- Student‟s educational fate cannot be relegated to his position on a map. - Says Delhi High Court
ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS v. LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.
W.P.(C) 202/2014
W.P.(C) 202/2014
Judgment Dated : 28/11/2014
CORAM : Manmohan .J
CONCLUSION:
1.The power to choose a school has to primarily vest with the parents and not in the administration.
2.Delhi High Court sets aside Lieutenant Governor’s guidelines allowing private unaided schools to set their own guidelines for nursery admissions
3.The impugned office orders are not only in violation of Rule 145, but also without jurisdiction as Sections 3(1) and 16 of the DSE Act, 1973 read with Rule 43 of the DSE Rules, 1973 did not empower the Administrator to override Rule 145 which conferred power to regulate admissions upon the head of a recognised unaided school.
4. The Court rarely interfere with the policy decision of the Government.
1.The power to choose a school has to primarily vest with the parents and not in the administration.
2.Delhi High Court sets aside Lieutenant Governor’s guidelines allowing private unaided schools to set their own guidelines for nursery admissions
3.The impugned office orders are not only in violation of Rule 145, but also without jurisdiction as Sections 3(1) and 16 of the DSE Act, 1973 read with Rule 43 of the DSE Rules, 1973 did not empower the Administrator to override Rule 145 which conferred power to regulate admissions upon the head of a recognised unaided school.
4. The Court rarely interfere with the policy decision of the Government.
- Subject : Criminal Law ( Punishment converted from Sec.302 to Sec.304)
The Appellant(Father) paid Rs.20 and Rs 10 to his sons to conceal the incident of death of their mother.
K. Ravi Kumar v. State of Karnataka
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2494 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2494 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 28/11/2014
CORAM : FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA .J, ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE .J
Brief Facts of the Case:
The Appellant's Father turned ill - He immediately wanted to leave for village along with his wife and son - Wife Objected - Heated Argument - Appellant Lost his mental balance and stabbed her with knife, also burn her by pouring kerosene oil.
The Appellant's Father turned ill - He immediately wanted to leave for village along with his wife and son - Wife Objected - Heated Argument - Appellant Lost his mental balance and stabbed her with knife, also burn her by pouring kerosene oil.
Reason for Conversion of Punishment:
1. This incident was not pre-mediated and hence, It falls under the Exception 4 of IPC. Accordingly, 10 years imprisonment was awarded.
- The Delhi High Court directed the Secretary, MHRD to lay down Policy Guideline to be followed by the Universities in the matter of the need for having a span period for completing the courses/ programmes being offered by the Universities.
- What should be the maximum duration for completing an educational course - Delhi High Court in Dilemma.
AMIT KUMAR AND ORS. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR
LPA No.956/2013
LPA No.956/2013
Judgment Dated : 27/11/2014
CORAM : G. Rohini CJ, RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW .J
CATCHPHRASE:
The High Court has also proposed certain suggestion for the same in para 27 of the Judgment.( Must Read)
CONCLUSION:
1.The students cannot be permitted to decide the academic policies or seek change thereof to enable them to get over their own deficiencies.
2.The Courts also have leaned in favour of a citizen educating
himself/herself by declaring illegal the age limits prescribed for joining an
educational programme or profession or vocation. Recently, vide order dated 11th November, 2014 in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 47/2014 titled H.D. Sailor Vs. Bar Council of Gujarat.
himself/herself by declaring illegal the age limits prescribed for joining an
educational programme or profession or vocation. Recently, vide order dated 11th November, 2014 in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 47/2014 titled H.D. Sailor Vs. Bar Council of Gujarat.
- The power under Section 173(8) CrPC has to be exercised for further investigation by the same investigating agency, which had conducted investigation and submitted a report under Section 173(2) CrPC.- Says Kerala High Court
CBI v. State of kerala and Ors.
WA.No. 729 of 2011
WA.No. 729 of 2011
Judgment Dated: 22/11/2014
CORAM : ASHOK BHUSHAN CJ, A.M.SHAFFIQUE .J
ISSUE INVOLVED:
Whether a Magistrate can direct the CBI to conduct investigation in exercise of his powers under Section 156(3) CrPC.
