(121) BALLU @ BALRAM @ BALMUKUND AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302 and 34 – Murder - The appeal challenges a High Court judgment which reversed the acquittal of the appellants by a trial court for charges under Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the IPC, related to a murder case involving a love affair - The main issue is whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and if the High Court was right in reversing the trial court’s acquittal - The appellants argue that the High Court erred in reversing the trial co India Law Library Docid # 1604040
(122) PURNI DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. BABU RAM AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2024 J&K Limitation Act - Article 182 - Suit for Possesion - The case originates from a 1984 suit for possession, leading to a decree in favor of the plaintiff in 1986 - After appeals, the decree became final in 2000 - An execution application was filed in 2000 and rejected in 2005, leading to the current appeal - The primary issue is whether the execution petition is time-barred, focusing on the applicability of Article 182 of the J&K Limitation Act and Section 48 of the CPC regarding the limitation India Law Library Docid # 1604041
(123) M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED Vs. A.S. RAGHAVENDRA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2024 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2(s) – “workman” - The respondent was appointed as Regional Business Head at Bharti Airtel Limited, with a dispute arising over his resignation being forceful - The main issue is whether the respondent falls within the definition of a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Bharti Airtel argued that the respondent held a managerial position and was not a "workman" as per the Act - The respondent claimed his duties were clerical, India Law Library Docid # 1604061
(124) THE GENERAL MANAGER, M/S BARSUA IRON ORE MINES Vs. THE VICE PRESIDENT UNITED MINES MAZDOOR UNION AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-04-2024 Service Law – Back Wages - The case involves a dispute over the date of birth of respondent no.3, an employee of Barsua Iron Ore Mines, which affected his retirement date - The main issue is whether the respondent no.3's date of birth should be considered as 27.12.1948 (initially declared) or 12.03.1955 (later claimed) - The appellant argued that the respondent cannot resile from the initially declared date of birth after 9 years, which would have made him underage for employment at the time - T India Law Library Docid # 1604062
(125) STATE OF KERALA Vs. UNION OF INDIA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-04-2024 Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act, 2003 - Section 4 - Fiscal management principles - The State of Kerala filed a suit against the Union of India, challenging actions related to fiscal management, including an amendment to the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act and restrictions on borrowing - The suit raises substantial constitutional questions regarding the interpretation of Article 131 and the extent of a state’s right to borrow under Article 293 – State of Kerala arg India Law Library Docid # 1604036
(126) STATE OF HARYANA Vs. DR. RITU SINGH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Briefly stated, the facts available on record are that a complaint was filed by the respondent no.2 with the police alleging certain offences committed by the respondent no.1, on the basis of which FIR[4] in question was registered. Respondent no.1 at the relevant point of time was working as veterinary doctor in Policlinic, Sonipat Animal Husbandry Department. Immediately, after registration of the FIR while the matter was still under investigation, the respondent no.1 filed a petition in the H India Law Library Docid # 1882481
(127) BLOOMBERG TELEVISION PRODUCTION SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 On 01 March 2024, an ex-parte ad interim order was passed by the ADJ 05 of the South Saket Courts, New Delhi[1] directing the appellants (a media platform, one of its editors, and the concerned journalists) to take down an article dated 21 February 2024 published on their online platform within a week. The appellants were also restrained from posting, circulating or publishing the article in respect of the respondent-plaintiff on any online or offline platform till the next date of hearing. The India Law Library Docid # 1882482
(128) AMUDHA Vs. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Abetment of suicide - The appellant, is charged under Section 306 IPC - The deceased, her uncle, committed suicide after a family dispute over property - The main issue is whether the appellant instigated the deceased to commit suicide, as she was in the USA from September 2019 until after the suicide in March 2020 - The appellant argues that no evidence shows she instigated the suicide, as she was abroad and had no contact with the deceased - The State contends India Law Library Docid # 1604029
(129) SABITA PAUL AND OTHER Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 376, 354, 389, 506, and 120-B - Information & Technology Act, 2000 - Section 67A - Anticipatory bail -The case involves allegations against Petitioners taking and using obscene photographs to extort money from the complainant - The core issue is the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to Appellant who is accused of conspiring with her son in the alleged crime - The petitioner had suppressed material facts regarding her previous attempts to secure anticipatory ba India Law Library Docid # 1604030
(130) DR. JAYA THAKUR AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service, and Term of Office) Act, 2023 – Section 7(1) - Selection Committee - The order discusses applications for stay regarding the selection and appointment of Election Commissioners, challenging the vires of Section 7(1) of the 2023 Act - The main issues are the alteration of the Selection Committee’s composition and the impact on transparent elections, along with procedural irregularities in the selection process - The petitioners argue tha India Law Library Docid # 1604031
