Supreme Court Weekly Round Up - Judgments [April 25-30, 2022]

Read Time: 12 minutes

  1. Keywords: Grace marks, reserved category, scheduled tribe, general category, CBDT, Department of Income Tax
    [Grace Marks policy] The Supreme Court recently held that a grace marks policy cannot be utilized by a person, who has passed in his own category, and grace marks are being used to enable him to move to the general category. With this view, the court set aside an order whereby the Union of India was directed to extend the grace marks in the subject of 'Other Taxes' by treating one Mukesh Kumar Meena, a reserved category candidate, as a person belonging to the General category.
    Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
    Case Title: Union of India and Ors. vs Mukesh Kumar Meena
    Click here to read more
  2. Keywords: Furlough, good jail conduct, remission, life imprisonment, death sentence, Delhi Prison Rules 2018, Article 72 Constitution of India, President of India, pardon
    [Furlough] While restoring a case for grant of furlough for reconsideration by the Director General of Prisons, the top court has held, "...when furlough is an incentive towards good jail conduct, even if the person is otherwise not to get any remission and has to remain in prison for whole of the remainder of his natural life, that does not, as a corollary, means that his right to seek furlough is foreclosed." Further, it was held that entitlement of furlough cannot be decided in the case of the present nature with reference to the question as to whether any remission would be available or not. 
    Bench: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose
    Click here to read more
  3. Keywords: Religious place, archaeological relevance, historical relevance, Namaz, mosque, waqf board, anjuman committee, mining
    [Religious place] The Supreme Court has remarked that in the absence of any proof of dedication or user, a dilapidated wall or platform cannot be conferred a status of a religious place for the purpose of offering prayers/ Namaaz. With this view, the top court dismissed an appeal filed by the Waqf Board, Rajasthan challenging an order of the Rajasthan High Court directing the Board not to interfere with the action of Jindal Saw Limited and others in removal of the structure forming part of Khasra No. 6731 at Village Pur, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
    Bench: Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramaniam
    Click here to read more
  4. Keywords: Auction purchaser, borrower, sale, debtor, loan, auction proceedings
    [Price escalation] The Supreme Court recently held that setting aside the confirmation of sale in favour of an Auction Purchaser only on the ground that the escalation in the prices of the property has not been taken into account was not sustainable.  With this view, a division bench reversed the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court insofar as it set aside the confirmation of the sale and the auction proceedings in favour of the Auction Purchaser.
    Bench: Justices L Nageshwar Rao and BR Gavai
    Click here to read more
  5. Keywords: Quashing court, Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, pre-trial stage
    [S. 482 CrPC] The Supreme Court recently held that a Court should be slow to grant the relief of quashing a complaint at a pre-trial stage, when the factual controversy is in the realm of possibility, particularly because of the legal presumption. "What is also of note is that the factual defence without having to adduce any evidence needs to be of an unimpeachable quality, so as to altogether disprove the allegations made in the complaint", added a division bench.
    Bench: Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy.
    Case Title: Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
    Click here to read more
  6. Keywords: Section 2(b) Gangsters Act, gang, gangster, gang leader,  Section 173(8) CrPC, Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act 1999, Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crime Act 2015 
    [UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986] A person against whom a single FIR/charge sheet is filed for any of the anti-social activities mentioned in section 2(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 can be prosecuted under the Gangsters Act and a single crime committed by a ‘Gangster’ is sufficient to apply the Gangsters Act on such members of a ‘Gang’, held the Supreme Court. On a fair reading of the definitions of ‘Gang’ and ‘Gangster’ under the Gangsters Act, 1986, a division bench held that it can be seen that a ‘Gang’ is a group of one or more persons who commit/s the crimes mentioned in the definition clause for the motive of earning undue advantage, whether pecuniary, material or otherwise.
    Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna 
    Case Title: Shraddha Gupta vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
    Click here to read more
  7. Keywords: Anganwadi workers, Anganwadi helpers, Gratuity Act 1972, Industrial Disputes Act 1947, welfare legislation, social security, remuneration, honorarium, wages
    [Anganwadi workers] The Supreme Court directed the authorities of the State of Gujarat to extend the benefits to eligible Anganwadi workers (AWWs) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs) under the Gratuity Act, 1972. The court was of the view that the Anganwadi centers have been employing ten or more AWWs and AWHs in the State, therefore, there was no doubt that Anganwadi centers were establishments contemplated by clause (b) of subsection (3) of Section 1 of the 1972 Act. The court on the plight of AWWs and AWHs was of the view that it is impossible to accept the contention that the job assigned to AWWs and AWHs is a part-time job.
    Bench: Justice Abhay S. Oka
    Case Title: Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya vs. District Development Officer Dahod & Ors. 
    Click here to read more