Whether a Magistrate can direct the CBI to conduct investigation in exercise of his powers under Section 156(3) CrPC.
CATCHPHRASE:
1.The High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 and the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India can issue such
direction to the CBI to investigate in certain cases.
1.The High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 and the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India can issue such
direction to the CBI to investigate in certain cases.
2.Permission of the State Government is not required, when the High Court and the Supreme Court issues a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate an offence.
3.The power under Section 173(8) CrPC can be utilised for further investigation by the same investigating authority, who has submitted report under Section 173(2) CrPC.
- The Supreme Court dissolved the marriage of parties on the ground of cruelty under Sec.13 (1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1956.
Ground of Cruelty: The wife had made a false criminal complaint against the husband and his family under sec.498-A and 307 of IPC.
K.SRINIVAS v. K. SUNITA
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1213 OF 2006
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1213 OF 2006
Judgment Dated : 19/11/2014
CORAM: VIKRAMAJIT SEN .J, PRAFULLA C. PANT .J
ISSUE INVOLVED:
Whether the filing of a false criminal complaint sufficiently proves matrimonial cruelty as would entitle the injured party to claim dissolution of marriage.(Answered in Affirmative)
CATCHPHRASE :
1.Irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce has not found statutory acceptance till date. Under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has plenary powers “to pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any case or order
pending before it”. This power, however, has not been bestowed by our Constitution on any other Court.
pending before it”. This power, however, has not been bestowed by our Constitution on any other Court.
- Pursuing law and practicing law are two different things. One can pursue law but for the purpose of obtaining license to practice, he or she must fulfill all the requirements and conditions prescribed by the Bar Council of India.- says Supreme Court
Archana Girish Sabnis v. Bar Council of India and Ors.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4232 OF 2007
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4232 OF 2007
Judgment Dated : 26/11/2014
CORAM: M.Y. Eqbal .J, Abhay Manohar Sapre .J
Whether the professional courses i.e. Licentiate of the Court of Examiners
in Homoeopathy Medicines (LCEH) is a degree or equivalent to a graduation degree by the Central Council of Homoeopathy.
in Homoeopathy Medicines (LCEH) is a degree or equivalent to a graduation degree by the Central Council of Homoeopathy.
As per Second Schedule of the Homoeopathy Central Council Act,1973.. it is evident that LCEH is not a bachelor degree but it is a qualification to practice in homeopathy medicine.
CONCLUSION:
1.Bar Council has the independent power to recognize any equivalent qualification to a graduate degree for the purpose of admission in the course of graduate degree in law.
- SC affirmed the Rarest of Rare Test Doctrine in a case where a helpless and defenceless child gets raped and murdered.
Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. State of Maharashtra
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2486-2487 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2486-2487 OF 2014
Judgment : 26/11/2014
CORAM : DIPAK MISRA .J, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN .J, UDAY UMESH LALIT .J
Brief of the Case:
A married man aged about two scores and seven make a four year minor
innocent girl child the prey of his lust and deliberately cause her death.
A married man aged about two scores and seven make a four year minor
innocent girl child the prey of his lust and deliberately cause her death.
CONCLUSION :
1. It is a crime against the holy body of a girl child and the soul of the society and such a crime is aggravated by the manner in which it has been committed.
1. It is a crime against the holy body of a girl child and the soul of the society and such a crime is aggravated by the manner in which it has been committed.
- The Division bench of Supreme Court directed the Additional Solicitor General, Mr Neeraj Kishan Kaul and the learned counsel for all the States( Except State of J & K) to file their responses through the concerned Health Secretaries to indicate "what steps have been taken and on the basis of the steps taken, what results have been achieved with respect to "Curbing of Female Foeticide and enhancement of Sex ratio".
VOLUNTARY HEALTH ASS. OF PUNJAB v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).349/2006
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).349/2006
Order Dated : 16/09/2014
CORAM: DIPAK MISRA .J, N.V. RAMANA .J
It is also to be noted here that the Apex Court in Voluntary Health Association of Punjab vs. Union of India & Ors.(2013) 4 SCC 1 had directed all the State Governments to file a status report within a period of three months.
