Bhupinder Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh [ALL SC 2003 October]

In order to exercise the discretion of reducing the sentence and statutory requirement is that the Court has to record ‘adequate and special reasons’ in the judgment and not fanciful reasons which would permit the Court to impose a sentence less than the prescribed minimum. The reason has not only to be adequate but special. What is adequate and special would depend upon several factors and no strait-jacket formula can be imposed.… Read More Bhupinder Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh [ALL SC 2003 October]

Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd. Versus Shapoorji Data Processing Ltd [ALL SC 2003 SEPTEMBER]

KEYWORDS:-EVIDENCE BY AFFIDAVIT AIR 2004 SC 355 : (2003) 5 Suppl. SCR 634 : (2004) 1 SCC 702 : JT 2003 (9) SC 109 : (2003) 9 SCALE 713 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd. Appellant Versus Shapoorji Data Processing Ltd. Respondent (Before : V. N. Khare, C.J.I., S. B. Sinha And Dr.… Read More Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd. Versus Shapoorji Data Processing Ltd [ALL SC 2003 SEPTEMBER]

Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. and others Vs Tapan Kr. Singh [ALL SC 2003 APRIL]

KEYWORD:- GD ENTRY-PUTTING WRONG SECTIONS BY POLICE IN FIR- The mentioning of a particular Section in the F.I.R. is not by itself conclusive as it is for the Court to frame charges having regard to the material on record. Even if a wrong Section is mentioned in the F.I.R., that does not prevent the Court… Read More Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. and others Vs Tapan Kr. Singh [ALL SC 2003 APRIL]

Ashok Kumar Mandal Appellant Versus Rabindra Nath Banerjee (D) by LRs. and Others[ALL SC 2003 DECEMBER]

KEYWORDS:- DATE:-03-12-2003 (2004) 10 SCC 578 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Ashok Kumar Mandal Appellant Versus Rabindra Nath Banerjee (D) by LRs. and Others Respondent (Before : Brijesh Kumar and Arun Kumar, JJ.) Decided On: 03-12-2003 Calcutta thika tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981—Sections 5 and 19. ORDER 1. This appeal is preferred against the order… Read More Ashok Kumar Mandal Appellant Versus Rabindra Nath Banerjee (D) by LRs. and Others[ALL SC 2003 DECEMBER]

State, through Special Cell, New Delhi  Versus Navjot Sandhu @ Afshan Guru and ors[SC 2003 MAY]

Keywords : power of superintendence The powers under Article 227 are wide and can be used, meet the ends of justice. They can be used interfere even with an interlocury order. (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) State, through Special Cell, New Delhi  Versus Navjot Sandhu @ Afshan Guru and ors (Before : S. N. Variava and Brijesh Kumar, JJ.)… Read More State, through Special Cell, New Delhi  Versus Navjot Sandhu @ Afshan Guru and ors[SC 2003 MAY]

Mysore Urban Development Authority Vs. K.M. Chikkathayamma & Ors.[ALL SC 2018 September]

September 07, 2018: LAND ACQUISITION-Any act done by the parties in relation to the subject matter of the appeals after the impugned order, cannot be pressed into service to support the impugned order. In other words, the legality and correctness of the impugned order has to be examined in the light of reasoning contained in the impugned order and not on the basis of the acts done by the parties subsequent to the passing of impugned order. It is for this reason the acts done by the party subsequent to passing of the impugned order are of no relevance for deciding the present appeals. APPEAL ALLOWED.… Read More Mysore Urban Development Authority Vs. K.M. Chikkathayamma & Ors.[ALL SC 2018 September]

Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. Vs. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice [ALL SC 2018 September]

September 6, 2018:-SECTION 377of IPC-Homosexuality-It is declared that insofar as Section 377 criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults (i.e. persons above the age of 18 years who are competent to consent) in private, is violative of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. It is, however, clarified that such consent must be free consent,… Read More Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. Vs. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice [ALL SC 2018 September]

Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr vs Naz Foundation & Ors [ALL SC 2013 DECEMBER]

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10972 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.15436 of 2009) Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr vs Naz Foundation & Ors Decided on: 11 December 2013 Bench: G.S. Singhvi, Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya JUDGMENT G.S. SINGHVI, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are directed against order… Read More Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr vs Naz Foundation & Ors [ALL SC 2013 DECEMBER]

C. Venkatachalam Versus Ajitkumar C. Shah and Others [ALL SC 2011 AUGUST]

In order to ensure smooth, consistent, uniform and unvarying functioning of the National Commission, the State Commissions and the District Forums, we deem it appropriate to direct the National Commission to frame comprehensive rules regarding appearances of the agents, representatives, registered organizations and/or non-advocates appearing before the National Commission, the State Commissions and the District Forums governing their qualifications, conduct and ethical behaviour of agents/non-advocates/representatives, registered organizations and/or agents appearing before the consumer forums.… Read More C. Venkatachalam Versus Ajitkumar C. Shah and Others [ALL SC 2011 AUGUST]

The scope and ambit of Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Power under Section 319 of the Code can be exercised by the Court suo motu or on an application by someone including accused already before it, if it is satisfied that any person other than accused has committed an offence and he is to be tried together with the accused. The power is discretionary and such discretion must be exercised judicially having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. Undisputedly, it is an extraordinary power which is conferred on the Court and should be used very sparingly and only if compelling reasons exist for taking action against a person against whom action had not been taken earlier. The word “EVIDENCE” in Section 319 contemplates EVIDENCE of witnesses given in Court. Under sub-section (4)(1)(b) of the aforesaid provision, it is specifically made clear that it will be presumed that newly added person had been an accused person when the Court took cognizance of the offence upon which the inquiry or trial was commenced. That would show that by virtue of sub-section (4)(1)(b) a legal fiction is created that cognizance would be presumed to have been taken so far as newly added accused is concerned. (See Lok Ram v. Nihal Singh and Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 1892)).… Read More The scope and ambit of Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure