L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Sangharaj Bhogappa Kamble vs State Of Maharashtra

2. On 5th November, 1988, the deceased had gone to his duty at 8:00a.m. and returned at 7:30p.m. and after having dinner with his family members was sitting in the house conversing with them. At that moment, the accused accompanied by his friend, who was a neighbour and also a friend of the deceased, came to the house of the deceased and asked him to join him for a drink. The deceased, however, replied that as he had already had his dinner he was not inclined to take any liquor. The accused nevertheless insisted that the deceased should at least come out of the house and sit with them. The deceased agreed to this arrangement and went out of the house and the accused, his friend and the deceased sat outside the complainant's house where the accused and his friend then consumed liquor. It appears that after short time the accused started talking in an incoherent manner on which his father came out and seeing his condition got annoyed and asked the accused to leave the place and to stop drinking. This led to an exchange of hot words between the accused and his father following which the accused slapped his father and the father also slapped the accused. The deceased intervened at that stage and asked the accused as to why he was abusing his father and remonstrated with him on that account. The accused, however, turned on the deceased and told him that he was nobody to interfere in a dispute between him and his father and a quarrel ensued between the two. The father of the deceased also intervened in the quarrel and tried to separate them but he was pushed aside. The accused then took out a knife from his pocket and stabbed the deceased in his chest causing him a serious injury leading to his death. While the quarrel was going on Leena, P.W.5, the sister of the deceased and several others also came to the spot. A case under Section 302 of the IPC was accordingly, registered against the accused and on completion of investigation he was put to trial. The trial court and the High Court have concurrently held that the case of the prosecution stood proved and that the accused was liable for the murder. He was, accordingly, awarded a life sentence.

8. We have also perused the medical evidence and find that there is effectively only one stab injury on the person of the deceased the others being abrasions which could have been caused during the intervention in the quarrel between the father and son. It cannot, therefore, be said with certainity that the accused intended to cause the very injury that he inflicted.

9. In this view of the matter, we feel that the conviction of the accused for the offence under Section 302 of IPC is not made out. He is, accordingly, acquitted of that offence. We, however, convict him for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of the IPC and sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years.

10. With this modification in the judgment of the courts below, the appeal is dismissed.
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs Jagdish Chopra

3. For the year 1995-96, there were 33 vacancies and advertisements were issued therefor. Respondent herein was one of the applicants for the said post. The Selection Committee prepared a select list. The respondent's name figured at serial No.10 of the said list. Out of 33 vacancies, 19 posts were to be filled up by Teachers (Physical Education) and 14 posts were meant for Teachers (Grade-III). Out of 19 posts of Teachers (Physical Education), 9 posts were for General Category candidates; 5 posts were reserved for OBC candidates; 2 posts for Scheduled Castes candidate and one post for Scheduled Tribes candidate. One post was to be filled on the vacancies arising out of appointment on compassionate grounds. The date of joining was fixed on 12.04.1996. The candidate placed at serial No.8 in the merit list did not join. The vacant post was said to have been carried forward to 1996-97. Respondent had also applied for the post of Teacher (Physical Education) in the said year but he was been placed at serial No.23 in the merit list and, thus, was not found fit to be appointed in 1996-97 also. He filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. On the premise that the validity of the merit list had expired, a learned Single Judge of the said High Court opined that he had no legal right to be appointed stating :

11. Furthermore, the Division Bench was not at all justified in directing grant of service benefits to the respondent from the date on which the appointed candidate at serial No.9 in the merit list ought to have joined the post. Such a direction, in our opinion, is wholly unwarranted.

We, however, cannot set aside the impugned judgment because of the fact that the State has appointed the respondent during the pendency of this Special Leave Petition. We may furthermore notice that even a stay of further proceedings in the contempt petition has been passed by this Court by an order dated 16.05.2007. We, therefore, are of the opinion that it will not be proper for this Court now at this juncture to set aside the said appointment as the appointment granted in favour of the respondent by the State was not by reason of his merit in the select list but by reason of the orders of the High Court. We, therefore, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and keeping in view the fact that the matter is pending for a long time, are of the opinion that a direction should be issued that the appointment of the respondent may be directed to be continued as if he was appointed on and from the date he joined the service.

12. The appeal is allowed to the afore mentioned extent. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
Jantia Hill Truck Owners Association vs S.A.Coal Dealer & Truck Owner Assn.& Ors

4. We may, at the outset also place on record that in the writ petition filed by the respondent - Shallang Area Coal Dealer and Truck Owner Association 16 points at which the driver/owners of the trucks are subjected to extortionate payments exacted without any authority of law were mentioned which are as under :-

5. The prayers in the said writ petition read as under :-

14. Indisputably an interim order was passed on 11th June, 2008 directing stoppage of collection of monies from the truck owners/drivers by the various local tribal chiefs. Pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof the Deputy Commissioner, West Khasi Hills, District of 11 Meghalaya issued an order dated 20th February, 2009 directing the said persons to remove/stop all the illegal Toll gates/Check gates/Weigh Bridge on public roads and stop collection of illegal tolls therein immediately within one week from the date of issue of the said letter.

There exists a distinction between an executive order made in terms of Articles 73 and 162 of the Constitution of India and one made under the Sixth Schedule thereof.

33. Services of the weighbridges are required to be obtained by the drivers/owners of the trucks for fulfillment of their statutory obligations. 23 They cannot obtain such services free of any charges. When private parties are given the right to set up such weighbridges, indisputably they would be entitled to reasonable profit.

39. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. The same is, therefore, set aside.

41. The High Court in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case may also consider the desirability of consideration of the matters pending before it together, if not already disposed of, so that the points raised by the writ-petitioners may be dealt with comprehensively.

42. The appeals are allowed. No costs.
K.C. Bajaj And Ors vs Union Of India And Ors

5. In furtherance of the decision taken by the Government vide Resolution dated 30.9.1997 for implementation of the recommendations of 5th Central Pay Commission and in continuation of the instructions contained in O.M. No.45/86/97-P&PW(A)-Part II dated 27.10.1997, the Government issued O.M. dated 10.2.1998 for grant of revised pension to those who were in receipt of specified types of pensions as on 1.1.1996 under Liberalised Pension Rules, 1950, Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, as amended from time to time, and the corresponding rules applicable to railway pensioners and pensioners of All India Services. As per O.M. dated 10.2.1998, pay of the employees who had retired prior to 1.1.1996 was to be fixed on notional basis at par with the serving employees and their pension was to be fixed at par with those who retired after 1.1.1996. The Railway Board adopted the policy contained in O.M. dated 10.2.1998 and issued order dated 10.3.1998.

21. While dictating the judgment, the Court found that the written arguments filed on behalf of the parties contain additional facts which were not brought to the notice of the Court during the course of hearing. Therefore, by an order dated 2.7.2013, the case was ordered to be listed for further arguments, which were heard on 24.9.2013 and judgment was again reserved.

12. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned order cannot be sustained, which is set aside accordingly. These writ petitions are allowed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to cost.”

14. SLP (C) No.14834/2006 filed against the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court was dismissed by this Court on 28.8.2006. Review Petition (C) D.No.17280/2007 was also dismissed on 17.1.2008 as barred by limitation and also on merits.

For further hearing, the cases be listed on 01.05.2013.”

29. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the ratio of the Digambar’s case cannot be invoked to justify the pick and choose methodology adopted by the Union of India in resisting the claim of similarly situated doctors that NPA payable to them shall be taken into consideration for calculating the pension. Such an approach by the Union of India is ex-facie arbitrary, unjust and has resulted in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

33. In the result, the appeals are allowed, the impugned order of the High Court as also the one passed by the Tribunal are set aside and the applications filed by the appellants before the Tribunal are allowed in terms of the prayer made. The respondents shall re-calculate the pension payable to the appellants by adding the element of NPA. This exercise shall be undertaken and completed by the concerned authorities within a period of three months from today.
State Of Mp. & Ors vs Mala Banerjee

3 Very briefly stated, the dispute pertains to the eligibility of the Respondents, all of whom are Lecturers/Teachers in the employment of the Education and Tribal Welfare Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, for increased pay scales. The Respondents claim the benefits of the Kramonnati Scheme with effect from 19.4.1999, whereas the Appellants assert that they are willing to grant the benefit of the Kramonnati Scheme to them, and obviously others similarly placed as they are, but with effect from 1.8.2003.

4 Under the Madhya Pradesh Revision of Pay Rules, 1990, the Respondents, were eligible for a higher pay scale on completion of 12 years of service. Subsequently, a policy dated 19.4.1999 known as the said Kramonnati Scheme came to be introduced entitling all Government servants to the benefit of two higher pay scales, the first on completion of 12 years of service, and the second on the further completion of another 12 years (24 years in all). The Appellants contend that this Circular applied to all their employees except the Teacher cadre, since the latter had already enjoyed the benefit of the Madhya Pradesh Revision of Pay Rules. On 2.11.2001, the Commissioner Public Instructions sanctioned the second Kramonnati for teachers with effect from 19.4.1999. The stand of the Appellants is that this was erroneously extended without obtaining the consent of the Finance Department, and was accordingly corrected by order dated 11.10.2006. However, despite this stance, the State Government took a policy decision on 3.9.2005 granting the benefit of a second Kramonnati to Teachers, but with effect from 1.8.2003. Recovery proceedings were initiated against teachers who had been bestowed Kramonnati from the earlier date.

9 We do not find any illegality in the Impugned Judgment and the Appeals are dismissed, but we desist from imposing costs.

10 Since these Appeals are being dismissed, it would be a futile and wasteful exercise to take up all pending Applications. To remove possible doubts, all the Applications are dismissed.

March 17, 2015.
Mukesh vs State Of Chhattisgarh

2. For the purpose of considering the rival legal contentions urged in this appeal and with a view to find out whether this Court is required to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court, the necessary facts are briefly stated hereunder:

3. On appeal, the High Court after going through the evidence on record and the statement of the witnesses held that though, there appears to be minor contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix with respect to the timing of lodging the FIR, but considering her entire statement, it is held that the same is rendered insignificant. Thus, the factual aspect of the matter does not lead the court to disbelieve the testimony of the prosecutrix which has already been supported by other witnesses. The appeal was thus dismissed on the ground that it was without substance. Hence, this appeal.

12. On the basis of the aforesaid rival legal contentions, evidence of the prosecution witnesses on record and the reasons assigned by the courts below, the following points would arise for consideration of this Court:

23. Thus, after considering the entirety of the case, we do not see any cogent reason to interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the courts below. The appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sunderlal Kanaiyalal Bhatija vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors

2. The private respondent No. 4 was arrested in TADA Case No. 114 of 1991 and 114-A of 1991. In the said case, there was a confessional statement made by the private respondent no. 4 which was recorded on 17.03.1991 along with another co- accused. The said confessional statements so recorded by the police were used by the prosecution as substantive evidence in the aforesaid TADA case. The aforesaid TADA case resulted in the conviction of the private respondent No. 4, which was finally confirmed even by this Court.

- Kalyan, praying that the original confessional statement of the private respondent No. 4 made in the aforesaid TADA case(s) be called for. The said application was rejected by the trial Court by its order dated 22.11.2005. The aforesaid order passed by the trial Court was challenged by the prosecution as well as the relative of the deceased by filing a Criminal Revision Application and a Criminal Writ Petition respectively in the High Court of Bombay. The High Court, after hearing the parties, however, dismissed both the aforesaid revision application and the writ petition by an order dated 29.09.2006. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the present Special Leave Petition was filed in which leave was granted and consequently the present appeal. 3

7. Subsequently, an application was filed by the State of Maharashtra which was registered as CRLMP No. 8133 of 2008 seeking their transposition as appellant. However, no order was passed on the application seeking transposition. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly, in view of the fact that, the substantive appeal of the State has been dismissed on merits, the application seeking transposition of the State of Mahrashtra as appellant cannot be allowed. The said application accordingly stands dismissed.