- The Kerala High Court clarified the myth about Sec.125(3) CrPC.
In case of default of payment under sec.125, The Court may sentence for imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made
MYTH : The aforesaid context means " The maximum of one month imprisonment could be imposed for the total default".
REALITY : The Actual meaning of Aforesaid context is " A month's imprisonment for every month's default is the maximum penalty".
M.GOPIKA v. A.T. STALIN
RP(FC)No. 287 of 2014
RP(FC)No. 287 of 2014
Order Dated : 13/11/2014
CORAM : K. RAMAKRISHNAN .J
ISSUE INVOLVED:
What is the period of imprisonment that has to be imposed for default under Sec.125(3) CrPC?
What is the period of imprisonment that has to be imposed for default under Sec.125(3) CrPC?
- " Rape Victim's statement alone is not sufficient to form the basis for conviction". - Supreme Court
MANOHARLAL v. STATE OF M.P.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1407 OF 2013
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1407 OF 2013
Judgment Dated : 21/11/2014
CORAM : Dipak Misra .J, Uday Umesh Lalit .J
Benefit of Doubt granted to the Accused:
1. Witnesses turned hostile.
2.Medical Evidence failed to provide any opinion over commission of rape.
1. Witnesses turned hostile.
2.Medical Evidence failed to provide any opinion over commission of rape.
CATCHPHRASE:
1. Corroboration of testimony of the prosecutrix as a condition for judicial reliance is not a requirement of law but a guidance of prudence under the given facts and circumstances.(Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi)
(2012) 7 SCC 178 )
1. Corroboration of testimony of the prosecutrix as a condition for judicial reliance is not a requirement of law but a guidance of prudence under the given facts and circumstances.(Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi)
(2012) 7 SCC 178 )
- " When three persons separately armed with weapons storm into the house of the victim in the dead of the night, merely because only one out of them uses the weapon and gives the fatal blow, would not absolve the others. - Supreme Court
( SC Uphold the spirit of Sec.34 IPC)
NAIM AND ANR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1565 OF 2012
Judgment Dated : 21/11/2014
CORAM : Dipak Misra .J, Uday Umesh Lalit .J
Brief Facts :
1. All the three accused visited the deceased house at night of 6-7th sept , 1999 and hit the deceased with sharp cutting weapon.
2. Trial Court Opinion :
The fatal blow was dealt by Sabbir and though the other two accused, namely, Kabir and Naim were present at the place of occurrence, they had not participated in the actual assault.Hence, Trial Court acquitted Kabir and Naim.
3. Reappreciation of evidence done by the High Court , which resulted in convicted both the two accused.
4. Hence, this present appeal under Sec.379 of CrPC r/w Art. 134 of Indian Constitution.
CATCHPHARSE :
1. Kindly Substitute "IPC" with " CrPC" while reading para 8 of the judgment..
- Subject : Contempt of Court Act,1971 - Sec.2(c)
The Punjab and Chandigarh High Court dated 20/11/2014 debarred the advocate from appearing in any court for two years on the ground of preparing a fake order so as to facilitate the stay of execution proceedings relating to demolition of house.
Court on its own motion v. Murari Lal & others
CROCP No.22 of 2014
CROCP No.22 of 2014
Judgment Dated : 20/11/2014
CORAM: HEMANT GUPTA .J, RAJ MOHAN SINGH .J
CONCLUSION:
1.The act of preparing forged order without filing a revision petition is not an act in respect of which apology can be tendered or accepted. It is the highest kind of misconduct, which a Member of the Bar can indulge.
1.The act of preparing forged order without filing a revision petition is not an act in respect of which apology can be tendered or accepted. It is the highest kind of misconduct, which a Member of the Bar can indulge.
- The Supreme Court upheld the statutory mandate that compromise suit cannot be challenged in the separate suit.
R. Rajanna v. S.R. Venkataswamy & Ors.
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 10416-10417 OF 2014
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 10416-10417 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 20/11/2014
CORAM : T.S. THAKUR .J, R. BANUMATHI .J
Issue Involved:
Can the validity of a decree passed on a compromise be challenged in a separate suit.
