Sunday, July 6, 2025
spot_img
Dashboard
Home Blog Page 39

Jindal Stainless Ltd. vs. State of Haryana  

Shivani Singh
-
0
Jindal Stainless Ltd. vs. State of Haryana  

Jindal Stainless Ltd. vs. State of Haryana  

Equivalent citations: AIR 2016 SUPREME COURT 5617, 2017 (12) SCC 1, (2016) 11 SCALE 1, 2017 (1) KLT SN 12 (SC) 

Bench: T.S. Thakur, A.K. Sikri, S.A. Bobde, Shiva Kirti Singh, N.V. Ramana 

PETITIONER: Jindal Stainless Ltd. 

RESPONDENT: State of Haryana. 

 BRIEF 

The Court reaffirmed that states have the power to levy VAT on the sale of goods within their jurisdiction. This power is derived from the Constitution, which allows states to tax sales and purchases within their own borders. sales within a single state. For interstate sales, where goods are sold across state borders, the Central Sales Tax Act governs the tax obligations. Thus, VAT is not applicable to interstate sales, and such sales are subject to central taxation. The ruling acknowledged that the VAT regime is part of the state’s fiscal policy and economic structure. The Court noted that businesses must comply with the state tax regulations for intrastate sales and adhere to central tax regulations for interstate transactions. The Supreme Court’s judgment in Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. State of Haryana affirmed the state’s power to levy VAT on intrastate sales, reinforcing the constitutional validity of VAT. 

 FACTS 

The case of Jindal Stainless Ltd. vs. State of Haryana (2016) involves a dispute over the imposition of sales tax on the sale of goods. Jindal Stainless Ltd., a company engaged in the production and sale of stainless-steel products, challenged the imposition of sales tax on sales made to other states. The dispute centred on whether the sales tax was correctly applied according to the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. The primary issue was whether the sale of goods by Jindal Stainless Ltd. to other states should be taxed under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act The legal question revolved around the interpretation of sales tax provisions and whether the tax imposition by the State of Haryana was in line with the applicable legal framework. The case is significant for its implications on tax law and the jurisdictional authority of state versus central taxation in India. 

 ISSUES

  1.   Jurisdiction for Taxation: Whether the State of Haryana had the authority to impose sales tax on sales made by Jindal Stainless Ltd. to other states, or if such sales fell under the central sales tax regime which would govern inter-state transactions.
  2.   Applicability of Tax Provisions: Whether the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, applied to the sales in question or if the transactions should have been taxed under the Central Sales Tax Act, which is designed for inter-state sales.
  3.   Validity of Taxation: Whether the imposition of sales tax by Haryana on these inter-state sales was valid under the prevailing tax laws and constitutional provisions. These issues required a detailed interpretation of both state and central sales tax laws to determine the correct application of tax provisions in inter-state trade.

 JUDGMENTS

  1.   Nature of Sales Tax: The Court clarified that sales tax on inter-state sales should be governed by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and not by the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. This means that the sales made by Jindal Stainless Ltd. to other states should be subject to central sales tax regulations rather than state-specific sales tax laws.
  2.   Jurisdiction and Authority: The Supreme Court emphasized that states cannot impose sales tax on inter-state transactions if such transactions fall under the jurisdiction of central sales tax law. This ruling underscored the division of authority between state and central governments regarding taxation of inter-state trade.
  3.   Taxability and Tax Rates: The judgment highlighted that any imposition of sales tax by the State of Haryana on sales made to other states was incorrect and invalid. The central sales tax regime should be applied, which may involve different tax rates and procedures. The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforced the principles of federal tax jurisdiction, ensuring that inter-state sales are regulated consistently across India under central law, rather than being subject to varying state regulations.

 ANALYSIS 

Jindal Stainless Ltd., a company engaged in the manufacture and sale of stainless-steel products, contested the imposition of sales tax by the State of Haryana on inter-state sales. The company argued that such sales should be governed by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, not the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. 

  1. Jurisdiction of Taxation: Whether the State of Haryana had the authority to levy sales tax on sales made to other states or if such sales should fall under the central sales tax regime.
  2. Applicability of Sales Tax Laws: Whether the Haryana General Sales Tax Act or the Central Sales Tax Act should govern the taxation of inter-state transactions.