8. The fact which is therefore apparent on the face of the record is that one of the appeals, which was filed by the State of Maharashtra as against the impugned order stood dismissed on merits by this Court by its order dated 13.05.2008, but, since in the present appeal, we had issued notice, therefore, 5 we are required to consider the points urged and issues raised by the appellant in the present appeal.

17.We, therefore, uphold the orders passed by the trial Court as also by the High Court and dismiss the appeal filed by the appellant herein. The bail bonds, if any, shall stand cancelled.

........................................... J [DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA] ........................................... J [H.L. DATTU] NEW DELHI MARCH 31, 2010.
Kashi Prashad vs Sttate Of U.P

7 The accused persons took the plea of self defence. According to Kali Prasad, Kali Charan and deceased-Lachhi Ram had deliberately driven their bullocks into field of the accused and on his intervention Lachhi Ram and Kali Charan began to abuse him and threatened him. He further stated that Kali Charan caught hold of him and when he managed to release himself from the clutches of Kali Charan, the deceased began to assault him with lathi and Kali Charan armed with a Khaulia rushed at him and thereupon his father Baldu rushed to save him and thereafter Kali Charan began to mount assault upon Baldu with Khaulia. Kashi Prasad further stated that he used spear to defend himself and his father Baldu and that he and Baldu both received injuries and they were medically examined in the District Jail, Hamirpur. The accused Baldu took similar plea. The accused Maha Prasad pleaded alibi.

10. Considering the factual scenario as projected by the prosecution, the proper conviction would be under Section 304 Part I IPC. Custodial sentence of 10 years would meet the ends of justice.

11. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Hill Properties Ltd vs Union Bank Of India & Ors

6. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court found no illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge and dismissed the Appeal, so also the Notice of Motion. Various safeguards incorporated by the learned Single Judge were reiterated. Aggrieved of the said order, this appeal has been preferred.

15. We may reiterate that the appellant will certainly have the right of pre-emption, but not at any value lesser than the market value of the suit flat at the time of the sale. Various directions already given by the High Court, therefore, will stand.

16. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed and the amount, if any, deposited by the Appellant be refunded to him. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
Benson vs State Of Kerala

On the allegation that the appellant was involved in committing thefts he was charged of having committed offences on different occasions and was separately tried in i) CC No.158 of 2004 before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chavakkad for offences punishable under Section 379, 414 read with 34 IPC, ii) CC No.1039 of 2003 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chavakkad for offences punishable under Section 379, 414 read with 34 IPC,

iii) CC No.390 of 2004 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chavakkad for offences punishable under Section 379, 414 read with 34 IPC and (iv) CC No.1168 of 2006 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kunnamkulam. By separate judgments, the appellant was convicted and sentenced in each of the aforesaid crimes. The respective appeals preferred by the appellant were dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Thrissur. The appellant filed Criminal Revision Petitions in the High Court which were also dismissed. The following chart would disclose the relevant details:-

Going by this normal principle, the sentence chart indicated in the communication dated 27.05.2016 is quite correct. However this normal rule is subject to a qualification and it is within the powers of the Court to direct that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentence.