Can the validity of a decree passed on a compromise be challenged in a separate suit.
Ratio Decidendi
Proviso to Rule 3 of Order XXIII of CPC,1908
CONCLUSION :
1.Reliance was placed upon Pushpa Devi Bhagat v. Rajinder
Singh and Ors. (2006) 5 SCC 566 " the only remedy available to a party
to a consent decree to avoid such consent decree, is to approach the court which recorded the compromise and made a decree in terms of it, and establish that there was no compromise."
1.Reliance was placed upon Pushpa Devi Bhagat v. Rajinder
Singh and Ors. (2006) 5 SCC 566 " the only remedy available to a party
to a consent decree to avoid such consent decree, is to approach the court which recorded the compromise and made a decree in terms of it, and establish that there was no compromise."
- The Supreme Court broke another myth relating to Sec.125 of CrPC.
MYTH : Under Sec.125 CrPC .....As a normal rule, The Magistrate should grant maintenance only from the date of the order and not from the date of the application for maintenance.
REALITY : The Court held in the present matter held that if the Magistrate intends to pass maintenance order, he is required to record reasons in support of such Order( Sec.125 r/w Sec.354(6) CrPC). Thus, such maintenance can be awarded from the date of the Order, or,
if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance, as the case may be. For awarding maintenance from the date of the application, express order is necessary.( Sec.125 r/w Sec 354 (6) of CrPC)
if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance, as the case may be. For awarding maintenance from the date of the application, express order is necessary.( Sec.125 r/w Sec 354 (6) of CrPC)
Jaiminiben Hirenbhai Vyas v. Hirenbhai Rameshchandra Vyas
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2435 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2435 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 19/11/2014
CORAM : J. CHELAMESWAR .J, S.A. BOBDE .J
- Police investigation is the foundation stone on which the entire edifice of the criminal law rests. - Says Supreme Court
BALJINDER KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1142/2011
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1142/2011
Judgment Dated : 19/11/2014
CORAM : T.S. Thakur .J, R. Banumathi .J
The Division Bench of Supreme Court today in the present matter converted the conviction of the lower court from Sec.304B IPC to Sec.498A of IPC.
Reason For Conversion : There is no evidence to show that the deceased was treated with cruelty or harassment in connection with the
demand of dowry “soon before her death” by the appellant. ( Absolutely valid ground for conversion)
demand of dowry “soon before her death” by the appellant. ( Absolutely valid ground for conversion)
CONCLUSION :
1. The Doctor in the present matter confirmed that the deceased was administered with some Poisonous substances which was also supported by Dying declaration by investigating officer did not pay heed to it. Had investigation been done properly, the case would have been subjected not only to Sec.304B and sec.498A but also with Sec.302 of IPC?
2. Such major discrepancy made me feel, Why CJI sathasivam override the judgment of Justice Katju ( Rajbeer @ Raju v. State of Haryana AIR 2011 SC 568)
- In case the employee acquires disability during the course of his service, the employer is statutorily obliged under Section 47 of The Persons with Disabilities(Equal Opportunities , Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 to provide alternate equivalent job. - Says Supreme Court
SUDARSHAN RAJPOOT v. U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 10353-10354 OF 2014
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 10353-10354 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 18/11/2014
CORAM : V.GOPALA GOWDA .J, C. NAGAPPAN .J
Brief facts of the case:
The Appellant was a driver - injured due to accident and broke his both legs - Transport Corporation struck off his name from the list of driver and even did not pay back-wages.
Conclusion :
1. The Apex Court relied upon Kunal Singh v. Union of India & Anr. 2003 (4) SCC 524
2. Merely because the words mentioned as “contractual driver” in the termination order dated 29.7.2000 to strike off his name from the contract employees roll does not automatically prove that he has worked as the driver on contract basis.
1. The Apex Court relied upon Kunal Singh v. Union of India & Anr. 2003 (4) SCC 524
2. Merely because the words mentioned as “contractual driver” in the termination order dated 29.7.2000 to strike off his name from the contract employees roll does not automatically prove that he has worked as the driver on contract basis.
- The test in determining the constitutional validity of the Rules is not whether a better method is available or should be implemented because this is a matter for the expert judgement of the rule making authority - says Allahabad High Court
Vinod Kumar Yadav & Anr. v. State Of U.P
W.P (Civil) No. 58787 of 2014
W.P (Civil) No. 58787 of 2014
Order Dated : 13/11/2014
CORAM: Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud,C J, Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel .J
Issues Involved:
1. Constitutional Validity of Rule 15(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Educational (Trained Graduates Grade) Service Rules, 1983.
2. Whether an interview should be held for an entry level position of an Assistant Teacher is a matter of policy for the State Government to decide.
Decision :
There is no compulsion on the State to necessarily hold a common entrance test or written examination for the purpose of recruitment and whether a written examination would better fulfill the object of the process is a matter which lies in the policy discretion of the State. Merely on this ground, The High Court cannot strike down the existing Rules.
There is no compulsion on the State to necessarily hold a common entrance test or written examination for the purpose of recruitment and whether a written examination would better fulfill the object of the process is a matter which lies in the policy discretion of the State. Merely on this ground, The High Court cannot strike down the existing Rules.
- Order for blacklisting a contractor cannot be passed without complying with the principles of natural justice.- says Madras High Court
M/s.Deepika Transports rep.by its Proprietor Mrs.V.Revathy v. State of Tamilnadu
Writ Petition Nos.24501 and 28029 of 2014
Writ Petition Nos.24501 and 28029 of 2014
Judgment Dated : 17/11/2014
CORAM :V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN .J
Brief Facts of the Case:
The petitioner was engaged for the transportation of milk, which is an
essential commodity and a food item. The allegation against the contractor was about theft of milk and of adulteration .
essential commodity and a food item. The allegation against the contractor was about theft of milk and of adulteration .
- The 3- Judge Bench of the Supreme Court cautioned the High Courts by stating that " It is not within the domain of the courts to embark upon an enquiry as to whether a particular public policy is wise and acceptable or whether a better policy could be evolved. The court can only interfere if the policy framed is absolutely capricious or not informed by reasons or totally arbitrary and founded ipse dixit offending the basic requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution."
In certain matters, as often said, there can be opinions and opinions but the Court is not expected to sit as an appellate authority on an opinion.
The Apex Court stated the conduct of High Court as :
"A Colossal Transgression of Power of Judicial Review"
"A Colossal Transgression of Power of Judicial Review"
Census Commissioner & Others v. R. Krishnamurthy
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9996 OF 2014
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9996 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 07/11/2014
CORAM :DIPAK MISRA .J, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN .J, UDAY UMESH LALIT .J
CONCLUSION:
1. The Central Government had issued a Notification prescribing the series of informations to be collected during the census. It covers
many areas. It includes information relating to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and does not refer to any other caste.
2.In such a situation, it is extremely difficult to visualize that the High Court, on the first occasion, without having a lis before it in that regard, could even have thought of issuing a command to the Census Department to take all such measures towards conducting the caste-wise census in the country so that the social justice in its true sense, which is the need of the hour, could be achieved. ( A verbis legis non est recidendum)
3.This is against the power conferred on the court.
4.The High Court had not only travelled beyond the lis in the first round of litigation, but had really yielded to some kind of emotional perspective, possibly paving the adventurous path to innovate. It is legally impermissible.
1. The Central Government had issued a Notification prescribing the series of informations to be collected during the census. It covers
many areas. It includes information relating to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and does not refer to any other caste.
2.In such a situation, it is extremely difficult to visualize that the High Court, on the first occasion, without having a lis before it in that regard, could even have thought of issuing a command to the Census Department to take all such measures towards conducting the caste-wise census in the country so that the social justice in its true sense, which is the need of the hour, could be achieved. ( A verbis legis non est recidendum)
3.This is against the power conferred on the court.
4.The High Court had not only travelled beyond the lis in the first round of litigation, but had really yielded to some kind of emotional perspective, possibly paving the adventurous path to innovate. It is legally impermissible.
- Consultation Paper on Adopting a Shared Parentage System in India by Law Commission of India Dated : 10/11/2014
REASON FOR CONSULTATION PAPER:
In judicial practice, there is neither a presumption that father is the natural guardian nor a presumption that mother is biologically better equipped to care for the minor. The judicial approach on child custody has evolved to such a level, that the context is favorable to take the discussion to the logical next step, which is the idea of shared parenting.
- "The husband is not only primarily responsible for safety of his wife, he is expected to be conversant with her state of mind more than any other relative". - Supreme Court
NARESH KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1266 OF 2013
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1266 OF 2013
Judgment Dated : 14/11/2014
CORAM : T.S. THAKUR .J, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL .J, R. BANUMATHI.J
CONCLUSION:
1. If the wife commits suicide by setting herself on fire, proceeded by
dissatisfaction of the husband and his family from the dowry, the interference of harassment against the husband may be patent.
dissatisfaction of the husband and his family from the dowry, the interference of harassment against the husband may be patent.
2.Failure to give an explanation or giving of false explanation can be taken as an additional circumstance.
- MYTH about Sec.31 of Cr.P.C
MYTH : Under Sec.31 Cr.P.C, Normal rule is to order the sentence to be consecutive and exception is to make the sentences concurrent.
REALITY : Section 31 Cr.P.C. leaves full discretion with the Court to order sentences for two or more offences at one trial to run concurrently.If a given transaction constitutes two offences under two enactments generally, it is wrong to have consecutive sentences.
O.M. CHERIAN v. STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2387 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2387 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 11/11/2014
CORAM: T.S. Thakur .J, Adarsh Kumar Goel .J, R. Banumathi .J
- Undue sympathy by means of imposing inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law and the society cannot endure long under serious threats. Says Supreme Court
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Surendra Singh
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2401 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2401 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 13/11/2014
CORAM: M.Y. Eqbal .J , Shiva Kirti Singh .J
Brief Facts of the Case:
Accident occurred due to negligent driving - one person died - Trial Court based on the facts and circumstances of the case convicted the accused under Sec.279,337 and 304-A of IPC - Accused filed by revision petition in order to modify the sentence, high court partially entertained the same - State approached the Apex court against the order to revision petition - Hence, the present appeal.
Accident occurred due to negligent driving - one person died - Trial Court based on the facts and circumstances of the case convicted the accused under Sec.279,337 and 304-A of IPC - Accused filed by revision petition in order to modify the sentence, high court partially entertained the same - State approached the Apex court against the order to revision petition - Hence, the present appeal.
CONCLUSION:
1. If the courts do not protect the injured, the injured would then resort to personal vengeance.
1. If the courts do not protect the injured, the injured would then resort to personal vengeance.
2.The duty of any court is to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was committed.
- The Supreme Court had struck down the provision that prohibited women make-up artists and hairdressers from becoming members of the Mumbai-based Cine Costume and Make-up Artists Association.
Charu Khurana & Others v. Union of India & Others
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.78 OF 2013
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.78 OF 2013
Judgment Dated :10/11/2014
CORAM : Dipak Mishra .J, U.U Lalit .J
Issues Involved:
Whether the female artists, who are eligible, can be deprived to work in the film industry as make-up man and only be permitted to work as hair dressers, solely because the Association which is controlled by the Trade Unions Act, 1926, has incorporated a clause relating to certain kind of classification.
Whether the female artists, who are eligible, can be deprived to work in the film industry as make-up man and only be permitted to work as hair dressers, solely because the Association which is controlled by the Trade Unions Act, 1926, has incorporated a clause relating to certain kind of classification.
CONCLUSION:
Unless the special provision is made, a trade union, which is registered under the statutory provision, cannot make a rule/regulation/bye-law contrary to the constitutional mandate and the statutory authority cannot accept the same.
Unless the special provision is made, a trade union, which is registered under the statutory provision, cannot make a rule/regulation/bye-law contrary to the constitutional mandate and the statutory authority cannot accept the same.
