1. Kamroon Khatoon v. State of Bihar, 12-09-2018
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Ss. 190 & 204 - the Magistrate at the stage of cognizance could differ from the opinion of the police and proceed against even those accused, who may not have been charge-sheeted in the case.
2. Bihar State Housing Board v. Braj Nandan Singh, 11-09-2018
Precedent - Each judgment of the Court has to be looked into in the context in which the judgment has been rendered - the judgments/observations of the Court should not be cited like euclid's theorems as the slightest of change in the facts of the case would make a sea difference in the judgment of the Court.
3. Ramjot Devi v. Union of India, 11-09-2018
Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Section 17 - death of husband in the railway accident - helpless widow of rural background and illiterate person - She is not expected to be versed with the provisions of limitation for filing application for compensation.
Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Section 17 - there is specific provision for filing application within one year of the occurrence of the accident. But as per sub-section (2) of the said section an application may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1) if the applicant satisfies the Claims Tribunal that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within such period. The appellant has shown sufficient cause for not filing the application within stipulated period of limitation - the justice should be done after hearing the parties and injustice should not be done merely on technicality by shutting down the opportunity of hearing to the parties.
Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - the words "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. It has further been pleased to observe that it must be remembered that in every case of delay, there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy, the Court must show utmost consideration to the suitor. The Court knows that refusal to condone delay would result in foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the Court is always deliberate.
4. Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. State of Bihar, 07-09-2018
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Mere recovery of tainted money would cast any kind of adverse inference against an accused unless and until there happens to be positive evidence on the score of demand as well as probability therefor.
Evidence Law - Reliability as well as acceptability of evidence of hostile witness - Mere a witness is characterized as a hostile witness, his evidence is not completely effaced. The said evidence remains admissible in the trial and there is no legal bar to base a conviction upon such testimony, if corroborated by other reliable evidence. Furthermore, the same can be accepted to the extent it is found to be dependable on a careful scrutiny thereof. [Referred Cases : Bhagwan Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1976 SC 302; Khujji @ Surendra Tiwani v. State of M.P., AIR 1991 SC 1853; Rabindra Kumar Dey v. State of Orissa, AIR 1977 SC 170; Syed Akbar v. State of Karnataka as reported in AIR 1979 SC 1848]
5. Sunil Kumar Sah @ Sunil Prasad v. State of Bihar, 07-09-2018
Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Section 18 (c) 27 (b) (ii) - Drugs and Cosmetics (Amendment) Act, 2008 - the prosecution can be instituted by a Drug Inspector or by any person aggrieved by filing a complaint. Police is not empowered to register any first information report and investigate the case so as to submit the chargesheet under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, investigation of the police and consequential taking cognizance of the case on the basis of the chargesheet submitted by the police after investigation is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
6. State of Bihar v. Rajdeo Chaudhary, 06-09-2018
Service Law - the resolution of the Finance Department fixing a date for giving the benefit of revised pay to only such Assistants who were appointed before the cut-off date. There does not appear to be any reason for fixing that date and the net impact of such a fixation has an evil portent of creating a class within a class, which is impermissible.
7. Md. Nizam v. State of Bihar, 05-09-2018
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 313 - Recording of statement is not merely formality, but entire circumstances and evidences, collected during the trial, are required to be explained to the accused.
Comments
Post a Comment