|C.C.No./ |Date |Date of |Crl. Appeal|Crl. |SLP | |Offence |of |Conviction |No. |R.P. |No. | | |occurrence |and Sentence | |No. in| | | | |by Judicial | |the | | | | |Magistrate | |High | | | | |First Class | |Court | | |158/2004 |03.06.2003 |28.06.06, |533/2012 |808/ |SLP | |in the Court | |RI for 2 |decided on |2015 |(Crl.)| |of Judicial | |years and |15.11.2012 | |3757/ | |Magistrate | |fine of |by Sessions| |2016 | |First Class | |Rs.1,000/- |Judge, | | | |(in short | |for offence |Thrissur | | | |JMFC), | |u/s 379 IPC | | | | |Chavakkad/ | |and RI for 2 | | | | |U/s 379, 414 | |years u/s 414| | | | |r/w 34 of IPC | |ID RI for 3 | | | | | | |months | | | | |1039/2003 |03.06.2003 |28.06.06, |759/2011 |859/ |SLP | |in the Court | |RI for 2 |decided on |2015 |(Crl.)| |of JMFC, | |years and |17.09.2012 | |3759/ | |Chavakkad/ | |fine of |by Sessions| |2016 | |U/s 379, 414 | |Rs.1,000/- |Judge, | | | |r/w 34 of IPC | |for offence |Thrissur | | | | | |u/s 379 IPC | | | | | | |and RI for 2 | | | | | | |years for | | | | | | |offence u/s | | | | | | |414 IPC, ID | | | | | | |RI for 3 | | | | | | |months. | | | | |390/2004 |03.06.2003 |28.06.06, |761/2011 |858/ |SLP | |in the Court | |RI for 2 |decided on |2015 |(Crl.)| |of JMFC, | |years and |04.08.2012 | |3758/ | |Chavakkad/ | |fine of |by Sessions| |2016 | |U/s 379, 414 | |Rs.1,000/- |Judge, | | | |r/w 34 of IPC | |for offence |Thrissur | | | | | |u/s 379 IPC | | | | | | |and RI for 2 | | | | | | |years u/s 414| | | | | | |ID RI for 3 | | | | | | |months | | | | |1168/2006 |03.06.2003 |31.12.08, |461/2011 |670/ |SLP | |in the Court | |RI for 1 year|decided on |2005 |(Crl.)| |of JMFC, | |and fine of |30.09.2011 | |3756/ | |Kunnamkulam/ | |Rs.1,000/- ID|by Sessions| |2016 | |U/s 379 r/w 34| |SI for 6 |Judge, | | | |of IPC | |months |Thrissur | | |
Shailesh Bandu Swami vs Dipak

point fresh members of the Standing Committee to fill the of- fices of those who are due to retire on the said date. (6) Any Councillor who ceases to be a member of the Standing Committee shall be eligible for reappointment.

C) Issue a writ of certiorari of any other appropriate in the nature of order and direction to quash and set aside the appointment of fresh members in meeting dated 14.06.2018 being contrary to the provisions of law. D) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, kindly grant stay to the election of Chairman of Standing Committee dated 15.06.2018 being contrary to the provisions of law.

E) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, kindly be restrained the Chairman of Standing Committee from taking any policy decision.

(v) The 8 members selected for retirement shall stand retired on 19.09.2018 and the fresh 8 members shall become members of the newly constituted Standing Committee on the same day.

(vi) Thereafter, such reconstituted Standing Committee shall in its first meeting to be held in the month of September 2018, elect its Chairman. Accordingly, there would be a smooth transition from the erstwhile Standing Committee to such newly constituted Standing Committee. If for some reason the Standing Committee is unable to appoint its Chairman within 30 days of 19.09.2018, the Corporation shall appoint the Chairman in a special meeting under Section 21(5) of the said Act, to be held within 15 days from expiry of the said period of 30 days.

(vii) The reconstituted Standing Committee and its Chairman appointed in terms of directions given hereinabove shall remain in existence for the remaining part of the one year tenure of the Standing Committee.

… … …” 16

20. We thus find that there was no reason for the High Court to interfere in its writ jurisdiction and issue directions as referred to above. We, therefore, allow these appeals, set aside the judgment and order under appeal and dismiss Writ Petition No.6987 of 2018. No costs.