  COURT’ S ANALYSIS

  1.   Central vs. State Taxation: The Supreme Court held that inter-state sales should be regulated by the Central Sales Tax Act, as this Act specifically deals with the taxation of goods sold across state boundaries. The Haryana General Sales Tax Act, being a state law, does not apply to inter-state transactions.
  2.   Principle of Federal Taxation*: The judgment reinforced the principle of federalism in taxation, asserting that central laws take precedence over state laws in the context of inter-state trade. This distinction helps prevent legal inconsistencies and ensures a uniform tax structure for inter-state transactions. 
  3.   Legal Precedent: The Court’s decision aligns with established principles of tax law, where central legislation governs inter-state transactions to avoid fragmentation of tax policies and potential double taxation.  

IMPLICATION 

  1. Uniformity in Taxation: The ruling ensures that inter-state sales are uniformly regulated under the Central Sales Tax Act, providing clarity and consistency across different states.
  2. Impact on Businesses: Companies involved in inter-state trade, like Jindal Stainless Ltd., benefit from a clear and consistent tax framework, reducing the complexity of compliance with multiple state tax regulations.
  3. Legal Precedent: This case serves as a significant precedent for future disputes concerning the jurisdiction of sales tax in inter-state trade, reinforcing the application of central tax laws in such contexts. the judgment in Jindal Stainless Ltd. vs. State of Haryana underscores the importance of clear jurisdictional boundaries between state and central taxation laws, facilitating a more streamlined and predictable tax environment for businesses engaged in interstate commerce.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

Chirag Bhanu Singh & Anr. vs. High Court of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

Kalpana Bisen
-
0
Chirag Bhanu Singh & Anr. vs. High Court of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India
Case Number: Writ Petition (C) No. 312 of 2024
Date of Decision: 16/04/2024
Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, J.
Parties:
– Petitioners: Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra
– Respondents: High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Registrar General of the Himachal Pradesh High Court
– Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Senior Counsel
– Counsel for Respondents: Dr. S. Muralidhar, Senior Counsel

Introduction

This case involves a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by the petitioners, two senior-most District and Sessions Judges of Himachal Pradesh. The petition challenges the recommendation of junior officers for elevation as judges of the Himachal Pradesh High Court while ignoring the directions for reconsideration issued by the Supreme Court Collegium in a resolution dated 4th January 2024. The petitioners seek a writ of certiorari to quash the recommendations made by the Himachal Pradesh High Court Collegium and a writ of mandamus directing the reconsideration of their elevation as per the Supreme Court Collegium’s instructions.

Facts

1. Initial Recommendation (2022): On 6th December 2022, the petitioners’ names were recommended by the Himachal Pradesh High Court Collegium for elevation as High Court judges.

2. Supreme Court Collegium Decision (2023): On 12th July 2023, the Supreme Court Collegium deferred consideration of the petitioners’ elevation. However, on 4th January 2024, the Supreme Court Collegium remitted the matter for reconsideration by the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

3. Communication from Law Minister: The Minister of Law and Justice communicated the Supreme Court Collegium’s decision to the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court on 16th January 2024, requesting fresh recommendations for the petitioners.

4. New Recommendations Ignoring Petitioners: Despite the Supreme Court Collegium’s direction, the Himachal Pradesh High Court Collegium recommended two other judicial officers for elevation on 23rd April 2024, without reconsidering the petitioners’ names.

Issues Raised

The primary issues before the court are:

1. Maintainability of the Writ Petition: Whether the writ petition is maintainable under Article 32, given the limited scope of judicial review in matters concerning judicial appointments.

2. Role of High Court Collegium: Whether the reconsideration of judicial appointments for elevation must be done collectively by the High Court Collegium or if the Chief Justice of the High Court can act individually in this process.

Submissions

Arguments for the Petitioners:

– Seniority and Service Record: The petitioners, being the seniormost judicial officers with unblemished records, claim a right to have their names reconsidered for elevation.
– Effective Consultation: Mr. Datar, Senior Counsel for the petitioners, argued that the collective consideration of the High Court Collegium is essential, and a decision taken solely by the Chief Justice is not in accordance with the Supreme Court Collegium’s resolution.
– Maintainability: The petitioners argue that judicial review is permissible on the grounds of lack of effective consultation, citing past judgments, including Mahesh Chandra Gupta v. Union of India (2010).

Arguments for the Respondents:

– Limited Scope of Judicial Review: Dr. Muralidhar, Senior Counsel for the respondents, argued that the writ petition is not maintainable since it pertains to the ‘suitability’ of the petitioners, a matter beyond judicial review.
– Chief Justice’s Discretion: The respondents contend that the Supreme Court Collegium’s resolution did not explicitly mandate the reconsideration by the entire High Court Collegium, thereby permitting the Chief Justice to act individually.

