Consumer Disputes: When the car had run only for 800 kms., than in case of defect, it would either be open for delivery of re-conditioned unit or replacement unit, as per the opinion of the mutually agreed technical expert. CN Anantharam v. Fiat India Limited, (Supreme Court).

Criminal procedure: Under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, accused has the right to be informed by the officer that he has the right to be searched in presence of gazetted officer or Magistrate, and there cannot be substantial compliance of this requirement. Although it is not necessary that the information be given in writing or prescribed form, however, the requirement is that the accused shall have the informed choice prior to search & seizure. Vijaysingh Chandubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat, (Supreme Court) (5J).

Criminal procedure: When the mis-representation/crime had been committed before the government department, then the embargo of complaint by the same department would not arise as the government departments cannot be equated to Court under s.195 of Code of Criminal Procedure which requires that the Court before whom mis-representation had been made shall institute the proceedings. Institute of Chartered Accountants v. Vimal Kumar Surana, (Supreme Court).

Criminal procedure: When FIR is lodged with the police authorities, they shall be permitted to investigate the same without any interference from the political / ministerial posts, and such interference is illegal, unwarranted, against equality and social justice. State of Maharashtra v. Sarangharsingh, (Supreme Court).

Dowry death: Ingredients u/s.304-B of Indian Penal Code: When the bride committed suicide due to harassment meted out by the husband, which was not coupled with demand for dowry, then such offence would only attract s.306 - 'abetment of suicide'. Narwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (Supreme Court).

Environment: Felling of trees: The mechanism provided under M.P. law is that after submitting of initial application before the Collector of concerned district, if no permission is granted, than after lapse of three months from the date of initial application and within "reasonable period", a reminder shall be submitted. If no order is passed within three months of reminder application, it would be deemed that permission has been granted. Smt. Raju Bai v. Collector, Balaghat, (HC of MP) (FB).

Hindu law: Adoption: When any child is adopted by the husband, there shall be express consent of the wife(s) for purposes of adoption which shall either be in writing or reflected by affirmative/positive act voluntarily and willingly done by her. Thus, mere presence, silence or lack of protest during the ceremony would not amount to grant of consent for adoption. Ghisalal v. Dhapubai, (Supreme Court).

Judicial propriety: Observing that "Something is rotten in Allahabad High Court", directions issued to Chief Justices of High Courts all over India to ensure that aspersions of nepotism, etc. are controlled. Further directed that if need be, to take necessary strict measures. Raja Khan v. Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board, (Supreme Court).

Mediation reports: Format: The report of the mediator should only contain whether it has been successful or not, and it shall not contain the description of offers & counter-offers to maintain its confidentiality. Moti Ram v. Ashok Kumar, (Supreme Court).

Public interest litigation: When the solitary petitioner in the PIL dies, then it remains open for the Court to continue the proceedings - either by asking any other individual or organisation to assist the Court in place of deceased petitioner or issue a notice through media inviting public-spirited bodies or persons to file applications to take up the position of the petitioner. Pragati Mahila Mandal v. Municipal Council, Nanded, (Supreme Court).

Right of legal representation: Resolutions passed by the Bar Association not to defend accused policemen in criminal cases violates right to be defended under Article 22(1) of Constitution of India. Every person however wicked, depraved, vile, degenerate, perverted, loathsome, execrable, vicious or repulsive may be regarded by the society has a right to be defended and it is the corresponding professional duty of the lawyers to defend such persons. AS Mohammed Rafi v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Supreme Court).

Secularism: Government spending small expenditure separately for separate religions, for eg., granting support to Haj pilgrims cannot be said to be against tenets of secularism. Unless the government spends substantial portions of any direct or indirect tax proceeds, it cannot be held to be in violation of constitutional provisions. Prafull Goradia v. Union of India, (Supreme Court).

Torts: When the motorcyclists met with an accident due to mud/sand lying on road, than local authority concerned would be liable to pay compensation having failed to meet the statutory liability for upkeep roads. UP Sharma v. Jabalpur Corporation (HC of MP).

FAQ's

Links