Trace Your Case

Categories
Investigation Uncategorized

Devender Kumar v. State of Haryana (2010) 6 SCC 753

ISSUE:

Whether second application for police remand after dismissal of first application is maintainable?

Whether bail can be cancelled on the ground of disclosures made by the accused during investigation?

RULE:

The second application for police remand after dismissal of first application is maintainable only if made within first 15 days of arrest.

Bail cannot be cancelled on the sole ground of any disclosures of the accused, when there is no allegation of misuse of the privilege of bail.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Investigation Uncategorized

Dropti Devi and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors (2012) 7 SCC 499

ISSUE:

Whether Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities, 1974 (“COFEPOSA”) is constitutionally valid, in light of the repeal of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (“FERA”)?

Whether preventive detention can exist for activities that are not criminal offences and do not attract any punishment?

RULE:

Preventive detention can exist for illegal activities which though do not attract any punishment, are prejudicial to the security of the State.

The repeal of FERA by the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, does not dilute the control of the Government over foreign exchange.

When a detention order is not executed for more than a year on account of the contumacious conduct of the detenu, he cannot take advantage of his own wrongdoing by challenging the detention order as having lapsed the maximum period.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Nature ad functions of criminal procedure Uncategorized

M. Narayanaswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu 1984 SCC OnLine Mad 71

ISSUE:

Whether the restriction on appointing Special Magistrates to only current or former government employees under Sections 13 and 18 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Code”) violates the principle of equality?

RULE:

Confining appointment to the post of Special Judicial Magistrates/ Special Metropolitan Magistrates to current or past government employees under Sections 13(1) and 18(1) of the Code is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Investigation Uncategorized

Naresh Kavarachand Khatri v. State of Gujarat (2008) 8 SCC 300

ISSUE:

Whether High Courts have the requisite jurisdiction to transfer an investigation from one police station to another at an initial stage?

RULE:

The power to direct transfer of investigation from one police station to another is vested with police authorities under Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Code”). The courts cannot interfere in the matter at an initial stage, especially without assigning reasons for doing so.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Nature ad functions of criminal procedure Uncategorized

Harpal Singh Chauhan v. State of U.P. AIR 1993 SC 2436

ISSUE:

Whether non-preparation of a panel of names for appointment as Public Prosecutors/ Additional Public Prosecutors under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Code”) is a curable defect?

Whether general comments as to the non-suitability of certain persons for appointment to the post of Public Prosecutors/ Additional Public Prosecutors, satisfies the requirement of Section 24(4) of the Code?

Whether judicial review of appointment of advocates as District Government Counsels is permissible, and to what extent?

RULE:

For appointing Public Prosecutors/ Additional Public Prosecutors, the District Magistrate must necessarily prepare a panel of suitable names in consultation with the Sessions Judge.

Vague and general comments against the suitability of persons to be appointed to the post of Public Prosecutor/ Additional Public Prosecutor, does not satisfy Section 24 of the Code.

Effective consultation between District Magistrate and Sessions Judge is required for appointing Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors under Section 24(4) of the Code.

While judicial review is permissible and the Courts can examine whether there was any infirmity in the decision-making process, Courts cannot substitute itself over the final decision of the authority vested with the decision-making power.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Uncategorized

Centrotrade Minerals & Metal v. Hindustan Copper Ltd, (2006) 11 SCC 245

ISSUE:

Whether the contract's two-tier arbitration clause, which allows for a second arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in London after the initial arbitration in India, is legitimate and allowed under Indian law. This issue has already been addressed and resolved in favor of the clause's legitimacy?

Whether the contract's two-tier arbitration clause, which allows for a second arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in London after the initial arbitration in India, is legitimate and allowed under Indian law. This issue has already been addressed and resolved in favour of the clause's legitimacy.

RULE:

In this scenario, the relevant rule is the two-tier arbitration clause included in the parties' contract. This section provides for a two-stage arbitration process, with the first stage involving arbitration in India and the case proceeding to a second arbitration conducted by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in London if either party is dissatisfied with the outcome. This regulation specifies the agreed-upon approach for resolving contract-related issues.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Commencement Of Judicial Proceedings Uncategorized

Kewal Krishan v. Suraj Bhan (1980 ) Supp. SCC 499

ISSUE:

Whether the Magistrate should have summarily dismissed the complaint under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code against Suraj Bhan accused?
Whether the error committed by the magistrate has occasioned into a gross failure of justice?

RULE:

Section 200, 202, 203 and 204 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here