aboutphlaw - Tumblr blog

[aboutphlaw]

V IMP::: Summoning of Record—By an appellate or revisional courts— (i) Trial court may send the Photo copy /scanned copy of the record and retain the original so that proceedings are not held up: (ii) In cases where specifically 2 original record is required by holding that photocopy will not serve the purpose, the appellate/revisional court may call for the record only for perusal and the same he returned while keeping a photocopy/scanned copy of the same.

V IMP::: Summoning of Record—By an appellate or revisional courts— (i) Trial court may send the Photo copy /scanned copy of the record and retain the original so that proceedings are not held up: (ii) In cases where specifically 2 original record is required by holding that photocopy will not serve the purpose, the appellate/revisional court may call for the record only for perusal and the same he returned while keeping a photocopy/scanned copy of the same.

2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 473 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 924

  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

  Before

Honble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Honble Mr. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman

    Criminal Appeal Nos. 1375-1376 Of 2013

     Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency P. Ltd. And Anr.

v.

Central Bureau of Investigation

  Decided on 25/04/2018

For the Appellant:          Mr. Vikas Singh.Sr.Adv., Mr. M.C.…

[aboutphlaw]

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302~Murder--Intention to kill-Intention to cause death must not be readily inferred-Merely because accused pierced the chest of deceased with spear (ballam), it cannot be assumed that accused intended to cause death.   

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302~Murder–Intention to kill-Intention to cause death must not be readily inferred-Merely because accused pierced the chest of deceased with spear (ballam), it cannot be assumed that accused intended to cause death.   

2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 470 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 927

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

TULARAM — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent

( Before : Madan B. Lokur and Deepak Gupta, JJ. )

Criminal Appeal No.663 of 2018 (Arising Out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.7483 of 2017)

Decided on : 02-05-2018

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302

Murder—Intention to kill—Merely because accused…

[aboutphlaw]

Narcotics—Personal Search—Accused posed faith in raiding party and gave written consent for being searched by raiding party—Held; this does not satisfy the requirement of S.50 NDPS Act—Accused acquitted. Narcotics—Personal Search—Search before Magistrate or Gazetted officer is mandatory requirement and strict compliance thereof is mandated.

Narcotics—Personal Search—Accused posed faith in raiding party and gave written consent for being searched by raiding party—Held; this does not satisfy the requirement of S.50 NDPS Act—Accused acquitted. Narcotics—Personal Search—Search before Magistrate or Gazetted officer is mandatory requirement and strict compliance thereof is mandated.

    2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 465 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 925

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

ARIF KHAN @ AGHA KHAN — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — Respondent

( Before : R.K. Agrawal and Abhay Manohar Sapre, JJ. )

Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2007

Decided on : 27-04-2018

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) – Section 20

Narcotics—Personal Search—Accused posed faith…

[aboutphlaw]

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166--Accident--License-Period of Validity- -Mere entry in dispatch register of registering authority could not be taken as gospel truth as the period of validity of license.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166–Accident–License-Period of Validity- -Mere entry in dispatch register of registering authority could not be taken as gospel truth as the period of validity of license.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

COMPAQ INTERNATIONAL — Appellant

Vs.

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. — Respondent

( Before : J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ. )

Civil Appeal Nos.2538-2539 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.24305-24306 of 2015)

Decided on : 27-03-2018

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 12

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 166

  Accident—License—

[aboutphlaw]

Accident—Negligence—Merely on the basis of the spot as per site map where the vehicle was found lying after the accident, it cannot be assumed that the appellant was driving the vehicle on the wrong side on the road at the relevant time Accident—Claim Petition—Non-examination of witness perse cannot be treated as fatal to the claim Accident—Claim Petition—Even when the accused were to be acquitted in the criminal case, the same may be no effect on the assessment of the liability to pay in claim before the tribunal

Accident—Negligence—Merely on the basis of the spot as per site map where the vehicle was found lying after the accident, it cannot be assumed that the appellant was driving the vehicle on the wrong side on the road at the relevant time Accident—Claim Petition—Non-examination of witness perse cannot be treated as fatal to the claim Accident—Claim Petition—Even when the accused were to be acquitted in the criminal case, the same may be no effect on the assessment of the liability to pay in claim before the tribunal

    (2018) 2 ACC 118 : (2018) AIR(SC) 1900 : (2018) DNJ 478 : (2018) 4 JT 114 : (2018) 5 SCALE 363

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

MANGLA RAM — Appellant

Vs.

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent

( Before : Dipak Misra, CJI. and A.M. Khanwilkar, J. )

Civil Appeal Nos. 2499-2500 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 28141-42 of 2017)

Decided on : 06-04-2018

  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 –…

[aboutphlaw]

Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.54--Sale Deed-Execution of--Suit for partition—Ancestral property-Contention that sale deed executed by her father 'D' 'was obtained by fraud as he was not keeping good health-Held; Sub-Registrar, who had registered the documents stated that the sale deed was executed by 'D' after he had explained to the parties about contents of sale deed-Attesting witnesses nowhere stated that 'D' was not in good state of mind at time of execution—No medical evidence has been produced in support of ill health of testator—Appeal dismissed.

Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.54–Sale Deed-Execution of–Suit for partition—Ancestral property-Contention that sale deed executed by her father ‘D’ ‘was obtained by fraud as he was not keeping good health-Held; Sub-Registrar, who had registered the documents stated that the sale deed was executed by ‘D’ after he had explained to the parties about contents of sale deed-Attesting witnesses nowhere stated that ‘D’ was not in good state of mind at time of execution—No medical evidence has been produced in support of ill health of testator—Appeal dismissed.

2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 227 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 897

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

KRISHNA DEVI — Appellant

Vs.

KESHRI NANDAN — Respondent

( Before : N.V. Ramana and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. )

Civil Appeal No.2367 of 2010

Decided on : 21-03-2018

Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.54–Sale Deed-Execution of–Suit for partition—Ancestral property-Contention that sale deed executed by her father…

[aboutphlaw]

Accident—Appeal—Conclusion by Tribunal was a possible view, which could not have been disturbed by the High Court in the appeal in a casual manner

Accident—Appeal—Conclusion by Tribunal was a possible view, which could not have been disturbed by the High Court in the appeal in a casual manner

(2018) AIR(SCW) 1640 : (2018) AIR(SC) 1640 : (2018) DNJ 442 : (2018) 3 JT 584 : (2018) 2 RCR(Civil) 736 : (2018) 5 SCALE 192: 2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 218

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

SHIVAWWA — Appellant

Vs.

BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent

( Before : Dipak Misra, CJI. and A.M. Khanwilkar, J. )

Civil Appeal No. 2247 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP (C) NO. 5485…

[aboutphlaw]

Land Acquisition—Limitation for filing reference—Application for reference filed within limitation without details—Proper application after period of limitation—Initial request for reference treated as proper application in interest of justice

Land Acquisition—Limitation for filing reference—Application for reference filed within limitation without details—Proper application after period of limitation—Initial request for reference treated as proper application in interest of justice

(2018) 2 RCR(Civil) 29 : (2018) 2 Scale 351 : (2018) 3 SCC 52

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

DIVISION BENCH

SHAHID JAMAL — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF U.P. — Respondent

( Before : Kurian Joseph and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. )

Civil Appeal No. 1349 of 2018 (Arising from SLP (C) No. 20203 of 2012)

Decided on : 30-01-2018

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 18

Land Acquisition—Limitation for filing reference—

[aboutphlaw]

Bail--Snatching--Assault-considering the fact that the petitioner is not involved in any other case; the investigation is complete and challan has already been presented conclusion of the trial will take long time-Bail granted. 

Bail–Snatching–Assault-considering the fact that the petitioner is not involved in any other case; the investigation is complete and challan has already been presented conclusion of the trial will take long time-Bail granted. 

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 290 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 514

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan

CRMNo.M-48535of2017

Vicky

v.

State of Haryana Decided on 11/01/2018

For the Petitioner:             Mr, Aman Pal, Advocate

For the Respondent:         Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439–Bail–Snatching–Assault-Use of…

[aboutphlaw]

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Bail--NDPS--Petitioner was granted interim bail will receiving of FSL report—Considering the fact that no substantive charge has been framed against the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner has not misused the concession of interim bail—Bail granted

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21–Bail–NDPS–Petitioner was granted interim bail will receiving of FSL report—Considering the fact that no substantive charge has been framed against the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner has not misused the concession of interim bail—Bail granted

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 289 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 512

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan

CRMNo.M-48077of2017

Rajinder Kumar

v.

State of Haryana Decided on 09/01/2018

For the Petitioner:            Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate

For the Respondent:        Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985,…

[aboutphlaw]

Cheating-Forgery—Bail— the investigation has been completed; chargeshave already been framed; offences are triable by the Court ofMagistrate; the petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.08.2017 prosecution evidence is yet to start, the present petition is allowed

Cheating-Forgery—Bail— the investigation has been completed; chargeshave already been framed; offences are triable by the Court ofMagistrate; the petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.08.2017 prosecution evidence is yet to start, the present petition is allowed

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 288 . 2018 LawHerald.Org 511

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr, Justice Arvlnd Singh Sangwan

CRM NoM-47776of2017

Anil Johar @ Anil Kumar

v.

State of Haryana Decided on 09/01/2018

For the Petitioner:            Mr. Partap Singh, Advocate

Mr, Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana. For the Respondent:        Mr, Veneet Chaudhary, Advocate

Indian Penal Code,…

[aboutphlaw]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.432--Premature Release-Contention that there was no complaint from any person regarding any danger to public safety when the petitioner was out of judicial custody and he was not involved in any FIR--Matter remanded to back to reconsider the case for premature release

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.432–Premature Release-Contention that there was no complaint from any person regarding any danger to public safety when the petitioner was out of judicial custody and he was not involved in any FIR–Matter remanded to back to reconsider the case for premature release

                        (2018) 1 LawHerald 286

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

SINGLE BENCH

RAJESH — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent

( Before : Mr. Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. )

CRWP No. 1127 of 2016

Decided on : 08-01-2018

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 432

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 148, Section 149, Section 302, Section 307

  Criminal Procedure Code, 1973,…

[aboutphlaw]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.293—Expert Evidence- Admissibility of -Comparison of Signatures-Report submitted by Assistant Director (Document) could be per se admissible as the officer in the rank of Assistant Director would fall at Sr.No.E of sub-Section (4) of Section 293 CrPC—Such report not to be discarded on the ground that neither the author of the report nor any other officer, well conversant with the facts of the case who could satisfactorily depose in Court on behalf of the author of the report, has also been produced as a witness

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.293—Expert Evidence- Admissibility of -Comparison of Signatures-Report submitted by Assistant Director (Document) could be per se admissible as the officer in the rank of Assistant Director would fall at Sr.No.E of sub-Section (4) of Section 293 CrPC—Such report not to be discarded on the ground that neither the author of the report nor any other officer, well conversant with the facts of the case who could satisfactorily depose in Court on behalf of the author of the report, has also been produced as a witness

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 281 (DB) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 1957

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA [DIVISION BENCH]

Before

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudhir Mittal

CRA-D-505-DBA of 2004 (O&M)

State of Punjab

v.

Baljit Singh & Ors.

Decided on 20/11/2017

For the Petitioner:            Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Addl, AG Punjab

For the Respondents:        Mr, PS Miglani &Mr.…

[aboutphlaw]

Gram Panchayat sought eviction after being held as owner of land in dispute-­Private respondents contended that land in possession is different from land adjudicated u/s 11 of 1961 Act-Eviction petition was dismissed-Matter remitted to collector to reconsider the matter to give categoric findings on disputed questions of fact.

Gram Panchayat sought eviction after being held as owner of land in dispute-­Private respondents contended that land in possession is different from land adjudicated u/s 11 of 1961 Act-Eviction petition was dismissed-Matter remitted to collector to reconsider the matter to give categoric findings on disputed questions of fact.

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 280 (DB) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 1956

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA [DIVISION BENCH]

Before

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal

CWP-6159of2016 Gram Panchayat Fatehpur

v.

State of Punjab & Ors. Decided on 26/10/2017

For the Petitioner:            Mr.Vinod Kumar, Advocate

Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, Sr.DAG, Punjab. For the Respondents:       …

[aboutphlaw]

Accident-income--Proof of-Disability @ 50%-injured claimed his income was Rs. 38.000/- per annum by running a tea stall-Statement not to be rejected on the ground that no receipt/bill book etc has been placed on record-Person running a tea stall by the road side cannot be expected to maintain accounts and records regarding his income

Accident-income–Proof of-Disability @ 50%-injured claimed his income was Rs. 38.000/- per annum by running a tea stall-Statement not to be rejected on the ground that no receipt/bill book etc has been placed on record-Person running a tea stall by the road side cannot be expected to maintain accounts and records regarding his income

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 277 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 1955

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal

FAONo. 1067 of 2006

Satya Devi & Ors.

v.

Dinesh Kumar & Anr.

  Decided on 09/11/2017

For the Petitioners:          Mr. Rahul Jain&Mr. Jasmeet Singh Bedi, Advocates

For the Respondent:         Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,…

[aboutphlaw]

Accident—Insurance—Theft of Vehicle—Insurance Company is still liable to pay to a third party, regarding accident by stolen vehicle.

Accident—Insurance—Theft of Vehicle—Insurance Company is still liable to pay to a third party, regarding accident by stolen vehicle.

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 274 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 1954

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal

FAONo.816of 2006

Rozi & Ors.

v.

Subhash Chand & Ors. Decided on 01/12/2017

For the Petitioner:            Mr. M.S. Kathuria, Advocate

For the Respondents:       Mr. H.R. Nahoria, Mr. Paul S. Saini& Mr. Vikas Sharma. Advocates___

Accident—Insurance—Theft of Vehicle—

[aboutphlaw]

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166--Accident--Negligence--Once, it is held that there was no negligence on the part of driver of the offending vehicle, no relief can be granted to the claimants, even if it is held that the death was on account of the injuries sustained in the accident.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166–Accident–Negligence–Once, it is held that there was no negligence on the part of driver of the offending vehicle, no relief can be granted to the claimants, even if it is held that the death was on account of the injuries sustained in the accident.

2018(1) Law Herald (P&H) 272 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 1953

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

Before

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal

FAO No.694 of 2005

Maghar & Anr.

v.

Rohit  alias Bunty & Ors.

   Decided on 17/11/2017

For the Petitioner:            Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate

For the Respondent:        Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166–Accident–Negligence–Once,…