L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Vasant Sampat Dupare vs State Of Maharashtra

2. According to the prosecution case on 3.4.2008 about 9-10 p.m., informant, Krushna Dudhraj Sharma, father of the deceased, lodged a report at the police station Wadi stating that he was staying in a tenanted house with his wife and two daughters, the kidnapped girl aged about 4 years and her sister aged about six months. One Subhash Sonawane was residing along with his wife and son in the neighbourhood of the informant as a tenant of the common landlord, Kushal Bansod. The appellant, Vasanta Dupare, a friend of Subhash Sonawane, was a frequent visitor to the house of Subhash. On the fateful day when the informant, carpenter by profession, returned home about 7.00 p.m., he found his wife weeping and on a query being made, she disclosed that Vasanta Dupare had taken the elder daughter on his bicycle while she was playing in the courtyard of the house and she had not yet returned home. He, being perturbed, searched for his daughter in the vicinity, but it was an exercise in futility. Thus, the initial allegation was that the appellant had kidnapped his minor daughter. On the basis of the aforesaid report, a crime was registered against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 363 of the IPC.

3. As the prosecution version further undrapes, on the same day, Santosh Ghatekar, PW-13, Assistant Police Inspector, while returning to the police station, received the information that the appellant was moving around Gati Godown located on Khadgaon Road, and he passed on the said information to Police Inspector D.J. Chauhan, PW-16, and eventually the appellant was apprehended and brought to the police station. While in police custody, on 4.4.2008, he took the investigating agency to the spot where he had after ravishing the minor girl child had murdered her. A memorandum of panchnama to that effect was prepared in the morning of 4.4.2008 and thereafter he led the police to the place of incident wherefrom the dead body of the minor girl was recovered. At his instance, the bicycle used was recovered from the godown located in between Khadgaon to Kamleshwar road belonging to one Ashwin Prakash Agrawal. Thereafter, the initial offence registered under Section 363 IPC was converted to offences under Section 376(2)(f), 367, 302 and 201 of the IPC. The Investigating Agency examined number of witnesses under Section 161 CrPC and completed all the formalities and laid the chargesheet before the competent court which in turn committed the matter to the Court of Session.

5. The prosecution, to substantiate the charges levelled against the appellant, examined 17 witnesses. After closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused was examined under Section 313 of the CrPC and he pleaded complete denial and false implication. The defence chose not to adduce any evidence.

From the aforesaid authority, it is seen that the Court did not think it appropriate to restore the death sentence passed by the trial court regard being had to the passage of time.

61. Consequently, we dismiss the criminal appeals preferred by the appellant and affirm the death sentence.
Iqbal Singh Narang & Ors vs Veeran Narang

3. The said Respondent filed Crl. RBT Complaint No.283/19.8.2003/2.8.2005 against the Appellants before the Illaqa Magistrate, under Sections 193, 420, 120-B IPC, for allegedly making false statements in judicial proceedings before the Rent Controller, Amritsar. The statement of the Complainant/Respondent was recorded before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Complainant/ Respondent also filed an application under Sections 193/420/425 IPC before the Rent Controller-cum-J.M. First Class, Amritsar, in Rent Application No.111 of 1998, which had been filed by the Appellant No.1, in which allegations had been made that the Appellant No.1 had made false statements therein.

5. On 20th April, 2006, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amritsar, after observing that no offence under Section 420 IPC had been made out against the accused, issued summons against them to face trial under Section 193 read with Section 120- B IPC.

8. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the High Court chose not to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence alleged to have been committed by the Appellants under Section 193/120-B IPC and dismissed the Misc. Case No.32515-M of 2006 filed by the Appellants herein.

15. In addition to the above, we also see no reason to quash the proceedings in which the Appellants herein had been summoned under Section 193/420/120- B IPC. The Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. The interim orders passed earlier are vacated.
Commissioner Of Income Central Ii vs Suresh N. Gupta

2. On 17.1.2001 a search under Section 132 of the 1961 Act was carried out at the premises of the respondent-assessee, an individual. The search unearthed an unexplained investment of Rs. 65,000/- being the value of household valuables and Rs. 97,427/- on account of unexplained marriage expenses (undisclosed income). Accordingly, in the block assessment, the A.O. determined the assessees undisclosed income at Rs. 1,62,427/-. He computed tax thereon at 60% in terms of Section 113 of the 1961 Act amounting to Rs. 97,456/- on which surcharge was levied at 17%, i.e., Rs.16,504/-. The levy of surcharge was challenged by the assessee in appeal before the CIT(A). The said appeal was allowed. The decision of CIT(A) has been confirmed by the Tribunal and the High Court. Hence, this civil appeal.

tax calculated under Chapter VIII-A of the Income- tax Act, 1961, (43 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Income-tax Act) shall be increased, -

and

50,000;

Where the total income exceeds Rs. 60,000 but does not exceed Rs.

1,50,000 Rs. 1,000 plus 20 per cent of the amount by which the total income exceeds Rs. 60,000;

Where the total income exceeds Rs. 1,50,000 Rs. 19,000 plus 30 per cent of the amount by which the total income exceeds Rs. 1,50,000.

(A) at the rate of twelve per cent of such income-tax where the total income exceeds sixty thousand rupees but does not exceed one lakh fifty thousand rupees; or (B) at the rate of seventeen per cent of such income-tax where the total income exceeds one lakh fifty thousand rupees;

23. For the aforestated reasons, we hold that even without the proviso to Section 113 (inserted vide FA 2002 w.e.f. 1.6.2002), the FA 2001 was applicable to block assessment under Chapter XIV-B in relation to the search initiated on 17.1.2001 and accordingly surcharge was leviable on the tax amounting to Rs. 97,456/- at 17% amounting to Rs. 16504/-. We accordingly answer the above question in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

28. For the aforestated reasons, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 13.2.2006 in Tax Appeal No. 1042 of 2005 and, accordingly, we allow the Departments civil appeal with no order as to costs.
B.R. Gupta And Another vs Rohit Jain

3. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner's company is carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products, having its registered office at Delhi. It is further alleged that the petitioner's company sold some of its products to the respondent in connection with which the respondent issued a cheque dated 5.12.2002 in favour of the petitioner. That cheque was presented by the petitioner to its bank being Punjab National Bank, Connaught Place, New Delhi, but the same was dishonoured. Hence, a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, which is pending before the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi.

6. The Transfer Petition is thus allowed.
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Jaipur vs M/S.Rajasthan Spg. & Wvg. Mills ...

RSWML are the manufacturers of yarn and fabric. It had set up a process house at Mordi in 1994-95. The process house was set up for processing their fabric. The woven fabrics manufactured at their weaving unit was processed on job work basis by Mordi processing house. This was with effect from 29th March, 1995. On 16th June, 1995 the said process house was let out by RSWML to Bhilwara Spinners Limited (BSL). Later on the lease agreement between RSWML and BSL stood terminated and the process house was leased out to Purvi Fabrics & Textures (PFTL).

For aforestated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department and the same are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
Rajinder Singh vs State Of Punjab

3. Coming back to the facts of the present appeal, a young woman, namely, Salwinder Kaur was married to the appellant Rajinder Singh sometime in the year 1990. On 31st August, 1993, within four years of the marriage, Salwinder Kaur consumed Aluminium Phosphide, which is a pesticide, as a result of which her young life was snuffed out. On the same day, an FIR was lodged against the husband, his older brother and the older brother's wife. The trial court after examining the evidence of the prosecution and the defence, acquitted the appellant's older brother and his wife but convicted the appellant under Section 304B and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, which is the minimum sentence that can be pronounced on a finding of guilt under the said Section. This was done after examining in particular the evidence of PW.2 - Karnail Singh, the father of the deceased woman, PW-3 - Gulzar Singh, his elder brother and PW-4 - Balwinder Singh, Sarpanch of the village. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana confirmed the conviction and the sentence vide the impugned judgment.

26. The facts of this appeal are glaring. Demands for money were made shortly after one year of the marriage. A she-buffalo was given by the father to the daughter as a peace offering. The peace offering had no effect. The daughter was ill-treated. She went back to her father and demanded money again. The father, then, went along with his brother and the Sarpanch of the village to the matrimonial home with a request that the daughter be not ill-treated on account of the demand for money. The father also assured the said persons that their money demand would be fulfilled and that they would have to wait till the crops of his field are harvested. Fifteen days before her death, Salwinder Kaur again visited her parents' house on being maltreated by her new family. Then came death by poisoning. The cross-examination of the father of Salwinder Kaur has, in no manner, shaken his evidence. On the facts, therefore, the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below are upheld. The appeal is dismissed.

25. We hasten to add that this is not a correct reflection of the law. "Soon before" is not synonymous with "immediately before".
S.S.Chheena vs Vijay Kumar Mahajan & Anr

4. Brief facts necessary to dispose of this appeal are as under:-

I request my uncle/aunt, mother/father to forgive me that I tried my best to fulfill their expected wishes but could not do the same because Harminder Singh has leveled false allegation against me. I want to say this thing again that I am innocent and request my mother/father that they may not make any complaint regarding my suicide. I will also say to Chhina Sahib even if they give justice and leave me but the people will have a suspicion about me. I am taking this step on account of my insult. Harminder Singh and his accomplices are responsible for my suicide or MD Singh who did not take into account my faith and without consulting me, has forwarded this case.

30. When we carefully scrutinize and critically examine the facts of this case in the light of the settled legal position the conclusion becomes obvious that no conviction can be legally sustained without any credible evidence or material on record against the appellant. The order of framing a charge under section 306 IPC against the appellant is palpably erroneous and unsustainable. It would be travesty of justice to compel the appellant to face a criminal trial without any credible material whatsoever. Consequently, the order of framing charge under section 306 IPC against the appellant is quashed and all proceedings pending against him are also set aside. 16

31. As a result, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside.

August 12, 2010
Panchi Devi vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors

Appellant's husband, who was working as work charge employee in the Public Works Department in the year 1958 and confirmed on the said post vide order dated 22.8.1972 with effect from 31.3.1970, died in the year 1978. Appellant after 14 years of her husband's death claimed family pension of her husband under Rule 22A of the Rajasthan Public Works Department (B&R) including Garden, Irrigation, Water Works and Ayurvedic Department Work Charge Employees Service Rules, 1964 (for short 'the Rules) which came into force with effect from 17.09.1980. Since, no order was passed on her representation, she filed a writ petition bearing No. 6890 of 1992 before the High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. A learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the said writ petition. Appellant thereafter filed a Special Appeal bearing -2- No. 295 of 1997 before the Division Bench of the High Court. By reason of the impugned order dated 15.12.1998, the said Special Appeal has been dismissed, inter alia, on the premise that the appellant had approached the High Court after 14 years of her husband's death and since all the dues admissible to the appellant's husband were duly settled during his life time and the widow of the deceased (appellant herein) received all the dues including gratuity and, thus, the question of her entitlement to family pension does not arise.

The Appeals are dismissed accordingly.

Being aggrieved, the appellant filed a review petition No.43 of 2004 along with an application for condonation of delay. The said review application has also been dismissed on the premise that the application for condonation of delay in filing the review petition has been dismissed.
Raja Mishra vs State Of Bihar Tr.Officer Incharge

2. The appellant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The trial court as well as the High Court have concurrently held on the basis of the evidence of P.W. 4 Ramadhar Tiwari, the father of the deceased, that a case under the aforesaid provisions was made out and that it was on account of the harassment meted out to the deceased in relation to dowry that she had met an 2 unnatural death. The evidence reveals that the appellant and his son i.e. the husband of the deceased had on several occasions demanded a motor cycle and in lieu thereof Rs. 17,000/- from the complainant and his family and that the last demand had been made twenty days prior to the incident which happened sometime on the 17th September, 1989. It appears that the police was not informed about the death and the body was cremated and the remains thrown into the river without informing the family of the deceased. As a result of the cumulative effect of the evidence, the aforesaid order was recorded.

6. With the above modification in the sentence, the appeal is dismissed.

........................J [HARJIT SINGH BEDI] .........................J [CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD] NEW DELHI NOVEMBER 18, 2010.
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Kanha @ Omprakash

3 According to the prosecution, on 8 October 2003, an altercation took place between two parties. The respondent, with an intention to kill one Dashrath Singh, shot him with a fire-arm and caused bleeding injuries on his right thigh. The brother of Dashrath Singh filed a complaint on the same day at the Gwalior Police Station. It was stated in the complaint that there was enmity between the parties over a love marriage which was opposed by the families as well as a dispute over a disc cable connection business. The allegation against the accused was that armed with deadly weapons, they formed an illegal assembly with a common motive of causing harm to the injured. The charge-sheet was filed under Sections 147 and 307 read with 149 and 323 of the Penal Code. The respondent was found guilty of the offence under Section 307 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years along with a fine of Rs 1,000 by the Trial Court. Seven other co-accused were acquitted of all the charges levelled against them.

17 In the present case, the nature of the injuries shows that there were eleven punctured wounds. The weapon of offence was a firearm. The circumstances of the case clearly indicate that there was an intention to murder. The presence of 11 punctured and bleeding wounds as well as the use of a fire arm leave no doubt that there was an intention to murder. Thus, the second part of Section 307 of the Penal Code is attracted in the present case. The judgement of the High Court overlooks material parts of the evidence and suffers from perversity. 4 (2014) 5 SCC 369 10 18 Hence, we set aside the judgement of the High Court and restore the order of conviction by the Trial court under Section 307 of the Penal Code as well as the sentence awarded of rigorous imprisonment of 3 years and a fine of Rs 1000. The appeal is, accordingly allowed. The respondent shall forthwith surrender to serve out the sentence. A copy of the judgment shall be forwarded by the Registry to the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned to secure compliance.

