Important Supreme Court Judgment July 23, 2019
1. Shiv Prakash Mishra v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 319 – Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence – The power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the trial court at any stage during trial to summon any person as an accused to face the trial if it appears from the evidence that such person has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused.
Case Number : Crl.A. No. 1105 of 2019 23-07-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Reetu Sharma
Respondent’s Advocate : Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad
Bench : Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi, Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi
2. Shri A.M.C.S. Swamy ADE / DPE / HYD (Central) v. Mehdi Agah Karbalai
The Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 135, 151 and 153- The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 193 – Cognizance of offences by Courts of Session – Special Court is empowered to take cognizance without there being an order of committal as contemplated under Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – When there is express provision in the Special Act empowering the Special Court to take cognizance of an offence without the accused being committed, it cannot be said that taking cognizance of offence by Special Court is in violation of Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Case Number : Crl.A. No. 1102 of 2019 23-07-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Rakesh K. Sharma
Bench : Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi, Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Subhash Reddy
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Subhash Reddy
Petitioner’s Advocate : Rakesh K. Sharma
Bench : Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi, Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Subhash Reddy
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Subhash Reddy
3. Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India
Real Estate Regulation and Development Act, 2016 – Section 8
Case Number : W.P. (C) No. 940 of 2017 23-07-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Himanshu Shekhar
Respondent’s Advocate : Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas AOR
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra
Petitioner’s Advocate : Himanshu Shekhar
Respondent’s Advocate : Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas AOR
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra
4. Surinder Pal Soni v. Sohan Lal (d) Thru Lr.
Practice and Procedure – Revisional Jurisdiction – In a Civil Revision arising out of an execution proceeding, the High Court has modified the decree – Such a course was not open in law.
Case Number : C.A. No. 5360 of 2019 23-07-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Shree Pal Singh
Bench : Hon’ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee
Judgment By : Hon’ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Petitioner’s Advocate : Shree Pal Singh
Bench : Hon’ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee
Judgment By : Hon’ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
![Tax Law Internship Opportunity at Legum Attorney [Chamber of Ashish Panday], Delhi [Tax Litigation]: Apply by 2nd November](https://www.ourlegalworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Legum-Attorney-Intern.png)
