Most minerals are spatially located in a few mineral rich states, namely, Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan and West Bengal. Constitution is a living organic document and must be interpreted in that spirit [Saurabh Chaudri v. Union of India, (2003) 11 SCC 146 ; Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of ..read more

“Earth teaches us patience, love; Air teaches us mobility, liberty; Fire teaches us warmth, courage; Sky teaches us equality, broad-mindedness; Water teaches us purity, cleanliness.” State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan, (1988) 4 SCC 655, speaking through Venkatachaliah J, observed, “‘Every source from which man has increased his power has been used to diminish prospects of his successors’.” Sacred texts have proffered to worship and respect nature and impel mankind to preserve same. This, in essence, is Doctrine of Intergenerational Equity. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ga ..read more

Haridas Das v. Usha Rani Banik, (2006) 4 SCC 78 while reiterating decisions in Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma v. Aribam Pishak Sharma, (1979) 4 SCC 389 and Meera Bhanja v. Nirmala Kumari Choudhury, (1995) 1 SCC 170 drew out narrow contours within which review jurisdiction of this Court had to be exercised and held, Order XLVII, CPC does not allow for rehearing of a dispute merely because a party had not highlighted all aspects of a case. When ground for review sought is discovery of new evidence, State of West Bengal v. Kamal Sengupta, (2008) 8 SCC 612 clarified, same must be evidence which should be ..read more

What cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly. It is apt to refer to a decision of a Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in Nalini Sunder v. GV Sunder, AIR 2003 Kar 86. It was held, a party could not make out a case on basis of evidence for which he/she has laid no foundation in pleadings. It is fairly settled, no amount of evidence can prove a case of a party who had not set up same in his/her pleadings, it was further held. According to us, it is correct. In absence of any specific provisions dealing with non-filing of written statements/forfeiture of right to file a written sta ..read more

A perusal of Section 307, IPC would make it clear, it really imbibes the true spirit of the maxim ‘culpae poena per esto’. It means ‘let the punishment be proportionate to the offence; let the punishment fit the crime.’ The second part of Section 307, IPC did not prescribe for imposition of punishment more than what is prescribed under the first part. An imposition of rigorous imprisonment for a term of 14 years for a conviction under Section 307, IPC is impermissible in law and it is liable to be interfered with. – Hon’ble Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Amit Rana v. State of Haryana, [Special Leave ..read more

We do not find any infirmity, much less any perversity, warranting any interference by this Court. However, there is one aspect which requires clarification. Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation does not always result in relief. A protection of legitimate expectation is subject to overriding public interest. Even if an individual’s expectation is reasonable and based on a past practice or representation by Executive or Legislature, it can be denied if justified by a significant public necessity. Judiciary affords considerable leeway to Executive and Legislature in matters of economic policy. Con ..read more

Appellant contends, i) no Arbitrable Dispute remained after a ‘full and final settlement’ and ii) appointment of an Arbitrator was an exercise in futility. However, we uphold and affirm, appointment of Justice K.A. Puj, Former Judge of High Court of Gujarat, as an Arbitrator. There is no rule of an absolute kind which precludes Arbitration in cases where a ‘full and final settlement’ has been arrived at. A dispute pertaining to ‘accord and satisfaction’ of claims is not one which attacks or questions existence of an Arbitration Agreement in any way. Arbitration Agreements, being separate and i ..read more

“It would be very wrong to say, under a particular statute, bail cannot be granted.” According to Police, Sheikh Javed Iqbal had confessed, he was engaged in illegal trade of supplying counterfeit Indian currency notes in Nepal. Sheikh Javed Iqbal was arrested on 23.02.2015. We are in July, 2024. 9 years have gone by. A reasonable view can be taken, trial is proceeding at snail’s pace, would not be concluded in near future and is likely to take considerable time. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 2787 of 2024, decided on 03.07.2024, was also a case where fak ..read more

It is a fact, certain High Courts maintained a view, sentencing to undergo ‘imprisonment till rising of Court’ would be no sentence at all according to law. It cannot be said, imposing a sentence of ‘imprisonment till rising of Court’ is impermissible or an action amounting to evasion of statutory provisions. However, we have no option but to hold, imposition of ‘imprisonment till rising of Court’ upon conviction for an offence under Section 494, IPC was unconscionably lenient or a flea-bite sentence. State of Karnataka v. Krishna, (1987) 1 SCC 538 is relevant. Court, while enhancing sentence ..read more

We are examining legality of arrest of Arvind Kejriwal on 21.03.2024. Gifford v. Kelson, (1943) 51 Man. R 120 accurately explains difference between “reasons to believe” and “suspicion”. “Suspicion” requires lower degree of satisfaction and does not amount to belief. An arrestee should be furnished “reasons to believe” to enable him to exercise his right to challenge same. An arrest under Section 19(1) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot be exercised as per whims and fancies. It has been strenuously urged, in present case, “reasons to believe” do not mention and record “reas ..read more