Judicial Precedents

– Second Judges Case: The Supreme Court has previously held that judicial review in matters of appointment is limited to issues of eligibility and lack of consultation with constitutional functionaries.
– Mahesh Chandra Gupta Case: This case established the distinction between ‘eligibility’ (subject to judicial review) and ‘suitability’ (beyond judicial review).
– Anna Mathews Case: The Court reaffirmed that judicial review cannot extend to reconsidering the decisions of the Collegium regarding suitability for judicial appointments.

Court’s Consideration

The Court, having issued notice only to the Registrar General of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, received a sealed report that revealed the Supreme Court Collegium’s resolution dated 4th January 2024 was never received by the High Court. It also noted correspondence between the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Supreme Court, indicating possible compliance with the resolution.

Conclusion

The case presents critical questions regarding the role of the High Court Collegium and the scope of judicial review in judicial appointments. The petitioners’ seniority and the alleged lack of effective consultation are central to the dispute. The Court is yet to deliver its judgment on whether the writ petition is maintainable and whether the reconsideration for elevation must involve collective deliberation by the High Court Collegium.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

Maniben Devraj Shah vs Municipal Corp. of Barihan Mumbai

Varsha Singh
-
0
Maniben Devraj Shah vs Municipal Corp. of Barihan Mumbai 
Supreme Court of India
Case number: 2970-2971 of 2012
Petitioner
Maniben Devraj Shah 
Respondent
Municipal Corporation of Brihan Mumbai
Bench
G.S Singhvi
S.J Mukhopadhaya, JJ.
Act: 
Section 5 Limitation Act
Section 314 of the Bombay municipal corporation act

Case Facts

The appellants filed suits for grant of a declaration that notices issues by the Corporation Act, 1888, for demolition of the properties specified in the plaints are illegal and not binding on them. They pleaded that the action taken by the Corporation is discriminatory and should be annulled because some persons whose structures were taken for road widening were allowed to construct mezzanine floor in the remaining portions of their respective properties and were also allotted alternative accommodation in the new building but were not given similar benefit.

The appellants further pleaded that they had entered into development agreements with Shamji D. Shah and Popatbhai Baghbhai Bharwad for the construction of the property and they will construct market for and on the behalf of the corporation. They prayed for the issue of direction to the respondent to provide shops in the market proposed to be constructed near Purnapragya High School, Bharucha Marg, Dahisar East Bombay.

Argument

In the written statement proffered on behalf of the corporation, a challenge was articulated regarding the suit’s maintainability, predicated upon the assertion that notice pursuant to Section 527 of the Act had not been duly issued. It was pleaded that the appellants built something on part of the road, and it needs to be torn down to make the road wider.

On the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed identical issues for all the cases. After looking at the evidence presented by both parties, the court decreed the suits by separate but identical judgements dated 2-5-2003. The corporation failed to contest the trial court’s judgement within the stipulated timeframe set forth by the Limitation Act and subsequently lodged appeals in September 2010, along with the affidavits of Shri Ranindra Y. Sirsikar and condonation of 7 years and 108 days delay, and states that the papers which were required for preferring the first appeal were misplaced and not traceable in spite of good efforts.

The appellants vehemently challenged the Corporation’s plea for condonation of delay, contending that the narrative surrounding the alleged misplacement of documents is implausible and warrants outright rejection. They further argued that the applications for condonation conspicuously fail to specify when the purportedly misplaced documents were subsequently recovered by the relevant department. They further pleaded that the transfer of Shri Ranindra Y. Sirsikar from one section to the other is irrelevant to the matter of condonation of delay, as the corporation has retained multiple legal counsel and has failed to provide any justification for the failure to submit applications for certified copies of the trial court’s judgement until 23-08-2010. The Single Judge of the High Court referred to the judgements of Court in Collector v. Katiji (1987) and State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao (2005), condoned the delay, and asserted that condoning of delay is sufficient and delay deserves to be condoned. 

The A.S. Bhasme, counsel representing the appellants, contended that the rational proffered by the Single Judge for condoning a delay exceeding 7 years and 3 months in the submission of the appeals is devoid of legal merit, thereby rendering the impugned order susceptible to annulment. The counsel emphasised that, in the absence of any repudiation by the corporation regarding its possession of battery of advocates adept at managing litigation, the reassignment of Shri Ranindra Y. Sirsikar to the miscellaneous court and subsequently to the other judicial forums is immaterial to the question of delay.

