Tag: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Supreme Court Protects Victim’s Rights: No Jail for Accused in POCSO Case
12Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Protects Victim’s Rights: No Jail for Accused in POCSO Case

The Supreme Court overturned a High Court ruling, reinstating convictions under the POCSO Act and IPC, emphasizing that Section 482 CrPC cannot quash serious offenses even with victim settlement. The Court underscored the State's constitutional duty under Article 21 and the JJ Act to protect and rehabilitate POCSO victims and their children. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a criminal appeal by the State of West Bengal against a Calcutta High Court judgment from October 18, 2023. The High Court had set aside the conviction of an accused person under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Supreme Court, in a judgment dated August 20, 2024, set aside the High Court's impugned judgment and restored the Special Court's verdict of convictio...
Read More
From Life Imprisonment to Freedom: Supreme Court Cites “Misreading of Evidence” in Acquittal
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

From Life Imprisonment to Freedom: Supreme Court Cites “Misreading of Evidence” in Acquittal

The Supreme Court, exercising its appellate jurisdiction under Article 136, set aside the concurrent convictions of the appellants, finding that the Trial Court and High Court had misread and ignored striking features of the prosecution's evidence. The Court highlighted issues with witness credibility, unexplained delays in statements, and unreliable corroborating evidence, concluding that guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt Facts Of The Case: In 2011, the wife of PW-1 won the Panchayat Board elections, a position held by Accused No. 1's family for approximately four decades. This led to numerous skirmishes between the two sides in the months following the elections. On the night of November 14, 2012, PW-1's brother (Deceased No. 1), his son (Deceased No. 2), and daughter (PW-9)...
Read More
Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration of Retired Lt. Col’s Promotion Grading After 20-Year Battle
5Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration of Retired Lt. Col’s Promotion Grading After 20-Year Battle

The Supreme Court partially allowed the civil appeal, upholding the Armed Forces Tribunal's decision but directing reconsideration of the appellant's 'Z' grading in the 2001 promotion board. The Court affirmed the Chief of Army Staff's discretionary authority under Defence Services Regulations to modify Selection Board recommendations, while emphasizing fair reconsideration of the appellant's case within three months. The judgment clarified that promotions in the Territorial Army remain subject to the Army's hierarchical decision-making process, balancing institutional autonomy with individual rights to equitable evaluation. Facts Of The Case: The case involved Lt. Col. NK Ghai (Retd.), who challenged his non-promotion to Colonel rank despite 22 years of service in the Territorial Army. ...
Read More
Govt Employee Loses Promotion Battle: Supreme Court Upholds Downgraded Designation After 40 Years
2Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Govt Employee Loses Promotion Battle: Supreme Court Upholds Downgraded Designation After 40 Years

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding that the appellant (a 1976 appointee) was validly redesignated from Junior Field Officer (Group B) to Carpet Training Officer (Group C) in 1978, and subsequent regularization in 2006 as CTO didn't entitle him to Handicrafts Promotion Officer status or its promotion channel. The Court ruled that cadre classification and scheme-specific redesignation were within the government's administrative discretion, and the appellant's acceptance of earlier CAT orders (without challenging the CTO designation) precluded belated claims for HPO benefits under Article 14 Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Rampat Azad, was appointed as a Junior Field Officer (JFO - Group B) in 1976 at the Carpet Weaving Training Centre, Varanasi, under the All-India Handicr...
Read More
Technical Flaws Sink Conviction: Supreme Court Rules Bank Fraud Trial Violated Accused Rights
2Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Technical Flaws Sink Conviction: Supreme Court Rules Bank Fraud Trial Violated Accused Rights

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants, holding that (1) Appellant No. 3's juvenility under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 invalidated his conviction, and (2) the trial court's failure to properly examine all appellants under Section 313 CrPC – by not putting material incriminating evidence to them – vitiated the trial, causing irreversible prejudice given the 40-year case delay. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a 1982-83 bank fraud where accused persons, including appellants Ramji Prasad Jaiswal and his two sons Ashok Kumar Jaiswal and Bal Mukund Jaiswal, allegedly conspired with SBI branch manager Ajay Kumar Srivastava (since deceased) to fraudulently obtain ₹13.29 lakh using fake transport receipts from their non-existent firm 'Rohtas Carriers'. The CBI registere...
Read More
Supreme Court Upholds Strict Environmental Laws: Prior Clearance Must for Projects, No Retrospective Approvals
26May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Strict Environmental Laws: Prior Clearance Must for Projects, No Retrospective Approvals

The Supreme Court ruled that ex post facto environmental clearances (ECs) violate environmental jurisprudence and are alien to the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the EIA Notification, 2006. Stressing the precautionary principle and Article 21 (right to a pollution-free environment), the Court struck down the 2017 notification and 2021 OM permitting retrospective ECs, holding them arbitrary and illegal. It reiterated that prior EC is mandatory, and no regularization of violations is permissible, aligning with its earlier judgments in Common Cause and Alembic Pharmaceuticals. The Court barred future exemptions but spared already granted ECs. Facts Of The Case: The case involved multiple writ petitions and a civil appeal challenging the legality of the 2017 notification and 2021 ...
Read More
Supreme Court Backs Arbitrator’s Power to Award Compound Interest :Rules on Interest Calculation in Award Enforcement
25May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Backs Arbitrator’s Power to Award Compound Interest :Rules on Interest Calculation in Award Enforcement

The Supreme Court ruled that arbitral tribunals have the power to award compound interest (interest on interest) under Section 31(7) of the Arbitration Act, 1996. It clarified that the "sum awarded" includes both principal and pre-award interest, and post-award interest can be calculated on this total amount. The judgment overruled earlier contrary interpretations, affirming arbitrators' discretion in interest calculations unless expressly barred by contract. The Court emphasized this aligns with the compensatory purpose of arbitration awards for delayed payments. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a contractual dispute between M/s Interstate Construction (appellant) and National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd. (respondent) regarding construction work for Ramagundam Super Therma...
Read More