…….............................................................J [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud] ….…….………….......................................J [MR Shah] New Delhi;

February 04, 2019.
Union Of India & Ors vs Madhu E.V. & Anr

3. The respondents were the original writ petitioners before the High Court. They were constables in the Border Security Force (BSF). On completion of 10 years service, they tendered resignation. Their resignation was accepted by the Commandant 48 BN BSF. The order accepting resignation provided that they would be entitled to pensionary benefits at their own request on extreme compassionate grounds. Later on, it was found that the pensionary benefits were not admissible to them and few others whose resignation was accepted under Rule 19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 (for short, ‘BSF Rules’). Accordingly, on October 20, 1998, a letter was sent intimating them that no pensionary benefits were admissible to those who have proceeded on resignation under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules. However, their case for reinstatement in BSF would be considered subject to refund of all payment made to them from the Government such as GPF, Gratuity, CGEGIS, etc. on their resignation. The respondents challenged the above communication by filing two separate Writ Petitions.

4. The writ petitions were contested by the present appellants (respondents therein). Their stand in the High Court was that the writ petitioners were governed by the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (for short, ‘CCS (Pension) Rules’) and as per these rules the minimum qualifying service for pension is 20 years and, therefore, they were not entitled to any pension.

5. The Single Judge of the High Court referred to Rules 19 and 182 of the BSF Rules and relevant provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, particularly Rules 26, 48-A and 49(2)(b). The Single Judge held that when the petitioners (therein) were allowed to resign with pensionary benefits under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules, then their claim for pension must be worked out under Rule 49(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules. Accordingly, the Single Judge, by his judgment dated September 29, 1999, allowed the writ petitions and directed the present appellants to grant pension to the petitioner (respondents herein) in accordance with Rule 49(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules.

1998 not to report for reinduction. Their pension has been stopped pursuant to the judgment in Rakesh Kumar (supra). These persons can be further divided into two sub- categories:

13. The view taken by the Single Judge and judgment of the Division Bench upholding the view taken by the Single Judge cannot be upheld and have to be set aside in light of the legal position noted above.

14. In the present case, the respondents had resigned from BSF service immediately after completion of 10 years service and, therefore, they are not entitled to any pensionary benefits.

15. We, accordingly, allow these Appeals and set aside the orders dated August 25, 2000 passed by the Division Bench and dated September 29, 1999 passed by the Single Judge. We, however, observe that amount of pension paid to the respondents herein, if any, shall not be recovered.

16. No costs.
Thahira P vs The Administrator, Ut Of Lakshdweep

2. The Administration of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep (Directorate of Education) issued an advertisement inviting applications from local candidates between 18-25 years having a bachelor’s degree in Digitally signed by Sociology from a recognised University for appointment to the post of MEENAKSHI KOHLI Date: 2018.04.17 15:17:51 IST Reason: Social Education Organizer.

4. The Administration considered all the applications and on 24 th May, 2011 published a check list of candidates who had applied for the post of Social Education Organiser. The check-list mentioned the desirable qualification was BSW/MSW from a recognised University and as regards the degree of Bachelor in Sociology it was mentioned that Sociology would be given 85% weightage, BSW 5% weightage and MSW 10% weightage.

5. Based on the above, the check-list showed that Thahira was Rank No.1 having obtained 48.03% marks while Kadeeja was Rank No.2 having obtained 46.43% marks.

18. Consequently, we are of opinion that the Tribunal and the High Court needlessly opened up a new avenue for challenging the appointment of Thahira as Social Education Organiser. Both the Tribunal and the High Court ought to have exercised due restraint given the time limit for raising an objection by the Administration and the actual SLP (C) No. 33281 of 2016 Page 6 of 7 objection raised by Kadeeja.

19. Accordingly, the order dated 15th March, 2016 passed by the Tribunal as well as the impugned judgment and order dated 9th September, 2016 passed by the High Court are set aside.

20. The petition is allowed. No costs.

............................................J (Madan B. Lokur) New Delhi; ...........................................J April 17, 2018 (Deepak Gupta) SLP (C) No. 33281 of 2016 Page 7 of 7
Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd vs Employees State Insurance Corporation

13. The object of the appellant-club is to promote polo, hunting, racing, tennis and other games, athletic sports and recreations amongst its members. Huge contribution is collected for becoming members of the club and only the privileged can become the members of the appellant-club. There are wide range of sports activities, recreations and big budget is involved. The kitchen of the club has a direct connection with the activities carried on in the rest of the club precincts. The members and the guests of the members share the services of the kitchen. The ESI Act is enacted to provide certain benefits to employees in case of sickness, maternity in case of female employees, employment injury and to make provision in certain other matters in relation thereto. We find no reason as to why the employees of the appellant-club should be kept out of the welfare coverage of the beneficial legislation like ESI Act.

27. The impugned order of the High Court does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference. We find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.

(R. Banumathi) New Delhi;

October 28, 2014