Important Supreme Court Judgment Pronounced on January 30, 2020

Important Supreme Court Judgment Pronounced on January 30

1. Govind Prasad Kejriwal v. State of Bihar

The Indian Penal Code, 1860- Section 341, 323 and 379- The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973– Section 202-It can’t be contested that while holding the request under Section 202 CrPC. the Magistrate is required to take an expansive view and an at prima facie case. Be that as it may, even while directing/holding a request under Section 202 CrPC the Magistrate is required to consider whether even an at prima facie case is made out or not and whether the criminal procedures started are a maltreatment of procedure of law or the Court or not or potentially whether the question is absolute of a common sort or not as well as whether the common debate is attempted to be given a shade of criminal contest or not.

Case Number: CrlA. No. 168 of 2020 31-01-2020
Petitioner’s advocate: Pankaj Bhagat
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Justice M.R. Shah
Judge : Hon’ble justice M.R. Shah

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT FOR WAIVER OF COST, FORMAT

2. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Panna Mahesh Chandra Dave

Constitution of India – Article 136 – Special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court – The High Court has recorded a finding of reality that the Municipal Corporation annihilated the superstructures and took ownership in an oppressive way. The Legal Services Committee has recorded a finding that the superstructures were in presence from a period preceding 1961. These discoveries of actuality can’t be meddled with by this Court in an extraordinary leave appeal, except if the discoveries stun our inner voice. The discoveries of the High court are not unreasonable. In this manner, we find definitely no grounds to meddle with the judgment of the High Court. Henceforth, the extraordinary leave petitions are rejected. No Cost.

Case Number: S.L.P. (C) No. 18065 of 2018 31-01-2020
Petitioner’s Advocate: Suchitra Atul Chitale
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Hon’ble Ramana, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vineet saran, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramasubramnian
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramasubramnian

3. Sushil Sethi v. State of Arunachal Pradesh

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – The Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 420 read with Section 120B – Step by step instructions to suppress the criminal procedures for the offence under Section 420 IPC.

Case Number: CrlA. No.125 of 2020 31-01-2020
Petitioner’s Advocate: Anando Mukherjee
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan, Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shah
Judgment: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shahice

Important Judgments Supreme Court 1-5 August, 2019

4. Uttar Bhartiya Rajak Samaj Panchayat Banganga Rajak Samaj Co-operative Housing Society v. State of Maharashtra

The Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1996 – Sections 37(1) and 154 – Clause 3 of the schedule –
Case Number: C.A. No. 888 of 2020 31-01-2020
Petitioner’s Advocate: Sneha Ravi Iyer
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Shubash Reddy
Judgment: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

5. Vinay Kumar Mittal v. Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. (DHFL)

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 – Regulation 6 – There are almost one lakh contributors who have contributed their lifetime income with Respondent No.1. A portion of the stores have developed and a portion of the contributors are basically sick. The worries of the investors and their privileges will be considered as per law.
Case Number: C.A. No. 660 of 2020 31-01-2020
Petitioner’s Advocate: Ashish Varmani
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Nageshwar Rao, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
Judgment: Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Nageshwar Rao

Author: Kriti Sharma (Intern)