- SUBJECT: PATENT LAW
The Delhi High Court clarified that "the requirement of furnishing information about the corresponding foreign applications under Section 8(1) of Patent Act,1970 is mandatory but is not the determinative factor of the legislative intent of Section 64(1) of Patent Act,1970
Sec. 8 refers to - Information and undertaking regarding foreign applications
Sec.64 refers to - Revocation of Patents
Hence, Any violation of the requirement under Section 8 may attract Section 64(1)(m) for revocation of the patent and such revocation is not automatic.
MAJ. (RETD.) SUKESH BEHL & ANR. v. KONINKLIJKE PHILLIPS ELECTRONICS
FAO(OS) No.16 OF 2014
FAO(OS) No.16 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 07/11/2014
CORAM: G. ROHINI .CJI, RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW .J
ISSUE INVOLVED:
Whether the failure to comply with the requirement of Section 8 of the Patents Act would invariably lead to the revocation of the suit patent under Section 64(1)(m) of the Patents Act.
CONCLUSION:
UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT
UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT
1. The first and primary rule of construction is that the intention of the legislature must be found in the words used by the legislature itself. If the words used are capable of one construction, only then it would not be open to the Courts to adopt any other hypothetical construction on the ground that such hypothetical construction is more consistent with the alleged object and policy of the Act.
- The Division Bench of Supreme Court retreived the two earlier judgment and sought for their strict compliance.
1.In Re - Implementation of the Laws for restricting use of loudspeakers and high volume producing sound systems, (2005) 5 SCC 733 ( R.C Lahoti CJI)
--> Guidelines for the noise Pollution (Refer Para 174-178 of the Judgment)
2.Firm Kaluram Sitaram v. The Dominion of India, AIR 1954 Bom 50 ( Justice Chagla)
--> The Constitution, inter alia, casts a duty on the State and their authorities to ensure that every citizen's cherished rights guaranteed to him under the Constitution are respected and preserved, and he/she is allowed to enjoy them in letter and spirit subject to reasonable restrictions put on them, as dreamt by the framers of the Constitution.
--> The Constitution, inter alia, casts a duty on the State and their authorities to ensure that every citizen's cherished rights guaranteed to him under the Constitution are respected and preserved, and he/she is allowed to enjoy them in letter and spirit subject to reasonable restrictions put on them, as dreamt by the framers of the Constitution.
Dr. Balwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.
CIVIL APPEAL No. 10024 OF 2014
CIVIL APPEAL No. 10024 OF 2014
Judgment Dated : 07/11/2014
CORAM : FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA .J, ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE .J
Brief Facts of the Case:
1. The Appellant is a retired DGP staying opposite to the Vidhyut Bhawan in Jyoti Nagar in Jaipur city which is very much near to the Vidhan Sabha ( Legislative Assembly) and there is a frequent visit of Political and non-political parties for protect March, Dharna, Procession etc. This creates huge nuisance around the periphery of the same.
2. The Appellant had already filed a complaint before Commissioner of Police but he need pay heed to it - Complaint was then filed to NHRC - NHRC transfered the matter to Rajasthan State Human Right Commission (RSHRC) - RSHRC passed order in favour of Appellant but went in vain - Writ Petition filed by the Appellant which said that appropriate order has already been issued - Intra-Court Appeal was then filed but they also played the same harp - Finally, The appellant approached the Supreme Court.
- Power under Art.226 and 227 cannot be curtailed by Parliamentary Legislation
The Delhi High Court accepted the Public Interest Litigation filed by three advocate challenging all the statutory appeal provisions provided under the 10 legislation mentioned below on the ground that it is violating the basic structure of the Constitution.
DINKAR KUMAR AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
W.P.(C) No.2844/2014
Order dated : 05/11/2014
W.P.(C) No.2844/2014
Order dated : 05/11/2014
CORAM : G Rohini CJ, RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW. J
As you are aware that in the recent judgment of Madras Bar Association v. Union of India,(Dated 25/09/2014) The Constitution Bench has already struck down the National Tax tribunal on the ground that Only Constitutional court or atleast minimum judges of 2 member of High Court have the power to look into the issue relating to substantial question of Law.