(131) M/S ACME PAPERS LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. CHINTAMAN DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Sections 10, 16 and 20 - Suits to be instituted where subject-matter situate - The case involves a dispute over a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the sale of land, with the petitioner seeking to transfer a suit from Sehore, Madhya Pradesh to Calcutta, West Bengal - The primary issue is the appropriate jurisdiction for the suit concerning the MoU and the suit property - The petitioner contends that the MoU was executed in Calcutta and that the validity and enfor India Law Library Docid # 1604032
(132) THIRUMOORTHY Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302, 363,342 and 201 - Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Sections 2(13) and 6 – The appellant was convicted for various offences including kidnapping, murder, and offences under the POCSO Act - The trial court sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for different terms - The appeal challenges the High Court’s dismissal of the appellant’s criminal appeal, affirming his conviction and sentences - The key issue is the non-adherence to th India Law Library Docid # 1604033
(133) AWUNGSHI CHIRMAYO AND ANOTHER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 306 –The case involves the death of a 25-year-old girl from Manipur, found dead in her rented accommodation in Delhi - The cause of death was unclear, with post-mortem reports showing post-mortem injuries but no cause of death - The main issue is the ineffective investigation into the death, initially registered as a suicide and later converted to a murder case - The appellants, cousins of the deceased, seek a thorough investigation by the CBI - The appe India Law Library Docid # 1604034
(134) RAM MURTI SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Grant of Bail - An FIR was registered for the murder of the appellant’s son, and the respondent no.2 was implicated during the investigation - The main issue is the challenge against the High Court’s order granting bail to respondent no.2. - The appellant argued that the High Court failed to consider relevant facts and allowed the bail application without adequate reasoning - Respondent no.2 argued that he was not named in the FIR and had already suffered i India Law Library Docid # 1604035
(135) BINA BASAK AND OTHERS Vs. SRI BIPUL KANTI BASAK AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 This matter pertains to right to title and possession of a property that was allotted by the Relief and Rehabilitation Department of Government of West Bengal to a family which had come to Siliguri from the then East Pakistan in 1950. Before moving forward with the facts of the case, it is imperative for us to mention that such rehabilitation programmes are introduced by the government with the sole aim of re-establishment of the displaced/ migrant families and not for the benefit of any individ India Law Library Docid # 1882462
(136) M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES LTD. Vs. M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 Civil Appeal No(S). 2032, 2035 and 2033 These appeals challenge the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad dated 02.02.2009, vide which the appeal filed by the M/s. Divgi Metal Wares Employees Association, which is respondent No.1 herein, came to be allowed. Similarly, by the said order, the Writ Petition No.31808/2003 filed by Respondent No.1 was also allowed and the Writ Petition No.7993/2006 filed by M/s Divgi Metal Wares Ltd., India Law Library Docid # 1882466
(137) PANKAJ SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 The Trial Court convicted the appellant-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC). The maximum sentence imposed is life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC with a fine of Rs.1,00,00/-. We must note that charges were also framed against the appellant-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 354D(1)(ii) and 506 of the IPC. The Trial Court acquitted the appellant-accused as India Law Library Docid # 1882480
(138) THE ORISSA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. SUKANTI MOHAPATRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, we are of the view that the impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, allowing Writ Petition (Civil) nos. 7220/2007 and 8405/2007 filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 - Sukanti Mohapatra and Prasanta Kumar Mohapatra, is unsustainable, both on facts and in law. The appellant before us - Orissa State Financial Corporation [1] had granted a loan of Rs.3,26,258.78 (Rupees three lakhs twenty six thousand two hundred fifty eig India Law Library Docid # 1882483
(139) M K RANJITSINH AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 The GIB (the scientific name of which is ardeotis nigriceps) is native to southern and western India. It typically occupies grasslands or arid regions. The State of Rajasthan is home to a majority of the current population. With time, the country has seen a rapid and steady decline in the population of the GIB. As of 2018, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, or IUCN as it is popularly known, classified the GIB as a critically endangered species. In IUCNs system of classification, India Law Library Docid # 1882487
(140) M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES LTD. Vs. M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-03-2024 Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 - Section 3, 7 and 10(3) – Transferring of employees between different units of the company - The case involves Appellant Company. and its employees’ association, concerning the legality of transferring employees between different units of the company - The main issue is whether the company’s Standing Orders, allowing transfers anywhere within India, are valid under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 - The company argues that t India Law Library Docid # 1604023