Section 130 of the Companies Act for re­opening of the books of accounts and re­casting the financial statements of the Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Limited; IL&FS Financial Services Limited and IL&FS Transportation Networks Limited for the last five years, viz. from Financial Year 2012­13 to the Financial Year 2017­18

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3747 OF 2019 Hari Sankaran … Appellant Versus Union of India & Others … Respondents J U D G M E N T M.R. SHAH, J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Order dated 31.01.2019 passed by the National Company… Read More Section 130 of the Companies Act for re­opening of the books of accounts and re­casting the financial statements of the Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Limited; IL&FS Financial Services Limited and IL&FS Transportation Networks Limited for the last five years, viz. from Financial Year 2012­13 to the Financial Year 2017­18

Therefore, identification by Tara Singh (PW-1) and Varun Singh (PW-4) of the appellant- Guman Singh as one of the perpetrators who had fired on Shiv Charan and Babu Singh (PW-3) is unreliable and should not be accepted without substantial corroboration and supporting material/evidence to establish involvement of the appellantGuman Singh. On the aspect of corroboration, prosecution relies upon the FSL report, exhibit P-48, opining that barrel residue examination of ‘8mm/.315’ country-made pistol (W/1) had revealed that pistol had been fired, but, definite time of its last firing could not be ascertained. The FSL report also opines that it was not possible to link definitely the ‘8mm/.315’ Soft Round nose Copper Jacketted Bullet ‘B/1’ from packet ‘D 1’ with the country-made pistol (W/1) from packet ‘E’ due to lack of sufficient evidence.Thus, the bullet ‘B/1’ recovered from the body of Babu Singh (PW3) would not be matched with the country-made pistol. The bullets recovered from the body of deceased Shiv Charan were not sentfor ballistic examination and comparison. This is surprising as bullets were certainly recovered from the body of the deceased Shiv Charan and no explanation is forthcoming why these bullets were not sent for ballistic examination.

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1475 OF 2017 GUMAN SINGH ….. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN ….. RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T SANJIV KHANNA, J. The appellant, Guman Singh impugns judgment dated 10.03.2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of… Read More Therefore, identification by Tara Singh (PW-1) and Varun Singh (PW-4) of the appellant- Guman Singh as one of the perpetrators who had fired on Shiv Charan and Babu Singh (PW-3) is unreliable and should not be accepted without substantial corroboration and supporting material/evidence to establish involvement of the appellantGuman Singh. On the aspect of corroboration, prosecution relies upon the FSL report, exhibit P-48, opining that barrel residue examination of ‘8mm/.315’ country-made pistol (W/1) had revealed that pistol had been fired, but, definite time of its last firing could not be ascertained. The FSL report also opines that it was not possible to link definitely the ‘8mm/.315’ Soft Round nose Copper Jacketted Bullet ‘B/1’ from packet ‘D 1’ with the country-made pistol (W/1) from packet ‘E’ due to lack of sufficient evidence.Thus, the bullet ‘B/1’ recovered from the body of Babu Singh (PW3) would not be matched with the country-made pistol. The bullets recovered from the body of deceased Shiv Charan were not sentfor ballistic examination and comparison. This is surprising as bullets were certainly recovered from the body of the deceased Shiv Charan and no explanation is forthcoming why these bullets were not sent for ballistic examination.