REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos .12164-12166 OF 2016 [Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.14911-14913 of 2013] THE STATE OF TAMILNADU …..APPELLANTS REP. BY ITS SECRETARY HOME, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPT & ORS Versus K BALU & ANR …..RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No. 12167 OF 2016 [Arising out… Read More Road Accidents = No shop for the sale of liquor shall be (i) visible from a national or state highway; (ii) directly accessible from a national or state highway and (iii) situated within a distance of 500 metres of the outer edge of the national or state highway or of a service lane along the highway.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.12179-12180 of 2016 (Arising out of CIVIL APPEAL (D)No. 34132 OF 2013) VIJAY SHANKAR MISHRA …..APPELLANT Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS …..RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J Leave granted Delay condoned. These appeals arise… Read More crossed the threshold of four red entries= there was no application of mind by the authorities to the circumstances which have to be taken into consideration while exercising the power under Rule 13. The mere fact that the appellant had crossed the threshold of four red entries could not be a ground to discharge him without considering other relevant circumstances including (i) the nature of the violation which led to the award of the red ink entries; (ii) whether the appellant had been exposed to duty in hard stations and to difficult living conditions; (iii) long years of service, just short of completing the qualifying period for pension. Even after the Madhya Pradesh High Court specifically directed consideration of his case bearing in mind the provisions of the circular, the relevant factors were not borne in mind. The order that was passed on 26 February 2007 failed to consider relevant and germane circumstances and does not indicate a due application of mind to the requirements of the letter of Army Headquarters dated 28 December 1988 and the circular dated 10 January 1989. For these reasons, we are of the view that the Armed Forces Tribunal was in error in rejecting the application. The orders of the Tribunal dated 23 September 2010 and 15 September 2011 are set aside. Since the appellant would have attained the age of superannuation, the ends of justice would be met if he is treated to have been in service till the time he would have completed the qualifying service for grant of pension. No back-wages shall however be admissible. The benefit of continuity of service for all other purposes shall be granted to the appellant including pension. The monetary benefits payable to the appellant shall be released within a period of four months from the date of this order.
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.504 OF 2015 Justice (Retd.) Markandey Katju ……Petitioner Versus The Lok Sabha & Anr. …. Respondents JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit J. This petition under Article 32 seeks quashing of Resolution dated 11.03.2015 passed by Rajya Sabha and Resolution dated 12.03.2015 passed by… Read More published a post on his Facebook Page in respect of Mahatma Gandhi, Father of the Nation. The post was entitled “Gandhi – A British Agent” and stated that Mahatma Gandhi did great harm to India. On the same date, another post was published by the petitioner on his Facebook Page in respect of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose referring to him as an agent of Japanese fascism = These posts evoked immediate response and on 11.03.2015, discussion took place in Rajya Sabha. At the end of the discussion, a Resolution was moved by the Chairman of Rajya Sabha which was passed unanimously by the House. The Resolution was to the following effect :- “This House expresses its unequivocal condemnation of the recent remarks of the former judge of the Supreme Court, Shri Justice Markandey Katju, against the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose led the Indian National Army for the freedom of the country“I therefore request both Houses of Parliament, through you, to recall the resolutions and apologize to me, or else to suspend the resolutions and give me an opportunity of hearing, personally or through my lawyer…
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4426 OF 2011 LALITESHWAR PRASAD SINGH & ORS. APPELLANTS Versus S.P. SRIVASTAVA (D) THR. LRS. RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T R. BANUMATHI, J. This appeal arises out of the judgment of High Court of Patna in First Appeal… Read More in terms of Order XLI Rule 31 CPC, the High Court has neither framed the points for determination nor discussed the evidence adduced by the defendants.; Having impleaded the appellants as parties in the first appeal, in terms of Order XLI Rule 27, the High Court ought to have afforded an opportunity to the appellants to adduce oral and documentary evidence and make their submissions.= First Appeal No. 230 of 2007 dated 30.07.2007 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for consideration of the matter afresh. First respondent-Plaintiff, being the appellant before the High Court, is directed to take steps for impleading the legal representatives of the deceased second respondent-Defendant. The High Court shall afford sufficient opportunity to both the parties to adduce additional evidence, both oral and documentary and further afford sufficient opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Since the suit is of the year 1994, we request the High Court to dispose the appeal expeditiously in accordance with law. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 771 OF 2015 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 25284 OF 2012 |RAM NARESH RAWAT |…..PETITIONER(S) | |VERSUS | | |SRI ASHWINI RAY & ORS. |…..RESPONDENT(S) | W I T H CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 838 OF 2015 IN SPECIAL LEAVE… Read More However, if some persons are given the benefit wrongly, that cannot form the basis of claiming the same relief. It is trite that right to equality under Article 14 is not in negative terms (See Indian Council of Agricultural Research & Anr. v. T.K. Suryanarayan & Ors.).
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1231 OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO. 5575 OF 2015) |STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH |…..APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |SANJAY KUMAR @ SUNNY |…..RESPONDENT(S) | J U D G M E N T A.K. SIKRI, J. Leave granted. Since the… Read More Child rape cases are cases of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of sexual pleasure. There cannot be anything more obscene than this. It is a crime against humanity. Many such cases are not even brought to light because of the social stigma attached thereto. According to some surveys, there has been a steep rise in child rape cases. Children need special care and protection. In such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. Their physical and mental immobility call for such protection. Children are the natural resource of our country. They are the country’s future. Hope of tomorrow rests on them. In our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position and one of the modes of her exploitation is rape besides other modes of sexual abuse. These factors point towards a different approach required to be adopted. The overturning of a well-considered and well- analysed judgment of the trial court on grounds like non-examination of other witnesses, when the case against the respondent otherwise stood established beyond any reasonable doubt was not called for. The minor contradiction of recovery of one or two underwears was wholly insignificant.”
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1222 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 7675 of 2015) Sharat Babu Digumarti …Appellant(s) Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi …Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T Dipak Misra, J. Leave granted. 2. The appellant along one Avnish… Read More Sections 292 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, “the IT Act”) = Once the special provisions having the overriding effect do cover a criminal act and the offender, he gets out of the net of the IPC and in this case, Section 292. It is apt to note here that electronic forms of transmission is covered by the IT Act, which is a special law. It is settled position in law that a special law shall prevail over the general and prior laws. = SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTI Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI