Supreme Court - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Upholds Fair Competition: Schott Glass Cleared of Abuse of Dominance

16May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Fair Competition: Schott Glass Cleared of Abuse of Dominance

The Supreme Court ruled that Schott Glass India did not abuse its dominant position under Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. It held that volume-based discounts and long-term supply agreements were commercially justified and lacked anti-competitive effects. The Court emphasized the necessity of an "effects-based analysis" to prove abuse of dominance and rejected the Competition Commission of India’s findings due to insufficient evidence and procedural lapses, including denial of cross-examination. The judgment reaffirms that mere market dominance is not illegal unless proven to harm competition. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a complaint filed by Kapoor Glass India Pvt. Ltd. before the Competition Commission of India (CCI) in 2010, alleging that Schott Glass India Pvt. ...

Supreme Court Rules on BSE Payout Dispute: No Release of Funds Until Fraud Investigation Completes

16May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules on BSE Payout Dispute: No Release of Funds Until Fraud Investigation Completes

The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC by directing the release of funds during an ongoing fraud investigation. Emphasizing that inherent powers cannot preempt trial court findings, the SC ruled that releasing disputed money would prejudice the investigation. The funds must remain withheld until trial concludes. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a dispute between NDA Securities Ltd. (Appellant) and State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. (Respondents) over the release of ₹15.90 lakhs withheld by the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). The appellant, a securities trading firm, alleged fraud after receiving a phone call in 2013 from an impersonator posing as client Brij Mohan Gagrani, instructing the purchase of 1 lakh shares of Ashutosh Paper Mills...

Public Servant’s Spouse Can Be Convicted for Aiding Corruption: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Corruption Case: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

16May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Public Servant’s Spouse Can Be Convicted for Aiding Corruption: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Corruption Case: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 109 IPC read with Sections 13(1)(e) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, ruling that a non-public servant (appellant) can abet the offence of possessing disproportionate assets by aiding a public servant (her husband). Relying on P. Nallammal (1999), the Court held that concealing illicit assets in the appellant’s name constituted intentional aid under Section 107 IPC, irrespective of marital status. The 2018 amendment to Section 12 of the PC Act (explicitly punishing abetment) was noted, though the offence was abettable even prior. The judgment reaffirms that abetment charges apply when a person facilitates the concealment of disproportionate wealth. Facts Of The Case: The case involves P. Shanthi Pugazhenthi, an As...

Supreme Court Reforms Senior Advocate Selection: Orders Fresh Rules for Senior Advocate Designation

16May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reforms Senior Advocate Selection: Orders Fresh Rules for Senior Advocate Designation

The Supreme Court critically examined the procedure for designation of Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, highlighting issues with interviews, point-based evaluation, and secret ballot voting. It emphasized transparency, objectivity, and uniformity in the designation process and referred the matter to the Chief Justice for reconsideration. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around the process of designating Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, as interpreted and modified by the Supreme Court in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) and subsequent judgments. The issue arose when concerns were raised about the effectiveness and fairness of the guidelines laid down in *Indira Jaising-1* and *Indira Jaising-2*, particularly afte...

Supreme Court Acquits Husband in Dowry Case under 498A IPC | Highlights Misuse of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

16May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Husband in Dowry Case under 498A IPC | Highlights Misuse of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, holding that vague and unsubstantiated allegations without specific instances or corroborative evidence cannot sustain a conviction. The Court emphasized that mere allegations of cruelty or dowry demand, unsupported by material particulars, fail to meet the legal threshold. It cautioned against the misuse of protective laws to rope in family members without concrete proof, reaffirming that prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment highlights the necessity of precise allegations and independent evidence in matrimonial offences. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty under Section 498A of...

Supreme Court Rules on Tenancy Dispute: Owner’s Redevelopment Rights Prevail Over Family Settlement Claim

14May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules on Tenancy Dispute: Owner’s Redevelopment Rights Prevail Over Family Settlement Claim

The Supreme Court overturned a High Court injunction order, emphasizing the strict requirements for granting interim relief under civil law. The Court held that the respondent failed to establish a prima facie case of tenancy rights, while the balance of convenience favored the appellant-owner. The judgment reaffirmed that injunctions cannot paralyze property rights without clear evidence of legal entitlement, though it safeguarded the respondent's potential claim by directing reservation of 550 sq ft pending the trial court's final decision. The ruling clarified that settlement discussions cannot substitute legal proof of tenancy. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a property dispute over a 22,000 sq ft plot in Chembur, Mumbai, originally owned by appellant Tushar Jani's father. In 19...

No Bail for Accused in India’s Largest Heroin Seizure Case: Supreme Court on NDPS and UAPA Act

14May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

No Bail for Accused in India’s Largest Heroin Seizure Case: Supreme Court on NDPS and UAPA Act

The Supreme Court upheld the denial of bail to the accused under the NDPS Act and UAPA, emphasizing the stringent conditions of Section 43D(5) of UAPA, which restricts bail if prima facie evidence suggests guilt. The Court ruled that circumstantial evidence, witness statements, and transnational conspiracy allegations met the threshold for continued detention, despite no direct recovery of contraband. The accused’s role in facilitating smuggling, foreign links, and risk of witness tampering justified rejecting bail. However, the Court allowed liberty to seek bail after six months or substantial trial progress, balancing personal liberty (Article 21) with national security concerns. The judgment clarified that terror financing charges were premature without further evidence. Facts Of The C...

Supreme Court Acquits Revenue Officer in Bribery Case Citing Lack of Proof : No Proven Demand, No Conviction

11May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Revenue Officer in Bribery Case Citing Lack of Proof : No Proven Demand, No Conviction

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of a revenue officer under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt, thus negating the presumption under Section 20 of the Act. Facts Of The Case: The case involves Partiala Sudhakar, a Revenue Inspector in the Mandal Revenue Office, Gundala Mandal, Nalgonda District, who was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution alleged that on August 6, 2003, Sudhakar demanded a bribe of Rs. 2,000 from the complainant (PW1) to process his application for drought compensation for damaged trees. When PW1 expressed inability to pay, Sudhakar ...

Big Win for State Tax Laws: 3 Clarifies Purchase Tax Scope “Kerala & Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Laws”

11May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Big Win for State Tax Laws: 3 Clarifies Purchase Tax Scope “Kerala & Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Laws”

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, ruling that purchase tax applies to taxable goods even when sellers are exempt. It clarified that these provisions constitute independent charging sections, ensuring tax collection when goods otherwise escape sale tax due to exemptions or specific transactional circumstances. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a batch of appeals concerning the applicability of purchase tax under Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The appellants, including C.T. Kochouseph and others, were dealers who had purchased goods from sellers exempted from tax under various gov...

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Citing Hostile Witnesses & Flawed Evidence

11May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Citing Hostile Witnesses & Flawed Evidence

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused in a murder case, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to the hostile testimony of 71 out of 87 witnesses. The Court held that reliance on police testimony and Section 161 CrPC statements violated Section 162 CrPC, and recoveries under Section 27 of the Evidence Act were inadmissible without independent corroboration. The judgment reaffirmed that acquittals can only be overturned if the trial court's view was wholly unreasonable, emphasizing the presumption of innocence. Facts Of The Case: The case involved the brutal murder of an employee allegedly orchestrated by his former employer (A1) due to professional rivalry. On April 28, 2011, the victim was hacked to death in front of his 15-year-old son (PW8) nea...