Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction u/s.482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by holding an enquiry as to whether the cheque in question was for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, and quashing the complaint proceedings Act, 1881 on the ground that the cheque was not issued for the discharge of any debt or other liability. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – ss.138, 139 – High Court quashed the complaint proceedings filed by
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court committed an error in law by permitting the examination of the minor witness. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.311 – The Appellant No.1 and the deceased were married in the year 2010 – A the wedlock in 2013 – Respondent No.2, the father of the deceased filed an FIR under various offences alleging that the complainant’s daughter was subjected to mental and physical cruelty in connection with demands for dowry – It was alleged that Appellant No.1 had an
Issue for Consideration Whether the conviction of the appellant-A1 (along with co-accused, A2) by the Trial Court u/ss.366A, 373, 34 IPC r/w ss.3, 4, 5 & 6, Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and the sentence awarded, affirmed by the High Court, ought to be upheld. Headnotes† Penal – Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 – ss.3, 4, 5 & 6 – An NGO worker (PW-11) intimated the police with regard to prostitution being carried out by the appellant-A1 in his rented premises – PW-8, an associate of the NGO was sent as a decoy – PW-12 (an
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether having regard to the Passports Act, Passport Rules, Notification GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 and OM dated 10.10.2019, respondents justified in declining to re-issue ordinary passport to the appellant for the normal period of ten years on account of the and subsisting conviction, despite “no objection” or permissions granted by the Delhi High Court and the NIA Court, Ranchi. Headnotes† Passports Act, 1967 – ss.5-10 and 22 – Passport Rules, 1980 – Notification GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 – OM dated
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in interfering with the mutation order(s) passed in favour of the appellant (claiming to be a legatee under the registered will of one ‘R’-the recorded tenure holder of land) thereby setting aside the order of the revenue ‘R’, despite there being nothing in the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 proscribing acquisition of rights in land through a will and no bar for seeking mutation based on a will. Headnotes† M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 – ss.109, 110 – Madhya Pradesh Bhu-Rajasv Sanhita
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was correct in enlarging the respondents/accused persons on bail, and directing the District Judge to conduct joint trial of the cases. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.439(2) and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.15A(5) – Enlargement on bail – Conduct of joint trial of cases – Over a land dispute, appellant-Scheduled Caste member along with his friend brutally assaulted and subjected to caste-based abuse, by accused
Issue for Consideration Whether the Commission established under the West Bengal Clinical Establishments (Registration, Regulation and Transparency) Act, 2017, could have given the findings it did, qua the qualifications of one of the doctors of the respondent-hospital; deficiency in patient Headnotes† West Bengal Clinical Establishments (Registration, Regulation and Transparency) Act, 2017 – ss.29, 33, 36, 38 – The appellant’s mother was admitted to the respondent-hospital – After five days of treatment with no improvement, she was
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether on death of the revisionist, the revision proceeding u/s.397 r/w s.401 Cr.P.C. would abate. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.397 r/w 401 – Power of revision – Exercise of – Revision proceeding u/s.397/401, revisionist – Trial court discharged the accused-respondents from offences punishable u/ss.419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 IPC and directed the trial to proceed u/s.420 IPC only – Aggrieved, the father of the appellant- informant filed Revision before the High Court – During
Issue for Consideration Whether the direction by the High Court for time bound investigation and protection from arrest while disposing of a petition for quashing without granting the relief actually prayed for, is justified, legally sustainable or not. Headnotes† Constitution of – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Whether a High Court, while exercising its jurisdiction u/Art.226 or s.482 CrPC, can routinely direct a time-bound investigation (e.g. within 90 days) at the very inception of a case: Held: It is well settled that the writ
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as to how the technical qualification with regard to possessing either a LMV (Transport with Badge Number) or HMV Licence, or both put together, continuously for a period of full two years as on the date of posts of Driver, is to be construed; whether a licence which may have expired within the last two years followed by renewal would automatically result in a situation, though deemed, where despite the licence getting renewed post-facto, but from the date of its expiry, would make it continuous in
Issue for Consideration Whether the decision making process of the respondents in disqualifying the appellant from the tender by not taking into account its past proportionate experience in the joint venture is vitiated by irrationality; whether the High Court erred in dismissing the the appellant challenging the rejection of its tender on the aforesaid ground. Headnotes† Tender – Disqualification from – When arbitrary – Respondent No.3 issued notice inviting tender for construction of road – Appellant submitted its tender – Respondent
Issue for Consideration Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the prosecution failed to prove the case against the appellants-accused persons beyond reasonable doubt; whether the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, affirming the order of conviction by the Trial Court ought to be set aside. Headnotes† Evidence – Interested/related witness – Conviction based upon deposition of, when not justified – Accused persons were convicted u/s.302 r/w ss.149 and 148, IPC relying upon the deposition given by PW-4-informant (mother
Issue for Consideration Whether the Trial Court and the High Court were correct in convicting the appellant solely on the basis of the theory of last seen together. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302 and 201 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.106 – According to the committed dacoity and, during its commission, caused the death of victim-deceased – It was further alleged that on 06.06.2004, the appellant was last seen with the deceased – The Trial Court, while acquitting the remaining five accused, convicted the appellant – The High
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the Sessions Court was competent to award a sentence of imprisonment for life till the remainder of life and prohibit the benefit of set-off as provided u/s.428 Cr.PC. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.428 – Period of to be set off against the sentence of imprisonment – Sessions Court, if competent to award a sentence of imprisonment for life till the remainder of life and prohibit the benefit of set-off u/s.428 – Accused set ablaze a widow who resisted his sexual advances and was convicted for
Issue for Consideration When a director of an accused company is convicted u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, without the company itself being convicted due to some existing ‘legal snag’-such as winding up, liquidation, or any similar scenario-can the appellate court, while director challenging his conviction and sentence, impose a condition of depositing 20% of the amount as prescribed u/s.148 of the Act. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – ss.138, 141, 148 – Whether, upon a conviction u/s.138 r/w. s.141, the appellate deposit
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the grant of a lease of forest land for agricultural purposes; and the correctness of the order passed by the High Court directing the Society to make a representation to be considered by the Central Government lease on the forest land. Headnotes† Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 – s.2 – Restriction on the de-reservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purpose – Grant of 10-years lease of forest land by the State Government to the respondent-Co-operative Society
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the challenge raised to the administrative notification issued by the High Court of Bombay appointing Kolhapur as a place at which the Judges and Division Courts of the said High Court may sit, the writ petition questioning the legality of the administrative decision and seeking quashing of the notification and for a restraint on the High Court from holding sittings at Kolhapur. Headnotes† States Reorganisation Act, 1956 – s.51(3) – Principal seat and other places of sitting of High Courts for new States
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether interference with the arbitral award by the High Court u/s.37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on the ground of patent illegality sustainable once the award has been affirmed u/s.34. Headnotes† Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 37 – Arbitral award – Interference by the High Court u/s.37 on the ground of patent illegality when award was affirmed u/s.34 – Sustainability – Respondent entered into an agreement with the appellant for mining and transporting of Bauxite – Dispute between the
Issue for Consideration Whether in view of provisions of s.31(10) versus s.31(11) of the Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986, when the Rank List is provided to be valid for two years, whether during such validity period when a vacancy arises, next candidate in List can legitimately put forward his or her right to be appointed, or the University would be justified in adverting to resort to rule of communal rotation during the currency of operative Rank List. Headnotes† Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986 – ss.31(10),
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court suspending the sentence of respondent no.2 and releasing him on bail during the pendency of the appeal. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.389 – Suspension of accused persons armed with weapons forcibly entered the temple, hurled abuses and surrounded the appellant and his father-pandit telling that the father was not performing puja and was engaging in politics – Co-villager fired revolver at the father, while others caught hold of him –