Expression "District Magistrate" and the "Chief Metropolitan Magistrate" as appearing in Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act shall deem to mean and include Additional District Magistrate and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the purposes of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

Rejection of candidature - RPF Constable - Candidate has used different language for filling up of the application form and the OMR answer book, therefore, his candidature was rightly rejected.

 

Prosecution can lead evidence only in accordance with the charge framed by the trial court - Where a higher charge is not framed for which there is evidence, the accused is entitled to assume that he is called upon to defend himself only with regard to the lesser offence

 sclaw.in

It would not be safe and/or prudent to convict the accused solely on the basis of their identification for the first time in the Court – Conviction under Sections 302/34 and 392 of IPC is set aside.

Punjab Excise - the role attributed, the nature and gravity of the offence, the stage of the case as well as the period of custody already undergone by the petitioners, Court deemed it appropriate to allow the petitions -- Petitioners admitted to regular bail.

Attempt to murder – Even the injuries are on the non-vital parts of the body and the weapons claimed to have been used in the occurrence are blunt weapons - Bail granted

NDPS interim bail - Superintendent, District Jail directed to ensure that the petitioner is taken in custody to the venue of Rasam Pagri/Bhog on 24.06.2022 by 10:00 AM and shall ensure that he is brought back to the jail premises by or before 5:00 PM on the same day itself

Live in relationship - Protection granted - but adhering to its fundamental duty of guarding their lives. Thus, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, it shall be appropriate that the concerned Superintendent of Police, SHO, or any officer to whom such powers have been delegated or have been authorized in this regard, provide appropriate protection to the petitioners for one week

Cheating – Criminal breach of trust -- Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct – directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 apply - Bail granted

DB - Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab to decide the stay application(s) afresh expeditiously, preferably within a period of 15 days - - status quo shall be maintained.

Challan without FSL - Default bail – Life of default bail - Bail granted State would be at liberty to seek cancellation/modification of the order

 aboutphlaw.com

Arms Act, 1959 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.394 & S.397-Evidence Act, 1872, S.9.

S.25—Robbery—Threat with knife—identification of accused—Complainant identified only one accused out of four accused-No other witness was examined-No Test Identification Parade was conducted-No other evidence against rest of three accused-Unidentified accused person were rightly acquitted- Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.394 & S.397-Evidence Act, 1872, S.9.;;

 Harjit Kaur v. State of Punjab & Ors. : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1010 

Civil & Criminal Proceedings

Damages-Claim for damages and loss due to physical assault by policeman-The judgment in the criminal case cannot govern the determination of the matter in civil suit when the plaintiff-respondent has led cogent and convincing evidence to prove the plea raised by him in the plaint.;;

Roshan Singh & Ors. v. Harpal Singh : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1338 

S.5 & S.27-Licenced Weapon

S.5 & S.27-Licenced Weapon-Opening fire in the area to scare the aggressors does not fall under the mischief of Section 5 of the Arms Act;;

Piara Singh v. State of Punjab : 2016(1) Law Herald (P&H)  696

Arms Act, 1959 S.4-Right to Religion-Wearing of Kirpan

Sec 4-Right to Religion-Wearing of Kirpan-ln recognition of the fundamental rights of the Sikhs to wear and carry kirpans as part of the profession of Sikh religion, the Kirpans carried or possessed by Sikhs are exempted from the provisions of Section 4 of the Arms Act, 1959-This exemption applies to all parts of India where Section 4 applies-Thus, no licence is required for a Sikh to wear or carry a kirpan-Constitution of India, 1950, Article 25,;;

Dilawar Singh v. State of Haryana : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 971

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.256 - Acquittal - Non appearance of complainant

 2016(2) CIVIL COURT CASES 717 (S.C.)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE & AMITAVAROY, JJ.


Criminal Appeal Nos.184 of 2016 (Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.6209 of 2011), D/ 29.02.2016.

VKBhat

Vs GRavi Kishore & Anr.


Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.256—Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Non appearance of complainant - Dismissal in default - Amounts to acquittal as contemplated u/s 256 Cr.P.C.

Having held as above the court granted permission to complainant to pursue remedy of appeal as the revision filed by the complainant was not  and only appeal was maintainable.

"9. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally in Second Revision Petition as well as the judgment passed by the High Court upholding the same. We do not intend to give any further comments in the matter.

10. However, observing the amount involved in this case, we only grant liberty to respondent No.l to take such steps as may be advised, in accordance with the provisions available in law and to proceed with the matter before the appropriate forum within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.


11. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed."

Arbitration Act, 194O

Award—Non-speaking order—The Arbitrator is not required to give reasons for his award under the Arbitration Act, 1940 unless the contract itself provides that the arbitrator shall give reasons and the arbitral reference makes it imperative—Therefore, award cannot be faulted on failure to give reasons.:;

 H.S. Tuli and Sons Builders (P) Ltd. (M/s) v. Union of India : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1073 :

Allotment of plot

Oustee Quota-Eligibility ~The acquired land must be of the oustee-!n other words, only those lands which a person owned at the time of acquisition can be taken into consideration—The ownership could indeed be acquired in any manner including by purchase or by inheritance.;:

 Gorakh Nath v. State of Punjab & Ors. : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1195 (DB

Allotment of plot

Eligibility—The expression 'applicant' shall also include and represent a 'spouse', for they are intertwined for the purposes of allotment of house sites.;;

 Manju S, Gupta (Mrs.) v. State of Haryana : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1273 (DB) 

Allotment of plot

Deemed Cancellation-Allotment letter sent by authorities was not responded by allottee-Before expiry of 30 days from alleged date of delivery of allotment letter, allottee had written to authorities that allotment letter be issued at the earliest-Authorities replied that it has been already issued and time has elapsed for deposit of initial 15% therefore, allotment is deemed to be canceled-Held; conduct of petitioner exhibits that he was awaiting forma! allotment and was ready and willing to perform his part of contract—Authorities could always issue another copy of allotment letter to the petitioner and require him to comply with the terms—In the present case, there is fair presumption that petitioner never received the allotment letter-Authorities had also not issued any formal cancellation letter which shows that they themselves were not sure whether letter was delivered or not-Authorities directed to issue formal letter of allotment.;;

Ashish Yadav v. State of Haryana & Or , : 2016(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1310 (DB) :