Skip to main content

Some important judgments

Petrol pump can't replace park
An urban site earmarked for civic amenities like public park or playground cannot be changed and given to run a petrol pump in a crowded residential area, the Supreme Court stated while dismissing the appeal of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) against a judgment of the Karnataka High Court. The high court had quashed allotment of a site in Bangalore for a BPCL outlet allowing a public interest petition by some residents. The government company appealed to the Supreme Court arguing, among other things, that petrol pump is a civic amenity, according to a notification. The Supreme Court rejected all the arguments and said that the state law did not allow the Bangalore Development Authority to convert areas reserved for civic amenities for activities which did not fall within the definition of civic amenities.

National Consumer Commission powers 
Once the finding of facts by a district consumer forum is accepted by the National Commission, it cannot change the order of compensation, the Supreme Court stated in the appeal Momna vs regional manager. In this case, a handicapped woman bought a three-wheeler which continually broke down despite repairs to the chassis. The district forum asked the manufacturer to replace the vehicle. On appeal, the national commission changed the order to replacing the chassis only. The Supreme Court ruled that the national commission transgressed its jurisdiction.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/liquidator-barred-from-selling-plot-113120800762_1.html

Police can’t take photographs of accused, Madras high court

Police cannot take photographs of undertrial prisoners and accused without permission from the magistrate concerned, the Madras high court has said.

"Police have no authority to do it on their own," a division bench comprising Justice S Rajeswaran and Justice PN Prakash said while dismissing the appeal filed by Lieutenant Colonel (retired) K Ramaraj against his conviction and sentence in the July 3, 2011 Dilson murder case.

Delving deeper into the issue, which concerns privacy of an individual as well as the danger it poses to the evidentiary value during trial, the judges said the source of police power to take photographs of an accused flows from Section 5 of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920.

An accused could be photographed only as per specific orders from the jurisdictional magistrate who would specify the time, place and measurement of such photographs, the judges said.

However, in order to avoid impersonation, the judges suggested the investigating agencies must take photographs of accused in serious cases by invoking Section 5 of the Act, that too after completion of the identification parade. "This will ensure that the state has record of persons, and the mischief of impersonation can also be controlled," they said.

Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-13/india/45160931_1_judges-madras-high-court-cooum-river

Reinstatement as an employee as a matter of right

An employee, sacked following disciplinary action, cannot seek reinstatement as a 'matter of right' even if a trial court acquits him in a criminal case based on the charges similar to the departmental inquiry, the Supreme Court has ruled in the case State of West Bengal & Ors vs Sankar Ghosh. "There is no rule of automatic reinstatement on acquittal by a criminal court even though the charges levelled against the delinquent before the inquiry officer as well as the criminal court are the same," it said. The apex court further added that Ghosh could not provide "any rule or regulation applicable to police force stating that once an employee has been acquitted by a criminal court, as a matter of right, he should be reinstated in service despite all the disciplinary proceedings."

Ghosh, working as a sepoy in the Kolkata Armed Police, was arrested for his complicity in the commission of a dacoity. The Disciplinary Authority terminated him after enquiry proved him guilty. While the trial court acquitted all the accused, both the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal and the Calcutta HC asked the Kolkata police to reinstate the sacked cop. The state government appealed to the Supreme Court, saying that the cop was not honourably acquitted by the criminal court as the acquittal was by way of giving benefit of doubt since the accused persons could not be identified during the parade.

Article referred: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-reinstatement-after-acquittal/1205949/

Defects in the panchnama do not invalidate the search

MDLR Resorts Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)

S. 132: Copy of search warrant should be given to the searched person. Defects in the panchnama do not invalidate the search or the s. 153A assessment proceedings

S. 153A(1) does not make any reference to panchnama or the date of panchnama. A panchnama is not a pre-condition for invoking s. 153A. As regards the argument that the time limit u/s 153B is calculated with reference to the date of the last panchnama, a panchnama was drawn up on the occasion of the search and it referred to documents belonging to the assessee though it did not refer to the assessee by name. The panchnama also does not refer to the conclusion of the search. The non-reference to the name of the assessee and the suspension/ conclusion of the search is a lapse and failure to comply with the requirements of the search and seizure manual. However, this does not affect the validity of the search or the assessment order u/s 153A. The department should take remedial steps and ensure that such lapses do not occur in future. Also, the department should give a copy of the search warrant to the person searched so as to curtail allegations of interpolation, addition of names etc.


Comments

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...