Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC384IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 3684 OF2023JAGVIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10th May, 2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad whereby the Criminal Appeal No.6318 of 2003 preferred by the appellant for challenging the judgment dated 25th November, 2003 and the order of sentence dated 27th November, 2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Mainpuri(hereinafter being referred to as the trial Court) in S.T. No.56 of 2003 was rejected.2. By the said judgment, learned trial Court convicted the accused appellant and accused Omkar for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1 1860(hereinafter being referred to as IPC) while acquitting accused Sobran and Durvin from the charges. The accused appellant as well as accused O...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC387REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.3033 of 2024) CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH HIS MOTHER Appellant (s) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Rajesh Bindal, J.Leave granted. BRIEF FACTS2 The present appeal has been filed by Child in Conflict with Law1 impugning the order2 passed by the High Court3. 1 Hereinafter referred to as CCL. 2 Order dated 15.11.2023 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.1243 of 2023. 3 High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. Page 1 of 773. Vide aforesaid order, the High Court set aside the order dated 10.04.2023 passed by the Board4.4. Briefly, the facts as available on record are that FIR5 was registered against the CCL for commission of offences under sections 376(i), 342 IPC and sections 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 20126. After his apprehension on 03.11.2021, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2024 INSC399Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos 4603-4604 of 2024 Tapas Guha & Ors Appellants Versus Union of India & Ors Respondents JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI1 Application for intervention is allowed.2. These Appeals arise from an order dated 25 January 2024 of the Eastern Zone Bench of the National Green Tribunal.3. The Ministry of Civil Aviation of the Union Government decided to build a commercial Airport at Silchar in Assam since the existing defence airport is not suitable for domestic civilian operations.4. Three tea estates, namely, (i) Doloo; (ii) Khoreel; and (iii) Silcoorie were identified by the Government of Assam for the sites of the airport. The Airport Authority of India1 conducted a feasibility study and chose Doloo as the site for a new Greenfield Airport on 1AAI 2 land admeasuring approximately 335 hectares. AAI made a request for additional land, following which an adjacent area in the same tea e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC381IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C)No.251 of 2016 ABHIMEET SINHA & ORS. ..PETITIONER(S) VERSUS HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) With WRIT PETITION (C) No.663/2021, WRIT PETITION (C) No.735/2021, WRIT PETITION (C) No.1073/2022, WRIT PETITION (C) No.1146/2022 and WRIT PETITION (C) No.785/2023 JUDGMENT Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. The common challenge in these six writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is to the constitutionality of the Rules stipulating minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test as a part of the selection criteria for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat respectively. The writ petitioners have approached this Court alleging a violation of their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 contained in Part III of the Constitution of India. The specific consideration to be made in these matters is whether prescribing minimum qualify...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC382REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024[Arising out of SLP (Civil) No(s). 3747 of 2020]. JATINDER KUMAR SAPRA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANUPAMA SAPRA RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.1. Leave granted.2. The instant appeal assails the correctness of an order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana (the High Court) in FAO-146-M-2005 (O&M) (the Impugned Order). Pertinently, vide the Impugned Order, the High Court dismissed the appeal; and accordingly upheld the correctness of an order dated 09.12.2004 passed by the Ld. Additional District Judge (Ad. Hoc), Faridabad (the Family Court) whereunder the Family Court dismissed a petition instituted by the Appellant herein under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage by way of a decree of divorce (the Underlying Order). SLP (C) No.3747 of 2020 Page 1 of 63. The Appellant and the Respondent before this C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC375NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.25032 of 2014 STATE OF U.P. & ANOTHER Petitioner(s) VERSUS MOHAN LAL Respondent(s) ORDER Rajesh Bindal, J.1. The present petition has been filed impugning order1 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court2. Along with the petition, an application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 1,633 days in filing the present petition.2. A perusal of the application filed by the petitioner-State seeking condonation of huge delay of 1,633 days in filing the petition 1 Dated 13.11.2009 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.34974 of 2001 2 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Page 1 of 4 shows that to challenge the impugned order dated 13.11.2009 passed by the High Court the file was put up before the Competent Authority, Bareilly, for the first time on 13.04.2011. On this file the Competent Authority directed to seek legal opinion from the District Government Counsel (Civil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 IN SC379NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP(CIVIL) NO(S). 7071 OF2024 DR. RANBEER BOSE & ANR. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANITA DAS & ANR. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellants in this appeal seek to assail the order dated 20th February, 2024 passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in MAT No.2124 of 2023. By the said order, the learned Division Bench rejected the appeal preferred by the appellants and affirmed the order dated 5th October, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Calcutta in Contempt Petition No.694 of 2022 in WPA No.24206 of 2019, wherein the following directions were issued:- Mr. Krishnendu Narayan Choudhury, Chairman, English Bazar Municipality is personally present in Court. 1 Time has been sought for by the learned senior advocate representing the alleged contemnor to comply the direction passed by the Court....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC369IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2379 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) No.4912 OF2022 ACHIN GUPTA APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.:1. Leave granted.2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana dated 05.04.2022 in the Criminal Main No.14198-2022 (CRM-M-14198-2022) filed by the Appellant herein (sole accused in the chargesheet) by which the High Court rejected the petition & thereby declined to quash the chargesheet dated 13.10.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 323, 406, 498A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC) arising from the First Information Report No.95 of 2021 lodged by the Page 1 of 36 Respondent No.2 (wife of the Appellant) at the Urban Estate Hisar Police Station, District Hisar. FACTUAL MATRIX3 The FIR dated 09.04.2021 reads thus: - 1. That the First Informant Tanu Gupta wife...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC373IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.3787 OF2024T.R. VIJAYARAMAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondent(s) With SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.3788 OF2024B. KANGARAJAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondent(s) ORDER RAJESH BINDAL, J.1. This order will dispose off two petitions bearing number S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3787 of 2024 and S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3788 of 2024. Page 1 of 72. Aggrieved against the judgment of the High Court1 in Criminal Appeal (MD) No.407 of 2016 and Criminal Appeal (MD) No.386 of 2016, the petitioners are before this court.3. The Trial Court2 in C.C. No.7 of 2008 after holding the Petitioner/T.R. Vijayaraman guilty of offence punishable under Sections 120-B, read with Section 420 IPC and Section 420 IPC sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of 5,000/-, in default to unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC368REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.437 OF2015ANEES APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT RESPONDENT JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts: - INDEX A. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION ............................................................... 3 B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT ......................... 15 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE STATE .................................... 17 D. ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 19 Criminal Appeal No.437 of 2015 Page 1 of 54 i. Principles of law governing the applicability of Section 106 of the Evidence Act ............................................................................................. 19 ii. What is prima facie case (foundational facts) in the context of Section 106 of the Evidence Act?. ............................
Tag this Judgment!