This is particularly pertinent given that the suits initiated by the appellants were adjudicated in May 2003, with no cogent justification proffered for the failure to submit applications for certified copies over a protracted span of 7 years and 5 months. Shri Bhasme further contended that the narrative surrounding the alleged misplacement of documents was a fabrication orchestrated by the corporation, which the High Court subsequently dismissed. The court found the assertions regarding this matter to be fundamentally ambiguous, lacking any specificity concerning the timeline of when the documents were purportedly located or the identity of the individual responsible for them. In support of his argument, Shri Bhasme relied upon the judgement of Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Ltd. v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corp. (2010).

Shri Pallav Shishodia, learned senior counsel appearing for the corporation, argued that the discretion exercised by the single judge of the high court to condone the delay does not suffer from any legal infirmity, and asserted that this court may, on a fresh analysis of the pleadings of the parties, form a different opinion does not furnish a valid ground for exercise of power under Article 136 of the constitution. In support of his argument, Shri Shishodis relied upon the judgements in Collector v. Katiji (1987), where the Shri Shishodia also pointed out that the appellants had raised illegal construction and if the challenge to the decrees passed by the trial court was aborted by the High Court by refusing to condone the delay, serious injury would have been caused to the public interest.

Shri Shishodia emphasized that the Limitation Act of 1963 has been acted with the objected of destroying the rights of the parties but to ensure that they approach the court for vindication of their rights without unreasonable delay. The idea underlying the concept of limitation is that every remedy should remain alive only till the expiry of the period fixed by legislature, the courts are empowered to condone the delay provided that sufficient cause is shown by the applicant.

The expression “sufficient cause” used in section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and other statutes is elastic enough to enable the court to apply the law in a meaningful manner which serves the ends of justice. No hard and fast rule has been or can laid down for deciding the applications for condonation of delay but a liberal approach should be adopted, that the substantive rights of the parties are not defeated merely because of delay. In the State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao (2005), the court referred to several precedents where what counts is not the length of the delay but the sufficiency of the cause and shortness of the delay is one of the circumstances to be taken into account in using the discretion.

The court duly acknowledged the pervasive bureaucratic inertia inherent in the operations of the state and its various agencies/instrumentalities. Consequently, it must be apprised of the underlying spirit and philosophical tenets of the relevant provisions when interpreting the concept of “sufficient cause”. The principle of merit must take precedence over the mere technicalities surrounding delays in the submission of appeals.

It is imperative to underscore that while a liberal and justice-centric approach is warranted in the exercise of discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and analogous statutes, the court cannot disregard the reality that a successful litigant has accrued certain rights based on the judgement in question. Furthermore, substantial time is expended at multiple junctures of litigation, in addition to the financial burdens incurred.

Reasoning

What colour the expression is sufficient cause would get in the factual matrix of a given case would largely depend on bona fide nature of the explanation. If the court finds that there has been no negligence on the part of the applicant and the cause shown for the delay does not lack bona fides, then it may condone the delay. If, on the other hand, the explanation given by the applicant is found to be concocted or he is thoroughly negligent in prosecuting his cause, then it would be a legitimate exercise of discretion not to condone the delay.

In case of the State and its agencies/instrumentalities, the court can take note of the fact that sufficient time is taken in the decision-making process but no premium can be given for total lethargy or utter negligence on the part of the officers of the State and or its instrumentalities/agencies and the applications filed by them for condonation of delay cannot be allowed as a matter of course by accepting the plea that dismissal of the matter on the ground of bar of limitation will cause injury to the public interest.

In the light of the foregoing, it is incumbent upon the court to ascertain whether the respondent’s justification for the condonation of a delay exceeding 7 years and 3 months is adequate, and whether the learned Single Judge of the High Court has appropriately adhered to the principles enunciated by this court in the exercise of discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

The learned Single Judge of the High Court altogether ignored the gapping holes in the narrative proffered, particularly regarding the inexplicable indifference exhibited by the parties in failing to initiate applications for the issuance of certified copies of the judgement for an inordinate span exceeding 7 years.