Moreover, In Nivedita Sharma v. Cellular Opertaor Assn. of India (2011) 14 SCC 377, the Supreme Court has already held that Article 226 being a basic feature of the Constitution cannot be curtailed by Parliamentary
legislation.
So, the main contention of Petitioners is that "All the Statutory Appeal provision provided under the 10 legislation has created an implicit imitation over the jurisdiction of the High Court and thereby affecting the basic feature of the Indian Constitution".
This issue seems really interesting, the Delhi High Court has given 4 weeks time to file a counter affadavit and also denied the argument of the respondent to dismiss the petition in limine.
Moreover, In Nivedita Sharma v. Cellular Opertaor Assn. of India (2011) 14 SCC 377, the Supreme Court has already held that Article 226 being a basic feature of the Constitution cannot be curtailed by Parliamentary
legislation.
So, the main contention of Petitioners is that "All the Statutory Appeal provision provided under the 10 legislation has created an implicit imitation over the jurisdiction of the High Court and thereby affecting the basic feature of the Indian Constitution".
This issue seems really interesting, the Delhi High Court has given 4 weeks time to file a counter affadavit and also denied the argument of the respondent to dismiss the petition in limine.
List of the Provision which has been challenged are as follows:
(1) Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986;
(2) Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961;
(3) Section 18 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
(4) Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992;
(5) Section 55 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969;
(6) Section 53T of the Competition Act, 2002;
(7) Section 30 and 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007;
(8) Section 22 of the National Green Tribunals Act, 2010;
(9) Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003; and,
(10) Section 423 of the Companies Act, 2013
(1) Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986;
(2) Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961;
(3) Section 18 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
(4) Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992;
(5) Section 55 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969;
(6) Section 53T of the Competition Act, 2002;
(7) Section 30 and 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007;
(8) Section 22 of the National Green Tribunals Act, 2010;
(9) Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003; and,
(10) Section 423 of the Companies Act, 2013
- The Competition Commission of India(CCI)has imposed a penalty of Rs. 7.68 Lakhs and Rs. 35.16 Thousands(@5% of the average of the turnover for the last 3 financial years)on Indian Jute Mills Association (IJMA) and Gunny Trade Association (GTA) respectively for contravening the provisions of section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘the Act’).
In Re:
Indian Sugar Mils Asociation & Ors. v. Indian Jute Mills Association and Anrs.
Case No. 38 of 2011
Indian Sugar Mils Asociation & Ors. v. Indian Jute Mills Association and Anrs.
Case No. 38 of 2011
Judgment Dated :31/10/2014
KEY CONCERN:
As per the provisions of the Jute Packaging Materials (Compulsory Use in Packaging Commodites) Act, 1987 (‘the JPM Act’) there was mandatory use of jute bags for packaging commodites such as cement, fertilzer, food grains and sugar since 1987. However, in year 1998 cement was exempted and in 2002 fertilizer was also exempted from compulsory use of jute bags in packaging. But no exemption to sugar industry in this regard was given.
CONCLUSION:
The Commission also noted in the order the provisions of the Jute Packaging Materials (Compulsory Use in Packaging Commodities) Act, 1987 placing statutory requirement on the sugar mills to undertake sugar packaging using jute bags only, against the principle of competitive neutrality as the entities manufacturing matching products were denied market access. Such a policy was further noted as not only restricting the choice of customers like sugar mills but was also potentially found to be escalating the cost ultimately borne by the end-consumers.
The Commission also noted in the order the provisions of the Jute Packaging Materials (Compulsory Use in Packaging Commodities) Act, 1987 placing statutory requirement on the sugar mills to undertake sugar packaging using jute bags only, against the principle of competitive neutrality as the entities manufacturing matching products were denied market access. Such a policy was further noted as not only restricting the choice of customers like sugar mills but was also potentially found to be escalating the cost ultimately borne by the end-consumers.
Accordingly, the Commission desired the Government of India to re-assess the current market situation for removing the market distortions arising out of such policy.
tongue emoticon
No comments:
Post a Comment