami, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Shri Tanmaya Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondents were heard on merits.2. Under challenge is the judgment and order dated 04.09.2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court whereby the Special Appeal was allowed after setting aside the judgment 1 and order of the learned Single Judge dated 31.10.2012 allowing the Writ Petition No.25718 of 2011.3. The result of the impugned order is that the services of the petitioner who was appointed as the temporary Collection Peon stood terminated, notwithstanding, the subsequent promotion earned by him on the post of Collection Amin on the strength of his continued working under the interim order passed by the High Court.4. The petitioner was a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2643-2644 OF2023(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) Nos. 6854-6855 of 2023) NIRANJAN DAS @ NIRU DAS @ MAHANTO ... APPELLANT(S) VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL ... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ABHAY S.OKA, J.Leave granted.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-State.3. The present appellant-Niranjan Das was Accused No.2 before the Trial Court. He was convicted by the Trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Trial Court convicted the appellant as well as the Accused No.1-Subodh Rajbanshi. It is pertinent to note that both of them were convicted Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 1 of 6 simplicitor under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 34 IPC was not applied.4. Separate appeals were preferred by both the accused. The appeals were heard on 12th May, 2022. In th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2023INSC786 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2023(@ OUT OF SLP(Crl.) No.1258/2022) SATBIR SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.2. Leave granted.3. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 14.12.2021 in CRMM No.40058/2021 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Order) passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the High Court), by which the prayer for recall of the appellant as a witness in the trial before the Court below for further examination has been rejected.4. The brief facts relating to the case are that the appellant made a complaint against the accused that they, being ex-employees of his company, had stolen company data and used such data to manufacture equipment, which was being manufactured by the appellants company. During trial, before the Repo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2023INSC784 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO . OF2023 (@ OUT OF SLP (Crl.) No.2256/2022) STATE OF HARYANA Appellant(s) VERSUS DHARAMRAJ Respondent(s) JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.2. Leave granted.3. The present appeal filed by the State of Haryana seeks cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the sole respondent vide Order dated 03.12.2021 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Order) passed in CRM-M No.49115/2021 by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondent is accused in First Information Report No.0239 dated 31.07.2020 at Police Station Badshahpur, Gurugram lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 341, 342 and 427 2 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC). Later, Sections 186, 353 and 364 of the IPC were also included.4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2023INSC778 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2628-2629 OF2023(@ SLP(CRL.) Nos.8506-8507/2022) ZUNAID APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) ORDER1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Leave granted.3. The two appeals arise out of the orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the Application No.14899/2022 filed by the respondents-accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.). These two appeals have been filed by the appellant-complainant challenging the order dated 21.07.2022 by which the High Court had granted the prayer made by the respondents-accused to amend the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and challenging the order dated 22.07.2022 by which the High Court has set aside the orders dated 15.11.2018 and dated 11.01.2022 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (for short, CJM) in Misc. Case No.06/11/2018 arising 2 out of Case Cr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2023INSC775 NonReportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.54835484 OF2023(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.67646765 of 2018) Vijaya Bhiku Kadam Appellant versus Mayani Bhag Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.1. Leave granted. FACTUAL ASPECTS2 The issue concerns the employment of the appellant, a lecturer, with the second respondentCollege which is affiliated to the fourth respondentShivaji University, Kolhapur, Maharashtra.3. The appellant has done M.A. in English and by the year 1992, she had acquired the qualification of PhD. The second respondentCollege was established in the Academic Year SLP (C) Nos.67646765 of 2018 Page 1 of 15 19911992. On an application made by the appellant, by the order dated 15th September 1992, the second respondent College appointed the appellant as a parttime lecturer in English for the Academic Year 19921993. The first respondentSociety runs the second respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2023INSC774 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.254 OF2010M. SIVADASAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRs. & ORS APPELLANTS Versus A. SOUDAMINI (DEAD) THROUGH LRs. & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT1 The appellants had filed a suit for partition and mesne profit way back in the year 1988, before the Court of Principal Munsif, KozhikodeI, Kerala, claiming ancestral rights over the property comprising of Items 1 & 2 in Plaint Schedule A; property admeasuring 33 cents and 42 cents respectively. The Trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs/appellants vide its Order and Judgment dated 03.02.1993 on the ground that the land along with the house sought to be partitioned is an agricultural land on which the plaintiffs/appellants, cannot claim any right. This finding of the Trial Court was upheld by the First Appellate Court, and finally by the High Court of Kerela by 2 the impugned Judgment dated 29.01.2009 in second appeal. In short, the present appellants have lost...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2023NSC813 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF2023(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO(S). 6534 OF2023 ILAVARASAN APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, with their consent.2. The brief facts are that the appellant had preferred a habeas corpus proceeding, alleging that he had married Mathithra in accordance with Section 7A of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same was solemnized under the aegis of Advocates and other social workers. He had alleged that she had been forcibly taken away, coerced into marrying her maternal uncle, after which she was restrained at the behest of her parents. The appellant alleged that Mathithra was detained or restrained against her will. The High Court dismissed the petition and recorded comments adverse to the conduct of Advocates, stating that they are incapable of certifying marriages under Section 7...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2023NSC771 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO(S). 252 OF2023RAJO @ RAJWA @ RAJENDRA MANDAL APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. The petitioner, currently serving a sentence of life imprisonment for commission of offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 approaches this court under its Article 32 jurisdiction, seeking appropriate direction to the first respondent to prematurely release him, on the ground that he has been in custody for 24 years without grant of remission or parole.2. The petitioner (aged 40, at the time), with three other co-accused persons, was convicted1 on 24.05.2001 for the murder of three persons two of which were police personnel (dafadars) and the third being a chowkidar, who were all on duty during a village mela by indiscriminate firing, while they were waiting 1 By the Sess...
Tag this Judgment!