Judgement

The Court ruled that the cause shown by the corporation for delayed filing of the appeals was, to say the least, wholly unsatisfactory and the reasons assigned by the learned Single Judge for condoning more than 7 years delay cannot but be treated as poo apology for the exercise of discretion by the court under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the result, the appeals are allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the judgements of the trial court are dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

HC Grants Bail to DHFL Promoter Wadhwan on Medical Grounds

Shivani Singh
-
0
HC Grants Bail to DHFL Promoter Wadhwan on Medical Grounds

HC Grants Bail to DHFL Promoter Wadhwan on Medical Grounds

The Delhi High Court granted bail to Dheeraj Wadhwan, a former director and promoter of DHFL, citing medical grounds. Wadhwan, who has been incarcerated for over 15 months and is facing charges of fraud worth ₹40,000 crore in a CBI case, suffers from various ailments, including kidney and lung conditions. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain noted that while Wadhwan’s condition does not require hospitalization, his treatment cannot be effectively provided in prison due to limited medical facilities.

Landmark Judgments Under the POCSO Act

Sommya Kashyap
-
0
Landmark Judgments Under the POCSO Act

Introduction

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, has been a crucial legal framework in India for safeguarding children against sexual offenses. Since its enactment, various landmark judgments have shaped the interpretation and application of the Act, setting significant legal precedents. This article delves into some of the most notable judgments under the POCSO Act that have had a profound impact on child protection laws in India.

1. Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017)

Background: This case addressed the issue of marital rape of minor girls, specifically in the context of child marriages. The petitioner, an NGO named Independent Thought, challenged the exception to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that allowed a husband to have non-consensual sexual intercourse with his wife if she was above 15 years of age.

Judgment: The Supreme Court of India held that the exception to Section 375 IPC, which allowed sexual intercourse with a wife between the ages of 15 and 18, was unconstitutional. The Court read down the exception to make it consistent with the POCSO Act, which sets the age of consent at 18 years. The judgment was a significant step toward recognizing the rights of minor girls, even within the institution of marriage, and ensuring that the POCSO Act’s protections extend to them.

Impact: This judgment aligned the IPC with the POCSO Act, reinforcing that the age of consent under the POCSO Act must prevail, and any sexual activity with a minor, even within marriage, is punishable. It underscored the need to protect the rights of girls who are married before they turn 18, a practice still prevalent in some parts of India.

2. Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India (2018)

Background: This case revolved around the Kathua rape and murder case, where an eight-year-old girl was brutally raped and murdered in Jammu and Kashmir. The incident sparked nationwide outrage and highlighted the urgent need for strict implementation of the POCSO Act.

Judgment: The Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the case from Jammu and Kashmir to Punjab, citing concerns over a fair trial in the state. The Court also directed that the trial be fast-tracked under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the importance of swift justice in cases involving child sexual abuse.

Impact: The judgment demonstrated the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring justice in cases of child sexual abuse and its willingness to intervene when the fair trial of such cases is at risk. The case also highlighted the importance of fast-tracking trials under the POCSO Act to deliver timely justice.

3. State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Wasim Sheikh (2019)

Background: This case involved the conviction of an accused under the POCSO Act for sexually assaulting a minor girl by inserting his finger into her private parts. The key issue was whether this act constituted “penetrative sexual assault” under the POCSO Act.

Judgment: The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, ruling that the insertion of a finger into the child’s private parts clearly fell within the definition of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 of the POCSO Act. The Court emphasized that any form of penetration, even if minimal, is sufficient to attract the provisions of the Act.

Impact: This judgment clarified the scope of “penetrative sexual assault” under the POCSO Act, ensuring that even acts that do not involve full sexual intercourse but still violate a child’s body are severely punished. It reinforced the comprehensive nature of the POCSO Act in protecting children from all forms of sexual abuse.

4. Satish v. State of Maharashtra (2021)

Background: In this controversial case, the Bombay High Court acquitted the accused of the charge of sexual assault under the POCSO Act, stating that groping a child without “skin-to-skin” contact did not constitute an offense under the Act. The ruling led to widespread outrage and concerns about the narrow interpretation of the law.

Judgment: The Supreme Court later overturned the Bombay High Court’s judgment, stating that the POCSO Act must be interpreted to give full effect to its objective of protecting children from sexual offenses. The Court ruled that any act that violates the modesty of a child, with or without skin-to-skin contact, constitutes sexual assault under the POCSO Act.

Impact: This judgment was pivotal in affirming that the POCSO Act’s protections cannot be diluted by narrow interpretations. The ruling reinforced the broad and inclusive definition of sexual assault under the Act, ensuring that the law serves its purpose of protecting children from all forms of sexual exploitation.

5. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022)

Background: This case involved the issue of whether the stringent bail provisions under the POCSO Act, which deny anticipatory bail in certain cases, are constitutional.

Judgment: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions, stating that the denial of anticipatory bail in certain serious cases under the POCSO Act was justified, given the grave nature of offenses involving child sexual abuse. The Court noted that the POCSO Act’s stringent provisions are necessary to protect children and deter offenders.

Impact: This judgment reaffirmed the need for stringent legal provisions to combat child sexual abuse and underscored the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the POCSO Act’s rigorous framework. It also highlighted the balance between protecting individual rights and ensuring the safety of children.

Conclusion

The landmark judgments under the POCSO Act have played a critical role in shaping the legal landscape of child protection in India. These cases have not only clarified the interpretation of the Act’s provisions but also reinforced the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the rights and dignity of children. The evolving jurisprudence under the POCSO Act continues to strengthen the legal framework, ensuring that children are protected from sexual offenses and that offenders are held accountable. As these judgments demonstrate, the judiciary plays a vital role in ensuring that the POCSO Act remains a robust tool for child protection, reflecting the evolving needs of society and the best interests of children.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

SC Criticizes Delay in FIR and Missing Post-Mortem Paperwork in R G Kar Rape-Murder Case

Shivani Singh
-
0
SC Criticizes Delay in FIR and Missing Post-Mortem Paperwork in R G Kar Rape-Murder Case

SC Criticizes Delay in FIR and Missing Post-Mortem Paperwork in R G Kar Rape-Murder Case

The Supreme Court has raised concerns over the delay in filing the FIR and missing post-mortem paperwork in the R G Kar Hospital rape-murder case. The court highlighted the absence of a crucial document (challan) and ordered the West Bengal government to submit it. The three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, stressed the significance of the missing paperwork and the 14-hour delay in registering the FIR. The court also directed protesting doctors to resume work, warning of disciplinary action.

The Meaning of ‘Sales’ under Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Shreya Sharma
-
0
The Meaning of ‘Sales’ under Transfer of Property Act, 1882

The Meaning of ‘Sales’ under Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Introduction

The term “sales” encompasses the various activities involved in the process of selling goods or services. As per the Transfer of Property Act 1882, sales entail not only the act of selling a property but also the transfer of ownership from the current owner to the subsequent owner. This transfer is conducted through a transaction method stipulated by the government of India. It is important to note that any attempt to circumvent this legally mandated process constitutes an illegal offence. Furthermore, under the Transfer of Property Act 1882, such unauthorized transfers are deemed void.

Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Bare act defined Sale.

“Sale” is a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part-paid and part-promised. Sale how made.—Such transfer, in the case of tangible immovable property of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, or in the case of a reversion or other intangible thing, can be made only by a registered instrument.

In the case of tangible immovable property of a value less than one hundred rupees, such transfer may be made either by a registered instrument or by delivery of the property. Delivery of tangible immovable property takes place when the seller places the buyer, or such person as he directs, in possession of the property.

Contract for sale.—A contract for the sale of immovable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on terms settled between the parties. It does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on such property

This section aims to provide a detailed explanation of the concept of sales. Sales is the process of transferring ownership of a property to another party in exchange for a specified price. It also involves a promise that after the payment, the recipient will become the new owner of the property. The terms “Part-Paid” or “Part-Promised” indicate that the transfer of ownership or the payment amount may not be completed in full at the time of the transaction. Instead, it depends on the specific terms outlined in the contract for the property transaction.

Sale made for the transfer of immovable tangible property or other intangible property of a value of more than 100 rupees and upwards requires mandatory registration. Also, in the case of reversion, which refers to when a life interest is created in favour of a particular person and that person dies during the transferor’s lifetime, the property will revert back to the transferor. In this circumstance, registration is also mandatory.

In the case of tangible immovable property valued at less than 100 rupees, registration is not mandatory and can be completed through the delivery of the property. Delivery of tangible immovable property occurs when the seller places the buyer or a person directed by the buyer in possession of the property.

The contract for the sale of immovable property is an agreement for the sale of the property according to the terms and conditions decided by the parties involved. This contract does not create any interest in or charge on the property.

Case

Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ld.Tr.Dir vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 11 October 2011

Equivalent citations: AIR 2012 SUPREME COURT 206, 2011 AIR SCW 6385, AIR 2012 SC (CIVIL) 91,

Bench: H. L. Gokhale, A. K. Patnaik, R. V. Raveendran

Facts: This case involves malpractice by many people to evade payment of stamp duty, registration fees, and capital gains taxes, and to generate black money. It all started when people began using General Power of Attorney (GPA) to transfer their property. GPA is a power given by the actual owner of the property to another person, granting them the authority to perform ownership rights such as transfer and lease. The petitioner challenges the legality and validity of such transactions because many people were misusing GPAs to commit fraud by transferring them to multiple individuals and deriving financial gain from them.

Issues:

1. Are GPA transfers legally valid and enforceable?
2. Do GPA transfers lead to adverse consequences such as the generation of black money, the growth of land mafia, and the criminalization of real estate transactions?
3. Are the measures taken by the states and the Union of India to discourage GPA transfers sufficient?

Judgement

The verdict by the honourable Supreme Court emphasized that the practice of transferring property through a General Power of Attorney (GPA) is deemed illegal due to its association with circumventing legal requirements and facilitating the generation of illicit funds. The court underscored the detrimental impact of this practice on the nation’s economy, civil society, and law and order. While acknowledging the efforts made by some states and union territories to curb this misuse, the court deemed these actions inadequate, leading to the prohibition of property transfer through this method.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

Supreme Court to Establish Guidelines to Prevent Delays in Executing Death Penalty After Mercy Plea Rejection

Shivani Singh
-
0
Supreme Court to Establish Guidelines to Prevent Delays in Executing Death Penalty After Mercy Plea Rejection

Supreme Court to Establish Guidelines to Prevent Delays in Executing Death Penalty After Mercy Plea Rejection

The Supreme Court of India is working on guidelines to address delays in the execution of death sentences after the rejection of mercy petitions. During a hearing, the court highlighted the psychological torment faced by convicts due to indefinite delays and stressed the need for procedural clarity for sessions courts. The proposed guidelines aim to streamline the process, ensuring timely enforcement of death sentences while respecting convicts’ rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty

Types of Evidence under Indian Evidence Law (Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023)

Kalpana Bisen
-
0
Types of Evidence under Indian Evidence Law (Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023)

The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, represents a significant evolution in India’s evidence law, replacing the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. With advancements in technology and changing societal norms, the need for a new, modern framework for evidence law became imperative. The 2023 Act brings clarity and introduces a structure that caters to both traditional and digital evidence forms. Evidence remains the backbone of the justice system, and its correct presentation and interpretation are essential for a fair trial. In this article, we explore the different types of evidence recognized under the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

 1. Introduction to Evidence in Indian Law

Evidence refers to any material or testimony presented in court to prove or disprove the facts in issue. It helps the court determine the truth of the matter. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which was a colonial-era statute, laid the foundation for evidence law in India. However, with the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the law has been updated to keep pace with modern developments, especially in technology, and to streamline the judicial process.

The BSA, 2023, continues to classify evidence into several types while adding new provisions that deal with electronic and digital evidence more comprehensively.

 2. Types of Evidence under Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

The Act classifies evidence into the following broad categories:

1. Oral Evidence
2. Documentary Evidence
3. Real Evidence
4. Electronic and Digital Evidence
5. Hearsay Evidence
6. Circumstantial Evidence
7. Primary and Secondary Evidence

Each category of evidence has its significance in the judicial process and different rules governing its admissibility.

3. Oral Evidence (Sections 59 and 60)

Oral evidence refers to statements made by witnesses during a trial. It is verbal testimony that relates to facts observed by the witness.

– Direct Testimony: Oral evidence must be direct, as per Section 59 of the BSA. The witness who presents oral evidence must have directly observed or experienced the fact. For example, if the fact can be seen, the witness must have seen it personally; if it is something heard, the witness must have heard it.

– Importance of Examination: Section 60 emphasizes that oral evidence must be examined in court. Witnesses can be cross-examined to test their credibility, perception, and memory.

Oral evidence is crucial in many cases, especially criminal trials, but it can also be unreliable due to human error, false memory, or intentional deceit.

 4. Documentary Evidence (Sections 61 to 90)

Documentary evidence includes any written or recorded material presented to the court. This can include traditional documents like contracts, letters, or wills, as well as modern digital documents.

– Primary Documentary Evidence: As per Section 62, original documents are considered primary evidence. The courts prefer the presentation of the original document to avoid any issues of forgery or tampering.

– Secondary Documentary Evidence: If the original document is unavailable for legitimate reasons (e.g., lost or destroyed), secondary evidence, such as certified copies, can be presented under Section 63. However, secondary evidence is accepted only when the original cannot be reasonably produced.

– Electronic Documents: The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, expands the definition of documentary evidence to include electronic records, such as emails, digital contracts, and data stored in electronic devices.

Documentary evidence, whether in written or electronic form, carries significant weight in court, especially when it involves official records or agreements.

5. Real Evidence (Physical Evidence)

Real evidence refers to physical objects that can be inspected by the court. This includes items like weapons, bloodstained clothing, or any other object that can directly connect a person to a crime or event.

– Forensic Importance: Real evidence is often supported by forensic analysis, such as DNA testing or ballistics, which can establish a direct link between the accused and the crime scene.

– Chain of Custody: To ensure the reliability of real evidence, it is crucial to maintain a proper chain of custody, which tracks the handling of the evidence from the time of collection to its presentation in court. Any break in this chain can cast doubt on the evidence’s integrity.

Real evidence provides a tangible connection to the facts in dispute and often serves as compelling proof in both civil and criminal cases.

6. Electronic and Digital Evidence (Sections 65A and 65B)

In the modern era, digital and electronic evidence has become crucial in legal proceedings. The BSA, 2023, recognizes the importance of electronic records, such as emails, SMS, social media posts, CCTV footage, and digital files.

– Admissibility of Electronic Evidence: Sections 65A and 65B lay down the conditions for the admissibility of electronic records. Section 65B, in particular, requires a certificate to verify the authenticity of electronic records to prevent manipulation or tampering.

– Cybersecurity Considerations: With the rise of cybercrimes and the increased reliance on digital transactions, courts must carefully examine electronic evidence for credibility and reliability. Expert testimony is often required to verify the source and integrity of electronic data.

Electronic evidence has played a crucial role in many cases, especially in areas like fraud, defamation, and contract disputes where digital communication is key.

7. Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay evidence refers to statements made outside the court, which are brought into the court to prove the truth of the matter stated. Generally, hearsay evidence is inadmissible because the court cannot test its veracity through cross-examination.

– Exceptions to Hearsay Rule: However, certain exceptions allow hearsay evidence, such as dying declarations (Section 32), statements made in the course of professional duty, or res gestae (statements made during the occurrence of an event).

Hearsay is excluded in most cases as it is considered unreliable due to the inability to cross-examine the original speaker.

8. Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence that requires the court to infer a fact based on the surrounding circumstances. Unlike direct evidence, circumstantial evidence does not directly prove a fact but relies on a series of inferences.

– Importance in Criminal Trials: Circumstantial evidence often plays a crucial role in criminal cases. If the circumstances presented are consistent and lead unerringly to the guilt of the accused, it can be the basis for conviction.

– Famous Case: The infamous “Aarushi Talwar” case in India heavily relied on circumstantial evidence, as there were no direct witnesses to the crime.

Circumstantial evidence can be powerful if it forms a consistent and unbroken chain leading to only one logical conclusion.

9. Primary and Secondary Evidence

– Primary Evidence: As per Section 62, primary evidence refers to the original document or object presented in court. This is the most reliable form of evidence.

– Secondary Evidence: If primary evidence is unavailable, secondary evidence, such as copies or oral descriptions of the original, can be used under Section 63, but only when the unavailability of the primary evidence is justified.

10. Conclusion

The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, marks a significant shift in the legal landscape of India, updating and modernizing evidence law to keep pace with technological advancements and new forms of communication. The various types of evidence, including oral, documentary, real, electronic, and circumstantial evidence, play a crucial role in ensuring that justice is served based on facts, not speculation. The recognition of electronic and digital evidence is a particularly important development, as courts must now handle cases involving everything from social media posts to digital contracts. By providing clear rules on the admissibility and handling of evidence, the BSA, 2023, strengthens the framework for a fair and efficient judicial process in India.

Also Read: 
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India

High Court Quashes RPF Case Against Techie Over Ticket Booking App

Shivani Singh
-
0
High Court Quashes RPF Case Against Techie Over Ticket Booking App

High Court Quashes RPF Case Against Techie Over Ticket Booking App

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case filed by the Railway Protection Force (RPF) against a Bengaluru-based techie who developed a ticket booking app in 2017 to assist railway users. The RPF accused the techie of violating the Railways Act by offering the app’s services to book tickets, allegedly bypassing the official IRCTC platform and charging a fee. The court found the allegations ambiguous and without proper evidence, ruling that using a third-party app for ticket booking does not inherently constitute an illegal act.

1...383940...70Page 39 of 70

TESTIMONIALS

LawArticle review

Contact us: info@lawarticle.in

FOLLOW US

© 2016-2025 eduLex Solutions | All Rights Reserved